Scrape

Imagine management of carrier ops. Who's got the Ouija Board?

Would it be reasonable to allow a snap to a parking location? A player would return to the carrier and want to refuel and rearm. They land then taxi to a parking area on the deck clear of the landing zone. A command "chock in" for example is given and the aircraft is snapped into a proper parking location that's closest to where the player is stopped. The chock in command is not required for any deck operations. Just an idea, not sure if it would work, or if its feasible to program. While excited for carrier ops, I am curious to what level carrier ops will be simulated. Carrier ops are complex by nature and in the framework of MP servers will it be up to the players to manage these operations?

I think it would make a lot of sense. Not all in the same weekend, but back to back yes. I would release it like this: Month 1 - 2.5 Month 1 - New module (since the Harrier trailer is out then Harrier is up first.) Month 2 - New module F-14 (Because I wanted this one to be first ;) Month 3 - New module F-18 (ED finishes this group with the flagship and any remaining ocean vessels as the first patch update to 2.5) Month 4 - Maintenance Month 5 - Sale for older modules (target is new players who might be curious of other modules) Once 2.5 is in then it's safe to bring in as many players as possible with the modules. Bringing in new players before 2.5 is premature. The split player experience and cost of the 2.0 maps will turn off a lot of players. Once the new Caucus map is available then a presentable experience is open to newcomers. 1.5 is an old map that has become dated to anyone not already all in with DCS, and the good looking newest maps are behind an intimidating initial price point for the full experience. With the new Caucus map as the base the game can expand its player base freely. A normal initial price point for a module gets a player into the game and they won't have to feel like they are settling for 2nd rate. The Caucus map has every environment needed to make use of all the modules if configured properly to include naval ops. The rest is a specialized experience that players will warm up to paying because they have already been satisfied with a quality experience.

What a nice surprise. Couple more modules and an update and we'll be all set!

I agree making kneeboard map to be dragged and zoomed. Yes yes yes.

If they would have used E-6's as RIO's it would have been easy, lol

Wing pylons and centerline pylon removed is as slick as it will ever get on an E-model. While it is possible, no E-model will fly with out CFTs (Conformal Fuel Tanks). The bomb racks on the CFTs will always be installed, as will stations RC/LC one through three along the fuselage. When in air to air config, the BRU-57 racks are still present only their sway pads are locked upward to give the 120 the clearance it needs. The launchers for missiles may or may not be present for A2G configs. Typically a cover panel is installed in the forward launchers. The cover panel is not an operational requirement, it just makes life easier on the maintenance crews.

+1 No sim has yet to really capture that 'alive' carrier feeling after the first launch. If they AI could understand how to navigate the carrier then it would go a long way to giving the feeling to the player that they are part of something bigger.

I think that the option of playing as a RIO might attract people who want the complexity and dynamic multiplayer simulation, but feel they don't have the time to become flight proficient. Mastering flight in a sim like DCS is intimidating to some players, most players. Present company excluded. However people are more likely to be willing to master a system, like the AWG-9, and contribute in a meaningful way. Once the merge is complete the game will look great, and sitting in the back of the Cat on the way back to the deck will be a good way to spend the weekend. Due to the complexity of DCS a dedicated RIO will be respected and sought after. A player spending time to flesh on the nuance of the aircraft will be rewarded by performing a function that the pilot can not perform. Because of the uniqueness of play-style, bonds that will form, drama that will erupt, this will be in my opinion the best module in DCS.

JHMCS (pronouced J-Himmicks) is always on. How would I know? Ask the guys who fix it, because the pilots will surely tell you when it's broken.

Sure can. It's not too hard as long as you don't rush it. Once touch down has happened a lot of pedal dancing is required to include braking. Of course very light braking! Landing the Spit isn't tough if given a proper approach but she doesn't like combat landings where you bank into the final. She won't respond nimbly once in landing configuration. I approach (not always, but the best landings...) a few miles out turn on final. RPM is forward like it is on takeoff. Carb vent forward, but this won't affect handling. I control the approach speed to 140mph. I don't ride the glideslope but instead pitch for deck just before the threshold. Flaps are down early and I trim so that constant pressure can be applied to the stick to maintain flight attitude. Trimming to neutral stick usually results in a pilot induced oscillation due to the 'floaty' response of the Spit at 140mph. Keeping pressure on the stick keeps the plane in a more reactionary state to stick inputs and its easier to make corrections. Once the the field is assured (you'd make it if your engine failed) then I reduce speed to 120mph. Just before the runway threshold begin a slow flare while reducing throttle. This takes some practice and judgement. The Spit will ride the bubble down the runway pretty far and then drop you abruptly if your timing is off. Reducing speed while flaring nose up to make a three wheel landing is the optimum goal. Everything should be gradual and gentle. Once down your feet will be very busy keeping her strait. Keep the stick full aft while you tame the girl to a safe taxi speed. Don't rush the braking, use the whole length of the runway. Most mindset I see online; Every landing always seems to be final, and everyone tries to save it. If the approach goes bad, then go around. Your subconscious will file that in, that didn't go so well box, instead of meh I'm on the ground anyway I'll just spawn a new aircraft. The touch and go is a timeless pilot training tool that's never been out of style.

The Spit was a monster initially, but I've tamed the takeoff experience. My proceedure is as follows: Fuel pump off Carb Air Fliter lever forward Elevator Trim one notch up on the gauge. Rpm lever forward Most important setting during take-off is the rudder trim as you may have noticed. Spin the knob full right then back it left until the T in the word Port is vertical. Then turn it a bit more left till that T is just past the vertical position. Here will require a slight adjustment due to your pedals and configuration, but this is about where you want it. *Boost increased to 8lbs* Always use this amount. Less than 8lbs on boost with max rpm will yank the airplane hard to the left from adverse yaw vs airspeed. No one likes this. The Spitfire like 8lbs, let her have this one and listen to the girl give her 8lbs. Release brakes Flight stick should be slight aft pitch and slight right roll input. How much depends on your curve settings. I don't use curves or saturation settings so for me its just slight pressure. You'll need a little right roll to assist with countering the adverse yaw from the engine. The aft pressure on the stick is to keep the tail wheel on the ground to assist directional stability before sufficient airspeed is attained to counter adverse yaw with the flight control surfaces. Rudder pedals should be full right. As the Spit increases speed gradually return the pedals to neutral while keeping the stick frozen. A little more work is required for crosswind take-offs. The rudder pedal should be the only surface in flux while on the take off roll, and if trimmed properly the only one needed. If done correctly neutral rudder should be achieved at the same time the wheels lift off the ground. All three wheels should loft into the air easily. Forward pressure may be required on the stick if elevator trim is set too high. Boost increased to 10lbs. Settle into a ten degree climb or less and allow the aircraft to enter a right hand turn. Pull rpm back to 2800 and adjust rudder trim as required. Open the carb vent (position aft) and engage fuel pump. You're up, now go shoot down some Jerries and don't blow the bloody engine!

Never dogfight below 180mph. When you are at 180mph do not go over 12lbs of boost, but I would recommend 8-10lbs when slow speed. Keep the rpm down to 2800. If you have a moment to breathe then power down to 2650rpm and 4-7lbs boost without climbing and the engine cools quickly. Keep the engine "breathing". Don't leave it maxed out while fighting. Pull it back when diving and the engine will cool very fast. Never run maximum boost for more than ten seconds regardless of temps. The best bank angle and turn rate combinations happens between 200-240mph. Managing speed is the key to the Spit being effective, more than in other fighters. If you keep the speed up then you can run the engine at 15lbs/2850rpm without problems. Do not ever follow anyone into the vertical or you will overheat in seconds. Loops should start at a 260mph min to avoid negative effects while reducing the throttle on the apex and not returning it till nose is near the horizon to avoid negative heat effects. If 240mph or below do not attempt a loop or follow into the vertical. Instead turn and go around using the time to cool the engine and go nose under the target to prevent a lead angle deflection shot. Build speed here and avoid high load banks that will slow the aircraft. Make sure the fuel pump is on! (Switch under elevator trim, not to be confused with fuel cock lever under starter switch) Lean fuel conditions add heat to the engine and high g dogfighting will create lean conditions.

I've seen this issue pop up in many different forums, but yes scratches are a thing. They exist is operation active duty aircraft. Canopies have a time change that often mated to the phase flow of an aircraft. As a maintainer of 17 years I have sat in the cockpits of F-16s and F-15Es performing functional checks and the canopies while clear are not perfect. Scuffs and scratches accumulate quickly despite the glass being "Waxed" daily. I don't think people realize how often pilots bump into them. No one is reckless around a canopy, but is tends to happen. The only perfectly clear canopy is a brand new one. What one considers a scratch and a scuff might need clarification but I will say that the glass is not perfect after a week.

The stick is modular, so I guess it would be up to Thrustmaster, but its possible.

Now that...was an update! o7 Hope you guys hit your target, a lot of people believe in you. Count me in for a purchase.

I see what you did there, lol.

@SkateZilla Yes I could have walked him through the process in a better way, I think I mentioned that, and the second nature of being a part of the DCS franchise allowed me to overlooked how I should present what was in front of him. That I will agree with. However. If a game requires a walk through from a current player to simply just get into the game itself there is a problem. Yes the answers can all be found if one looks for them, but there isn't anything communicating to the user that there will be a problem in the first place. When the steam version is downloaded is it communicated to the average curious customer that not all of the game will be playable with that version? How often is something like that experienced by a customer of any product? Not very. Currently I have two games on my hard drive to play a single game experience. It's been some time, and aside from a post from last year saying that 2.5 would be out by 2016 year end there isn't much I've found with casual searching. It isn't about me. I know how I could have handled the situation better. It's about a person (not my friend but a random person) who sees a video, or see's the DCS title scroll across the steam store and becomes curious enough to download it. It's about the customer that comes to the site looking to make a purchase. Imagine how that would look to the uninitiated so to speak. Maps that look awesome and amazing, but not playable with the version that they probably downloaded first (1.5) But there is a 2.0 and why would someone want to download a 1.5 when there is a 2.0? Even if they understand it all, does that make it easier to open that wallet or hesitate? They might have read that DCS World was free to experience with paid content to expand that experience. Nothing wrong there, but the branches of that experience are fragmented into 3 different versions of the game. A version that plays some of the modules. A version that plays only one of three maps. A version that plays 2 of three maps. Regardless of how I handled the situation, and regardless of how much I respect and have affection for playing this game, its not the best way to conduct business. 2.5 is supposed to fix all of that, and this is most welcome news. I look forward to it.

@Buzzles I agree 2.5 is the solution I was looking for. What I read it was said to be ready by the end of 2016 in a post from Wags. Perhaps there is more up to date information when it is supposed to be ready, but I don't mind that so much. Knowing that is indeed the goal then it seems to correct much of what I was speaking of. Also in the post I found Wags also stated that the merger was long overdue and I can't ask for more than that in the terms of understanding. Hopefully it all comes together sooner rather than later. @Arsonist There are games that offer official content via the workshop. rFactor 2 has paid content that can be downloaded via the workshop for example. The key to play that content is checked post download. I'll take that you said you might misunderstand due to a language barrier into account, so I won't debate all of your points, but one stands out. My friend is a grown man. He began his journey into DCS on his own and then I spoke with him after I returned home after work. It is not my responsibility nor should it ever be anyone's responsibility to hand walk anyone into a game. If a person needs to be escorted into a game to understand it then the game has a communication problem. Beyond that its my intention to let it go now that I am aware of 2.5. I was aware of the Caucus update, but not 2.5. I play the game often, but I don't come to the forums often. I hope we have come to terms.

Buzzles take a moment to read my post. My friend did read the page which is why he posed the questions and discovered the mismatch on his own. The questions isn't weather or not it was clear, it's weather or not the condition should exist. That can and should be laid at ED's feet. I've been a customer of ED since the first Lock On and every iteration since. I know what 1.5 is. Reading isn't the issue I am raising. I am not stating a problem for myself. You read my post, but misunderstood, I am highlighting a problem in organization. We would agree that a clunky and convoluted UI takes away from a game experience and in the worst cases will ruin the game to a degree. This is also true for the purchase experience for the first time customer. Look around the market at other games. The average customer coming into the DCS store is rarely if ever exposed to this level of purchase complication and compatibility. DCS is not a new title. It's a full functioning game. Multiple single player campaigns, and multiplayer missions that can update mission status in PVP in real time to websites. Hardly what I would call Alpha at this stage. In the old days Beta signified that all the core features are functioning in the game. Isn't that what we have? Modules cost full price without a sale, and a full price experience should be offered from the beginning. We are years in, not just out of the gate, and I'm not going anywhere. I don't care if my friend plays or not. Don't you think its within the power of ED to streamline DCS? I do. Perhaps it isn't perceived as a problem otherwise I feel that it might have been addressed sooner. The road-map imo should have merged the game into one cohesive unit as soon as possible. I'm not sure what standard ED has to reach to call their game finished, but its finished. They continue to improve and expand the game, but DCS as a game is finished. Campaigns work, maps work, aircraft fly. I think it's time to sell it as a finished project. New aviators or strategist to the game should feel welcome when they arrive. There is enough study to learn the aircraft and systems. The setup and intro into the world should be easy. If a restaurant is down 3 alleys and 4 different sets of stairs there will only be but so many customers that eat there no matter how good the food is. Restaurants are made accessible so people will be tempted to try out the food. It's just good business.

I have a hardcore gaming friend wanted to get into DCS. He's the kind of guy who plays SH3 with all the assist turned off. He sees the new modules coming out feels its a good time to be a part of DCS and where its going. He downloads the Steam version then later we meet online. He wants to try multi-crew functions because that's what appealed to him to begin with. Then he sees that the Gazelle isn't comparable with the steam version (strike one). Aren't the modules in the steam workshop? He doesn't understand why the website and steam are two different versions of the same game, but ok. He deletes the steam version and downloads DCS world 1.5. Then he finds that the servers I usually frequent are on DCS 2. He thought that meant he would have to download a patch or update. I explain. Annoyance sets in (strike two). Uninstalled 1.5 and downloads 2.0. Then realizes that after buying the aircraft, and after downloaded 2.0 he would need to buy a map to just play the game (strike three). He said to call him later when the game sorted itself out. I hadn't occurred to me how confusing it must be for a newcomer who doesn't have any history with this game to get into it. There are three versions of this game out there. Two of them not compatible at all. The average consumer never has to worry about that and shouldn't be expected to. Not to mention the steep introductory price to get started without a sale, which if you don't have any history with the website wouldn't know that they are frequent. On my wishlist. One DCS game, one user interface.

This mission is not meant to be played solo. Coordination is required between players to achieve success.

Although the pilots name are on the side of the aircraft, pilots fly aircraft available according to maintenance status. Little effort if any is made to put a pilot in "their aircraft". Perhaps for a DV of significant rank, but again only if its available in the line up for that day.

Would it be possible to allow aircraft to share lasers? Lase a target for another aircraft? That would be an awesome change.

I agree Janes did a great job with the cockpit. This would be the airframe absolutely! Allowing two players in the same aircraft would be the right way to go about it though.