Not the best manual

[felixx75]

I know, that writing a manual is a very hard task. At the moment the manual tells me, where to find the switches, what is the name of the switches, wich system the switch is for, but not, how or when to use the system or what it does (in most cases). So I hope, there will be improvements in the future

[MK84]

Better than the JF-17s manual, just not as funny. 

[Llanero]

It´s the first version. I´m sure Aerges will improve the manual. It happens with most of the modules. 

[Rongor]

I was about to vent off the same thought. Glad the OP did it. The manual is confusing and not very explanatory.

Picturing a switch labeled XY and the only explanation is "This is the XY switch" is not very helpful and a bit lazy imo.

In many cases the (apparently) French abbreviations aren't disclosed anywhere. So the switch is explained but the label's meaning remains a mystery ('Sdef Fs' for example)...

Even Razbam's Mirage2K manual did it better and that one was a mess.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Rongor

[Rudel_chw]

12 minutes ago, Rongor said:

The manual is confusing and not very explanatory.

Actually, the manual is very close to the one Dassault wrote for the real aircraft… but I agree, it could be more detailed and informative 

[ARM505]

I will just mention that real aircraft manuals can often be like this.

The Boeing 737 FCOMs (Flight Crew Operating Manual) for example, often just describe things along the lines of 'this is the button, this is what it does, this is the logic that governs it'. Not often 'this is how you use this system, this is the recommended way, this is industry best practice' etc - sometimes yes, sometimes no. For that, you often refer to the FCTM (Flight Crew Training Manual) AND (and this is the important bit) your actual training given by a qualified instructor. Which we lack. The Airbus A340 manual was described to me by a friend who flies them as 'written by an angry French lawyer that they keep locked in a basement and permanently drunk'.

So it's a tough ask for the developer, as they have to patch together a technical manual, and throw in some expanded explanations, which can be very challenging.

 

But I agree, gleaning ways to actually use the systems is hard using the manual. Think of it as a challenge!

Edited July 24, 2022 by ARM505

[Nealius]

46 minutes ago, ARM505 said:

The Boeing 737 FCOMs (Flight Crew Operating Manual) for example, often just describe things along the lines of 'this is the button, this is what it does, this is the logic that governs it'

Most things in the current F1 manual give "this is <insert button name>" but does not explain what it does nor the logic that governs it. The other confusing point is that all of the switch names are given in English, when the French abbreviation should be included as well to match it with the actual switch in the cockpit.

[Flying Toaster]

It really needs a big explanation of the failure panel, instead of having the warnings all tucked away in individual sections.

[felixx75]

4 hours ago, Rongor said:

[...]

Even Razbam's Mirage2K manual did it better and that one was a mess.

 

The M2000C manual is one of the best manuals for any module (beside the AV8B manual after it's finished), if not THE best manual imo.

[TLTeo]

1 hour ago, felixx75 said:

The M2000C manual is one of the best manuals for any module (beside the AV8B manual after it's finished), if not THE best manual imo.

It is now, but years ago it was significantly less informative.

[Dustband]

I actually think the M2000C is one of the worst manuals out there. Not only is it still unfinished after 6 years, it also gives the wrong information and lacks in concisiveness. When you need to Google your way trough a module, that's not good.

The C-101 manual was really good, and I really hope Aerges will go that direction instead of the Razbam direction.

[Rudel_chw]

9 minutes ago, Dustband said:

I actually think the M2000C is one of the worst manuals out there.

 

I disagree, I liked it, with a lot of information on its almost 700 pages, including what is lacking on the F1 manual: an Aircraft Employment section. Of course it is not finished, as the module isnt either ... it just needs updating to cater to the latest changes that the Module has had.

[Rongor]

I don't think whoever wrote this had a clue what he wants to convey

[jojo]

6 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

Actually, the manual is very close to the one Dassault wrote for the real aircraft… but I agree, it could be more detailed and informative 

I disagree. Mirage F1 CZ or AZ manual are easier to understand.

[Gronank]

This passage had me scratchinng my head:

What is the significance of the P.CAB light to the ejection seat?

[Breakaway]

Hopefully we get a guide from Chuck soon.

[ARM505]

6 hours ago, Flying Toaster said:

It really needs a big explanation of the failure panel, instead of having the warnings all tucked away in individual sections.

[Rudel_chw]

18 minutes ago, Breakaway said:

Hopefully we get a guide from Chuck soon.

 

The Apache guide will be first tough.

[Snappy]

1 hour ago, Gronank said:

This passage had me scratchinng my head:

What is the significance of the P.CAB light to the ejection seat?

Well , thats easy. Once you blow away the canopy for ejection, the cabin pressure is going to equalize to ambient air pressure really fast . /s  :))

Edited July 24, 2022 by Snappy

[giaco1]

Anybody Know if the ILS working, and wich is the procedure tu use it?

Thx

[Rongor]

3 minutes ago, giaco1 said:

Anybody Know if the ILS working, and wich is the procedure tu use it?

Thx

I do, but this is the wrong thread to tell you.

[turkeydriver]

Beta manual genius

[Nealius]

Another glaring omission, aside from the lack of bombing tables for other weapons, is the radar's E+00 vs D+00. Red Kite's video doesn't mention its usage at all, and the manual simply says that E is elevation and D is altitude difference, stepped in 1,000ft increments. It fails to explain the difference between elevation and altitude difference, since per the manual they are both indicated in values of altitude, and by the definition given are effectively the same thing.

Edited July 25, 2022 by Nealius

[Draken35]

 

1 hour ago, Nealius said:

Another glaring omission,...

 

Or what is the deal with the HUD Horizon Line moving around in Nav mode... Is it a bug or a feature? If it is a feature, well is very unique, so how do we use it and for what?

[Nealius]

That as well. The HUD is very much like the Tomcat's, where the horizon and pitch markers are totally useless. It's impossible to establish a specific dive angle for proper weapons employment because the pitch markers shift.