Syndrome

The CCD on the K model was designed as an upgrade to the IR tracking on the previous models, so it works better in daylight and even low light conditions have a longer standoff range than the G from which is was upgraded. Which is why the pentagon paid a pretty penny just for the camera upgrades. The only thing the K is worse at than the D model is night time usage. That's not how it works in the game though. The game seems to treat all lock-on or hand offs as if it were night time, so currently the D is the best model for everything except forcing an area lock. The effective ranges for all the mavericks are about 3x too short. But tbf, the shorter range is more exciting than realism when trying to maintain standoff from manpads and even tanks.

I kinda doubt they are going to go on a fake name account zapping spree when they are trying to expand their customer base. Yeah they might do it, if they really just want some level of baseline clean data and don't care about how much market share they lose, but it's not like facebook is famous for enforcing their own rules.

Yeah, unfortunately the only way to fly the F-16 the way it was designed to be flown is to disable g-effects. But then you have to roleplay the gloc after-30 or so seconds. Hopefully this gets fixed soon.

Do you have auto turn enabled in the targeting panel?

Viper doesn't feel nearly as agile and responsive as the Hornet, so I'd have to say Hornet. Otherwise it would be the Viper hands down.

DCS will last another 100 years, confirmed.

Very nice. This is what I am using currently for the KA-50 theme. Not sure if it would work as well for the Hind, but maybe?

Oh wow... Gazelle was the first DCS module I purchased a year ago, and I am only now just learning about this. Well I'm sure glad I stopped by the forums today :D This one little toggle completely changes the feel of the Gazelle flight model. I might not even need curves anymore. EDIT: Yup, curves are completely unnecessary now. I think this is also the source of all of the complaints about the FM being too twitchy. Wish I knew before it was easily solved. The Gazelle is absolute pleasure to fly now.

:clap_2::clap::clap_2::clap::clap_2::clap_2::clap::clap_2: Also, nice cameo of the Kiowa in the background, just noticed it. Hopefully this means something is imminent? :)

EDIT: Scratch all of the below. No curves are needed to fly the Gazelle. All you need to do is uncheck the FORCE FEEDBACK box under OPTIONS > MISC. Then the step-wise twitchy-ness to the cyclic inputs completely goes away. The collective curve is still useful though. ===================================================== Casmo's settings iirc were 40% y-axis saturation on Pitch and 25% on Roll. Also a 15% curve on the collective to dampen the bursty take off sensitivity. The rudder changes he made were imo gear specific. With Crosswind MFG for example, no curves are needed for Rudder inputs. The less the better. Personally I use the user modified curves very similar to Casmo's but the full range at the extremes so I can still have enough agility to evade incoming fire when needed. With Casmo's settings, the roll is so slow that I've had the rotors fail from the strain of going past the horizontal with a similar effect as a mast bump in a Huey. Realistic idk? But I prefer to be have full agility when needed.

Not sure what's going on as this is a new issue for me, but the bullets are consistently landing several hundred meters above/behind the target when in CCIP A/G gun mode. Did something change, or am I making an obvious mistake? I'm not very experienced with the Hornet, but I've played around with the CCIP A/G gun before and never had this issue.

Been said many times before, but don't be afraid to ask a question thinking it's stupid, very likely someone else is having that same issue and hasn't asked yet. In this case me ;)

So has anyone confirmed what causes the problem, how to avoid it? I encountered it when I was rapidly shutting down engines without reversing every step on the startup in order, and also changing the loadout. Not sure what triggered the issue, but maybe something to do a hydraulic failure? I tried meticulously shutting down the jet, and restarting and that seemed to work just fine with the FCS test giving a "GO" reading on BIT page before testing rather than the "RESTRT" Error message that just leads to the LEF control surface failure that I experienced when the BIT test failed.

If you're referring to missiles, then the dogfight override needs to be cycled to allow you to refire the reloaded infinite ordnance. With the dumb bombs at least, they seem to refill and drop without any extra fuss.

I have the modules and ran this test. Couldn't break mach 1 at low alt with 2 bags and six 120. Did you dive from 50k ft?

The F-16 with bags on at sea level with a full tank isn't even breaking 599 knots. After dumping stores a few patches back I would get to 700+. Now I'm only hitting 639. I then tried having a clean wing, no pylons, and 1% infinite fuel. Starting at 650 knots, it took 2 minutes to hit 900 knots, and couldn't break it. What sim is the OP playing? Because it's not DCS. If anything the drag has increased.

Yeah that's what I thought too until I tested it out. You can only see stars in the top 30 degs from zenith. As long as the sun is up, the horizon stays opaque blue regardless of the time of day. The main issue here is that the sky near the horizon is too opaque blue at high altitude. You have to reach 90,000 ft before it starts to look like 45,000 ft IRL. DCS at 90,000 ft Real Life at 45,000 ft

There are some definite differences. Mostly in the sky darkening at high altitude. Even at 81,000 ft, the sky is very blue and the land features are noticably larger than a real life images from 60,000 ft. I mean it still looks good, but the OP has a point.

Yeah, I hear ya, speedbrake def helps with lighter setups. To clarify, since I was vague before, by "toggling" I meant switching back and forth between two speedbrake settings. Unfortunately there is no speedbrake axis so the toggle depends on how long you hold the Extend and Retract buttons. The main reason I use the speedbrakes for fine adj on a less sensitive Hotas is because the change in speed is more immediate than using the throttle because there is a significant delay in engine response time. So if you over correct with speedbrake, you can make a small rapid change to the speedbrake angle without overshooting/undershooting the greenzone like you might with a delayed over-correction on a throttle response. With a more sensitive Hotas, you can just make smaller throttle changes and wait it out without worries. My current throttle can make increments of 1/5 to 1/3 of a knot/hr. By "toggling" the speed brake between 2 settings, I can get momentary 1/2 knot/hr increments. With the a throttle like a TWCS, I can get just under 1 knot/hr increments with nyogel, but with a significant delay.

Gotta say AAR is tough when you start out, practice really helps. It's mostly about getting fine control of the throttle. The fine control of the stick will come especially if you use light finger tips, but if you can't get your speed controlled, it can easily lead to PIOs that exacerbate bad stick inputs. Hardware also matters. My old 16000 thrustmaster throttle was massively improved with nyogel. I hate to say it, AAR does have a P2W component, since getting a high quality hotas REALLY helps, probably more than is fair. After upgrading my throttle, AAR went from "smoke from the ears" frustrating to almost trivially easy and relaxing. That being said, you can "fake" fine control with any hotas by toggling the speedbrake to quickly change speed by fractions of a knot/hr.

Thanks for the update. I always see you responding here and in discord giving helpful info, taking bug reports, and near term time tables when stuff is getting close to release. I don't post much, but just want to say: it's very much appreciated.

Hmm, so the solution is to roll back to a graphics driver with multiple severe security flaws and expose your computer to hacks that were patched out in the more recent drivers? Looks like I picked bad time to try this plane out. :/

The subwoofer portion of the F-16 afterburner sound profile is very subtle compared to the F/A-18 Hornet. The Hornet can be felt as an actual "kick" from bass shakers, but the F-16 afterburner bass is barely perceptible with either sound or vibration. Likewise the sound profile of the Vulcan Cannon is so high pitched that there is no vibration in the sub 60hz at all. 20-50hz is generally the sweet spot for bass transducers. Thanks for reading!

Just a heads up in case Heatblur are still working on this module. Just watched Top Gun for the first time since I was a kid and then I saw the sale today and was hyped up and about to hit purchase, but then I went to check if there was a pilot body yet. Looks like the answer is still no? Sheesh. Well, I waited this long, guess I can wait a bit longer.

Does everyone who is crashing own the super carrier module?