IRememberJeep

I second what Metzger said, I see the F-16 being flown in most servers. The ones I frequent anyway. I also see them carrying a plethora of different munitions. CAP loadouts with AIM-9s & AIM-120s, AI loadouts with TPOD and LGBs, and even CAS loadouts with CBUs & Mk 82s. I suppose you could make the argument that we don’t have Mavericks or JDAMs but at the end of the day I’d rather have the flight model correct and leave the development to the developers. I’ll start supporting these complaint posts this time next year if we don’t have additions. Maybe it’s just me who got a good download of the F-16 that’s usable? As to the OP searching for vids, you may want to message/comment to the content creators and tell them you want to see more F-16 vids. They most likely will listen and I agree that I would like to see more F-16 vids. I’ve seen quite a few tutorials and also there are a few mission videos posted up with the F-16 including from Cap & The Grim Reapers. Edit: I’d like to add that the Hornet didn’t get the TPOD until fairly recently. The F-16 launched with it. I think the Devs should be thanked for adding as many munitions as they did at launch because it was a whole lot more than I expected considering it’s Early Access.

+1

I get it specifically from the HSD after MIDS is switched on and INS is switched to Nav. So basically when it starts displaying SA on that page. As soon as I switch to SMS or a different page the frames come back. If I switch back to HSD the frames drop again. I have no issues with the F-18 SA page or any other aircraft for that matter, so I figured it was a bug of some sort.

If you switch off of the HSD page it will fix the frame rate issue until it is fixed. That is what I do anyway. I will quickly switch to it and back if looking for a bit of SA. But yes, it’s not just you. I believe everyone is getting low FPS with the HSD displaying SA.

A bump in FPS? My friend this is borderline magic. My FPS jumped tremendously in all games, DCS included...though DCS is a big one. Thank you so much for sharing this.

That’s pretty awesome. I wouldn’t mind that many military aircraft coming here. Haha. Fantastic photo by the way! I’m going to be more aware and ready to get a photo/vid of these aircraft. For some reason the fly overs seem more frequent. In any case I know I can get some good photos of the Chinooks Boeing test flies. Hopefully I get lucky and see some more Hornets or maybe even an F-16. @AeriaGloria it’s funny because I just saw a vid where a flight of Canadian F/A-18s flew from Canada to California and landed at LAX (I think it was LAX) for training. Seems like a long journey just to introduce a pilot to crowded airspace. Haha.

Oh no kidding, I didn’t know it was so common. This was the first time I saw any military aircraft come out of PIA, I was surprised to say the least. I wish I saw it more often. Haha. Hahaha, yeah Hog Island Rd. There is nothing like having an airliner zoom right over your head. It’s like that scene from Wayne’s World, when they’re laying on the hood of the car, on that road. Though for obvious reasons the Police Don’t like people stopping anymore.

How’s it going everyone, A short story and some questions to ask as I know we have current/former military aviators in the community. So I happen to live close by the Philadelphia International Airport and today while stopping at the store I was in the parking lot finishing a cigarette with the window down. There are constantly airliners taking off and landing which I’ve been accustomed to the sound of. Anyway, while finishing my cigarette I suddenly hear an aircraft engine that immediately catches my attention because it’s distinctly different than a run of the mill airliner. Sure enough as I look to my left I see a three ship of F/A-18 Super Hornets climbing out of Philadelphia International each trailing each other. It immediately brings a huge smile to my face seeing one of my favorite aircraft and hearing those amazing engines but I also immediately have questions. If anyone knows is it common for a military aircraft to land at a civilian airport? I will occasionally see CH-47s being test flown around the neighborhood/Delaware River but they come out of the Boeing facility a few miles to the South. Other than that I will see random aircraft such as A-10s, AH-64s, AH-1Ws, UH-60s heading South to North, on a very rare basis and never did they take off from PIA. The closest air base would be the ANG Willow Grove and there is also McGuire AFB not all that far in NJ. I find it odd that the Hornets would have been flying out of WG or McGuire and make a stop at PIA? Are civilian airport normally capable of accommodating military aircraft? Fuel, maintenance...etc? Before anyone asks I live close enough to the Airport to know they took off from there. When I saw them they were low in the takeoff corridor and climbing. So they weren’t just passing by. Anyway, if anyone has any insight it would be appreciated.

If you’re finding that it’s still a WIP and not enjoyable then don’t play it. I think that’s the best answer you’re going to find. I listed earlier a host of features that are working and working quite well but at the end of the day it’s still in EA and still in active production. If you take the time to learn the Viper right now as is you’ll have a good time. Yes things might change but not so drastically to where it will be like relearning the aircraft all over again. It would be one thing if this were released as complete but it wasn’t. I get your opinion on the F-16 but I don’t share it as I think the module is quite usable and fun. It actually may benefit you learning the systems currently implemented and then learning each system one by one as more comes online. It would definitely benefit the production of the F-16 having another person play/testing it and finding any bugs. Overall though I think the F-16 is in a damn good state and ED should be commended for their hard work.

I’ve been keeping track of my stats since my logbook isn’t recording my MP missions. Out of 9 times being shot down I’ve survived to eject twice. Once in the F/A-18C and once in the F-16C, so it is possible to survive even by missile hits.

Such a brilliant idea, thank you for the suggestion. This was really one of my biggest issues with the F-16 since the F/A-18 allows you to use Programs 1 & 5 on the HOTAS.

Well wait now you’re talking about the maintainers of the aircraft? I’d imagine they do check all flight systems but there is more at work against the aircraft than the aircraft itself. The alignment on your vehicle may have just been recalibrated but I’ll bet that if you let go of the wheel your car will bank to one side or the other. USMC said roughly the same already which is true. When you’re talking about practice and skill being unable to overcome unexpected/unpredicted events you’re wrong. Most military training is based on things going wrong and hammering into you how to overcome those issues immediately based off repetition of training and thinking quickly. The more you train at something the better you’ll be, the less you’ll panic, and the quicker you can adjust/adapt. So if the Thunderbirds, who are constantly flying in formation, are rolling down a runway I’m quite sure they’re able to adjust for any discrepancy in the NWS due to surface, winds, air pressure...etc. Hence the drift of the aircraft in DCS while taxiing (minus the Falcon which I think may be a bit off in some aspect but I could be wrong. See my earlier post).

All these issues though are people getting bothered by their own expectations not being met. ED never said “we’re releasing the F-16 in EA but all systems initially implemented will be perfect and fully refined.” I don’t understand these arbitrary numbers of systems that should be complete/offered at EA launch or state of initial systems at launch. All of that is on the individual and not on ED who are trying to implement complicated systems into a game full of other complicated systems all interacting with each other. In defense of the current state of the module though I have to say again that for being so young in EA there is a whole lot there and functional. Really one can do everything the F-18 can do minus carrier ops, a few guided weapons and SEAD on a decent level. Sure it’s not as refined yet but again this is EA and the module is 2-3 months old. One needs to realize that unexpected things will occur and considering that I would argue that the systems we have implemented so far are quite good. Heck, my biggest problem is a small one that has to do with an MFD page. Other than that I can fly, land, bomb, dogfight, BVR and we have RWS, TWS, D/L, IFF, TACAN, CMDS, AAR, Lights, TPOD, Coordinate Entering, HMD...and I’m sure I’m leaving some out. With those listed systems I have minimal issue. The biggest two are SA MFD & TPOD changing the waypoint which, in my opinion, aren’t big enough to prevent me from playing/enjoying the game while the fix is being worked on because it’s in EA and not a finished product. If you’re buying into EA you’re more or less volunteering as a tester for that company while also gaining access to the current state of the project to enjoy. I don’t think it’s fair to ED to throw arbitrary expectations on them that they never promised at EA release. I mean really it comes down to not buying/playing the module if you don’t want to play/test because that’s what EA is about as stated many many times before. Airing grievances based off of expectations you had that were never promised is not constructive nor do I think the Devs deserve to have that put on them. It’s like buying a pack of seeds and being pissed off that the seeds aren’t a bouquet of flowers and then going back to the store to complain about it. Maybe I can better understand the issue if someone explained what the Viper is missing currently that prevents them from enjoying it. Because as I read these complaints I am trying to understand the opposing view.

Except when it’s the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels. :megalol: So wait, are you arguing that they don’t take off in formation? That it’s a hoax perpetrated on the aviation lovers?! Seriously though they can take off in formation even with slight deviation in the alignment (for lack of a better term) because they practice and have the skill from flying thousands of hours (I’d imagine that many). They know how their aircraft handle and drill their maneuvers constantly. You’re right that unpredicted things can happen but that’s where skill and training comes in. So when that unexpected thing happens your brain automatically knows what to do so that you can react as quick as possible. I imagine that USMC Trev is right what with all the variables affecting the aircraft while rolling down a runway.

Practice....and skill?

With all due respect but instead of suggesting ED not release EA products why don’t you just refrain from buying EA modules until they are considered complete? That way you don’t have an frustrations. ED never claimed that the F-16 would be perfect when released and the whole point of EA is to hammer out bugs and gather data when in play. So purchasing any EA product you know what you’re getting in to. NL makes such a great point in that the amount of data they can gather from EA must cut down the time it takes to identify and fix problems. I have to imagine that cuts down on development time by a lot considering this isn’t some run of the mill video game. A lot goes into every aspect of each module. That being said you’re acting like the F-16 is ineffective in combat or that one can’t even take off with it. For being three months old in EA the F-16 has a lot of systems and features up and running. Look through server lists and you’ll find tons of people flying it. I would recommend sitting down and actually learning the aircraft because there is quite a bit to learn and it is a whole other animal compared to the F/A-18. In fact it may even be a system shock going from one aircraft to the other. I guarantee you’ll get more out of the module by playing/learning it than complaining about lack of features on the forums. I do get that you’re frustrated with lack of features but that is Early Access for you. It’s not as though it’s hidden, you knew what you were getting into.

I cannot wait for this feature in the Viper. This picture makes waiting so much worse. :greedy: I suppose in it’s absence it would be a good time to become proficient in using the funnel.

I find myself quite often launching DCS with the intent on flying my Hornet only to find myself in the seat of my F-16. Overall for EA I think it’s current state is fair. Obviously there is a lot of work to be done but the basics are there. I think the biggest problem I have with the F-16 at the moment is that the SA page drops my FPS considerably. Enough to make the game unplayable and where I have to keep the right MFD on the stores page. But really for an EA aircraft we have a competent FCS and all the basics there to allow this aircraft to be enjoyable, especially in MP. Besides the SA page being a huge problem I think for such a young module it’s quite good and really makes me look forward to seeing this aircraft grow. As much as I love my Hornet there is something about the Viper, even in EA, that keeps drawing me back. Edit: Scratch that, I think the biggest problem about the F-16 is that I need to learn to do better in 1 v 2 air to air. :megalol:

I had this problem initially with the Hornet until I added a bit of curve to the axis. Between that and having a light touch when steering on the ground you should find that will most likely fix the problem. Well that and practice as I find the more you taxi/takeoff you get a better feel for the aircraft and it’s handling. As far as the F-16C is concerned I do think there is some issue there. It is the only aircraft that I can’t seem to get a handle on and even with curve applied, it is extremely touchy and difficult to keep on an optimal path. I don’t mean to say it’s impossible but it definitely takes more work than any other aircraft. This includes going at low speed while taxiing to the runway. There is always that large drift and having flown the F-16C since release I feel as though I would have been able to get it under control if it were a pilot issue. In any case this is just my opinion and I could very well be wrong on the F-16C.

That sounds like a good problem to have. :megalol: I think it’s safe to say this may the most anticipated feature coming to the Hornet in the short term. Then again it doesn’t take much to make me happy. If ED/Deka can give us TWS and LOD for the JF-17 then I’ll be happy. Edit: I would also like to second the cheek mounted TPOD for the Hornet. That would be a phenomenal addition.

I too have been having this issue recently. If I adjust the roll trim at all, say after firing an AIM-120, then I completely screw up the flight characteristics for the rest of the flight. After using trim it causes the aircraft to either roll left or right without ever being able to find the sweet spot. This is no matter how short or light a press of the trim hat is. I am wondering if this is something that needs to be worked out on ED’s side or if this is somehow pilot error? Keep in mind that I have no issues with the A-10C or F/A-18C. The trim controls on those aircraft are fantastic. It seems like as of right now the F-16C HOTAS trim is way sensitive, and sensitive to the point that I opt to not use it and just fight the roll until my load is once again symmetric.

I agree Airhunter it is a bummer. I would have much rather seen the GBU-24 than the Walleye. No offense to the Walleye users. :-D Maybe we'll get lucky and ED will surprise us with it soon.

I've had this work in GAW. Although there are some bugs where AWACS won't respond to the call randomly.

VFA-105 Gunslingers or VFA-25 Fist of the Fleet if I feel like changing it up. @Tusker: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3300613/

Really glad it’s not just me. The elevation control for the F-16 was always touchy but not to this extreme. I guess it’s back to the F-18 for now although I would like to say that these F-16 updates are really fantastic minus these small hiccups. Hats off to ED for making this headway toward TWS for both aircraft.