MadCat1381

The pilot's notes state: "...A voltmeter across the accumulator is fitted at the top of the instrument panel..." So you're probably right.

The P-51D-25 and 30 we have in DCS have metal covered elevators and the V-1650-7 engine. The only fabric covered control surface is the rudder.

Same panel as the one where you find the FCR and radar altimeter power switches. To the right of the stick and below the mechanical clock.

That's one of the best features of the Viper's cockpit. Way less fiddling around with OSBs when you are in combat.

The SMS pages has some kind of sub level page. I think it is called INV. Try OSB 4 or 7... can't remeber where to start counting them. The 4th in the upper row. Sometimes INV is written there, sometimes not but the button is still functional.

Not sure, but I guess the Block 40 Vipers (Night Falcons) have a HUD that can use these controls.

Same for me. At Creech AB. QNH 29.99 - Field elevation 3126ft Altimeter set to 29.99 in elec mode shows 2980ft, in pneu mode 2920ft. HUD indicates 2920ft. The INS is set to the correct elevation when starting the alignment. AltBug_F16C.trk

He says, that the DL switch next to the MIDS knob is not implemented and not used in this block.

Does anyone know how the Litening integrates with the HTS? I read, that the Sniper integrated quite well.

I wouldn't recommend that. The FCS tries to give you the trimmed AoA, so you will be fighting the plane all the time and you're going to develop a bad habit. That way I think it will be harder in the long run to get this technique right. Real navy pilots train hundreds of landings before going to the boat. It is just hard.

Both modules have a targeting pod for laser guided bombs (LGBs) and other funny stuff. Both will have the same abilities (more or less). Both can do A/A and A/G as both are molti role fighters. And yes, if you want the capabilities now, go Hornet, as the Viper is still really early access. Not much is implemented yet. To be honest, if you can wait, it is just personal preference. I always thought, the Hornet would be my plane, but I just like the cockpit of the Viper more. The layout and HOTAS just ticks all the boxes for me. This might be different for you, so it's really hard to help you with your question. Both are great planes. A ground radar maps the ground in front of the airplane and highlights structures and moving targets. Not very precise over land but very helpfull over the sea. Both will get it, sooner or later. Edit: Both can load about the same amount of ordnance.

Hi, there seems to be no sync between the SAlt on the DED INS page and the HUD or the Altimeter. The HUD shows the wrong altitudes which is pretty obvious on the NTTR map. But that's actually not what I wanted to report. When you fully align the INS and go for a fly, at some point the SAlt on the DED starts to count down, even when the plane is not moving (after landing). I had a flight after which the SAlt showed less (more?) then -2000ft after about 1 hour of flight time! The flight in the track file is not that long, but it shows the behavior. I don't know if this value is related to any system yet, but I guess a INS guided weapon will have a hard time hitting anything with the wrong altitude value. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I7rb-FljEw-YagPv_2aOd0_XvsOua1sY/view?usp=sharing Greetings MadCat

Spitfire and Fw190 for me as well. These taildraggers just won't behave. :D

Agreed, seems more like the frictional coefficent between the tires and the ground is too low. And if I understand the technical documentation (NATOPS a.s.o.) correctly, the anti skid system should prevent the wheels from locking up.

On some photos you can see, that the small after part of the canopy is clear and not gold tinted, on some it has the same color as the main part. And it seems that this small section does not get refurbished as often as the main part so it gets somewhat dull over time. But that's just my guesswork. Looking at photos of seemingly new F-16s, it seems that the aft transparency has the same color (the same goldish tint) as the main canopy.

As a Hornetdriver I must admit, that the first thing I switch off is the moving map. :D It's small, hard to read and the HSI symbology is barely visible. I have no need for a moving map. I guess on the tiny MFDs of the Viper it would be even harder to see anything on it.

It is one of many possible answers. I don't think that there is just one true answer to this. Another on you've given already. As a former aircraft mechanic I can say that this is one of the most important considerations in any aircraft. Build anything as light as possible without sacrificing safety and function. I never said it was impossible to build an electrical starter strong enough to crank a 35+ liter engine but it was rarely done, even by nations with plenty of supplies of ore and other materials. The bigger the engine you want to crank, the more mass you have to move and the heavier the starter gets you need. The start-up current will increase as well, so you need a stronger batterie. All that adds to the weight, no one wants that. As it was common, I think the fly wheel was just the more practical solution. And btw. looking at the german developments early in the war or before, they rarly cared about rescources. One example is the 1942 Porsche Tiger (VK 45.01 (P)) with its petrol electric drive. Two petrol engines, a generator (500kVA) and two big electrical motors (230kW each). That's alot of copper!

At least it is blue and quite big. But happened to me as well.

Nice!

Because the Merlin is a relatively small engine, with "only" 27.5 litres. The Merlins in the Hurricane were started by a handcrank and a flywheel. Early Spits too. For comparison: DB 601 33.9ltrs DB 605 35.7ltrs BMW 801 41.8ltrs P&W R-2800 45.9ltrs Most bigger engines had fly wheels, especially the radials. The P&W R-2800 in the F4U and the P-47 used a fly wheel, Wright Cyclone etc. It was common.

No it wont. Tritium lighting was invented in the 1960s. What they had back in WWII was Radium paint (Radioluminescent paint). The paint glows bacause of it's radioactivity. But what the Germans and other nations used in some planes was UV lighting of the panel (Fluorescent paint). The paint will only glow when hit by UV light. That's why it's not glowing without elecrical power.

I was using the Warthog Grip. I had the inner guns bound to the first stage trigger, the outboard guns to the cms push or forward button (was playing around with this a bit) and the bomb pickle to the red bomb release button. The safety flip cover I had bound to the master mode select button. For me it's not a big deal if the bomb pickle is ab bit harder to reach, but the guns need to be easy to reach. I'm using a similar layout with the hornet grip now.

The radar altimeter will give you your AGL as long as it is less then 5000ft, no matter how high your barometric altitude is. You can fly at 20000ft baro, when the ground is at 17000ft you will still get the correct height AGL. If you are above 5000ft AGL you'll need a map and your baro alt to get your height above ground.

Happens in single player as well. Did a small sortie on the PG map and every time I fired the guns these two CBs popped after 1 or 2 seconds. The CB for the undercarriage (Fahrwerksbetaetigung) often comes out when trying to retract the gear as well.

I mostly use the rudder trim, works fine for me. What you have to consider is, that you have, unlike the other warbirds we have in DCS now, wing tanks. If you don't use the fuel from both tanks equally by switching the tanks regulalry, you will get an uneven "payload". Then you need to use the aileron rim as well.