Chaogen

Right. That was my 2nd point that being operated by the Navy or Air Force has no bearing on being Aircraft Carrier Capable or not. 1st was that an F-16 isn't exclusively an Air Force Jet.

Just to be clear the F-16 has and is being operated by the U.S. Navy. Reference the F-16N and NAWDC. I say this because if you make a blanket statement like that may bring your whole statement in question and for the sake of informational accuracy to those who are unaware, especially when they find a photo of a F-16 covered in Navy Insignia. That said however, it never has land on a Carrier, unlike the C-130 or U-2 (an Air Force plane). Using the F-16's Arresting Hook will almost certainly result in airframe damage of some kind, and is there only to stop the A/C in case emergencies as you stated, such as brake failure so the A/C doesn't go off runway that would very likely kill the pilot. I do think there should be some damage modeling to that affect, to prevent a similar situation we have with F-5s clogging up the Flight Deck.

I have the same setup. After connecting, and with the wings folded back, I use the ADL (+) cross on the HUD and place it on the back hole of the refueling pod, constantly adjusting with Rudder and Throttle (Speed-brake if needed) to keep it there.

That's not how probability works at all. Outcomes possibility is not the same thing. For probability to follow the same distribution as outcome they likelihood of each outcome must be equal. The Likelihood of a High Fidelity Module going on same in the same year it was released has been historically 0. Therefor the Probability of the Module being part of the Christmas Sale based on a historical analysis is 0%. Unless the developer decides to an outcome to the contrary. Which honestly they shouldn't be. This module is worth every bit they are charging. They are not some big game developer who sell to the console masses and can offset their low margins against volume to recoup the development costs.

To affirm what pmiceli and others have said, in a steam gauge 6 pack world, changing between QFE and QNH when your fields are on average 4500 ft MSL it is a real pain. Additionally switching between ISA Setting and QFE is painful too. With QNH, figuring out your pattern/circuit altitudes on a dial gauge is pretty easy. Just need to know the Field Altitude (which your map will have). QFE is dependent on getting an ATIS report/Contacting a tower before landing. And THAT QFE is only applicable to THAT airfield. In a place where most airfields are unmanned, QFE is almost unusable, and a bad practice to learn flying your approaches/circuits with. If you don't know the QNH setting you can always dial in your ISA setting and be close. All charts will have objects AMSL including the terrain elevation for mountains, peaks and obstacles. So honestly I see very little use for it, except maybe a zero-zero ILS approach if for whatever reason you don't have a radar altimeter and you cant do the math. Of course with all the modern glass cockpits and integrated GPS navigation this whole conversation becomes even less of an issue.

Speaking strictly from a GA perspective, I've yet to see anyone use AGL over AMSL. Been flying for almost 20 years and never seen QFE used even by other pilots or instructors that had been flying considerably longer than that.. And my home airfield where I flew most at is 5500 MSL with a 2800x30ft Runway.

If we could force people to use audio comms like teamspeak or SRS and actually work together instead of trying to be the first to kill something that would be great, but alas. So instead if simple IFF can be done, I would prefer not to get fragged by someone who isn't communicating and just taking potshots. Then they can complain about how realistic IFF'ing is really hard when it gets rolled out. To paraphrase George Carlin, if they figure out how to program their smartphones, they can jolly well figure out how to properly IFF when the time comes.

I imagine an accidental weapons discharge on a carrier is a bigger problem than on an Airbase. Like the USS Forrestal.

We are still talking about an Early Access Module and $16 right?

I guess some of us are here for Penny Benjamin. Others are here for the Trophy.

So if full pitch down doesn't work, how do you expect trim to do so? The transition is going to be brutal in any flight regime where you rapidly change your wing profile and consequently your lift variables. Keep it at the setting until you leave the formation. And as lunaticfringe said bomb mode works, as it does for all formation flying. Even all the way down to 200kts as long as you don't perform any rapid maneuvers. What purpose does transitioning serve? You maybe inefficiently configured for a while, but not un-flyable. After you leave the formation, power out until you reach a speed at which the CADC would have swept the wings back anyway and then switch to Auto. If you want to know what they did in real life you would have to ask the Tomcat pilots on the forum, but I suspect you are not going to get one definitive answer, since from what I've gathered different squads/aircrews did things differently. The last recommendation I saw was to fly in Bomb Mode. Has worked for me since day 1.

Ok. I've seen this a lot in the forums lately. You do not fly an aircraft with trim. You deflect the flight control stick or yoke to maintain whatever attitude you want to hold and then trim to relieve the pressure off the stick. In other words, trim until you could take your hand off the control. Now that maybe because of the springs in your flight stick or the aerodynamic pressures in a mechanically connected flight control, but the principal still holds. So when transitioning you have to still fly the A/C with your stick until you get the A/C stable and then trim. Same applies in Case 1 approach. Trim is not there as a fine flight control input. This is probably one of the big things Flight Sims will tend to erroneously instill in pilots who later transition to real Aircraft.

Prices are not subsidized by Steam depending on the Economic Buying power of a country. If there is a cost difference its because of local tax/tariff laws. Btw, the answer is the numerical value of a module in Reals is 4.2 times the price of the price of a module in US dollar (US to BRL 4.13 this morning). What he was saying is Steam allows him to finance his game or put it on layaway. What you're saying people buying in US dollar need to pay more after conversion using purchasing power parity rates?

double post

Ok, I don't understand. Eagle Dynamics is Russian. What does the Dollar have to do with it? The exchange rate is the exchange rate. Be it Rubles to Dollar or Rubels to Reals. So is the price you pay 4.2 times the converted US dollar price? Or 4.2 times the US Dollar Price? Or 4.2 times the Ruble Price?

It is relevant because it is a core component of your co-efficient of lift. That physics force that keeps your plane in the air. The reason you use it in a turn is to ensure that you keep your lift generation is as efficient as possible before you start inducing so much drag that your engines can't produce enough thrust to maintain you airspeed. It also keeps you from completely separating airflow over your wings and stalling (more than likely entering a spin). Another key component of the physics equation for lift. Someone at Grumman figured out the sweet spot with some math and that why we have the "magical" 15 units of AOA for maximum (EDIT: Sustained) turning rate. AOA for landing sets the A/C up for the maximum amount of lift co-efficient to generate the maximum amount of lift for the minimum airspeed (+ safety margin determined in flight test). And while attitude and AOA seems similar, they are not. Your aircraft velocity vector determines AOA. Pitch Attitude is a meaningless measurement that only serves to tell you which way is up and a poor substitute in the absence of having an AOA instrument.

Are any of you using the "easy" communications menu ( \ ) vs the Mic Buttons? Different servers use different communications settings.

Your arguments are all over the place. You always rebuttal with quotes to specific statements rather than the context of any one person's reply. I'll return the favor by saying, no you do not make a turn by tactile feel when driving. You make it by visual feedback. Power-steering took the raw feedback loop out of the equation a long time ago, and if you adjust your turn based on feel you are on the very edge of loosing dynamic friction, so unless you drift for a living I highly doubt your argument is relevant. Additionally you cannot compare a 2 dimensional force environment with a 3 dimensional one. Your brain has evolved to function in the former, not the latter. And besides that, most brake and gas pedals are just electronic controllers anyway. The "feedback" you get is from a spring. The bottom line of your whole argument across the forum is that you are expecting a SOFTWARE developer to solve a HARDWARE problem. Any suggestion about hardware solutions that anyone posts is immediately dismissed because you can't afford it. You want to FEEL the plane, yet no Flight Simulator on this planet will replicate the G-Forces in the flight envelope you are referring to. Not even a multi-million dollar Level D one. Why are you expecting it from a game you paid $79 for? So what exactly are you looking for? Pick what you want, state it and stick with it, but understand at some point the answer is NO. Stop arguing for the sake of arguing. You are not going to convince anyone here that your opinions are superior because you believe no else is able to grasp your thought process.

In normal flight yes. By all means go practice. But he specifically asked how to avoid entering a stall and spin, and my instruction is based on countering those few seconds as the spin develops, where there is no time to feel out the response. My apologies for not clarifying that.

Right, the Alignment of your Gyros is independent of the co-ordinates you enter. The alignment is the calibration of your Aircraft to accurately sense forces applied to the A/C and those translate into changes in co-ordinates through the Gyros, Accelerometers and an integral computer. Think of the co-ordinates you enter in terms of a CNC machine. They are so it can display your positions in your work space, so you know where you are, which is also why you can apply the inflight visual or tacan fix. Therefor it doesn't matter when you enter it during the process or even what order. If your system had been degraded, likely the Gyros/Accelerometers have been damaged (yes in this case its simulated before someone feels the need to point that out.) and no longer able to accurately sense forces and/or integrate those into accurate delta distances / co-ordinate changes, regardless of how you entered your starting co-ordinates or even the fixes you applied. As to how it got damaged is a good question. I think you are on the right path with a desync between the pilot and RIO?

Yes, I would assume the Navy did their part in removing instruments, but a lot of their other A/C are in just as bad shape. The B-1A (1 of 2) they have is in an abysmal state. Maybe their planes have been stripped as much as they have since the museum isn't a Government or Military entity anymore?

Copious amounts of rudder. Just mash the pedal in the opposite direction of the incipient spin. Do not use aileron to attempt correcting roll. Get the nose pointed into the A/C's velocity vector (No, not the HUD indicator but where your aircraft is moving to, or where it was going before departure, so you can re-establish laminar airflow again. Surfaces inducing local lift forces like ailerons or the elevons do not help your situation. Keep them neutral as much as possible), eventually settling in a shallow dive, or above the horizon enough to keep you out of the dirt. Be ready to catch your nose with the rudder again as it swings through this point you are aiming for. Once the shaking stops, continue on with what you were doing. But keep you movements smooth. That keeps your boundary layer intact and your plane in the air. Now personally I also mash my throttles into full AB if they weren't already, in a turning fight. But this is prior to entering a developed spin which is what you were asking for. Post departure the rules change. Victory wrote the guide on recovery so when he is ready to release it again, you can read up on it. Bottom-line is to not enter the spin in the first place.

Yes. Please would someone explain to me why the airspeed is so crucial? Never, in all my formation flights (and I'm talking 10 ft separation) and AAR, have I ever looked at my ASI. Its 80% Eyeballing the lead and 10% Communication from your lead about his intentions and 10% having a lead that doesn't jerk his plane around. If your lead is telling you what speed to fly something's wrong. For landing on the windowed inner circle 300 kts is at 6 o'clock. The major line to the left is 350 (7 o'clock) for the overhead and major line to the right (5 o'clock) is 250 for gear and flaps. After that its AOA all the way.

By the way this conversation started with METEOP having trouble in a landing pattern. Something all planes are required to do eventually. Nice attempt at subverting my response but regardless your ability to perform BFM has nothing to do with the original or follow-up statement I made or the excuses you remarked. I'm all for people having constructive discussions but if you insist on snide-sarcastic-fallacious counter-arguments: Already answered. Additionally I would pay to see you ACM in 0-0 conditions. Besides that, AGAIN, in BFM your inner won't help you because BMF include a positive vertical (to the Aircraft) G aspect, that will exceed other force vectors by multiple factors, eliminating your ability to accurately use any other equilibrium sensing for any benefit, which was your original 2nd excuse. Your first was you cannot sense feedback from your stick to fly an aircraft. Thousands of pilots do it every day. But since you insist on a military example, I will refer you to the General Dynamics F-16. Arguably one of the best ACM fighters that has no feedback what-so-ever. You also don't need a STALL stick shaker in the HB F-14 since you exceptionally well modeled visual and audio cues to make up for hardware limitations.

I didn't think I needed a disclaimer that this is a computer simulated aircraft and not the real thing. But here its is now. Hate to tell it to you, but your inner ear isn't going to help one bit. Even in the biggest airliners, the 1 or more G environment is going to be towards your seat. Vertigo and Spatial Disorientation (more specifically the loss of perception which way is up in the absence of external visual cues) happens to the best of pilots. That's why they invented instruments to give you a visual cue when you can't see outside and instead of misleading equilibrium sensory feedback. After you've flown through a thunderstorm in the dark your realize to trust your instruments really quickly. So your Mk.1 eyeball is just as relevant in sim as it is in real life. And communication with the stick isn't a requirement either. Airbuses have been flying for decades without any feedback, except for a stall stick shaker which is software activated anyway. In-fact the first commercial FBW active-side-stick aircraft wasn't available until last year.