Zeagle

This is fine if there is just one flight in the area. But get two flights in there and this gets confusing fast as there could be two "dash 2" guys answering. Flights always use the lead callsign, such as "DRAGN34" and add their position to it. In this case wingmen would be "DRAGN35", "DRAGN36", etc. (BTW...5 letters only for the callsign) This way you know which aircraft in which flight you are talking to. The wingmen never get on the radio unless the flight has been split up. Obviously they are on some intercom or interflight freq to talk among themselves. If two flights have joined, then you could have for example DRAGN34 with DRAGN27. They would use the lead callsign for ATC until split up. In this case they would advise ATC that the wingman is actually DRAGN27 or vice versa depending on who was in the lead. If they were talking to some ground unit, I am sure there would be some sort of pre-brief as to who was going to be doing what. As far as the ARMY way of doing things, I have no idea. I did talk to many US ARMY helos in my career. All the flights I worked conformed to the above description. We never had confusion as to who was who. Except maybe that one time the USAF tried to intercept some US ARMY helos during my busy day working the Cayman Caravan. But that is a story for another day.

I have actually seen this callsign in real life. UGLY01 flight of 2 A-10's.

Callsigns are assigned to flights. They don't just pick them themselves. For example, take the 93rd TFS MAKOS. Their approved callsigns include MAKO, SHARK, and AKULA. They usually append a number on the end of that to help differentiate callsigns in the ATC environment. You might have MAKO11 flight of 4 and SHARK21 flight of 4. The individual callsigns would be MAKO11, MAKO12, MAKO13, and MAKO14 and likewise for the SHARK flight. When joined-up they use the callsign of the lead aircraft. When they split up they use their individual callsign such as SHARK22 or SHARK23, etc. When a flight is joined up, only one aircraft talks to ATC. Those numbers appended to the callsign have no relevance to any number physically on the plane. The Navy is a different in that they use the board number or MODEX for certain operations. I do not know how the Army does it. I am sure that an ATO would direct a squadron to use certain callsigns and flight numbers in order to cut down on confusion. Now, a JTAC or AWACS controller, or some other kind of commander onboard an aircraft will usually have a pre-briefed callsign that they will use. All players are usually aware of this callsign. An AWACS controller might have a specific callsign to use independent of the callsign of the aircraft he is in.

Well I think they did a good job overall. But the parking is bad. Maybe that is a DCS limitation.

Reflections are a fact of life under a curved canopy. Ask any aviation photographer and they will tell you reflections are a real issue. I personally don't think they are a problem at all in sim.

I don't know why this is so hard for Ugra Media. There is only one runway at Khmeimim. The runway closest to the ramp is a taxiway and parking area. The large aircraft you see in the lower right is being loaded with equipment.

I am using the same stick. I like all the functionality. My collective is the Virpil CM-3 throttle. Pedals are Virpil ACE.

learn something new everyday

I am assuming that is the Tiger APC? Does anyone know what the LUV ground vehicle prefix means? Are those vehicles supposed to have lights?

I thought Blue Thunder was rather well made. Thankfully I never actually watched the whole Firebirds movie. The cringe factor was just too high.

14 days exactly from order placed to unboxing my ACE pedals here in the US. I think Virpil has their act together now. I think I waited 2 or 3 months for my Virpil HOTAS setup.

Check the MOOSE_Missions example AID-A2A-061 -- Setup the squadrons. A2ADispatcher:SetSquadron( "Kuznetsov", "Kuznetsov", { "SQ CCCP SU-33" }, 20 ) -- Setup the overhead A2ADispatcher:SetSquadronOverhead( "Kuznetsov", 1.2 ) -- Setup the Grouping A2ADispatcher:SetSquadronGrouping( "Kuznetsov", 1 ) -- Setup the Takeoff methods A2ADispatcher:SetSquadronTakeoff( "Kuznetsov", AI_A2A_DISPATCHER.Takeoff.Runway ) -- Setup the Landing methods A2ADispatcher:SetSquadronLandingAtRunway( "Kuznetsov" ) AID-A2A-061 - Takeoff From Ship Runway Test.miz

try this solution spawn_test_modified.lua

+1

I suspect a power problem. 525W seems a bit low for that setup.

Both of those are used in aviation on a daily basis. So there is no war to be fought there. As for wind, I don't know how ED managed to get the wind backwards. But it looks like they succeeded nicely.

Works good for me. No issues. No noticeable fps drops.

True.

If something causes your tail rotor to not be "effective", then it most certainly is LTE. I read through the whole LTA / LTE thing here on the forum. That was like watching people arguing over what kind of dog pooped the poop they just stepped in.

What you describe is loss of tail rotor effectiveness. This is a real problem in mountain flying. Quadg's advice is the solution.

I really enjoyed the mission. I am sorry i could not fly longer. I flew out on magnetic heading to grid MM00 and picked up the ELT signal on 114.166. I also encountered icing, something new for me in the Mi8. I used the doppler system to navigate back to Tbilisi.

yes they are all the same for that map.

I just got my Tobii Eye Tracker 5. I am still experimenting with settings

Request Russian Mi-8MTV2 (MEDEVAC / SAR)

@unhappytroll..one word..fun. I am trying to decide between the MEDEVAC Mi-8 or the Mi-24. Satarosa..will the downed pilot be broadcasting on one of the preset VHF frequencies of the ARK-UD?