Jump to content

Community A-4E-C


heclak

Recommended Posts

Thanks man! Does it work for mk20's also?
Diferrent weapon, diferrent values, so no... Snake Eyes are high drag weapons. You must test everthing by yourself on the bombing range and write down the values unfortunately. The table in my previous post is something that I've made to try to find similar values in the tables that I came across the internet but nothing really fits terefore I asked if the sight depression is being calibrated in the module at all as values in the DCS doesn't correspond to anyhing that I found by now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diferrent weapon, diferrent values, so no... Snake Eyes are high drag weapons. You must test everthing by yourself on the bombing range and write down the values unfortunately. The table in my previous post is something that I've made to try to find similar values in the tables that I came across the internet but nothing really fits terefore I asked if the sight depression is being calibrated in the module at all as values in the DCS doesn't correspond to anyhing that I found by now.

 

Ok, thanks anyway.

 

There's a A-4E-C guide that has bombing tables for mk-82 (both low and high drag) based on the F-5 manual.

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GNsvLojKhlihl-G7B-Mif628isJIcLGk/view?usp=sharing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just haven't found any usability or parallels with these tables and A-4E-C module.

 

My mate and I have found pretty different mils settings for the same attack profiles even if we swear blind we're flying the exact profile pretty closely.

 

e.g. I use 40mils for 45* / 400kt / 4000' rel / MK82 slicks. He uses over 100, and we're both pretty accurate.

 

So yeah, fly a test range and work out your own numbers.

 

One hot tip though - use 75mils depression as a landing setting for the Stennis. Gives you a nice reference for the upwind, downwind and groove pitch to fly accurately. YMMV.

DCS Wishlist: | Navy F-14 | Navy F/A-18 | AH-6 | Navy A-6 | Official Navy A-4 | Carrier Ops | Dynamic Campaign | Marine AH-1 |

 

Streaming DCS sometimes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mate and I have found pretty different mils settings for the same attack profiles even if we swear blind we're flying the exact profile pretty closely.

 

e.g. I use 40mils for 45* / 400kt / 4000' rel / MK82 slicks. He uses over 100, and we're both pretty accurate.

 

So yeah, fly a test range and work out your own numbers.

 

One hot tip though - use 75mils depression as a landing setting for the Stennis. Gives you a nice reference for the upwind, downwind and groove pitch to fly accurately. YMMV.

 

 

 

 

Hi All,

Being a newbe to DCS, I'm wondering if anyone is using a Warthog HOTAS profile for this great A-4 ?

Looking for that.

Thanks,

Toan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't they let you have access to the SDK?

 

It is not as easy as it seems, you would need to get Boeing’s license to use the A-4 trademarks, then the team of people that developed this aircraft would have to form a software company that can convince Eagle Dynamics that they are worthy of being Third Party Associate .. no, not easy at all.

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600 - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the dev team does not want that kind of presure..

They have already stated tehy do not want to becoem a 3rd party asociate.

 

And its quite obviouse that TheMC donneld douglas fee must be astronomical, otehrwise soemone would have picked up the B or C models or even the F or M...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... The MC donneld douglas fee must be astronomical

 

 

Actually, McDonell-Douglas doesn't exists anymore .. was absorbed by Boeing.

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600 - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't they let you have access to the SDK?

 

I think he's asking why ED doesn't allow SDK access to independent mod makers.

 

Well, then DCS will be open source (not exactly but pretty much) and there wouldn't be any incentive to be licensed developer or ED if mod developers put out free, fully functional content. And altho open source may sound good, it also brings lots of chaos. Kinda what happened to Falcon 4.0. There were Free Falcon, Falcon BMS, Falcon Allied Force... So many versions of Linux. It'll divide the what already is relatively small community.


Edited by Taz1004
Link to comment
Share on other sites

its kinda funny that some people assume the SDK is some kind of fairy dust that makes everything better in an instant.

It would require rewriting a big chunk of the codebase and probably even require some new coders since its a different language, which are in very very short supply in the modding community to begin with.

Plus, no sane person would want to become 3rd party cause that means getting yelled at by 100 people when one of the lightbulps has the wrong RGB color.

and all the other things mentioned above.

'controlling' the Ka50 feels like a discussion with the Autopilot and trim system about the flight direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, McDonell-Douglas doesn't exists anymore .. was absorbed by Boeing.

 

And That is what I find So Intriguin.. they give ED the license for the F/A-18 but NOT the A-4 Skyhawk?.. weird to say the least...

 

Someone should aporach Lockhead Martin and ask about the A-4-AR witch is theirs as I understand it, and the avionics si all LM, since its a mini F-16 APG-67 ARG a nerfed 66, and a better engine...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And That is what I find So Intriguin.. they give ED the license for the F/A-18 but NOT the A-4 Skyhawk?.. weird to say the least...

 

Why weird? .. licenses are not free, why would ED spend money for an A-4 license if they don't have intentions to develop such a Module?

 

Someone should aporach Lockhead Martin and ask about the A-4-AR ...

 

I have no idea how much $$$ is a license for simulator use, but I doubt that it would be something cheap, unless LM was interested on a professional version of the simulator (doubtful, as the LM development dates from 1994 and Argentina was the only customer).

 

Anyway, my point is that developing commercial simulator software has a lot of not so obvious costs, and that goes beyond what a users community may want to do .. a free Mod is one thing, a commercial module is quite different.

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600 - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why weird? .. licenses are not free, why would ED spend money for an A-4 license if they don't have intentions to develop such a Module?

 

 

 

I have no idea how much $$$ is a license for simulator use, but I doubt that it would be something cheap, unless LM was interested on a professional version of the simulator (doubtful, as the LM development dates from 1994 and Argentina was the only customer).

 

Anyway, my point is that developing commercial simulator software has a lot of not so obvious costs, and that goes beyond what a users community may want to do .. a free Mod is one thing, a commercial module is quite different.

 

ED Owning a License for the F/A-18C has nothing to do with another independent company wanting a license for an A-4E Skyhawk.

 

Licensing Fee is not the problem, if the team is not selling the product.

The Last developer that stated the A-4E was dropped due to license fee was because they planned to sell the product.

 

As for SDK, it is restricted to licensed development teams for a reason.

 

Beoing still owns all the rights to the A-4 Skyhawk,

 

The Lockheed Martin A4-AR is essentially an A-4M Upgraded w/ F-16 (Lockheed Martin) Avionics they were contracted to do the Upgrade, that's the only reason the A4-AR is referred to as Lockheed Martin Fighting Hawk.

 

With the A-4E's Level of Tech, the only thing the lack of SDK Access limits is Radios. Everything else can be done without it.

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill,

X470 Taichi Ultimate, 2x R7970 Lightnings Crossfired @ 1.1/6.0GHz,

3x ASUS VS248HP + Hanns·G HZ201HPB + Oculus HMD,

Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs, CH Fighterstick+Pro Throttle+Pro Pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to be clear, allowing or distributing a SDK or documentation on an API does not make software open source. The two are not related in any way.

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...