whiteladder

This thread is giving me serious cockpit envy. Mine is a nomadic simming existance, with a lenovo p50 laptop ( just exceptable fps), X56 sticks, trackhat head tracking, streamdeck xl, streamdeck +, mfd's exported and pedals.

Yeah this is a great video, he has some super advice, about using just pitch and rudder for the final few feet of line up and wriggling your fingers and toes before pre-contact! Well worth a watch

Ok so this is a very niche problem, but just in case anyone else comes across a similar issue. We had an old lenovo P50 laptop come into work to be scrapped, battery was charging slowly and wouldn't hold the charge very long, with a clean install of windows and latest drivers it was running dcs at 70 fps, admittedly with low graphic setting. Opening the nvidia control panel made this drop to less than 10 fps, and to only way to get it back to 70 fps was a fresh install of windows and the device drivers. What was happening was when the nvidia control panel was opening it was checking the battery, seeing a problem with it and setting the power consumption of the graphics card to low to try and allow the battery to charge( overriding the windows and nvidia battery settings set to performance and not power saving). When I removed the battery and ran the laptop on just the mains it went straight back to 70 fps. With the battery in back to 10fps So if you have an older laptop and the battery has seen better days it might be having an unforseen effect on your performance.

Agreed I have the xl and +, the Dialstack is really good I have the first 2 dials setup with 2 radio channels, top level is channel selection, click the dial stack and second level is radio volume. I have the next 2 rotaries set to various dials in each cockpit, so for example in my AV8B setup the dial stack on rotary 3 are all e/w related, its top level Decoy control, second is RWR volume and third is jammer selection. Also the ability to swipe pages with the LCD screen is so useful, I have mine set with page one set as a threat page, so for example from the harrier it has the SAM, CW, AI and AAA lamps on the top row of buttons, these illuminate as appropriate, under that the next row of buttons I have chaff dispense, flare salvo (spits from all 4 bucket continually),flare ( either single or if program is select in the EW page that) and on the last button something I call Flare Popup, which I hit if I`m running in for a popup attack it will fire 1 flare every second for 30 seconds. If I swipe to page 2 its set to Engine read outs, with fuel flow, JPT, Stab position, H2O level, RPM, Fuel Total and Flap Pos displayed on each button and a 3 way switch for H2O selection. I have the Xl set so when it changes the cockpit profile (F16, F18.AH64,AV8b,and F14) it automatically switch to the appropriate profile on the Streamdeck + as well.

Have had the opportunity to sit in the cockpit of a Vulcan recently, my vote was easy.

I know what I`m asking for my birthday in September!!

I think the situation when using any pod against Sam systems (with the stock game, and no sam scripts running) is quite complicated. If you are on a strike mission, using the jammer might create a gap in the Wez between 2 site that allows you to sqeeze through, however if there is a bigger enough overlap between 2 sites running the pod prior to being locked is a bad idea. This is simple because generally the Sam sites are so dumb and will always launch at you at the earliest opportunity, which is good for the pilot because it gives you the best chance defeat the missile kinematically ie bleed its energy. With the pod switched on all the time all that is happening is pushing the engagement closer to the Sam sites no escape zone, I don`t think the deception jamming give a bigger enough safety margin to outweigh facing missiles with much high energy. In fact against the stock game on SEAD missions you could argue that saving the weight by not taking the pod and using Israeli wagon wheel tactics are the most effective way to deal with Sam sites, you want the most shots at you at the longest range, and then hit the site while the launchers are empty.

This is what I`m currently working on, been on the go on and off for about a year.

The seeker can distinguish between a valid target and a structure.

So I think the OP is refering to a incident from the Book Viper Pilot where Dan Hampton talks about coupling the ils to a Markpoint. This is related to a incident where he recovered group of F16 to a divert airfield, which had no published ils approach. The direct quote from the book is: Dan Hampton states he could have data linked this to the rest of his make shift flight, but past the lat/long verbally for them to generate their own markpoints to couple their own ils. It certainly is implied that this mark point is being use to drive the ils needles instead of the normal ils signals. Another quote later in the same chapter confirms this So I guess there are 2 questions does our dcs f16 version have this feature irl and is it modelled in game?

Just to be clear does this mean you can`t couple the ILS to a Markpoint?

At the moment I think the only difference between HMS Andromeda and all the other Leanders in game is the hull number, so it will have been Seacat and not Seawolf, so I would say you were extremely unlucky given how abysmal Seacat was in real life. Would be interesting to see how GWS-22 Seacat is modelled in game, because guidance wise it could use a Type 904 radar for 2 radar guided modes and 2 manual modes, so you may or may not get a launch indication.

Never Saw it

Ok this is going around in circles, I`m more than happy to admit I`m wrong, its just you are doing my work for me and keep posting stuff that proves I`m not, if you could comprehend what the page is telling you, literally in the 11th paragraph down I have put in bold the bits that show you that UCT is not PILOT training its AVIATOR training conducted in the T-6a training Aircraft. If you read Dan Hamptons book Viper Pilot it goes into great detail about Pilot training, the selection process and how Pilot and WSO streams diverge. But I suspect you have dug your heels in at this point, so I`m out. In addition to pilot and RPA pilot training, AETC provides Undergraduate Combat Systems Officer Training; this training takes place at NAS Pensacola, Florida. UCT combines skill sets of the legacy Navigator, Electronic Warfare Officer, and Weapon Systems Officer pipelines to produce an aviator skilled in advanced navigation systems, electronic warfare and weapons employment. The Primary phase of UCT utilizes the T-6A and focuses on teaching students the fundamentals of instrument and visual navigation, while developing airmanship, and building a foundation of mission management skills.

Nahen, Nahen, I`ll give you the benefit of doubt, because there are some language issue here, but you assert that WSO are pilots, and then post a very long quote which is actually telling you the training they receive is not Pilot training at all! Going through IFS does not qualify you as a pilot, it’s a screening process that filters out people not suited to further pilot training, and at UCT they are doing basic Airmanship and Navigation, this is not the same as Pilot training. Stick time is not the same as pilot training, and they are not getting the same check rides that a pilot HAS to pass to go through to the next level of training. All this quote from a WSO is telling you is that they could probably fly an Eagle in an emergency, NOT that they are qualified pilots.