ravenzino

Not sure of the others, but I, as just a regular person who loves DCS, can only comprehend limited number of aircrafts. Also, I believe most attractive aircrafts are almost all out now, with F-15E on the horizon. So the return of investment of future module might not be as good, the sustainability of current business model, therefore and in my opinion, is at risk. If I get to choose between endless new modules and enrichment of core game, I'll definitely choose the latter. I don't want and don't need to learn sooooo many aircrafts... neither should that be the ultimate goal of DCS...

Very well said, VERY WELL SAID, especially this: Can't agree more. That is exactly what I feel these days.

I second. Don't know what else to say... The video basically said it all. I just feel obliged to support it, as my contribution of 2 cents... Thanks for BIGNEWY's comment. Wish the team behind do take it as seriously. Just a bit of personal journey with DCS so far... feel free to ignore it...

I found that the mapping in UI Layer takes higher priority. Might worth have a look there.

As confirmed by multiple sources, it is bugged atm. Guess either that list is actually longer than it appears to be, or ED's internal test is a bit ... rushed. (Which is pretty much just a side-effect of the Early Access, right? ... yea, it has to be... I guess...)

This is my first question asked on ED's Discord channel right after seeing that change log, and BIGNEWY has confirmed that this is just one fix of the Track Replay, we might still went into some problem.

#2370 Ordered in late August, received shipment notice this morning. Feel excited :)

A DCS: C-130 Series would be very cool, providing multiple variations (KC-130, AC-130, etc.) in a single module. It would not be boring at all if I can put the AC-130 in autopilot and play with those guns and cannon for strike mission. KC-130 could be interesting to fly occasionally with mates / squadron. C-130 for parachuting troops, vehicles and/or deliver ammo supply. Today we have people piloting choppers on MP servers for transportation as well, and an almost dedicated script framework CTLD. I can see people using C-130 for same purpose as well. It could also enable new MP game mode where each side needs to fly and escort its C-130 with precious cargo to the destination. Different from AI pilot, a human controlled C-130 need to consider flight path, countermeasure use, etc., and of course, coordinating with escort fighter jets. Just my 2 cents.

I'm doing this all the time...... :megalol: Hope the upcoming VR gloves can help a bit as well: rise the hand, block the sun... would be cool. But anyway, a helmet visor is still very much needed for sure.

The RWR on F/A-18C indicates differently upon STT Lock and Missile Launch. Not sure the other jets.

+1

Landing gear sound is there all the time, isn't it? Flaps is constantly moving when set in AUTO (UP). I wish its sound is unnoticeable in RL as well as in game... That said, if there's sound when putting flaps in MID or LOW position IRL, then yeah, guess it should be modelled... I like those mechanical sound on other aircrafts. Wind noise when landing gear is down ---- +1

Yes and no. While keeping it realistic does have its value, just like all the other game feature like Labels and some easy mode settings, they are there to compensate some limitation imposed by the simulation environment or simply the hardware. Label vs spotting issue in VR, for example. You can consider this requested feature as a compensation to the reality that in a lot of MP servers, 1) very few people talks... 2) no briefing or any planning... ED can always add a tick box in mission option, allowing mission designer / server admins to enable or disable this feature.

I recently play a lot on Growling Sidewinder server. It enforces not only 10 min delay, but also nothing other than your own aircraft can be seen in the local tacview record. However, they do provide a server side tacview record download after each server restart, which includes all. I think this is fair as you'll eventually get all the details you'll need. I'm not familiar with the burning skies, but I guess it would only be fair if a server both enforce delay and provide server side tacview download. Otherwise, this rule is basically encouraging, if not forcing, people to AFK without disconnecting for 20 mins before they leave the server... a waste of both people's time as well as server resources...

+1 It'll be a very useful tool for MP coordination and cooperation.

Some may dislike my answer... As much as I like the TGP and blowing things up, I find A2G is of less challenge than A2A, so I ended up spending much more time in A2A(PvE at first, now almost exclusively PvP). Well, tbh, this might mostly because it's much harder to find an A2G opponent that is not an AI, making A2G mission way too predictable. Dealing with AI ground units is mostly just planning and execution. I still do it when I have less time or just want to blow something up. But if I want some serious and rewarding play, I always go to PvP, or at least A2A in PvE MP servers. Having said that, if I had a team or in a squadron, I guess I would like A2G more, as a team would enable a lot of complicated A2G scenarios which requires teamwork, and teamwork is always fun.

TacView can provide you with more details. Highly recommend.

+1000 should be a low hanging fruit

I failed to make myself clear... Not its definition, but more of why it is called "F-pole", where did this name come from...

Can anyone explain the name "F-pole"?

Just noticed something interesting to me... Push Back on deck is literally push back, like, by hands... I always thought they would use a tractor... At about 17:00 of this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEKDSTgDR2M&t=25s, the push back starts with no signs of machinery being used... Also in this photo: Will this be part of the animated deck crew / DCS Supercarrier?

Didn't know popping out wing folding handle without folding up wings can still unlock NWS HI. That makes perfect sense! As well as why keep wings unfolded when carrying live AIM9s. Thanks Maverick!

Not sure if it is IRL, but NWS will not go to high automatically with folded wing in DCS... The rests are more or less aligned with my observation. Because folding wings requires ailerons in up position, it makes sense that retracting flaps before wing folding might shorten the reaction time on the folding part, but eventually, the end-to-end time cost is the same (flaps up + wing folding vs wing folding straight away). On top of that, skipping the flaps and go straight for the wing folding is combining two actions into one, which itself might save you one second or two, or at least gives you one less thing to worry about... Besides, if you keep wing folding as the last step of your procedure, you'll have to hold NWS button while you clear out of LA, unless you use a toggle switch to force NWS HI all the way, which might be less realistic... Either way, it doesn't feel optimized... not sure what the actual procedure is IRL though.

Nah, I did a lot of carrier landing, but I never bothered to retract the flaps. I just fold the wings, then the ailerons will be up automatically. It happens pretty quick. Wings started to fold up even before I cleared the landing zone... My procedures after a successful trap: 1. throttle back to idle 2. wing folding lever: pull and rotate up (mouse wheel afterward, followed with two mouse clicks -- right clicks IIRC) 3. hook lever up 4. NWS to high 5. throttle up a bit and get the hell out of the LZ <--- at about this time (or in about 1-2 seconds), the wings start to fold up

+1