kengou

This video was mostly ILS, touch and goes, and pattern work, he doesn't give much feedback good or bad, but it all seems pretty close to what he expects to happen, so if there's nothing bad worth mentioning I take that as good.

I grabbed the MiG-29. It’s a lot of fun.

Not that I've ever noticed. What information do you think is new?

Viper is very barebones right now so I'd suggest Hornet. It has similar avionics to the Harrier should you ever want to learn it. It's also worth mentioning that the Night Attack Harrier in DCS has AIM-9 even if it's not a dogfighter. And regardless of B+ or NA version, the Harrier is not a nimble fighter like the Hornet or Viper. B+ can mount AMRAAMs but it will never be as good at it as Hornet.

I only play offline and do plenty of air-to-air. My answer is yes definitely, it's worthwhile to play against the AI. The AI in DCS is better than many other flight sims where all they do is turn in a circle forever. The AI does use a broken flight model, but how disadvantageous that is depends entirely on the matchup. And I suspect different planes have different degrees of wackiness in the flight model. Anyway, the main problem with the AI flight model is the lack of need to conserve energy and the crazy thrust to weight ratio. An F-5 at near stall speed will just pull up and rocket into the sky at will. So as long as you have a matchup where you would have a thrust advantage you can still use that to keep up to some extent. But if you have equal thrust or less than the plane you're fighting, you're gunna be in for a really rough time because the AI will do vertical loops all day long until he's behind you.

TWS is not implemented yet in the module.

It is not yet implemented, but planned soon. Probably they added it in anticipation of the TWS mode being available in the near future. No date has yet been given for the TWS mode.

I would say no, not worth it right now. Probably in 6 months or a year it'll be terrific, but right now so many MFD and DED pages don't exist, damage model is WIP, it has no radar gunsight, master modes and weapon logic isn't working properly, no cursor zero... it's just very rough. It will be a difficult learning experience for newcomers and it means that employing the F-16 is going to involve lots of workarounds.

A17 would mean the missile will go active (using its onboard radar) in 17 seconds, which is when you can break lock and go defensive and allow the missile to continue guiding. After that it changes to time to impact.

1. Datalink pod is what it's called. 2. Autolock as far as I can tell. 3. No zoom. 4. I doubt it but have not tested this.

The MiG-29 should have a better sustained turn rate at higher speeds so try to get into a one-circle fight and get the fight slow. The AI is definitely beatable, don't let anyone say to give up because it uses a UFO flight model. It does, but it's still beatable with sound BFM.

It's because ACM and radar in general are WIP. It should definitely work with AMRAAMs.

I don't think there's any way. The TPOD is not as closely integrated to the Harrier as other jets. Best thing to do is just leave the TPOD up though, I don't see why you'd really need to switch to it frequently with HOTAS. Put HTS mode on and you can work entirely off the TPOD with no need for the DMT throughout an attack run or CAS operations.

I don’t think it’s possible on the real jet. I recommend binding the view zoom to a handy button or slider.

Who says the Hornet isn’t getting TWS in parallel? Seems all we have are assumptions right now.

I'm quite sure any bugfixes or visual updates (free) will just come along in an update for everybody.

I would have thought the speedbrakes retract on landing because of Carrier requirements. Boltering with the speedbrake out could make it hard to regain takeoff speed.

I believe 4 degrees nose down is for taxiing to prevent FOD from RCS. 2 degrees is takeoff trim. Edit: I don't think I'm allowed to quote NATOPS here, but 2 degrees nose down trim is correct to close the RCS puffer, but it is recommended to set 4 degrees nose down since the stick can move fore and aft a bit during taxi. But aside from that I do agree, once airborn I have my hand on the stick and often have to add some pitch up.

Without videos and tracks it's hard for us to know if you're doing anything wrong. For what it's worth I've been playing other F-16 sims for years before this, and in taxi/landing/takeoff DCS feels just the same. No problems braking for me. Make sure to open the speed brake on landing, aerobrake until 100 kts, pull stick full aft after the nosewheel is down for more drag, and brake only below like 70 knots or so. Should slow you down well before the end of the runway.

The only map I've bought is Persian Gulf and it's a really big, really attractive map, especially for carrier ops and Helicopter stuff in the cities. I do see tons and tons of missions and campaigns for NTTR though and wonder what I'm missing out on...

This isn’t a bug. It is real behavior. The problem is we lack the Cursor Zero function to reset the location of the steerpoint.

I think TGP only works in CCRP right now? Make sure the TGP screen is set as SOI as well.

I wouldn't say it's realistic for the ground crew to be able to repair a busted landing gear within a minute or two with the aircraft sitting there on the ramp on its belly. Time to find a new aircraft.

I find it really buggy right now. I'll nudge the axis and it'll jump or drift a bunch sometimes before stopping movement.

I haven't tried it yet. My gaming time is limited so I think it would be frustrating to fly half a mission or do a 10 minute cold start only to find a critical system failure means I have to abort and RTB. If I had more free time to play, I would love to try it out for the realism and procedure aspect though.