FalcoGer

What is it called? I can't find it.

wait, they're actual tubes? Just proves my point. they're stuck in the 50s...

Why has it taken so long for the military to develop a color CCD to put into their aircraft? In DCS all we get is grayscale images. The F18C uses modern flat, LCD screens, yet they have limited color support. What is it with military to be both 10 years ahead of everyone else but then stuck in the 1950s at the same time?

So it ranges from... darkgreen-gray to... darkgreen-gray. I like the efficiency. At least ED's art department doesn't need to work too hard.

How long can you fly on a normal tank? Do we really need this? The Ka-50 can fly for several hours. I've never run out of fuel in that thing. The Ka-50 has external tanks, but I never had a need to install them.

I'd turn them off straight away. The other pilot can stay but I don't want a body in the seat where I'm sitting. Sure in real life you can move out of the way to access switches, but in DCS it's a pain for me to do lateral head movements since I only have a 3 DOF head tracker. It works most of the time. Then again the apache cockpit is rather clean. Either way I'd like to save the frames.

Well an option would be a good compromise. What I would like though is having the AI help with the startup. I don't know how it's done in the real bird. Do you read the checklist for each other or do you do your own things?

I'm a full time dev. If I work on something not work related I'd say that's amateur work, even though I'm a decent programmer. I don't mean to be condescending to those amazing people doing open source work. Amateurs need not be bad at what they do and I certainly didn't say that. I don't see how this could be complex. You already know the radio frequencies. All you need to do is read them from the module. Anything else is fluff that can be added later They could literally just do the same thing as SRS. And again, what would be more advanced than what SRS is doing? Doing one app that does one thing is the same thing as writing one library for dcs that does one thing. In fact it's easier BECAUSE it is integrated and they have access to all the data instead of having to sift it through a lua export layer. I am saying "make something, then improve on it later.", not "make the best thing possible right now and take 20 years to develop it." and 80% solution like SRS is enough for now. As for giving them time... Don't you think 10 years is enough time already? We're not talking about developing something ridiculously complex here. It can become very complex depending on how much you want to simulate it, but then again an 80% solution that takes 3 months is still better than the 95% solution that takes 20 years.

since you're at it, might as well request an axis for sensor slew.

They promise too much. They should promise a few things and then go through with them. Showing how amazing SRS and other third party tools like Overlord Bot or SRS ATIS are only shows how lacking ED's implementation of the relevant system is. They promise comms and give us a subpar system after 10 years, they promise ATC and give us nothing for 10 years, they promise DTC and give us nothing for 10 years. And when we ask for it it's always "We're working on it, it's complicated." or "We're working on it, you'll get news soon." where "soon" is apparently effectively the same as "never". It's been a year. Where is the news? They included voice comms but couldn't be bothered to have different channels for different frequencies, or implement it properly in the game? Even Arma manages to do that with the teamspeak SDK, as does the other sim's built in solution (also using teamspeak sdk as far as I know). Not having filters or atmospheric/range effects is fine, as long as it gets fixed eventually. None of this is rocket science or classified. It has been done by amateurs multiple times in an adequate manner. I have VoIP turned on, yet I have yet to hear a single thing from anyone on any server, nor have I found a key binding for PTT in the controls options. From what I hear you need extra setup to make it work and it's complicated and non intuitive. Not what I'd call an "integrated solution". So long as fans can do a better job programming than ED, SRS will remain the go to tool, even if it requires a bit of setup. I'm a bit baffled how they manage to make such a beautiful looking game with such great attention to detail and simulate highly complex systems and then fail at this basic stuff that's in every other game/sim.

The aircraft without dedicated radio controls are completely unusable in missions where a lot is going on. Especially AWACS constantly giving you useless information every 5 seconds, without you hearing the calls for others by the way. Please fix AWACS Then you hear everyone. AI calling waypoints, every carrier landing, every tanker conversation, every airfield spamming "you are cleared to taxi" whenever someone moves an inch. On a multiplayer server with 10-30 people it is a constant yelling of everyone at everyone and you hear it all. what's worse you can't turn it off! You can go to the options and decrease "Helmet" volume, but then you don't get bitching betty telling you to "Pull up!" This needs to be addressed. Either add some obscure key bindings to enter the radio frequencies. Make the cockpit partially clickable for interactive elements (like the salvo select for the Su25T) and add the radio to that list, add a key binding to open an interface where you can punch in the frequencies. A key binding and/or axis command for the radio volume. ANYTHING. Please. It's literally impossible to have a conversation with someone on discord or SRS with this going on.

I also agree that this should be an option. It allows for easier testing and longer, specific training. Though I don't think that respawning a different set of weapons in the air is really feasible to implement. Changing fuel load and consumption rate I can agree with. Weapons not being consumed, too. Though it's really a niece request. Also game mode is a broken mess. I don't think DCS is the type of game you spend money on just to do game mode. Some people do, but I doubt it's many. Though that's of course hard to say without supporting data.

The apache start is actually quite quick. In paricular the INS alignment takes 4 minutes (or 6 without GPS) That's enough time to get the rest going while not waiting forever on it when you're done setting things up. I find hot starts quite bothersome because I always need something or other that wasn't set up correctly and in the end I spend more time trying to remember what I need to do after a hot start and looking through all the menus and over all switches and changing the settings to what I want rather than doing that as I start the aircraft. And then I end up missing things anyway and need to fiddle with things at the most inappropriate times. I expect similar startup times to the F16 with stored heading alignment mode (~5 minutes).

What's that? Do you mean to say the ammo belt breaks if you stop a burst midway through? I disagree. Everything should be modeled as faithful as data that is available. Whatever is classified should be modeled to the point of information that is available, for example how something looks on the screen or what the end result is rather than the detailed physical description of how it works. If the poor state of EW in DCS is anything, it's an appeal to the devs to step it up and finally get things implemented properly. If you take Mode 4 IFF for example, it's classified, sure. But we still know how it works in principle and what it looks like on the MFD/HUD/ and Audio/Light/Warning on the receiving end for mismatch keys, etc. In effect you have an encrypted communication between two aircraft via radio. There are 2 encryption keys to choose from, A and B, preloaded into the aircraft, each of which is valid for 24h, switching occurs at midnight. Both keys are sent/received for a short overlap duration. If the keys match, then the second aircraft will respond, otherwise it will not. If the response is missing it will show unknown, otherwise friend. Mode 1-3 will also show bad for a wrong response, because it's not encrypted. All of that is public knowledge. There is no need to know the protocol exactly. A reasonable estimation can be derived from that. In fact I don't even know why this is classified to begin with. Security by obscurity has never been a valid approach anyway, you'd be much better off using a well known standard for radio encryption. Either way the point is there is no need to know the protocol, radio frequencies involved, encryption key lengths or anything. All of that would just be wasted processor power anyway. The rest should be filled in with reasonable estimations. Besides I don't think that CMWS is so complicated that you can't come up with a reasonable estimation by using the non classified data that is available.

What's that? Some kind of IR pointer? I haven't heard about this before? Doesn't the TADS not support IR pointing by default? Are we talking about the rotary switch on the yellow background? Why does it have 4 positions?

Considering that they already have the assets and code in the game for the big ones, I don't see why they wouldn't just put them in. All they need to do is change the text on the MFD.

Weird. They said no, but then they show videos with them bent up. What gives?

Source? It's not in the FAQ. I'd love flechettes

Or when you turn on the heater in the cold.

You mean there being no tech for flechettes in DCS (yet? I hope?) Also how good would those be for anti air? I guess it'd be hard to fuze them correctly.

Would be nice to have in other aircraft as well. Jeez, just imagine an A10 with 6x19 rockets going ham. Don't have to worry about finding that infantry in the city anymore. The entire city can just die. At least from one side. I'm sure the USAF can pay the repair bill for the windows.

From the vietnam video it seems like the rockets open up fairly early while the tree video shows them open really late though it might be a perspective thing. What's a typical distance from the target that you would want to deploy the flechettes?

The burning is a bit awkward. I think there'd a a few sparks, then the protections would kick in and cut the power.

Which manual are we talking about? I saw some checklists in the TM 1-1520-251-10 operator's manual. In particular I couldn't find the abbreviated checklists. Starting from section 8.11, it seems you have missed a few items. Though I don't know how DCS will handle them so it might or might not be valid to skip them for DCS purposes. Either way I am looking forward to your kneeboards. Also I concur, a clean version would be nice.

I, too, would like to have rotor blades while on the ground. And in the air. Actually in the air especially.