I’m finding trying to tank with the Viking is using my entire repertoire of curses. The thing bounces around like a tennis ball and never seems to settle at a steady speed. And it seems to be worse than tanking in a Mirage.
For me the problem is keeping hooked up to the Viking, catching the basket is the easier part. Seems like people are having more luck with keeping up with the KC-130 (more slack on the hose?).
A post was split to a new topic: DCS F/A-18C LSO/Plat Mod
The thing that makes tanking so annoying for me is the hose physics. That needs a total makeover (and I think at some point ED have said they want to do that).
Same here. Really tricky stuff…
I have my doubts that this is permanent. Every early beta I have flown has had quirks that made it difficult to fly. Naively I had expected the Hornet to be the exception but it is not. Something is happening to the way drag relates to AOA which is making speed control more difficult than it probably should be. The Harrier has far more planform drag and an older, less responsive motor. It should be more difficult to keep a precise position. But the S-3 poses no real challenge in the Harrier. My money says that in a couple of months we’ll all be coming back to threads like this expressing amazement at how much better our traps and drinks have become with practice. When really it’s all been due to the continued refinement of the model.
I’m having trouble even getting in the basket. When I pull up to the tanker all is well, except for minute speed changes. Slight changes in power to match tanker speed cause the aircraft to ascend/descend. So begins the up and down. Let’s say that the tanker is flying 291 kts. I pull up and get to precontact at 291, but then it is 292 or 289. And when I add or remove a wee bit of power, the aircraft climbs or descends. So, back to stabilizing altitude. Will keep practicing.
Same thing I’m getting, and I remember it being a discussion point when the Mirage came out as well.
Is the tanking problems related at all to the type of tanker? Is the S-3 somehow harder than the KC-130? I found the KC-130 pretty easy for some reason…
Careful what you wish for, I’m not sure there is any part of a more realistic simulation of hose physics that would make any of this easier.
The Harrier is also a different aircraft, created by a different team, with different priorities. I would be shocked if the flight model or engine simulation on the Harrier were comparable to those on the Hornet.
This is just behavior that comes with the turf. Now that you recognize it, begin to anticipate and account for it when planning your input.
The KC-130 has like twice to three times the hose length of the buddy store on S-3, which means it has a much bigger error of margin before you fall off the hose. I imagine people are in for similar trouble with the KC-135
Fun fact, the bow wave off the nose will push the basket away from you as you approach on pretty much anything but the 135 centerline basket.
This isn’t about easy or hard, it is about annoying because unrealistic. If you are solidly plugged in on a hose and move a few inches too much forward that just should cause you to fly right through the basket and the hose.
That’s what I want! I have watched dozens of refueling videos from different planes and read so many stories about it, and all those tell me: Refueling in DCSW is nowhere near realistic, neither the boom nor the drogue variant.
These are words to remember when instead of phasing through, it rips the hose out of the pod and sends it down your engine intake
Oh man that would be just too awesome. I fear we won’t get that though.
just mucked about with the hornet post patch. Radar still delivering wonderful weirdness i.e. 57b vertical scan, which then confuses the hell out of it. Choosing another a2a weapon brings it back into happiness though.
Not tried bombs yet, but missiles can fire multiples in one go. Best I have done so far is 3 aim7’s in a single trigger depress. (all missed)
Radar still scans the sky when it standby
That is awesome!
I created a new post and moved some of the posts from this one over to that one. Name should be self explanatory
[Replying to below.] OK I’ll soften the tone. I was not making any sort of comparison between the 2 planes other than to use one to highlight how some of the perceived difficulty in flying the other might be sourced to the fledgling flight model and not a reflection of the real challenge of flying the real thing. The A-10, P-51, Bf109, Gazelle (to name a few) were much harder to fly in their early beta stages.
Let’s check the attitude please.
I’m loving the Hornet and got confident enough with my recoveries, that I decided to try refueling. At this time I became an angry little man. I began dancing all over and cursing my Warthog. I brought out a Warthong base, greased it and removed the big spring. I hope this gets me on the hose. Ill be trying after work.
Incidently, reading books like 100 missions north and when the thunder rolled, I didn’t expect it to be easy. But boy am I crap at it.