Richard Dastardly

True, I was thinking "hey they're being replaced by the a400" & got a bit premature :) it's not quite as old as the Hercules in absolute terms, but it's old enough that you can say it's "about that old" by now. To add another point to it, RR Tyne engines sound great.

Pretty safe bet when the DCS log is showing WARNING F-14: F-14 Build vs DCS version mismatch! Built with: 2.5.5.36367, DCS is: 2.5.5.36986 Note - not saying that is causing a problem,just that DCS has changed something & not the Tomcat.

The Transall ( C-160 ) was a long-serving twin engined western tactical lifter that looked very like a small Hercules, about half the payload of a 130H & was built to land on rough strips. An-26 is also twin-engined but it's not quite the same sort of lifter. No gunships afaik for either ( I don't think they'd be as much fun as people are thinking ), but worse nothing like the MC-130 which imo would be the thing to go for.

I think most of what I've heared about it's flight capability boiled down to "well, it's not as bad as a Phantom" - damned by faint praise indeed :) it seemed like it was designed to a 1950s brief of bomber interception, ignoring the possibility that the bombers would be either a) escorted by something that could fight, or b) *were* something that could fight. I've read good things about the radar, and Skyflash was a vast improvement on Sparrow, but I'd imagine feeling pretty goddamn nervous closing on a bunch of Flankers in one...

Issue in MP again - spawned in a F-14 on a Stennis ( on a mod-free server to be clear ) & was kicked with a tainting error which I've yet to locate in the logfile. Removing Hermes from tech & leaving the livery folders there cleared the error. Will investigate further.

Concur, all selectable now. It's probably in the thread somewhere, but what's the reason for the dip in the deck near the forward lift? ( sadly spawning onboard still throws my helis overboard :S happy to wait on that one though )

Hmm, can't seem to select different paint for the '81 version... the files are all there, just nothing in the mission editor dropdown.

Out of curiosity, what would you consider hard about a C-141? other than the apparent lack of support for more than two engines... Out of all of them, the ones you'd either take to or across front lines would seem to be the ones to choose. Tactical insertion is still dodging enemy defences & dropping stores :p You somehow missed the AN-12, btw.

"Said in November 2019".

Could look at the Westlands version of the D model I suppose ( bigger engines, navalised, doesn't regularily crash ), but apparently getting usable docs over here for vaguely recent aircraft is a near-impossible chore :S still, an avenue of attack. Think the Cobra will be more fun, frankly.

If it's a might-have-been, like a Fleet Air Arm F-14 ( there was nearly a carrier big enough to operate them ) or something from a film that's vaguely representative like the Mig-28 for the F-5 then I'm good. I guess basically as long as it's not outside the bounds of probability so it doesn't ruin my suspension of disbelief much. We also have more imagination than available airframes, so some things have to stand in as substitutes...

That is not a 737 - frankentanker is mostly based off a 767. Not the best aircraft to want in game given it's ( being polite ) troubled introduction to service.

O-2? :P On a serious note, an A-37 would probably be amazing fun.

Tornado passing a Bucc down low? laff ;) Have been buzzed at low level by just about every western cold war strike aircraft ( and a few more ) given the low fly area I grew up in, you'd expect 8+ Tornado flights a day plus innumerable Hawks. Got their money's worth out of airframes back then for sure. I'm torn between wanting a strike Tornado or a Bucc ( first... ideally both but priorities ). The Bucc would be a very nice cold war carrier strike aircraft...

iRacing is a subscription model because it's a service, and anyone who's had anything to do with iRacing knows their development cycle makes ED look frantic. If there's funding issues with these complex modules maybe ED should look at not doing 10 year old planes, and do easier and quicker to develop 40 year old ones instead? how about fixing CA a bit so people might want it for more than novelty? If there's a problem here it's of their own devising, and squeezing even more money out of us is not the way forward. Subs would be effectively making us pay twice for content, there's no added value for the subs payment.

Pretty much only ft altitude & NM for distance ( and obviously kts ), no? in the UK we generally use metric unless we're driving, you get used to mixing them...

I may have msised a detailed roadmap, but I'd very much like to see a couple more AI air units, at least one German one. I'd suggest the Ju-88, given that is almost as multirole as the Mosquito... using B-17s on Axis side lacks many things. A couple more ground units, eg a fixed artillery piece - commonwealth 25pdr perhaps? or maybe something which would fit in with any era - just to add ground variety would also be appreciated.

Because the F-16 release has nothing to do with regular updates, which include some rather overdue patches to other modules & bugfixes. We're way way overdue one at this point. They could release the F-16 & still not update anything else about the game.

So Mirage fix today ( wed ) or we're still having to wait for the F-16?

A full fidelity tactical airlifter, sure, especially one with some more unique systems like night flying aids or even TFR . As long as it's something that's used more like an oversized helicopter than an airliner. If one day we can get much more dynamic battlegrounds where loiter time for anything but AFAC is actually useful, then I'll be more interested in CAS bomb trucks.

Hercules/Transall ( note - twin engined )/AN-12 might be fun, tactical airlift would have uses - although they might have done the market research for non-combat heavy aircraft already & that's why we don't have them, because they're definitely simpler to develop than combat aircraft when they're missing the entire weapons suites. I'd vote for a MH-130 and a MH-53 - they can both still perform their logistics roles ( somewhat ) but with a bunch of unique features on top. The likely heavy bombers would either be a B-1 or Vulcan ( given the Tu-22M is still in service & there's problems on the Russian end ), and you could just obliterate the map with those given our lack of realistic servicing.

Growing up in a low-fly training area not far from the main naval air station in this country I've had a fair experience of hovering Harriers... and even some distance away they are *loud*. "Is someone launching a rocket out there?" loud. Not surprised you could hear him in the cockpit!

I've been idly studying this because it also seems to happen when you dynamically spawn troops ( CTLD, for instance ) - what size group is it? does changing group size make any difference? some discussion prompted a theory that it's a pathfinding issue ( as in units starting pathfinding is stalling the server tick ) so there's a chance using smaller groups would ease it.

Yes -_-. And Razbam realised the update was broken before the patch went out, only they weren't able to pull it. No Viper for me until older items are completed, and I'm starting to hate it already.

I couldn't get multiple frequencies to work, had to set up individual beacons for each. Otherwise, seems good.