Slant

It has been much improved since then. And as you can tell, the community is a lot calmer and doesn't complain as much as some might have anticipated. Remember this time last year? Every patch must have set you and the community into panic mode, because essential stuff broke. Keep it up, you're on the right track.

Hmm, good point.

I'm going to make one of "those" posts, so excuse me... but... I'm not an expert, but SEEMS TO ME (lol) that you could fix this by giving control over the TCS camera for a locked target to the pilots own computer for the duration of a stabilized picture. Then take it back when the lock breaks. For discrepancies, we'll have to rely on netcode to be fast enough to resolve a split locked/free state between pilots and RIOs... It's a bit of an annoying problem, since TCS gives vital information to the pilot about the enemy's aircraft state, missile shots etc.

Hmm, he would already be close to rolling out on the reciprocal. If he had pulled too hard, that would have been the wrong play entirely. Is it possible that they oversped during the take off/carrier launch and he didn't notice? It's easy for some people to forget flaps, the Tomcat accellerates rather fast once you're flying level.

LOL, you'd think. And then you spawn at Senakhi at night, floodlights on the apron all around you and your cockpit is a black hole.

Hello. Great idea implementing 2FA. Unfortunately, the setup issue is a bit unclear. When you enter the confirmation code for the first time, the site just reloads without telling you if it worked or not. If you try it again, it gives you a generic "an error has occurred" message. A bit more useful feedback would be appreciated, especially since this is easily able to lock you out from your account and have to contact customer support for help, potentially adding a whole load of extra hassle in the process. A clear indicator that your setup was accepted and worked, a more helpful error message ("Your 2FA is already set up" or something like that) would fix these issues.

Not sure what the big deal is. Date gets pushed back, people are going to want to talk about it. Not sure what's worst, the group that voices their concerns or the group that is upset that other people have concerns. ED's communication policy in this is adequate given the situation. It's not bad, or good, it just is what is necessary. No need to question everything now. @BIGNEWYWe appreciate the info when it becomes available. I'm sure many are curious about what the issues are and I'm equally sure that there's no harm in saying "more testing required" like you did. Now, having said that... ED can handle being the butt of a few jokes here and there, they know the deal and there's no reason for a holier than thou attitude (from other forum posters, not 9L or BN, they are doing what they have to). Let people have fun with it. This goes out for the various people asking ED to minimise their predictions to quarterly estimates (lol) and or try to backseat moderate this forum and judging it a bad place. The forum wouldn't be better if you banned everyone asking curious questions. It would be worse. You would be talking to yourself. Calm down, let everyone be. As long as they're not disrupting the forum, the only harm is that you have to scroll past their posts. Not everyone lives on the forum 24/7 and can read every response in real time.

Die Auswahl der Waffen würde ich eher an der Jahreszahl festmachen in der du spielst.

The heck? Why would you close this thread? Are you angry or something?

Sounds about right.

I wouldn't expect the Eurofighter in 2021. Manage your expectations, this will be a long wait.

All I want to know, is Grumman in on this project? Would be so cool to see the Grumman logo appear. "Officially endorsed product of the Northrop Grumman Corp." I don't know why, but I like stuff like that. Hehe

It's a bit of a hobby of mine to take comments like these and point this out: To be as unbalanced, overpowered and unfair as they possibly can. Mind you, I'm a layman and don't know what I'm talking about, but as a layman it seems logical to me that military R&D is always trying to be better at being as unfair to the enemy as they possibly can. I'm sure they were already dreaming about the 54D when the whole program got cancelled. Military planning always seems to center around the principle of "killing them without them killing us." (simplified to a stupid degree, I'm sure), and being "better" is always just a temporary solution in that you can always be better. Ie. when missiles have a 100% hit rate under any circumstance at any range (take this literally, not even a statistical possibility of a miss in a scenario where the universe is ceasing to exist and your opponent is on the other side of the universe), that's about the time when I would imagine the military development team going "Uh, yeah.. that's it, we're done. This is the last missile we design." And they'd only do that to turn around and start developing a countermeasure to that, with the intended goal to induce a 100% miss rate in all incoming attacks, again, under any circumstances (ie. you standing on the runway stationairy while they shoot at you from point blank range)

Agreed, I merely wanted to point out early that expectation management is going to be important for this. We're all waiting, but it'll be a long haul. Maybe I shouldn't have used years as an example, but I hope people are smart enough to see that I was merely talking in hypotheticals. I agree that 2022 seems unlikely. Personally, I think 2023 is within the realm of the possible, though.

I would be very surprised if it comes in 2021. Or heck, even 2022. Be patient, folks. DCS modules are notoriously behind schedule because they are hard to make. The fidelity required is quite difficult to achieve.

I'm game. Say when and where. We can provide the server, too.

The team is doing god's work. The naval community here is craving this so hard.

Am Anfang ist es sicherlich etwas frustrierend. Als Tip (kennst du bestimmt schon) unbedingt in CAT III wechseln, damit die Eingaben noch feiner werden. Viel Geduld haben und nicht überreagieren, wenn man z.B. auf dem Display nach vorne wandert. Power korrigieren (z.B. Schub wegnehmen) und dann die Korrektur halbieren (d.h. die Hälfte dann wieder an Schub zugeben!). Du warst in diesem Beispiel ja "zu schnell" und wanderst nach vorne, nimmste bissel Schub weg und wanderst nach hinten um deine Position zu korrigieren, aber dann willste ja irgendwann wieder stationär sein, also direkt Schub (Hälfte der vorherigen Korrektur) zugeben und gucken obs hält. Ist ziemlich dumm, aber solche festen Vorgänge helfen einem, das ganze etwas strukturierter anzugehen als einfach nur "nach Gefühl". Das geht zwar auch prima (für mich), aber erfordert eben auch ne Menge an Erfahrung. Es hilft mir mental auch massiv weiter zu wissen, dass auch der Boom Operator einen gewissen Bereich hat, in dem er mich haben will. Ich muss nicht punktgenau sein und es ist okay ein bissel hin und her zu driften, oder vor und zurück. Das entspannt direkt und wie ich immer sage, ohne Zen kein AAR. Geht einfach net wenn man angespannt ist.

Den Podcast habe ich gehört. Der war ziemlich gut! Witzigerweise hab ich den Podcast gehört während ich im McDonald's Drive-In stand. Jetzt verbinde ich McDoof mit dem Typhoon.

Ja, der Tanker ist leider nicht sehr gut implementiert. Der Korb ist nur ein Graphicobjekt, bis du quasi den Korb für dich "reservierst", dann erst kannst du damit interagieren. Ist mir am Anfang auch ständig passiert. Die gute Nachricht ist, dass der Tanker (unrealistischerweise) in den meisten Szenarien den Korb erst ausfährt, wenn du ready for contact bist. Irgendwann wird ED hoffentlich auch mal den Tanker anpacken und da einiges verbessern. Immerhin geht es aber so schonmal.

Hi, can you confirm if it has been a bug in the past that is now fixed? For some reason in my group there is still the information that ACLS is bugged and shouldn't be used. I'm trying to gauge if that has been a myth from the start, if our information is outdated and we missed it being fixed or if there's an issue we need to explore to give you some feedback.

Ha! In my endless search of real life things carrying over into a sim, this is one of them. I can't count the times I told people to calm down and not use their afterburners. I have gone entire missions without a/b or going beyond 350 (Phoenix is good at doing all the running for me against inferior enemies). There have been cases of Hornet/Harrier people telling me how jealous they are of the Tomcat's long legs. I had to agree, but when I pointed out that they are hopelessly overloading their airframes and needn't complain about having short legs, they had nothing to say against that... later they changed their mentality about their loadout and behold, the hornet can actually stay in the air quite a long time! And they can even loiter, who'da thunk! It's a bit of a learning experience, I think. I've been the same. Got into DCS, look a jet fighter with afterburner! Let's see how fast I can go. I remember running out of fuel in the F-15 after 5 minutes. I'm not even joking. These days I take a perverse pleasure telling people that my loiter time is approaching 2h. No, no refueling needed, thank you for asking. Of course, all of that is thrown out the window if I actually get into a serious dogfight, yes, I am indeed Joker. Yes, I promised 2h, but what can you do, once I start dumping gas into the exhaust, I burn fuel as fast as anyone... haha.

Let me pick this up, as this is an issue for us. I've read the "font argument" from a couple of sides and since you bring it up here, I'd like to point out the pragmatic side of this. I am in a unit with some 30-40 aircraft (12 of which are Tomcats) that includes people from all over the world, some living in places with somewhat restricted data plans for their internet. Our livery folder is several Gigabytes huge at this point. In no small part that is due to us having to include the complete F-14B livery for every sidenumber included in our squadron. If we could somehow cut down on that during the compression phase, the question of what font is realistic or was actually used is secondary. I realise that we're discussing realism here, but this would be a thing where I would argue that the simisms need to take precedence over realism. This is hurting players with low bandwidth and/or limited data plans (or not enough room on their harddisk, we have several people who have to delete maps on their SSDs to make space for our livery) and if we could have a system similar to the Hornet, where the Bortnumber is taken from the garage/rearm window with a generic "best looking for everyone" font, that would be a tremendous QoL improvement for many people. If only as a temporary solution until you come up with something better? But we understand that you may have different plans. Just making sure that you have good feedback.

Wenn du einmal hinter der Kurve ("behind the (power) curve") bist, ist es recht schwer wieder aus dem Loch rauszukommen. Sollte dir das nochmal passieren, Nase runter, Geschwindigkeit aufnehmen und mit 300+ wieder steigen. Wenn dein AOA zu hoch ist, verwendest du bei niedrigen Geschwindigkeiten einen Großteil deines Schubs nur um die Höhe zu halten, statt die Geschwindigkeit. Und dann ist irgendwann nichts mehr mit steigen, du kämpfst dann nur noch darum die Höhe und Geschwindigkeit zu halten. Ein guter Weg sowas zu vermeiden ist tatsächlich das zu tun was alle immer sagen: Pitch für Geschwindigkeit, Schub für Steig-/Sinkrate. So variierst du deine Steigrate aber kommst nicht in den aerodynamisch ineffizienten Bereich hinter der Leistungskurve. Ich geh immer direkt in Milpower und ändere nur noch Pitch um bei ~300kts bzw. ~.75-.8M (ab ~20k Fuß) zu bleiben. Damit kommst du locker hin.

Mit 6000lbs biste meist auf der sicheren Seite. Wenn ich mich nicht irre, bekommen wir noch eine Simulation von Fahrwerksschäden irgendwann. Von daher ist deine Frage nicht ganz irrelevant.