sLYFa

The empty weight is about 44000lbs, the rails and adapters you see in the video add about another 1000lbs-1500lbs. That leaves about 9000lbs of fuel left to stay below 54000, which is less then half of what the Tomcat can take. So we cannot assume anything safely. During normal cyclic ops, aircrews tend to recover with max trap weight but that doesn't always happen. As long as they are above 3000-4000 lbs of fuel they can take shot at recovery before going to the bolter tanker.

The new suspension model is awesome, many thanks! Feels way better now and you don't have to work the throttles constantly to taxi. Strut compression on trapping is now actually there. I tried to capture it but the VR resolution may be to bad to see it.

You don't cycle them, you turn them on because they should've been off on the deck in the first place.

When an AI flight arrives in the overhead holding pattern (i.e. the stack), any AI aircraft on the deck stop departing and remain in their respective parking position. The AI flights overhead in turn wait for the AI on deck to depart and thus circle forever. This was different in 2.7. Back then, AI would launch regardless of any other AI/player aircraft in the stack and AI in the stack would start to land as soon as the last AI launched from the waist catapults. A little track shows the behavior: Four aircraft are tasked to launch. No.1-3 launch but No.4 does not as another Hornet enters the stack just before he would start taxiing. If you put the incoming Hornet just a few miles further out, all four will launch since the incoming Hornet won't be there in time to block the launch sequence. This may not be too important for most people but it completely destroys any somewhat realistic launch/recovery scenario since IRL aircraft hold overhead the carrier well before the first aircraft on deck launches. This was possible in DCS in 2.7 but not anymore sadly. ai_carrier_launch_bug1.trk

Its not about the pressure altimeter at all. The issue is that the alt rad warning does not come on when the radalt needle crosses the index but a lot earlier if the bug is set above 900ft. It would also be super handy if rotating the warning knob would control the index position rather then the warning altitude. Right now you need to turn it a lot for anything above 1000ft since the scale is compressed beyond 1000ft.

Thats the ATLS, it won't let you run burners on one side only regardless of throttle setting.

NORM is used between 40 and 80°F

I had a similar issue, turned out the potentiometer responsible for the weapon selector was worn out. Got a replacement from Virpil for 30€ or so and everything worked again.

RSHIFT+RCTL+numpad works for me or are you talking about the viewpoint shake with maneuvering you get with SHIFT+F1? There is no such option for VR afaik and I believe if there was it would be rather unpleasant

Its always at least MIL power and whatever rpm that gives for takeoff on both variants. There are no derated TO procedures for the Tomcat.

The fact that the extinguisher advisory lights dont come on after pressing either button also indicates its very much wip.

Defended point is labelled 'MAN' in the jester destination steerpoint menu.

Since it wasn't previously and the changelog doesn't mention anything I would assume that the pylons still have no weight FM-wise.

Both Hornet and Tomcat use the same DL system (link4A) for ACLS. The different implementation in the ME comes from the fact that ACLS was not present in DCS core functions up until recently. Btw ICLS and ACLS are two different things, although they provide essentially the same information in the F-14.

I experience these "faulty syncs" at much higher turn rates at about 90°/min. It also doesn't happen in DG mode so I assume it must have something to do with the automatic MAD correction feature in SLV mode.

I have the same impression. Very often afte I finish AAR my heading readout is way off. Same for flying in the marshall stack. Shallow turns seem to result in an unwanted sync to a wrong heading.

The speedbrake induced trim was indeed there at release but was remove about half a year ago later IIRC since it caused too much TEU trim requirement in the landing configuration. The compromise HB did back then was to remove the speedbrake's pitch up moment and the associated ITS function.

Yes it should. But its just a couple of degrees NU when deploying the flaps. For the speedbrake, the stabs wont move since this part is not fully implemented yet.

ITS is already implemented, you can see the pitch trim change as you extend/retract flaps. The system is not perfect though so you still need to trim by hand. As for the speedbrake, IRL the ITS would trim a bit TED when the speedbrake came out to counter the small pitch up moment the speedbrake creates. In DCS this used to be somewhat implemented but due to the very complex aerodynamics involved, it wasnt perfect and created problems on other, more important ends. The workaround right now is that the speedbrake in DCS does not create any pitching moments (unlike IRL) that the ITS would need to adjust for. So FM wise it is correct but you wont see the stabs moving down a bit when deploying the speedbrake.

Yes and all you need to model that is the local speed of sound which the atmosphere model provides. The compressibility factor becomes important at high pressures beyond 10bar or very low temperatures. Unless somebody does a reentry vehicle, its not needed in DCS.

The atmospheric modelling is fine in DCS, at least for what it needs. The inversion layer is modelled and you get the correct temperature at altitude. Not sure what compressibility factors are needed for since in DCS we are far away from the pressures where the difference between real and ideal gas becomes relevant. Thermals would surely be nice to have but are irrelevant to this discussion. This whole baseless criticism of DCS's inner workings is not helpful to the discussion. It would be nice if people refrained from that and sticked to flight testing instead of speculation on what ED does wrong.

Same here, please add it! And emergency generator and mach lever test too for the A.

if you change the stock skins in the core game folder yes

One more minor thing regarding oversweep: While holding the handle at 68°, the OVSP flag should appear after the wing bags are deflated and the hz tail auth light going out, advising the pilot that the handle can be moved past 68deg into oversweep. This used to be the case prior to the wingsweep update but now the OVSP flag appears only after putting the handle past 68°

That may be true but there has been a disturbing increase in Tomcat related CTDs/freezes in the last couple of months, both SP and MP.