MBot

In fact, reported even earlier in August: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=192128

I think there might be too much emphasis on the swing wings here. I am not sure this can be considered a Heatblur technology, or if this just uses the tools provided by ED. At the risk of going in circles, I think more thought should be given on the Forrestal carrier. Heatblur spends considerable effort on building this carrier (with animated deck crews as far as we know, and probably more interesting stuff). Don't you think it would be reasonable for them to make future aircraft that operate on this carrier?

Regarding the RB 75/Maverick operational range, I came across some interesting comments from former F-4 and F-16 drivers: http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=364993&sid=a8c623d39825482b54a229f74cb24401#p364993 http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=365134&sid=a8c623d39825482b54a229f74cb24401#p365134 http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=365176&sid=1fb46264e7fad44ade76ef5f7237a144#p365176 Fascinating reads. Keep in mind that the RB 75 is a AGM-65A without the scene magnification of the AGM-65B. Also keep in mind that the RB 75T has a blast fragmentation warhead, as opposed to the anti-tank warhead of the RB 75/AGM-65A/AGM-65B.

The groaning of the grip could be fixed by tightening the screws. But now I have a new issue. After a while, the stick base started to make a "knacking" sound, together with a little resistance to overcome, when moving the stick on the roll axis from the center to the left (right on my installation, since it is backwards). I eventually opened the base, couldn't find anything and put everything back together, after which the problem went away. Now after some hours of use, it came back again. Anyone has experienced the same?

I can confirm that this additional line makes a 2-stage trigger usable to control the fix trigger in game. For radar fixes, everything works as expected. A little caution about using the Maverick though. I tested the following: -Fix trigger pulled to T1, Maverick is slewable. Ok. -Fix trigger released, Maverick returns to bore. Ok. -Fix trigger pulled to T1, slew Maverick, then pulled to TV for lock on attempt. Ok. -Fix trigger released. Maverick does not return to bore and stays locked on (or remains pointed where it was in case TV did not result in a lock on). Not sure of this is intended behaviour for the Maverick or a problem with the joystick mapping. -To unlock Maverick, fix trigger has to be pulled to T1 and released to T0 again. Maverick returns to bore. Ok.

Beautiful!

Thank you RagnarDa, I will have a look at it when I get home. I think it would be great if mappings for 2-stage triggers could be added to the official bindings. The 2-stage gun trigger seems to me to be the most natural place to map the function, and such triggers are very widely used (Warthog, G940, VPC T-50, VBK and probably a lot more). I did previously add my own bindings in LUA. The problem with this approach is that you have to repeat it after every update, which is very often (and becomes pretty annoying). I expected this to be a workaround until the official bindings are completed, so now I am glad I spoke up and could raise some awareness about it.

Thank you Cobra, this is greatly appreciated.

That is not the point. Surely over half a year after release the Viggen should support a widely available trigger type without modding.

Some more things I noticed are off with the controls assignment: The function Mode Selector clockwise and counter-clockwise cannot be assigned to controllers other than the keyboard. (Edit: There are in fact a lot of functions which cannot be assigned to controllers). The function "High-pressure fuel valve (For HOTAS, Off if pressed)" does not actually turn on again if the button is no longer pressed.

Well, I can't. T0, T1 and TV are "switch to" commands. This means if I pull the trigger to stage 1, the game goes to T1. If I then let go of the trigger, the game does not go back to T0 but stays in T1. What would be needed are T1 and TV which remain as long as you keep the button pressed and a return to T0 if you press nothing. Basically how Belsimtek implemented the two-stage trigger on the F-5E.

I just tried to setup my new T-50 stick for the Viggen. Do I miss something important or is it still not possible to map the 2-stage radar trigger on an actual 2-stage trigger without modding the game?

My grip is making a LOT of groaning plastic sounds when under load (strong spring, 175mm extension). Anyone experiencing the same?

I never said they do. All I said is that the fact that RAZBAM plans to do the A-6E after the AV-8B(NA), Mirage IIIC, A-29B, MiG-19P, AV-8B+, A-7E and any other yet to be announced aircraft, would not prevent Heatblur to plan the A-6E on their own. RAZBAM plans a lot of things...

Heatblur have developed or are developing their own air-ground mapping radar and two-seater AI. It is therefore likely that future Heatblur aircraft will build on these technologies.

Plans are just plans. RAZBAM will be busy for years to come and do not have any exclusive rights to reserve any aircraft.

Good call, my bet is also on the A-6E. Heatblur is spending considerable resources and effort to build the Forrestal-class carriers, so it is only logical to assume that they will do additional aircraft to fit on this carrier. In addition of having developed all the key technologies necessary to build the Intruder, it is also the major aircraft that is really necessary to complete a period correct air wing with the Tomcat in DCS. Either the Grumman Air Wing of USS Ranger (2 Tomcat and 2 Intruder squadrons) or the regular air wing with Hornets (2 Tomcat, 2 Hornet, 1 Intruder squadrons). It would also be needed for the Corsair air wing (2 Tomcat, 2 Corsair, 1 Intruder), but obviously this would also need the Corsair in addition. Given this close ties to the Tomcat, I think the Intruder is a fairly safe bet.

This is still a problem. AI F-5 and MiG-21 incorrectly have a look-down capable radar. The F-4E correctly do not detect low flying aircraft, proving that the basic functionality is working. It seems the Tiger and the MiG-21 are not correctly configured.

That is actually working as intended. The reason is to to nudge the AI in the right direction of doing something useful. I don't like the Escort task as it glues the escorts to the maneuvers of the main body flight. Also custom engage tasks are not available for Escorts, so a switch to Figure Sweep is required. It's all just names anyway.

I am currently traveling and won't be back until in 2 weeks. Can somebody check?

Here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3219445&postcount=9

In which case M3 would have suspended the WWII F4U to work on the P-38 instead. Possible scenario if they wanted to do something appropriate for the Normandy map. The Corsair would have been another orphan module.

According to the shipment tracking, my order left Belarus on the 9th. That was the last update. Is that normal or cause to worry?

Considering the current manpower situation at Magnitude 3 (as far as we know), the short development cycle and the apparent advanced stage of the module, I think we should expect a very simple aircraft. In my opinion the MiG-23 doesn't sound probable at this point, except perhaps for the MiG-23MS. If they still have some connection to the Marines, perhaps the OV-10A Bronco?

Good catch. As you can see, I usually do not use the 55G6 EWR, so that typo went unnoticed until I discovered the problem with 1L13 last week.