Jump to content

bkthunder

Members
  • Content Count

    1512
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

About bkthunder

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. No snarkyness intended. I'm just very puzzled by how you look at the problem. "Why should you"? Well, for instance because you're coming off the target and you have a bandit on your ass, full throttle and, oh look, M 1.6! It doesn't take some "special skills" or a crazy maneuver to do this. But the real question you should be asking is, why does the FM allow you to reach M 1.6? And besides, apart from this specific bomb-drop related bug, the FM regularly allows you to reach M 1.06 in level flight, which is also unrealistic as far as the available references suggest.
  2. Why would a Harrier accelerate to mach 1.6? I'm also confused. A clean F-18 in full afterburner takes several minutes to reach mach 1.6, at high altitude, not at 12k feet! And yet you seem to think it's normal that a Harrier gets to mach 1.6 at full throttle, and somehow this is user / pilot error. The massively draggy air intakes of the Harrier won't make it past mach 1 because they have no way to slow down the incoming air. The engine would seize. Good that you passed it to the devs, 'cause it's definitely a bug
  3. Nobody mentioned it but the FLCS rules are still based on the NASA test paper which IS NOT how the FLCS works in the operational F-16. The g-onset rate is too low and can't even reach 9g at the correct speed. The negative g is also limited, the real a/c has a limit of -3.5g. But they said this is all WIP. The engine is also pretty weird, RPM values are specially off. Not sure if this translates into reduced thrust in game.
  4. Sorry but, are you an F-16CM block 50 (circa 2007) pilot? ED have SMEs and DCS, while not perfect, is by far the best and most accurate flight simulator on the market. The bug section exists for users to report bugs, but as you see this bug has been labelled as "Need Reference", which means it's definitely not enough for anyone to just come here and say "logic says that rubber chocks that are 4 inches high will not stop a 131Kn engine from pushing the aircraft past them". It also doesn't help to post articles related to different aircraft such as the block 40, in different condtions etc.
  5. Thanks.. pretty disappointed about the IFLOLS and ICLS, I'll pass for now
  6. Hi all, and Happy New Year! I don’t own the SC but I might be getting it depending on a few things. I watched videos, read the forums etc and I have a general understanding, but some very key points for me are not clear, so I ask you: - do you get correct IFLOLS indications for the F-14? That means, the IFLOLS is adjusted to the specific aircraft to allow a correct glide slope and a 3 wire with a centered ball. - does the ICLS match the IFLOLS? I.e. centered needles = centered ball - is the catapult end-speed correct for different GW and different a
  7. The wind and engine bugs have been reported, over and over again. Don't hold your breath, this module's FM is as broken as it could possibly be, and nobody has done a thing about it for the past 2 or 3 years.
  8. Just because you can in DCS, doesn't mean the real Harrier can. The real question is "does the real Harrier reach Mach 1.06?" If not, then it's a bug. I highly doubt the real aircraft goes supersonic in level flight, and I could find no sources that say it can. Maybe this should be checked and/or explained a bit better, with some arguments and references to prove your point.
  9. I think the wind bug is still present, so wind will impact the performance of the F-5 depending on which direction you're pointing at... ridiculous but it is what it is. Make sure you have 0 wind in the mission.
  10. BUMP, the track is provided on the first post. You have to download it because the link is only available for one week (sorry, I'm not gonna pay a monthly subscription just for it).
  11. I don't doubt the report of the Block 40 in Alaska jumping the chocks, but this is not nearly the same aircraft nor the same conditions that we have in DCS. The question is, would and F-16CM Block 50 (again the specific airframe number would help) jump the chocks in the conditions depicted in DCS i.e. one of the Caucaus map airports for example? There are so many variables, off the top of my head: - the friction of the ground, we know that soviet airports are much more rugged and they have those tiles that certainly provide more grip to a chock placed on the ground! - the
  12. I think that's the key here, how can we know if the specific F-16 modeled by ED jumps the chocks or not? I mean, the one in your picutre is a block 40 from Aviano AB, in Italy, so maybe they have to tie it down due to local regulations. I think if ED could share the exact airframe number they are simulating, it would then be easier for you to find a picutre or video of that specific aircraft jumping the chocks while in afterburner.
  13. Thanks, that didn't work. However I solved the problem by downloading the calibration tool from a different source, and it worked... I'm puzzled as to why TM doesn't have the calibration tool download on their website..
  14. Bignewy the track replay was added to the first post 1 hour before your comment above. I did not discuss moderation in public, unless you are confusing me with some other post/thread/user. You sent me a PM to which I replied privately asking where did I reference BMS in my post, but didn't get a reply. Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...