Tom Kazansky

Danke für die Info. Hatte mich schon immer gefragt, ob man sich in der Luft in so nem Jet auch wohl fühlen kann, mit den ganzen Überlebensklamotten und Anti-G-Anzügen. Was mich zu ner weiteten Frage bringt: braucht man im Tornado überhaupt Anzüge die einem die G-Belastungen erleichtern?

jo bin ich. hinten und vorn war aber zu der Zeit noch jung und da fielen mir die Temperaturen (wahrscheinlich vor Aufregung) nicht auf. Ich stell mir Hitze bei den Belastungen z.B. im Tiefflug ganz schon schwierig vor. Stresst einen das nicht extrem? Oder merkt man das erst hinterher? das hört sich gut an.

Welcome to DCS World. I find your expectations and hopes about the ATC very refreshing. But let me say ATC in DCS is not realistic yet. (Supercarrier is a different story and also WIP). But to be fair: ED is working on a huge overhaul of ATC with no ETA. I for one use ATC only to simulate immersion. Even though ATC ignores almost everything I do right and wrong. So don't take it too seriously until the big update that most of us are looking very much forward to.

When activated, this little clock should be flashing in bright colors whenever one of the drop down menus for adding stuff is used, because there are lots of (legit) threads like this one.

Yes, that's it. IIRC large is 30 km, medium is 20 and small is 10.

Have you tried to give the Hapoon a longer search range by activating them earlier? This way the speed of the target has less impact. edit: or did your Hapoon lock the target and has been "outturned"? Hard to imagine that a moving target of the size of a navy ship with 10 to 30 knots could do that.

... but only after multicore implementation for DCS please.

Your thread reminds me of another with the same issue. At the end of the day the tire wasn't blown while landing but it has already been blown on take off because its max speed has been exceeded. Just an idea to think about. (I haven't watched your huge track though.)

I like the rest of the cockpitsounds very much. The F-14 gives a lot more feedback this way than other modules. Seems like I have to live with that limitation of an unchangeable squelch volume.

this problem still exists in newest stable DCS (=current OB). is there no way to get the squelch sound connected to the volume knob? (or at least off by an option?) it doesn't make sense to me that I can turn down jester's volume to zero but the squelch still blows my ears. (almost needless to say: I love the Tomcat, but I hate to press the button for the jester-menu and hear squelch all the time till I found what I wanted in the menu.)

I want to bump this thread with a track because even after some changes to the wing sweep related systems this old issue is still not solved. newest Stable DCS 2.7.16.28157 (= current OB) see the very short track, please. 1.) What I did: just scrolled the mouse wheel downwards (nothing else) expected behaviour: sweep lever should stay down (max oversweep position) what happens: sweep lever magically jumps into maximum top position and spreads the wings to the max. 2.) after the first jump to the top position the track shows another related issue: I scrolled the mousewheel downwards from the top position of the lever and it gets stuck at the position where it should go to oversweep. I waited for the wings to reach max sweep, but downscrolling the mousewheel does not push the lever over this "detent". Only grabbing the lever with the left mouse button and pulling it downwards a bit does the job. After that I once again scrolled the mousewheel down and the (2nd) jump to the max forward position occurred a soon as lever reaches the max oversweep position. Issue here: I don't see why the scrolling can't do what grabbing with the left mouse button can at the "detent". F-14B 2.7.16 Wing Sweep Lever Mousewheel Bug Caucasus 01.trk

Thanks for clarifying. Looking very much forward to the F-4E's and those Navy variants, too.

Thanks. I digged in the FAQs of the HB Phantom thread and maybe found some kind of answer to my question from above: "Q: Why won’t all variants be part of one module? A: The investment of time and effort to do the Navy and Marine Corps versions of the F-4 justice makes it unrealistic for us to include everything in one package. We want to make sure to tell the story of each Phantom variant chosen in the most content rich and appropriate way possible, while making sure that we stay a thriving and viable team. We’ll share more details on our plans with regards to variant additions to the F-4 later, but we remain steadfastly committed to ensuring that we are fair to our beloved community and supporters." So there may be more than one Navy Phantom but (they are) not included in the first module? (Which would be totally fair and fine imho.)

Thanks a lot for sharing that. If I may ask just one question: At 1:04:35 I hear: "we will be doing Navy Phantoms" I wasn't aware we would get more than one Navy variant. Is this little "-s" correct?

Freut mich

1. Hast du noch andere Eingabegeräte an deinem PC angeschlossen? (Lenkrad, Gamepad,...) 2. Sind vielleicht noch andere Achsen deines HOTAS auf die Stick Achsen deiner Su-25 gelegt? (Findest du in den Einstellungen/Steuerung/Achsen heraus)

Imho a trackfile would show what you are doing (right and wrong). Much easier and more complete than talking about "every" single detail.

And what does CEII's status "open beta" mean? In the ED shop it is the only module tagged "open beta".

Well there is a Nesher variant called Finger that is as close to the Kfir C.2 as it can get for your idea. It fits the timeframe but I'm not sure (at all) it was already part of the mentioned conflict: "In the 1979 contract with IAI, the Argentine Air Force stipulated that the Daggers would be equipped with new avionics and HUD systems to take them to the Kfir C.2 (and beyond in some subsystems) standard. The program, named Finger, was underway in 1982 when the Falklands War broke out. With the war over, as some of these systems were made by the British Marconi Electronic Systems, they needed to be replaced after an arms embargo was imposed by the UK. The replacement of such systems took the planes to the final Finger IIIB standard mainly by replacing the British equipment with French-built Thomson-CSF." read it here: https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/IAI_Nesher

Danke euch beiden. Sehr interessant.

Ist das bestätigt, dass TWINVIS eine F-35 auch dann aufspüren kann, wenn diese "nichts" emittiert? Die von der ILA 2018 sollen ja sogar mit Transponder geflogen sein (was Sinn macht).

Even with questioning the constructivity of those kind of OP's the thread has value. If it was a poll it would be 1 : 15 so far To get constructive myself: a trackfile showing the problems would probably help, as mentioned above.

I've been thinking a lot about this these days and I have some concerns about what will happen with DCS after Vukan and especially multicore. Will ED use the new engine to put a lot more new features into DCS what pushes our future Pc's again to the limits in 2D and VR users have similar problems like today?

Ja, das wäre die sicherste Lösung. Auch meiner Meinung nach. Ich denke trotzdem, dass Politiker anders denken und erstmal den Kauf der F-35 "verkaufen" und sich danach um die Aufstockung der Munition kümmern (können), ohne dass es die Medien/Öffentlichkeit interessiert. Ich würd's so machen.

Vielleicht ersetzt man nur die die grad noch fliegen können.