All Activity

For all the people whom have been flying MiG-21s and Hinds, (SPO-10 my beloved) not getting a launch warning is not a problem I think And I hope this function will be pushed to all modules, inculding blue and red, so the case of the Magic RWRs that we have in most jets would not be the case anymore. But sadly as for, that the RWR just not even possible to use, since it gives back constant lock tone from a ground search radar that is on the friendly side 100 plus KM away is absurd. And this mixed with the unserviced SPO that can't work with a radar emitting (while it should, even if the reading could be chaotic in HPRF, but not even in MPRF there should be no problem) and I don't want to get into details here about the R-27R API bug where the enemy rolls and the missile stop tracking, since this topic is about the SPO. This things are core functions that needs to be fixed, since as for now other than enjoying the MiG in a traning server (what I have been doing greatly) you can't take it anywhere to fly in a digital combat setting, what ruins the point of a combat flight simulator.

Oh nice for some reason I thought you couldn't

Yes, you can do both and you do get auditory warnings from CMWS in the front.

After attacking the 3 main targets, I orbit for quite a while for further taskings but nothing happens so I decided to RTB only to get a 60 score. Did I miss a trigger or something? Thanks.

I've had pretty much the same exact issue in VR but mine was happening in the FC3 Mig-29 as well. I figured mine was all modules, but maybe it was just the FC3 Mig-29 and carried over to the FF, not sure. It is annoying though and difficult to get it in the right position.

Here is my take on making Antenna elevation control in the MIG29 in a Free search (no GCI) environment manageable. I fly in Imperial so I have used nm and feet for the discussion. The Target Manual range throttle wheel was not operational in this version of the MIG29 Situation: TDC position in range coupled with Delta H selection controls Antenna elevation and therefore the altitude coverage. With a Fixed Delta H changing the TDC position in range causes the Antenna elevation to change. So as you move the TDC over the target Antenna elevation will change, at close ranges this antenna elevation can be large. Radar Information In search the 4 Bar scan covers on average 10 degrees. The coverage does in fact vary depending on function and TDC range position but 10 degrees is a good calculation compromise. Each click of Delta H varies the beam centre Altitude coverage by 1000m or 3280' for the +- 1 Delta H click. For the remainder Delta H clicks 2, 4, 6, 8 each click raises the antenna 2 degrees or 2000m or 6400’. Proposed solution: To minimise pilot workload and keep elevation control workable I suggest placing the TDC at 30nm range. This is a typical contact range in the Mig29. It also means that small TDC changes in TDC range to place it over the target will not result in large changes in Antenna elevation. As can be seen in the diagram below 10 degrees covers a fair bit of sky 32,000' at 30nm and 64,000' at 60nm. With the TDC at 30nm the AH value effectively equates to antenna elevation in degrees. (The old Elevation formula: Ant Elev = Alt Diff in 100s ft/Range in nm might be handy) If running at sea level then to get the bottom of the beam close to parallel to the ground then set TDC at 30nm and delta H at +4. (2 clicks of Delta H = 4degrees in elevation). Which means at 30nm you are covering Ground level to 29,000’ and at 60nm ground level to 58,000’. Once you have the search process done then consider going into TWS as Antenna elevation will be controlled by the FCS. With Good GCI then the TDC can be placed at the called target range and Delta H value.

Can you release flares (and chaff) from the front seat?

Well damn that is VERY awesome of you. I'll do some further troubleshooting first. But seriously nice of you.

Now that would be the day. The number of folks complaining about the SPO15 would be far fewer, if blue also had realistic RWR.

Read far enough back in this thread. You are not getting launch warning. Treat every lock as possible launch

It’s only from 30-45 degrees off nose it locks only r-73. Get lock and slowly move nose away and you will likely see it eventually. That being said it seems slightly bugged this patch

My countdown from most difficult(oh, why even bother level) to easiest(why don't they all work like that level) 4th Gen modules is: 5) Tomcat RIO, 4)A-10C, 3)F/A-18C, 2)M2k, 1)JF-17. So you're saying its a bit more difficult than the M2K in your opinion, but its not F/A-18 levels of learning complexity, is it? The reason I'm asking is because I'm not sure I want to take on a new difficult module. On the other hand, my alternative is sitting there watching mind-slobbering navigation tutorials on the Chinook, and how the navigational-hydraulic operates on the rear linkage valve. But, then again, I could be flying a shiny new MiG. Life is full of really tough choices.

salve, ho installato oasis, all'inizio ha funzionato ma poi a un certo punto prima se ne è andato l'audio del mio hp reverb g2 e poi misteriosamente ha smesso di funzionare anche il visore, ero nella pace con openxr e mi sono messo nei casini, sistema operativo windows 11 ovviamente, avete qualche consiglio?

Sounds like an unrelated problem so raise your own post. Attach your DCS log file after replicating the crash, might be something simple.

If it's a brand new install then make sure that core parking is disabled (ParkControl software can be used for this to disable for all the power management profiles) if you haven't already. Same thing applies to things like turning off power management for your root usb controllers in Device Manager.

hey Max , i wrote wrong but i installed in saved games/dcs/mods/aircraft...path was correct, but not working. actually i tried only the bvr version. no big deal aniway, only is a little strange

The fact that it's a sim is why it is not "balanced". This is how the SPO-15LM worked. Pointing to other systems in the game is not an argument. ED themselves have said the SPO-15LM model will carry over into DCS core as a new standard for RWR simulation

Ob Zen6 "10000x3d" unterstützt wird, bleibt bei den 600er Boards bis dato leider noch eine klitzekleine Unsicherheit. Die 800er wurden ja erst vor paar tagen bestätigt. https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Mainboard-Hardware-154107/News/Zen-6-auf-AM5-Mainboards-1483478/ Und PCGH-Redakteur-Thorsten schreibt im Kommentarbereich dazu: Bei B800ern sind (im Gegensatz zu X800ern) zumindest keine Änderungen in der I/O-Nutzung des Sockels aufgefallen. Ob was bei der Stromzuleitung geändert wurde, kann ich natürlich nicht sagen, aber die vergleichbaren Spannungswandler dahinter schließen zumindest neue Rails oder komplett andere Spannungsbereiche aus. Meiner Meinung nach könnte nur eine Umwidmung von Reserve- zu Power-Pins (Hinweise: keine) in Kombination mit einer Missachtung der vorangehenden Reservierung durch die Hersteller (Hinweise: keine) eine technische Inkompatibilität von Zen 6 zu 600ern bei bestehender Kompatibilität zu 800ern begeründen. (Vergleiche 1151 SKL versus 1151 CFL.) Aber es wäre sehr ungewöhnlich, wenn so etwas ein Jahr über Vorstellung der 800er hinaus geheim gehalten werden könnte. Meine Schlussfolgerung: Außer der USB-Auffälligkeit bei X800, deren Ausnutzung aber neben 600ern auch B800 aussperren würde, gibt es im AM5 nur Firmware-seitig Potenzial für Aufrüstsperren. Letzteres, also Marktpolitik, kann man aber nicht voraussagen. Ich erinnere an Ryzen 5000 inklusive 5800X3D, deren Betrieb auf 300er und 400er solange "unmöglich" war, bis genug Leute Alder Lake gekauft hatten sowie umgekehrt an 1000er, 2000er und 3000er APUs, die bis heute nur vereinzelt auf B550 laufen. Hoffe aber nicht dass AMD das "Marktpolitisch" durchzieht. Es gibt viele gute 600er Boards die so viele 800er schlagen. Und ja, der eigentliche "Sprung" ist ja von 50 auf 70 und nicht von 600 auf 800 und genau da wird AMDs labeling Desaster wiedermal sichtbar. Aber das wars ja noch nicht jetzt kommt noch der Hersteller der mit guten Platinenlayout erhebliche Möglichkeiten hat, sich in Funtionalität, Leistung und Preis von der Konkurenz zu unterscheiden. Ich hab mich entschieden, und bin raus... für die nächsten paar Jahre zumindest zum "E" sag ich jetzt nix mehr

So will we see an improved version of the RWR system with launch detection and working continues instead of the “thing” we have now? Realism is nice but since this is a sim it should be balanced as well. I for one are really frustrated with the fact I don’t know when being fired at… don’t get proper warnings all the time while we have a whole fleet of modules that have a balanced suite of RWR systems unlike the real thing…. It just doesn’t make sense to put a brilliant module like the fulcrum in the DCS skies with such a weird choice of handicapping.

Have no idea. Never tried ACLS. But, you're correct, thanks for reminding me. Only issues with my FFB2 is airstarts in the F-14 where it immediately dives when I hit fly. It's definitely a HP/F-14/FFB problem. Don't have it neither in the Viggen nor the F-4E. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

I'll beta test for you guys. I'm a rotocraft instructor, currently flying for a Sheriff's Office in Florida. Keep me in mind!

You mean apart from ACLS not working with FFB?

Ugh...I appreciate the attempt at a dynamic campaign. I really do. This would be better described as an Airboss campaign. I'm straight up not having a good time spending 10-15 min. getting the mission going. I was hoping to jump into my jet and just be part of something or a storyline, but I see what you're trying to do. At least you tried.

Genau so hab ich auch gedacht, nur mit ~5 Jahren.

Never trust a YouTuber that has no idea about PCs. Do not disable E cores and don't use lasso. DCS uses E cores for less important tasks. If you disable them, DCS uses more valuable cores for the same tasks. That's a downside.