31 Dec 2017 Live Stream (Discussion)

part 1 is another than the live stream was. . . ;-)

Matt, nice video looking forward to future ones and the early release.

It is very disappointing to see that in 2.5 they still do not solve the problem of the clouds that disappear .. bahhhh

(google translator).

It is very disappointing to see that in 2.5 they still do not solve the problem of the clouds that disappear .. bahhhh

(google translator).

Wags mentioned in the video that the clouds are a tweak on the current existing technology, and that they'd be revisiting the technology at a later date.

But great video! I'm almost as excited for the new Caucasus map as I am for the Hornet!

Seeing that terrain just completely humbled me. Most realistic I have ever seen, actually made me feel like I was in the air and brought good feelings. No way I can run this though considering running minimum graphics on 1.5 is still rough for me (and many others I bet). Awesome video

Managed to catch it mobile while I was busy moving (almost done, been a heck of a last month.)

Wags, don't feel bad - for some reason, I always manage to hit the battery switch at the most inopportune moments as well :D

Absolutely stunning. I can not wait.

Looks nice.

But how is SPOTTING GROUND Targets ??

In VR ?

Any better ?

Thanks anyway Matt :)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok I watched it on utube, next morning in UK, Excellent video, oh look a Hind .... parked at the end of the peri track, lol.. The aircraft was brill, but the updated scenery, that was a game changer for me, so much more realistic in the way the hills, rolling hills as we see when actually flying, as opposed to knowing this computer generate...up to now. Just after take off the look left reminded my brain of part of Scotland (mountain skyline, I, be hunting out for a 2nd hand digital tv with a big screen.

That wing flex brings a whole new meaning to "flexing on them bitch*s"

Flexing on them Sukhois

Simply outstanding! Really looking forward to 2.5 and the Hornet! Caucasus looks so beautiful we all will have a blast coming back to the Black Sea Region!

Happy New Year People! :thumbup:

Are we going to get also wing "wobble" over the already existing wing flex?

thanks!

Are we going to get also wing "wobble" over the already existing wing flex?

 

thanks!

So far the Vapor effects are looking great

I also think a bit a of wobble during weapon release, turbulence and high alpha would be a nice addition.

yeah!, Im not even asking for any kind of simulation to be done for this, just an animation with some kind of randomization depending of obvious parameters would be more than enough, we just need the visual effect here.

The flex alone by itself looks a bit "sterile" without the commonly associated wobble/vibration and the Hornet is one the the most "wobble wing" fighter aircrafts I have seen so its the perfect plane for this :)...also, this effect makes you "feel" the wind flowing through the wings which imho is a great thing.

Of course, the flex looks already superb in the video, just I think it needs that vibration to make it just fully awesome :thumbup:

thanks!!

Vibration comes from the camera too, which is something you don't want oversimulated in DCS else you will get sickness, I don't think what I saw in the video varies enough from the videos I've seen to really warrant any change, you would be better getting a buttkicker to simulate any vibrations.

Vibration comes from the camera too, which is something you don't want oversimulated in DCS else you will get sickness, I don't think what I saw in the video varies enough from the videos I've seen to really warrant any change, you would be better getting a buttkicker to simulate any vibrations.

Sorry mate but, though there are camera shake also, wings do wobble A LOT!...you can see it in some videos when the plane is just flying straight (so camera should be very stable) just because of the turbulences and speed.

Looks nice.

 

But how is SPOTTING GROUND Targets ??

 

In VR ?

 

Any better ?

 

Thanks anyway Matt :)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Still hope to get bit info about this :)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know ED is working on spotting. :D

I understand the Hornet is being currently "built" but can I check something regarding fuel? I thought the flight was rather short and I reviewed the fuel use a bit over-much.

The Hornet starts with 1284x of "T" fuel (tanks?) and 11,500 I fuel (internal?)

The fuel begins to flow from the "T" only until it reached the "I" number. Thereafter it flowed at apparently the same rate from both T and I simultaneously and they stayed equal to each other until landed after 18 and a bit minutes on 4050 lbs in both T and I. That's 23,000 minus 8100 lbs or 15,000 lbs of fuel in 18 mins or 50,000 lbs an hour. Is that a bit much?

Additional question: the bingo alarm went off when the fuel read 6,000 in both T and I, does the Bingo warning calculate both or just the internal fuel? I don't really know what is desirable although logic says it should be remaining fuel which should account for both, which if externals were empty first, would have been more correct.

I'm wondering if (and I don't know) the fuel should have depleted from the externals first or if there was some sort of cross feed that was going a bit fast.

I'm not hung up on this as mostly I just want to know what kind of sensible air time the Hornet should do, because with the A-10C we were kindda spoiled and no one was ever worried about fuel, but with this plane it should be a lot more interesting.

Same on the F-15 on internal fuel i would imagine, Like internal fuel on the harrier you can set bingo limit quite high possibly?

I understand the Hornet is being currently "built" but can I check something regarding fuel? I thought the flight was rather short and I reviewed the fuel use a bit over-much.

 

The Hornet starts with 1284x of "T" fuel (tanks?) and 11,500 I fuel (internal?)

The fuel begins to flow from the "T" only until it reached the "I" number. Thereafter it flowed at apparently the same rate from both T and I simultaneously and they stayed equal to each other until landed after 18 and a bit minutes on 4050 lbs in both T and I. That's 23,000 minus 8100 lbs or 15,000 lbs of fuel in 18 mins or 50,000 lbs an hour. Is that a bit much?

 

Additional question: the bingo alarm went off when the fuel read 6,000 in both T and I, does the Bingo warning calculate both or just the internal fuel? I don't really know what is desirable although logic says it should be remaining fuel which should account for both, which if externals were empty first, would have been more correct.

 

I'm wondering if (and I don't know) the fuel should have depleted from the externals first or if there was some sort of cross feed that was going a bit fast.

 

I'm not hung up on this as mostly I just want to know what kind of sensible air time the Hornet should do, because with the A-10C we were kindda spoiled and no one was ever worried about fuel, but with this plane it should be a lot more interesting.

I don't know about the flight time, but I believe T is the total fuel (internal + tanks) and I is just internal. Once his single centerline tank was empty, the total fuel was equal to his internal fuel. I agree though I was surprised that the plane his bingo so quickly, maybe I'm just used to the A-10 and planes with better loiter times :)

Nightwolf is correct.

NATOPS:

2.2.10.1 Integrated Fuel/Engine Indicator. The IFEI fuel display window contains three digital

counters to provide dynamic fuel quantity indications (figure 2-6). The upper digital counter displays

total aircraft fuel quantity (10-pound increments). The middle digital counter displays total internal

fuel quantity (10-pound increments). A digital counter legend is displayed to the right of the upper and

middle counters (T - total fuel, I - internal fuel). The lower digital counter displays the selected BINGO

fuel quantity (100-pound increments). The UP and DOWN arrows on the IFEI provide BINGO level

adjustments from 0 to 20,000 pounds in 100 pound increments (BINGO counter scrolls if arrow keys

are depressed for more than one second). Individual fuel tank monitoring is provided by the QTY

pushbutton. False fuel indications occur during and immediately following maneuvering flight. In LOT

12 and up, the IFEI is NVG compatible.

A-A refueling will become much more important with the Hornet. But I'm really looking forward to "taking her up" as Wags said, instead of painfully climbing foot by foot as in the A-10C :joystick:

I don't know about the flight time, but I believe T is the total fuel (internal + tanks) and I is just internal. Once his single centerline tank was empty, the total fuel was equal to his internal fuel. I agree though I was surprised that the plane his bingo so quickly, maybe I'm just used to the A-10 and planes with better loiter times :)

He also passed those oil derricks at 650kts on the deck. Pretty sure he was at 99% on both engines for much of the last five minutes or so.

Maybe the Hornet will get MP participants to fly in the flight levels for a change instead of down in the weeds. High/Low/High is a more realistic mission profile than Low/Lower/Lowest.

He also passed those oil derricks at 650kts on the deck. Pretty sure he was at 99% on both engines for much of the last five minutes or so.

 

Maybe the Hornet will get MP participants to fly in the flight levels for a change instead of down in the weeds. High/Low/High is a more realistic mission profile than Low/Lower/Lowest.

He certainly wasn't flying for fuel efficiency :lol:

He also passed those oil derricks at 650kts on the deck. Pretty sure he was at 99% on both engines for much of the last five minutes or so.

 

Maybe the Hornet will get MP participants to fly in the flight levels for a change instead of down in the weeds. High/Low/High is a more realistic mission profile than Low/Lower/Lowest.

New trees will stop the dirt huggers, So i wouldnt worry in trying to get to low hhaha :lol:

Flying Full AB burns fuel quickly