kengou

My guess is this would be used in a departure from controlled flight situation, when you need full command authority to regain control.

Just my opinion. I find flying the MiG more often frustrating than fun, it feels like I'm fighting the jet all the time. I own the MiG and only got to try the F-86 in the last free fly event but I found the Sabre much better, and regret my MiG purchase.

If you're referring to HUD velocity vector caging, this is not possible in AG mode because the bomb fall line is affected by wind and it's important to see wind effects in the HUD.

IMO no, the MiG-15 isn't worth it if you have the F-86 and you like learning systems. The MiG has no systems to speak of, while the F-86 has a bombing computer and radar gunsight. The MiG is also, imo, much more difficult to fly and fight with, and it's a pain to hit anything with its guns.

A-10 isn't a SEAD aircraft. It can tackle some mid-range SAMs like SA-8, SA-13, SA-15. With pop-up attacks from very low level it might have a chance against other advanced SAMs too, but it'll be very dangerous. I wouldn't buy the A-10 if you expect to go SAM hunting with it. It isn't designed to fight in such dangerous contested airspace.

At high AOA, why do you think the Hornet must be superior? I have no idea which is better, but the JF-17 has large leading edge extensions just like the Hornet. Both seem to be fairly good in a 1-circle fight. Of course, there seems to be more public data on the Hornet than the JF-17 in this regard, so it's hard to say really. One major advantage of the Hornet's in a 2-circle fight is of course the AIM-9X and JHMCS. Fuel should also be to the Hornet's favor, I believe, so 2-circle would be the best way to go in theory.

I'm sure more people want a SU-27 and I would be happy to get one, but to be honest I don't really love operating Russian aircraft. The cockpits are ergonomic nightmares, everything's in metric, and the HUD and Avionics are never user-friendly. I'd be happy to experience it as a curiosity, as I do with the MiG-21 and MiG-15, but doubt I'd play with it regularly. I would fly the F-15 much more.

Radar silent means enemy fighters won't see you on RWR. Unknown if this works on AI (I doubt it) but should work on human pilots. They can still pick you up on their own radar of course if you're within their search cone/range. Best used for sneaking past hostiles at low level on a strike mission or something. I don't believe EMCON silenced radios/datalink/iff is modeled at all in DCS.

I have the f/A-18 stick and also use the real-life mappings and nothing else. I mean, that's why you bought it, right, to have a stick just like the real plane? Sensor Select is used for the TPOD. Radar elevation and raid/fov and TDC cursor are all available on the throttle in the real thing, so I suggest mapping those buttons to your throttle.

Make sure you hold down the Uncage button with the boresight over the target, then try pulling a little lead and verify the seeker is following the target. It sometimes takes a second of holding it down, won't work on a single press.

I would assume it matches the reference CG, since they base their calculations and values on available documentation.

So I'm understanding you right: You're in boresight mode with the AIM-9M. You put the circle on the bandit and hear tone. At this point, if you press and hold uncage for a second or two, what should happen is the circle will become 'glued' to the bandit if it moves around your HUD as the seeker head follows the heat source. You can fire the AIM-9M as soon as you hear the tone, whether it's uncaged or not, but uncaging is best practice to ensure the seeker head won't lose the heat source as soon as the bandit moves away from boresight. Uncaging will not command a radar lock, I'm not clear if that's what you are expecting or not.

No, missile override is not meant for ACM. It's a quick way to select AMRAAMs as well as custom radar settings (not implemented yet), separate from the regular AA master mode. It ought to remember its settings from the last time you opened it in the same flight (although I'm not sure if this is implemented yet). If you manually put it into ACM modes using the MFD buttons, I believe it ought to remember that for next time, but I'd have to test that in another sim to see if that's how it would behave. Dogfight override is meant for ACM modes.

In settings you have the option to enable the afterburner detent - you can bind fingerlifts to a button and use that to push through the detent in-game. If you don't do that, you need to hear the afterburner audio feedback as well as look at your fuel flow gauge on the IFEI to see it spike when afterburner is engaged.

If I'm a designer on the A-10 HOTAS, and I have to have one switch which needs to both cycle left and right MFD pages and assign SOI to any screen or HUD. I can set long press to one of those two sets of functions. What's more annoying for the pilots? Long press each time I want to change to the next page can be forever if you're cycling over to a Maverick after locking a target with the TGP, for example. So I've gotta use short press for page cycle. Short press for SOI would be great too, but if I can only use long press for one thing, page cycle is much better than SOI. Every design, be it aircraft design or user interface design, is a series of compromises. Is the A-10's HOTAS perfect? No. But it can do a LOT without touching the screens, more than most aircraft. I do love the way the F-16 does it though. DMS short down to toggle SOI between each MFD, DMS up to set SOI to HUD (and up multiple times would no doubt be a fine way to toggle HUD and HMD on other aircraft), and DMS left/right short to cycle pages.

IMO no big downside to using beta. I've never been bothered enough by a beta bug that it was a show-stopper to me. On only one or two occasions over the last 5 years or so have I delayed an update for a day or two to wait for a hotfix before updating. Really not a big deal. And the benefit is getting planes, maps, new features and even bug fixes weeks to months ahead of Stable. Kind of an easy decision, for me.

It's pretty normal for brand new features in early access modules to not show up in the manuals for months sometimes. Please see Wags' latest videos on how to use Maverick and HARM:

If your radar can see the targets in TWS mode, even if they aren't currently designated, all AMRAAMs in the air should receive midcourse updates toward their targets. In auto TWS mode, the only way you would stop sending midcourse updates is by switching radar modes or the target leaving your radar field of view entirely (i.e. you beaming or turning cold).

Not at this time. Unsure if this will be possible in the future, but I have read that in real life windman ground target designations can transmit onto your SA page via datalink. Maybe they can be hooked/loaded that way, but I do not know.

Only tested with AGM-65H last night so far, but it was very consistant behavior that the Mav seeker would slew to the TGP upon TMS up, but it would never lock. I had to manually lock the target on the WPN page. Auto mode was active on the TPOD.

I appreciate the definitions of what Razbam considers beta, release, finished, etc. Seems a bit off from the software definitions I've been familiar with, but I know this is typical of DCS in general. Normally, software implemented with barebones features and having constant feature additions would be considered alpha. Feature-complete but buggy or all features added but some not fully complete would be beta. Finally a product with no missing functionality at all and only an acceptable level of bugs and no "show-stopper" bugs would be considered released. Razbam's definitions appear to label alpha as beta, beta as release, and release as "finished". But whatever, now there won't be miscommunication based on clashing definitions anymore.

It was at the end of the notes. Seems the Tone is gone and the AIM-9X radar lock is jittery.

My understanding is that the offset required is only a limitation of the way Doppler Beam Sharpening works. The Viggen has no DBS so it has no problem with radar mapping across its entire field of view (just like the Hornet's in normal mode). The JF-17 and F-16 have different radars than the Hornet so I can't speak to how they are supposed to work in reality.

Do you have data to confirm this behavior? It makes sense to me that the outer bombs drop first, to provide a better roll rate and less load on the outer wings. It seems to work this way on most planes.

I've seen how simple it is in MSFS2020 to do this. One keybind starts pushback, press again to stop it, super simple. A great bonus if they manage to add a person on a cart that can come up and push you back too, but unneeded.