VC

They're already removed. Someone told me they stop the twist but that wasn't the case so I took them out to prevent damage as you say. I'm afraid it's not practical for me to use an extension. Would shimming the collar with something to improve the friction where the metal ring holds down the grip be practical?

The grip is connected securely, the collar is screwed on as tight as it will go and it's fine in normal flight. But in hard maneuvering I'm regularly accidentally twisting the grip, sometimes quite far. Anything I can do to prevent this?

Is TWS-A likely to make the coming patch?

I've set up my WarBRD (with TM F-18 grip) and it all works fine. However, I noticed in my DCS mappings that it automatically assigned Rudder as stick "RZ" axis and Thrust as stick "Z" axis. These axes don't phisically exist on the stick/grip or in the VPC profile as far as I can see in the "VPC Joystick Setup" program. No problem I thought, I just unmap them in DCS. But there is a problem, because the stick is detected as a game controller these non-existent axes are recognised in other games and create phantom inputs in ways that cannot be unmapped. Have I missed something in setup? Is there a way to remove these axes from the profile so only the X and Y that actually exist are recognized?

I'm a little concerned we have opposite experiences with identical hardware, but oh well. Apologies for misunderstanding as well. Of course I don't want random rotation especially since I'm fighting muscle memory from having a twist stick for a long time before this. But if it's going to happen anyway I'd prefer the peace of mind of following the manufacturers advice. I also turned the base while testing it and it felt OK, but long term I think I would prefer turning the grip in the base, otherwise the base takes up an awkward space and the axes aren't aligned relative to my body.

I have found this to not be the case. I left the little screws on the base in and I am able to accidentally twist the grip anyway despite tightening the grip collar as far as it will go. This makes me worried I risk damage unless I follow Virpil recommendations and remove the screws. Of course this is personal preference. But if you look at the real Hornet cockpit you will see the grip is rotated to provide a more comfortable angle for the right hand coming in onto the centre stick. The Thrustmaster grip, held centred, is not entirely comfortable in the "straight" configuration forced by the position of the two small base screws and their respective recesses in the grip.

Just to piggyback on this thread slightly. So if I want the grip to be at an angle to the base, so it's more comfortable to hold centered, I remove those two screws? And the connector will twist without risk of damage? Do I remove the little diamond shaped plate as well?

Seems to have worked o7

OK thanks, just checking I won't damage anything on the PCB by stuffing it in? It's also quite stiff, is it fine if I force a 90 degree bend in it at the seal?

Just setting up my WarBRD and I noticed there's quite a bit of spare USB cable inside the housing, assuming I fit the little rubber connector into the slot in the base. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do with the spare. Do I push it in under the electronics? Can I move the rubber seal along the cable? Do I never mind the seal and just pull the cable through the hole?

Case 1 isn't meant to make the landing more difficult, but it's meant to speed up the recovery process so it is indirectly more difficult by adding a lot of workload and precise timings. It's one thing coming out of a finals turn into a 15 second groove and getting that landing right, versus having several minutes to line up on speed and on glide slope by starting a miles behind the ship and coming in straight. Anyway I see your point and share your experience. For me the issue with the F-18 isn't the hook physics, it's the laggy throttle response and that instant "sink or float" behaviour that takes a lot of practice to get around and put the plane on a wire. The F-14 has much more inertia to it and better throttle response, so it goes where you point it more reliably, and without working your left hand like you're using the throttle to train your biceps.

OK I'll have a check, and also check if the single number has the problem as well (I use the Z mode so I have center of scan zone not upper and lower numbers). Anyway if it's exactly twice you should be aple to approximate the maths for small angles. If the target is 6,000 feet above you then you set your height to 3,000 feet more than your altitude.

Can you elaborate on this, I'm curious. I got the Mirage recently and I haven't noticed anything wrong with this. Is the single number also wrong if you change it to the mode where it shows center of scan zone?

On a related note, I'm sure if the Hornet's auto-throttle worked properly (in DCS) it would be a breeze to carrier land as well. The other carrier based aircraft are already easier by comparison, but landing with auto-throttle on both the F-14 and the Su-33 really feels like cheating.

Aha, got it. So LGBs are probably better for close support type tasks e.g. clearing out FARP defenders on typical MP servers despite you needing to stick around to guide the bomb in. But JDAM may be better for getting rid of unarmoured AAA and small SAM batteries (assuming they don't move, but I don't think they do).

When would you use one but not the other? Specifically, when would you use LGBs over JDAM? On the surface it would seem JDAMs are strictly better. You can use TOO with the TPod in the same way as you would set up an LGB pass, but then JDAM is fire and forget and doesn't seem to be any less accurate than an LGB. Or are they less accurate by enough that trying to take out small armoured targets (e.g. tanks) with JDAM isn't a good idea?

I dunno, improbable I guess but sounds like a fun exercise, or an impressive way to clear out a FARP :D

So just to clarify, if you have two bombs on a station you need to manually select TOO1 and then TOO2 when you step back onto that station? And presumably you need to press the pickle button once for each bomb? And how on earth do you have time to do all this designate/undesignate/step sequence without overflying the target while trying to set everything up? :D Do you set an altitude hold orbit while you do all the setup then run in?

Thanks! I shall start paying more attention to it then!

So when I just flick it straight to Nav without waiting and my map is immediately correct, is that using GPS?

So am I right then, that aside from practice and immersion it doesn't need to be done for you to be able to go about the rest of your sortie effectively?

I've been assuming for ages that the Hornet INS alignment isn't implemented. Maybe I missed a patch note or something but I've now noticed there's a procedure for it. Thing is, I've just been throwing the switch straight to NAV and haven't had any issues. Admittedly I've only done a bit of PvP air to air that required cold start like this, but navigation is fine, moving map is in the right place, I can get back to base etc. all without aligning. Is the INS alignment placeholder? Is it needed for accurate air to ground delivery?

VR has zoom too you know, two different levels of zoom even in DCS ;) But basically this. 1:1 tracking is so intuitive it makes up for all the other perceived disadvantages. And looking around really isn't that hard, not like you're strapped in. I experimented with some head tracking a while ago but found the movement so counter-intuitive, especially with having to move your eyes in the opposite direction to your head to still be looking at the screen. I went back to using a HAT switch for view until I got VR. In VR it's also so much easier to predict where a target will be, to reacquire if they e.g. go below your aircraft. It's 1:1, your brain does all the work for you. You judge their speed as they pass out of view, look over to the other side where you expect them to be and they come out right there.

Aha, yup, and then stuff like this happens :D

This thread should probably be in the Hornet section not here. My understanding from the first post: the issue is that the Hornet RWR gives very late pitbull warning for the SD-10. I've also experienced this, getting splashed with little warning, but assumed it was just me not paying attention. I dubt there's a bug, if the SD-10 just pitbulls very late, you should be defending way sooner than that anyway. The indication is there for sure. The other issue is JF-17 and SD-10 show as "U" on the Hornet RWR, which is annoying and makes defensive mistakes more likely. Again... Hornet problem, nothing for Deka to do here.