viper2097

Faszinierend wie manche denken. Das Cockpit sieht wohl so "fürchterlich" aus weil es wohl in Echt auch so aussieht: Da wird sich gefragt "Wie ED sowas freigeben konnte?"... Schon bemerkt dass das Ding fast vollständig fertig in den EA geht? Dass der TPod in seinem Verhalten (slewn, unschärfe, Auflösung, bewegende Gates etc.) so toll animiert ist wie in keinem anderen Modul? Dass ein funktionierendes A-G Radar inkludiert ist? Dass die externen Licht in der Helligkeit gut passen und mit den Reflektionen absolut genial aussehen? Dass das Ding wohl im Sinne der Avionik auf einer Ebene (wenn nicht höher) mit der F-16 und F-18 angesiedelt ist. Dass es das erste mal in DCS ist, dass ich sehe dass ein HUD "rund" projeziert wird, und nicht rechteckig bis zum Sichtende. (Siehe F-16, DCS vs. *piep* um zu verstehen was ich meine) Dass, wenn ich es richtig verstanden habe, es das erste Modul mit Sensorfusion ist (RWR & SA display um den Flugzeugtyp dem Radarkontakt zuzuweisen) Dass es ein custom IFF hat (was das auch immer heißen mag wird man sehen...) Dass das externe Modell eigentlich richtig gut aussieht... Ausserdem empfinde ich persönlich dass das Cockpit auch nicht wirklich schlecht aussieht wenn ich mir das Video von Jabbers so ansehe... Wenn einem Eye Candy lieber ist als detaillierte Umsetzungen aller Funktionalitäten dann ist man wohl bei einem anderen Dev besser aufgehoben. Ich hingegen finde es absolut geil dass Deka anscheinend so eine technische Detailverliebtheit an den Tag legt und werde mir daher die JF-17 zu Release mal genau ansehen.

The Harrier is now (or tomorrow?) two years in early access. There are more then plenty of bugs, I would say 90% not even aknowledged by Razbam, and countless missing functions. Some bugs are also 2 years old. After developing a completely new module in the meantime, Razbam said that they have learned from their faults, that they have three independent teams working on the modules and that they are working full steam on finishing the Harrier, the Mig-19 and getting the M2K bugfree and on the level of recent DCS modules. They also said, that they will touch nothing else until those three modules are finished. The last update to the Harrier was two weeks ago and was really not worth mentioning. Before that, the last update has been in the middle of July with fixing a few bugs. That is already 4 months ago. Razbam, how is it planed to go on with the Harrier? At the moment, it feels abandoned (again).

PTT - Voice & Com menu in the future I would like to link to this existing thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=254447 I really think that this would be a good and easy idea to handle voice & com in the future.

Will the deck sliding issue be fixed with the upcoming supercarrier?

You missunderstood me. I wanted to clean up with two fairy tales: 1 - Everyone refers to do refueling in bomb mode. -> Thats wrong, 40° would be the correct, not bomb mode with 55°. 2 - Its hardly to master refueling in auto cause she's bitc*ing around as hell. -> To show that this is just not true, I posted the video. Additonaly, I just said that the reason for useing 40° is not present in DCS, so it does not help you really. I would guess, that most people are haveing a harder time in Auto because they are not approaching slow, perfectly trimmed and with only little inputs on the throttle and stick. For me personally, refuleing in Auto is different then doing it with 40°, but I would not say that one is harder then the other. Flying with Auto or 40° result in having two different flight profiles, more or less like doing it with two different aircraft. So you would need to learn one or the other. Maybe 40° does not lift as much as Auto when adding throttle, but for that it is more nervous on roll and more damped on pitch, you trade always only one thing for another.

You can't use it as it is INTENDED. Intended would mean, to be on a moving carrier, crank up the turbines, set the air source to both and THEN turn on the cooling in the backseat and start up the WCS and begin aligning. If the WCS will be turned on before getting cooling air from the turbines, it would get damaged quite fast. So the workaround we need to use at the moment is, to accept that this would break the system IRL. Fine if you don't want to use it in a realistic way, but I would like to do that as DCS is designed around realism. And I would like to prevent the RIO from useing the comit bag even before the plane got in the air. its so worse in VR... My patience in the whole DCS enviroment is getting overused more and more, but It would be easier to wait for a fix if we would know what the situation is. At the moment we know nothing, except that HB is pointing at ED and ED is pointing at HB. That makes me more sick than being RIO on a moving ship. As you can see, ED also pays no attention to that situation. Maybe you'll find someone who have spare time to do something like that, record it, report it and wait months for no answer. I'm not gonna test that.

Good if you are fine with it as it is. I would like to use the Tomcat as it is intended to. To do so, this bug needs to be fixed. At least it would be nice if the Devs would let us not sit in the dark regarding that topic.

A few days ago, we had a sortie wich also included aerial refueling. I captured it on video and thought that I could show it to you. I did that with wings in Auto and a KC-135MPRS which was flying a circle pattern. The key to success on aerial refueling with the Tomcat is to follow the rules: Fly in formation with the tanker until your are trimmed hands free. Do it slow, don't hesitate and don't get into osscilation with the stick. Set the tanker to cruise around 250kts IAS. Use this link: Or jump here to 2:15: n0CjS15bdhM I still don't know why there are so many wrong informations and fairy tales about the wingsweep: The F-14 have NEVER been refueld with wings in bomb mode. NEVER. New IRL turkey drivers have been advised to refuel with wings in 40°. Bomb mode would be 55°. This was advised, to avoid turbulences on the vertical stabs coming from the wing of the tanker. According to the swept back wings, the AOA rises and the vertical fins are lower then they would be in Auto. This effect (turbulences on vertical stabs) is not even modelled in DCS. So there is no need to sweep the wings back. Second, I hear often that the slats and maneuver flaps are going crazy. Thats the next fairy tale. You are flying constant and straight with 250kts IAS. There are no slats or maneuver flaps being used. And if they would, it would also not matter because you are flying straight and constant. No difference if they would be out 50% the whole time. Experienced IRL turkey driver refueld with wings in Auto. Just a matter of training. In fact, refueling with 55° (bomb mode) makes your life harder. The turkey gets really nervous to roll inputs and you are very slow and near a stall with the resulting AOA. If your problem is the restriced view, then better try to change your viewpoint. So let me say as conclusion: The F-14 is not a FBW aircraft. If you add one thing (thrust), two other things (speed and lift) will happen. You have to avoid those effects already before they start (pitch down when adding thrust) to happen. Only thing that helps: Training, training, training. Follow the rules for aerial refueling as said above. (And don't forget to set the air source to left unless you wan't to breath some kerosene :smartass: )

Don't get me wrong, I'm the last one who will find that hell of a bug pile or workarounds ok, but there seems really to be something messed up on your side. Ok, I'm useing IFA all the time, but I don't get a CTF when turning the switch from off to IFA (over all other modes) when the turbine did already started up and the generator is running already.

I don't care who is responsible and I don't care about the reason, I just want to get it fixed to be able to startup the F-14 from the carrier without getting seasick. Read again post. nr. 3. Heatblur says, that it is EDs fault, and ED says that they can't do anything about it as long as Heatblur does not bring it up to ED. So, they are both pointing at each other and let us in the dark. Probelm is existing since the F-14 got released, so over an half year later, at least an statement of the actual situation would be be highly appreciated.

Pikey, just twist the INS knob to IFA, wait 2 minutes and fly. No need for doing a sea or ground alignement with datacable or coordinate entry. IIRC, the Harrier was released in EA on November 29th, so prepare your cake, we have a 2 year anniversary.

Sorry, but that is just not true.

4790K@4.5GHz, 32GB, GTX 1080, SteamSS 150%, PD 1.0

Odyssey+ with GTX1080 here. No problems about readability in the F-14. On my personal opinion, the cockpit looks much better, and is better readable then the Av-8b cockpit. Also I feel not a big difference in performance between those two. Flying both on nearly max settings with stable 30-45fps.

Bei dem was ich bis jetzt gesehen habe, sieht es für mich so aus als ob sie die Prioritäten alle richtig gesetzt haben. (Siehe optisches Erscheinungsbild Tpod z.B., sehr vollständiger EA Status, keine großes Aufreden im Vorhinein etc.). Die JF-17 finde ich zwar IRL jetzt nicht so prickelnd, denke aber das Deka da ganze Arbeit mit dem Modul abliefern wird. Bin sehr gespannt...

Since the last update, the first two aircraft on the Stennis spawn next to each other. Related to the massive desync and rubberbanding issues on any carrier, this is a guarantee to have both airframes demolished within seconds. Maybe the team can also investigste on that issue.

Is there anywhere a roadmap for EA or something similar? To get a picture of what is included on EA release and what will be WIP and / or missing?

Zeus answered it already. Add it to "the List". https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3075959&postcount=693

Great idea. Maxbe boring, but at least interesting to get a look behind the scene. Thx for that!

1. NRAS does not affect a CTO as you don't rotate the nozzles. 2. Thtas more or less a DCS Simulator against real life problem. You don't have the feeling in your butt and especially take offs are with most modules not as smooth as they should be IRL. 3. You get those two adversary lights because you also try to turn on the ECM (lowest knob) and you have not equipped the ECM pod.

Ok, thank you and good to know! (When I said no AM/FM messed up, I meant that I did not accidently selected another modulation in the ME)

Why not? TPod on station 2 and Aim-9/Agm-122 on station 6 would sound quite good to me... However, Zeus made this promise already over 1 1/2 year ago: So better to not expect him to keep his promise.

Just would like to ask if there is a known bug with the radio presets? Observed it so far only on the RIO radio. If I enter the correct frequencies in the ME, and then manualy (as RIO) select a preset, or tell Jester to select a preset, I don't get a respond from the one I try to talk to. When dialing in the frequency manual (as RIO) it works. When i tell Jester to dial in the frequency manual (digits, no preset), it works. Seems like there is still a wrong preset frequency, or? Nope: Stennis was on Preset 2. Told Jester to use preset 2. He dialed it in, got no response from the Stennis. Told Jester to dial in the Stennis (TAC -> Stennis). Radio stayedl on the preset and did not change to a manual frequency. -> Suddenly it worked. (No AM/FM messed up) When this problem occours, it is reproduceable (no answer when on presets, ansewrs when dialing in manual or via TAC), unfortuantely, I did not found out when it occours. Did anybody else observed something similar?

Need to try it one day with the L-39, but as the whole sync is really messed up, I'd guess it will be the same. Caught it on tape yesterday: I-LV6A3ManE I would not see that as a low priority bug...

Still present, unfortunately, very annoying :-/ : I-LV6A3ManE Are there any news on that topic from the Dev side?