Im_TheSaint

D4n, get good, srsly.

I think I spoted an inconsistency between the manuals and the visual model. As per pictures, the 3d model of our DCS P-47 uses the CE 13' paddle blade propeller, specifically the symmetric type with a narrow base which was indeed used on the d30 and 40 models. However the manual states a very generic Curtis constant air speed propeller of the size of 12'2". This was sometimes called the toothpick proppeler. I believe this a accuracy conflict between the manual and the 3d model. On top of this, almost with absolute certainty the manual is wrong. As the "symmetric paddle" prop has been used on models since the P47-d23RE variant. And the performance of the plane in game indicates it's being used instead of the original toothpick prop. More info for enthusiasts: The original toohthpick prop had lower proppeler efficiency, or rather, the better paddle prop had a much higher efficiency. This efficiency gap would only be enlargened with the higher HP engines which came rather quickly after the plane's A variants. From thrust horsepower calculations based on climb rate difference between the toothpick (in the manual) and the paddle prop (in the 3d model and on the actual planes), the effective thrust horsepower difference for a 2600HP engine, can come up to 400 or more more thrust horespower available (based on data used). Which is a massive difference from just a prop change. Sobert S. Johnson a P-47 ace, in his book named Thuderbolt! Talks about this prop in some praise "Never again did a Focke Wulf FW190 or a Messerschmitt ME 109 outclimb me in the thunderbolt, the new prop was worth 1000 horsepower more and then some." Arguably his claim of the new prop being worth 1000 engine HP could even be accurate. Given he was flying a 2800+ engine HP plane with an overspun turbo and higher RPM engine, given the old prop's inneficiency in harnessing this power. The new prop on his plane could have performed like having a 1000 engine HP more with the old prop.

It´s a dtc app. It works. Use it. It´s good. Let´s all thank the guy who made it for us. Link attached. https://github.com/the-paid-actor/dcs-dtc/releases

The visual

We will have one tommorow. The playerneeds to wake up.

Just watch 84f851d3c05c84721b26b3d85a58357d.mp4 The visual

RWR / other viewport exports. I have a home cockpit and I need to export my RWR and some other cockpit panels to a screen to use the F16. I used to have this line in my RWR_ALR56_init.lua : dofile(LockOn_Options.common_script_path.."ViewportHandling.lua") try_find_assigned_viewport("F16_RWR") and then in my monitor config i used this: F16_RWR = { x = 3760; y = 1440; width = 480; height = 480; } This was also possible for the DED, PLFD. Everyone who has a home pit needs this functionality. Please let me know, do you also think it belongs here and needs to be a supported feature?

Hello Ed, due to the changes to cockpit script files during the last patch, my RWR export now breaks integrity check. I have a home cockpit and I need to export my RWR to use the F16. How do I do it now? I used to have this line in my RWR_ALR56_init.lua dofile(LockOn_Options.common_script_path.."ViewportHandling.lua") try_find_assigned_viewport("F16_RWR") and then in my monitor config F16_RWR = { x = 3760; y = 1440; width = 480; height = 480; } How do I export the RWR after this patch, without breaking integrity check?

E-TF[803] Saint F16-C

Im a competetive player bro. Dont tell me to get good I did.

PLS target size and RCS size modelling. PLS missiles which dont go off the rail dumb when I have a lock PLS missiles which have correct PK/R modelling. PLS a full fidelity missile native do DCS, 120 Bs and Cs are FC3 by all standards of virtual modelling. They aren´t full fidelity. We need a full fidelity misisle. Same goes for red force. PS: C7 PLS ?!?!?!? Its a block 50 viper and a block 20 hornet game. They are supposed to have propper missiles, especially since DCS is now moving forward now. And the reason why I am begging today is that I dont wake in 2022 with meteors phoenixes and SD10s being finished fully and debugged, and 120s are still FC3 missiles.

I must say, I am very happy to see that you included the Sniper XR pod. Some time ago, I think it was in September 2019 you released an initial placeholder roadmap. This included the Sniper XR pod, but after some time, the post was edited and the Sniper XR pod was erased from it. This gave us, the community, some gut wrenching feelings of both sadness and madness, as we went to overthink the situation into a conspiracy. The Sniper XR pod is still used and it is cutting edge techonogy. As to my knowledgethe materials to cover it arent fully public yet. Maybe this question isn´t answerable, but are you please able to say at this time, what the chances of it seeing full release are? PS: if you choose to strike out a feature from some list of features, as the Sniper pod was, we are a respectfull and understanding community we will take it as it is. So in the future, please don´t make things dissapear overnigh, without a trace or a commentary. It gave us much heart ache.

Hello, Than you very much for this. 1. Please can you at this time comment, on how effective can we expect the towed decoy to be in DCS BVR? 2. Please is it at this time possible to make any comments on the future of the 16s A/A radar performance. We see you have tagged the thread discussing that as fixed internally, can you please let us know some information at this time?

E-TF[212] Saint Blue F-16c

Squadron Name: ETF Discord ID on MVP Discord: ET-F[212] Saint Contact person Discord ID: Im_TheSaint#4970 Aircraft Selection - F-16C Pilots: Slovakia - Saint

le dott

Hi, I´d like to sign up: ET-F [212] Saint F-16

On top of this critisism, the typical google used in fighter and other single man aircraft, isnt a mono tube, its usual a dual or a quad tube. The Special forces GPNVG was an idea adopted from the air force from A10s, from the PNVG Quadocular with 97 degrees field of view, and reportedly full depth perception. 050426-F-0000S-001.webp

Hi 1bigdog, That´s a good idea, but I don´t think it is possible. You can´t render the F2 external view on a screen next to the F1 First person view. They replace each other, they cant be placed next to each other. In DCS if you have one or several screeens you can actually adjust the elements which display on your screens. You could take your MFDs and export them onto a screen. This is all posible. It works like this: you create viewports "screens" and elements to fill these viewports (an element would be the player camera, or a multi function display of sorts). And I am afraid it isn´t possible to display the F2 External view port and the F1 viewport as at the same time. I talked to a mod developer about this because I wanted to export the F10 map viewport. It turns out the map replaces your first person camera when it´s sellected, I assume the same applies for the external view. Im attaching what it looks like when you are exporting two elements - MFDs in adition to the camera onto a screen. It´s unrelated but it helps you get an understanding of what is and isn´t possible in DCS. As said, Im afraid this isn´t.

I can provide more info if required

Simple problem. Check wing pylons from the sceenshot. - you know thats not right :D

Thats too sad, the Viper is a small aircraft External fuel tanks mess it up badly.

I have found no procedure for jettisoning any payload in the manual. However there is a lot of text in there, discussing conditions surrounding how to jettison what, and which type of control settings may have affect on jettisoning. Is this feature already in curret EA on Beta or not? I haven´t been unable to jettison succesfully. Maybe my mistake, maybe its not even possible yet. Maybe someone has figured it out, please I need advice.