Jump to content

Glide

Members
  • Posts

    765
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Glide

  1. I think what Pete is saying is that the training missions are scripted, and some have limited fuel by default. After you get comfortable, you should head over to the Mission Editor. It's easy to use after you click around in it for a few days, and the manual is very detailed. Lots of good videos online showing how to do basic stuff. Add a carrier group and bounce away.

  2. I agree, she's very hard to control on the runway. Rudder inputs can be deadly. Also asymmetric loads are dangerous. Always jettison and balance if you can. Practicing with a clean config helps.

     

     

     

    I also noticed that targeting pod imbalance. Glad it wasn't just my sloppy skills.

  3. Battle of Bandar Lengeh

     

    Mission 1

     

    Blue is making a push. Red is intent on pushing them back. Units are scrambling to support. You are tasked with battlefield recon. Good luck out there. Orbit steer-point 6, and bring your camera.

     

    Mission 2

     

    Blue consolidates and pushes up the coast for key bridges.

     

    Mission 3

     

    Blue has a tough battle ahead. Bring your AGM's.

     

    Mission 4

     

    Remnants of Red fall back and await reinforcements. Blue pushes on.

     

     

    Mission 5

     

     

    Blue rolls up to the airfield. The prize is near!

     

     

     

    Find the missions here.

  4. I have hit the deck hard a few times in the F-16, and the biggest issue for me is how easy it is to veer and tip. I did hear a thunk one day, and with no caution lights I decided to continue the flight. As soon as I pulled a turn, something broke off. On landing, same issue. Keeping it on the runway is a white knuckle experience. I haven't learned to flare my landings yet. That's next on the list.

  5. Obviously the pilot is going to move the cursor over the target manually if he wants a particular one. I don't know why anyone would find that laughable, so I assume you're talking about the pod. Still, why is it laughable? Even with J-Stars, pilots would get directed to a general area and have to find and identify the actual target by working the pod over an area to recce it.

     

     

    It's a small detail, but the use of the term "slew" is the key here. Yes, the analog controls have the ability to move the radar cursor around manually, but I believe the reality is that the system can track 8 targets, and a simple TMS right should cause the radar cursor to jump to the next target being tracked. It should cycle through them with a simple click. We should not have to slew the cursor, bug the target, drop the bug, slew the cursor, bug the target, etc. It should be TMS next, TMS next, bug, lock, fire. Does that make sense? Just like when you TAB between fields on a form. You don't have to use the arrow keys to move the mouse cursor. When the pilot selects TMS next or TMS right the cursor should jump or cycle to the what the Lantirn thinks is the next highest threat.

     

     

    I see the same behavior in the DCS F-16 model. This functionality has been modeled in other flight sims. I don't see why the community wouldn't model this in their F-16's.

  6. You make an excellent point on the JF-17. Theses automation systems are in other, closely related aircraft. There is way too much workload in the F-16 with respect to target acquisition in both the DCS and BMS Vipers. Look at history of the F-16 and the previous 2-seat designs. Target acquisition has to be a simple click of a switch: select next target. I find the idea of Viper drivers slewing radar cursors around while flying laughable. Not in a single-seat jet of this modern vintage.

     

     

     

    The functions are the same as the Lantirn: navigation and terrain avoidance, target acquisition automation, FLIR overlay on the hud.

  7. These are recon missions for the F-16 which allow the player to observe a hot little action unfold over 4 missions and two days. Morning and evening flights are scheduled so takeoff and landing are nice eye candy.

     

     

    Mission 1: The forward Blue units get cut off early in the mission, and you will have to clear the air defense before you can recon that area.

     

    Mission 2: Blue takes the initiative and pushes forward. Red armor reinforcements approach.

     

    Mission 3: Blue must strike out southeast to reach the airfield. Red armor units are in the area.

     

    Mission 4: Red armor failed to block the advance. Red must hold the airfield. Blue advances.

     

     

    https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/?set_filter=Y&arrFilter_pf%5Bfiletype%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5Bgameversion%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5Bfilelang%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5Baircraft%5D=&arrFilter_DATE_CREATE_1_DAYS_TO_BACK=&CREATED_BY=oldpond&sort_by_order=TIMESTAMP_X_DESC&set_filter=Filter

  8. I agree with this statement. With that said though, our viper should have the digital terrain system which offers coupled autopilot terrain following just like the lantirn pod. The only thing missing in that case is the flir nav camera... which was made obsolescent by nvgs.

     

     

    I disagree on the NVG's. You can fly an entire night mission with just FLIR overlaid on the HUD. NVG''s are useful for scanning around, but not required.

  9. I don't think that striving for being exact in what is simulated is a silly idea. But I also like to have options. So if our Viper variant was technically capable of employing the TFR, I am all for it to include it.

     

     

     

    I totally get the cool-factor, but the real question is: does our Viper variant have the necessary hard-and software to use the TFR?

     

     

    Yes, the Block 50 had it with the Lantirn, but who knows with the new pod? And who cares? Model it just like the Lantirn and call it Litening. Or just model Block 50 without the Litening upgrade.

  10. DCS has this silly idea that they should make each plane an exact replica* of an existing real one, version 1.2345 block 6.7890, license plate zxcvb, even if that means for example, not including such a great feature as the TFR.

    I am not sure what brought them to the current roadmap. TFR autopilot functions have been modeled in many flight sim games in the past. EF-2000 had a fun one, and that plane hadn't even been built when that game came out. I say leave the current tech to MS 2020 where vendors like to showcase their logos. Model old tech that is fun to fly.

  11. The landing missions are both excellent. I nailed them first try, but I had been practicing in the F/A-18 recently. Good reminder that landing weight is key to success.

    The up front controls mission was excellent as well. Best I have seen. And, you are left with a jet that has unlimited fuel. (hair on fire). Note to self, jettison stores and fuel before landing. I clipped the power lines at the threshold and came off the runway in one piece. The jet felt like a tonne of bricks on approach. On the plus side, I had a chance to recon my first mission builder setup. Next: make stuff go boom.

  12. Fly's wonderfully! There seems to be some terrain avoidance noise going on, as I kept getting pull up indicators on the MFD's when I was clearly above limits. I know this is under development.

    Nice range on the fuel tank. I got a nice long flight in without refueling. Landing was sloppy on my part but no flashing lights. :thumbup:

    Looking forward to terrain following radar so I can get my night time NOE thrills. :alien:

    Thanks for a wonderful sim!

×
×
  • Create New...