All Activity

Yeah, just “depending on use and mode” could be a lot (in this case it’s toss/CCRP and I assume anytime in CCIP that laser either can’t find range or is burned out), and while the DTC “target altitude” isn’t In relation to departure airfield, I suppose that it could be input into the actual MiG-29 interface as departure airfield delta H and it’s just simplified to “target altitude” in the DCS DTC for sake of simplicity Thing is combat manual says that backup bombing method without laser relies on radar altitude elevation method like Mi-24. Perhaps it only uses this if there is radar altitude present and no laser? Either way, it’s obviously using “target altitude” over radar when there’s no laser range. I wonder if I could test it by just not setting target altitude and burning laser out, but even when I do CCRP with no target altitude set its obviously using a value like “0 m ASL” instead of radar altitude. Of course, it could be a typo in combat manual and actually means elevation method of the set target altitude. Interesting limitation when I imagine it would have been absolutely 0 trouble for the Ts100 computer to just remember the Laser range coordinates when pitching up for CCRP. Also, I know someone earlier said they used KMGU fine without Coop/retard forward, but for me it seems to work perfect with the switch forward and KMGU, and they hit too long with the switch back.

I suppose I'm replying to a bot, but for the sake of correcting wrong answer above, so that new players are not mislead, OP is talking about the cover of front row of CBs, which is very much implemented, animated and functional... as long as one uses mouse to flip it.

From a previous post of mine.

You will likely see news when there is one :)

They'll tell us stuff when they have stuff to tell.

I feel the same. At least we have a thread now. Maybe someone comes up with a solution some day....

Thank you for your passionate support. Terrible take, though...

So get crimp connectors or a terminal block. This isn't difficult. You can even get terminal blocks that don't require you to be able to use a screwdriver.

How many people do you think are in that situation? Most of the potential customers could have bought one when they were available and didn't.

As an example the AN/APG-65 and APG-72 RADARS and the ALQ-126 deception repeaters max power is 1000 Watts or 60dbm. For every +/- 3 dbm you double or halve your power... ie 63 dbm = 2000W or 57 dbm = 500w. The RWR receiver doesn't care about the power level of the received TTR signal. However your ALQ deception repeater does. It's what trips your transmitter to respond, or stop responding when in Repeat Mode. It's called Sense (On) and Snap (Off) setting. Ground based TTRs will probably have more max power, depending on the system, than airborne TTRs.

Glad to spark some discussion and curious to see how the C-130 FARP system is implemented. For reference, the OH-58 could be forward deployed via C-130 and ready within 10-30 mins to fly a mission. It seems to be a capability which was at least practiced by the US Army. https://www.dvidshub.net/news/printable/204642 https://www.army.mil/article/121011/troop_trains_for_rapid_deployment_capability

If the AoA indicator is off, is the Hook height off? Has anyone tried passes at 8 degrees under the donut? Or using a hard IAS reference?

Cams.... I didn't like them at all. They are supposed to be for the M2000. Don't waste your money.

Is this fixed? Or at least turn off easy comm in the mission setting as they are designed in the way that the player should tune the Freq

This is just my late night opinion, after having a few drinks, but the F-5E and the C-101 aircraft couldn't be more opposite in flying character. The C-101 is like you're floating in the air, and couldn't be more docile. The F-5E, by contrast is "oh F***, I'm behind the power curve!". So I think if you want to become an F-14 or MiG-29 pilot, and fly a very capable pussycat of a fighter, then the C-101 would be the closest trainer in handling. If you want to fly a brick like the Phantom II, and don't mind dying a lot during final approach, on your way to getting good, emphasize the F-5!

What setting do you have them set to on the AI gunner panel? Long or Short. When on "long" my testing has them firing almost continually as long as there is an active target. It modifies the CH-47 to define the attachments, so unfortunately no.

Aah - so the Huey shot was of <another game> - not DCS. OK - thanks for confirming! Pity - I didn't mind HIP previously for information. Now it seems to be going the direction of click-bait for views instead of being informative.

Prior to the above drama (admittedly I somewhat created, I will stop) thanks for the heads up Nineline. Good to know this is in the works. Looking forward to it and I appreciate the response.

Okay time to amend my previous statement. It seems to work a very specific way now. If you have laser range for the entire targeting process, CCIP, it seems to work perfect for anything now However, unless you have a target altitude set relatively correctly, it will not work for CCRP. And it’s pretty easy to tell, without target altitude set it’s wildly off, and with target altitude it’s spot on This seems to even give a range advantage. I can do CCRP way beyond laser range as long as I have a relatively correctly set target altitude. I wonder if the real 29 is like this. My impression from reading combat manual was that it “remembers” the coordinates of the lasered target when pitching up for CCRP. But it doesn’t mention anything that directly opposes this, and it has 0 mention of a set target altitude.

@Renko sir, I think you've found something truly interesting. And I think it is modeled correctly in DCS (not a common occurence) My theory is this: the bombs are bursting open in a height below to what is set on them in the Mission Editor and in the cockpit because the FMU-140 sensor does not measure distance to the ground, but to the target. The FMU-140 fuze sensor information I took from this web page (https://navyaviation.tpub.com/14023/css/Fmu-140-B-Dispenser-Proximity-Fuze-32.htm). It states that the FMU-140 is a doppler radar. It does not show the radar pattern, but I believe it projects forward of the fuze, similar to the M20/M20A1 main lobe projection, forward of the bomb axis, as shown in the picture below, taken from the same web page. (see pictures below) So, my hypothesis is this: what the bomb fuze is seeing is the slant range to target, not the height above ground, as one would expect. Let's take the first example, HOF set at 1,500 feet. From the track, we gather that the bomb pitch angle is - 35 degrees at the moment of the burst. The burst altitude AGL is around 900 feet, as stated before. The bomb scheme can be simplified as a right triangle. The bomb pitch angle is -35º at the moment of the burst. Let's disregard the negative sign. So if the external angle to a right triangle is 35º, in order to both sum up 90º, the internal has to be 55º (let's call it Alpha). In order for the angles of a right triangle to sum 180º we have: 90º (from the right angle) + 55º (Alpha) + internal angle 2 (Beta) = 180º. Thus, the Internal angle 2 (Beta) is 35º. Using sine, we have that: sine of 35º is equal to the burst height h (ft AGL), divided by the hypotenuse, in this case, the HOF (same as the Slant Range). Adjusting the equation we end up with h = sin 35º x S.R. (Slant Range) Doing the math, we have: h = 0,57 x 1,500. Thus h = 855 ft. Which is consistent to the results we see on the tracks provided. For the other drop, with a HOF set at 3,000 ft, we can use the same logic: In this case, h = sin 44º x 3,000 . Thus h = 2,000 ft AGL. Again, consistent to what can be extracted from the track files. The solution? Either drop from a steeper angle, or from level flight at a higher altitude. I usually use CBU-99s with the FMU-140 from 10,000 feet with a HOF of 3,000 feet, and they work most of the time.

.

A thunk on weapon release is realistic.

Worked for me yesterday?