Leaderboard

Just for you Billy

Зайдешь почитать "обсуждение официальных новостей", а тут бред какой-то всякие непонятные графоманы пишут. Поток сознания, никому не интересный.

ED has stated that Phase Two of their radar development will include azimuth/bar settings effecting detection performance. "Upon Phase 1 release and tuning, we will implement Phase 2 that will include the effect of radar azimuth and bar settings on detection ranges and the inclusion of more accurate look down radar performance." This is not a correct application of radar theory. The radar range equation does not contain azimuth or bar values in it. Azimuth and bar settings only effect what is has been called Max Range Cumulative detection performance. Which indicates a typical range the radar will first see a target. See my full explanation here. But in short it is a simple way of telling a high ranking officer the typical range he could expect his first detection. Though this does not inform the officer that the detections will be rare/irregular at this range. Azimuth and bar settings have little to no effect on performance. This is a misnomer told to pilots. Detection range performance is based on a probability of detecting a RCS at a given range. ex the APG-66 has a 10% chance of detecting a T-38 at 20 Nmi in a single sweep. (ie the main beam crossed the target once) The benefit of lower ur bar and azimuth isn’t that this performance changes. Rather it’s that you get many more sweeps per second on the target. ie you get more chances to detect the target. Each sweep always being 10% (given the T-38 example). Said another way, you simply get to roll the dice more often. But the average performance remains the same. ED should instead use single scan probability of detection (not effected by azimuth/bar), rather than max cumulative. For instance, given the APG-66 / T-38 example above. Using single scan Pd, the T-38 would only be detected 1/10 sweeps at 20 Nmi. If ED used Max Cumulative, they'd simply make the detection 100% at 20 Nmi. I've made a fully open source/non-ITAR analysis of the APG-63 detailing the math behind all of this. ED should use the SNR figures provided to determine single scan Pd. Id recommend using a 0% Pd for anything lower than a 10% Pd, and a 100% Pd for anything above 95% Pd to simplify the code and because SNR figures get unreliable at these extremes. Note that my math/analysis has been cross checked against the APG-66 as well, with estimates nearly match Westinghouse themselves https://i.imgur.com/cVZSyQf.jpg Note that this graph is from IEEE, and has no government restrictions: "F-16 Pulse Doppler Radar (AN/APG-66) Performance" IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. AES-19, NO. I JANUARY 1983 APG-63-70 HPRF Basic Analysis.pdf

Hey Citizen, Once I resolve a few issues I will release the USS Lewis Puller. I agree it will be a great fwd replenishment base for the Helicopters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Lewis_B._Puller_(ESB-3)

From the Heatblur discord, F-4E radar image (map PPI search mode):

The biggest difficulty besides finding the Noise Figure for a given radar, was figuring out the SNR for each Pd, per mode. This is key to developing a single scan Pd for a radar. To save ED the trouble, I'm attaching an excel spread sheet which contains the SNR figures for a swirling case 1 target (fluctuating air target), with a Probability of false alarm of 10^-6 (typical of modern fighter radars). It calculates the SNR per mode given binomial distribution probability of "M of N detection logic". Examples: 1. HPRF RWS uses 3 stage FMR for ranging (ie 3 separate coherent processing intervals or CPIs). "Single Burst" (ie single CPI) SNR for 50% Pd = 12.8dB. Given that all 3 CPIs need to detect the target (M of N = 3 of 3), if 12.8dB were used, a single scan Pd would result in a Pd of 12.5%, not 50%. (0.5 * 0.5 * 0.5 = 0.125) Thus a higher "Single Burst" SNR is require to determine single scan Pd. In this case, a 17.6dB SNR gives about 80% Pd per CPI. given that this mode uses 3 CPIs AND requires target detection in all 3 CPIs, this 17.6 dB SNR results in a single scan SNR of 50%. (0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 = 0.5) 2. MPRF logic is different. Typical M of N detection logic for MPRF is 3 of 8. That is a minimum of 3 detections given a total of 8 CPIs per time on target. What you will see is that because we get 8 chances to 'flip a coin' and we only need 'three chances to get heads' (where 'heads' = detection). The required SNR for a given Pd is less than HPRFs 3 of 3. In truth though, MPRF can almost guarantee that 1 - 2 of its CPIs wont ever see the target due to range and doppler eclipsing. Various sources indicate that on average targets only exist in clear region 57 - 65 % of MPRF CPIs. I've simplified this logic by including a duty cycle input. For example if a MPRF using 8 CPIs has a duty of 15%, Ive made it so that the calculated Pd/SNR treats the M of N logic not as 3 of 8, but as 3 of * (8 * (1 - duty cycle) where duty cycle is indicative of probability of eclipsing. Thus the single scan probability of detection for 3 of 8 MPRF search mode would actually be 3 of 6.8. Simply plug in your duty cycle and choose the mode of interest and use that SNR on the far left to determine the single scan Pd when applied to the radar range equation. Edit: I've added the reference for Single Burst SNR (Swirling Case 1). Again, this is not the Single Scan SNR that SHOULD be used for actual detection. Single Scan SNR can be found in my attached excel. SNR Figures.xlsx

Good Afternoon Everyone. I have released the Egyptian Frigate ENS Tahya Misr livery. You can find the livery along with the Normandie FREEM Frigate under the Warship Section of the Admirals189 DCS World Mods website. Soon to be released mods will be the USS Lewis Puller ESB-3 mobile expeditionary base with the livery of the Hershel "Woody" Williams ESB-4. We'll see which direction I'm headed afterward. I will not be releasing any Warship, Warships until I finish the USS Fitzgerald DDG-62 which I'm working hard on as we speak. It's a lot of work but it will be well worth it. Stay Posted! Thanks. Admiral189 DCS World Mods

The last two weeks have been enough for me and my next work regarding DCS. For now, I'll show you what I've been working on. The new cockpit for the external model is ready! I really appreciate your support and favorable comments, many thanks! And yes here is the right place for update

И чтобы толпы зомби тросы на авианосцах обрывали. Экипаж становится инфицированным и начинает грызть тросы, которые при обрыве ломали самолеты игроков и расчленяли живой персонал. При этом инфекция передается только от птиц, которые в свою очередь попадают в самолеты. Я джва года жду такую игру.

**DCS: SA-342 Gazelle update news** With the release of the upcoming SA-342 Gazelle update fast approaching we will be updating you about what to expect in the first iteration of what started out as a flight model update over the next few days. Starting today by publishing the change log that we have accumulated so far. The change log is subject to change as even today we're still working on new features and fixes but should be indicative of the scope of this update. With this announcement we'd also like to reach out to all mission creators to emphasize on the fact that we're trying to reduce the amount of Gazelle variants available in DCS World by essentially combining these versions. In the upcoming patch, the SA-342 Mistral has become redundant and is now only available as an AI aircraft to ensure mission compatibility. The SA-342 Gazelle has essentially been absorbed by the SA-342L which, in its now much more modular form, is able to be outfitted with the mistral ATAM system. We ask mission creators to be aware of this change and update their (multiplayer)missions accordingly. We apologize for the inconvenience. ‘FM’ Update SA342 - Common to all Updated external textures to PBR standard Added raindrops on canopy Interior lighting and reflections updated Flight model Entirely rewritten FM Overhauled engine and rotor behaviours Updated mass and payload mass parameters Many new behaviours added or reworked (ground effect, flapback/blowback, retreating blade stall, density altitude, ETL…) Engine surge effect from rapid collective movement added Force Feedback support added Removed ‘Easier Controls’ special option Removed ‘Rudder Trimmer’ special option (replaced with new trim options) New trim options for cyclic and pedal behaviour when using ‘Force Trim Interrupt’ None - has no effect Instant - trim position instantly set to current cyclic/pedal position Fade In/Fade Out - trim position will move to current cyclic/pedal position over short time period (<1sec) (also applies to ‘Trimmer Reset’) Applied upon Recentering - trim position will apply instantly only when cyclic/pedal position is recentered Updated controls indicator Red marker shows control position Grey marker shows trim position Autopilot markers removed for further consideration Updated/added network animations Implemented IFF panel (limited functionality) Updated autopilot system Airspeed/Altitude hold mode removed for further consideration “Auto-collective” removed for further consideration Added light indicators for auto-hover (CSV) and heading-align (ALV) autopilot modes Autopilot master switch will not engage/will disengage if pitch, roll or yaw SAS disabled Added smoke display system Smoke launchers can be equipped in the rearm/refuel screen Smoke launchers have a new input to toggle on/off Collective can be hidden by clicking on base of collective Added tablet navigation aid Tablet can be disabled from mission editor Tablet provides map, heading, airspeed and groundspeed GPS information Tablet is disabled / invisible in missions with a date set prior to April 1994 Updated slip ball to be less erratic Fuel warning light now flickers if below 80L SA342L Added new weapons: 2x/4x Mistral 2x/4x HOT3 HMP400 gunpods (100, 200, 400) Selectable GIAT M621 20mm Replaced Viviane screen with periscope sight Replaced Viviane control panel with periscope control board Periscope provides two zoom levels Toggleable gyro stabilisation Selectable reticles for estimating distance Connected to ‘VIS’ mode on Artificial Horizon same as Viviane Pilot sight can be hidden by clicking on mounting of pilot sight AI now able to fire HOT3 missiles Added ground crew option to remove doors Added option to shoot multiple pylons if the weapon is from the same type SA342M Viviane camera code overhauled Viviane multicrew synchronisation improved AI now able to fire HOT3 missiles SA342 Mistral Removed playable version (now replaced by SA342L) Removed Custom Cockpit options SA342 Minigun Added special option to decouple minigun from head/camera view Added inputs for keyboard/joystick control of minigun Added inputs for mouse control of minigun Added clickables and inputs for minigun safety, sight power/brightness and IR laser

So off DCS topic but interesting story; a few years ago, pre-virus, my best friend (retired Green Beret) was diving in Saipan with U.S. Joint POW-MIA Accounting Command (JPAC) documenting wreckages and searching for US personal. He dove on a great amount of Japanese planes but finally he radio up to the surface that he found US wreckage. Topside doubted him and asked for confirmation. His response "I'm staring at the white letters on the tires that spell GOODYEAR"... topside responded "Copy we will take that as confirmation"... I know a lot more about that wreckage than I can share on open channels but thought you would like that little snippet of the story.

SU-57 FELON STANDALONE BUILD 4.5 and What's Coming. New custom radar suite including a rear facing radar. NEW RWR and DEFENSE SUITE. NEW Navigation suite display. NEW HUD with Helmet Display. Updated FM ( EFM) and Thrust Vectoring. Updated AL-41F1 Engine. Updates to both External models and internally. New Electrical system. New Weapon system. No FC3 Required.

I have also been adding some eye candy to the F-15EX as part of a mini-update, version 1.67. This stuff will require you to have the Gripen mod and Currenthill's B-21 mod installed to show up, but for AI F-15EXs it provides some extra air to ground firepower! Version 1.67 is right around the corner and will also include working AIM-120Ds.

Just around the corner...

Mission Editor! Mission Editor! Mission Editor! Takes only a few minutes to figure out how to make a super simple mission. Put your plane in the air, put one object on the ground, load up, kill object. Then try it a different weapons, then change the time and weather, than add more objects. Etc. etc. You get better and faster at building your own missions. And it's good fun. I fly 100% of my flights out of the mission editor. Every flight is my flight and that's the way I like it.

I'd love to see the SA-4 system to fill that hole in the Russian SAM series.

Good Morning/Good Afternoon Everyone. I have created a livery of the ENS Tahya Misr Egyptian Frigate which was previously the FREMM French Frigate Normandie. France sold the Normandie to Egypt which is now the ENS Tahya Misr. So I will be uploading the new files to be added to the French Frigate Normandie Livery. I attempted to create a new model but there's a conflict with Normandie. I will upload the files later this afternoon. I think it makes sense to have a warship for the new map region. WIP

Ohh!! That one looks fantastic

Hello everyone, We are gauging interest from the community about opening up a RedFor division within the 51st Virtual Fighter Wing. Recruitment is not officially open yet, but we are putting feelers out to see if there is enough of an appetite for it. We are seeking: -English speakers -Probably North America based, (or at least available during the evening hours of NA time zones). -A passion for RedFor weapon systems and tech. -Flanker series (27, 30, 33) pilots are what we are most interested in, as well as RedFor rotary, and Su-25. -MiG-29, 21, JF-17, F-1, etc will also be considered, but the airframes in the above bullet point are the priority. Our goal is not to use RedFor as cannon fodder or punching bags, but instead to create interesting and plausible scenarios where Blue and Red can interact through parallel objectives, weapons hold ROE and rising tensions, communications monitoring/jamming/encrypting, explore elements outside the game like spying and intelligence gathering on discord, and occasionally full-on combat when the tensions hit a boiling point or ROEs are met. Our goal is to create an environment where RedFor can compete, thrive, and stand shoulder-to-shoulder as equals with our established Eagle, Viper, Hornet, Warthog, Harrier, Apache/Helo, and Controller squadrons. With that being said RedFor pilots should be OK with being outnumbered and out-teched by the more developed and more popular BluFor airframes. (That's just the reality of DCS). We already have a RedFor discord role, which we use to bring in friends and guests of the wing to add a PVP element to some of our main wing events, but we are testing the waters to see if there are enough virtual RedFor pilots out there to establish something more structured. Ideally we would love to stand up a RedFor squadron, (or sub-wing?), within the 51st that has their own CO and XO, instructor pilots, their own initial qualification and training program (IQTs), standardized operating procedures (SOPs), and tactics. If this is something that interests you, please join the discord (https://discord.gg/51stvfw) and reach out to me via DMs. There is no official application for RedFor at this time, we are still in the brainstorming phase. Thanks! JoNay | 51st VFW

Version 1.3.2 -- Feature Update -- 20230607 After adding stopGap last time (a surprisingly well received module, thank you for your kind comments!), this update brings an add-on module to stopGaps: sittingDucks. while stopGap makes player slots visible on your airfield, sittingDucks makes player slots vulnerable. This multiplayer-only module adds new possibilities to missions: it makes it a viable option for players to attack the other side's airfields to deny that side access to some aircraft, while it also requires players to defend their airfield from enemy players to retain access to their own strategic aircraft. Like stopGap before, sittingDucks is an DML-expansion on my "sittingDucks standalone" module, adding DML-only QoL features like the ability to turn it on/off at will, and open up access to restock time to mission designers simply providing a config zone. Then, people responded well to the ability to add their own colors to owned zones, and - admittedly after some prompting - I have now added a the ability to define colors in a more common way that is reminiscent of CSS/HTML: for example, "#CC3300" is a deep, firetruck red (see below). And the PlayerScore module has received another important update. Until now, it displayed individual player scores. It now can display coalition score as well. This presented a number of problems, since players can (and do) change their affiliation with a coalition over the course of a mission (especially on long-running missions on a server). Thus, a player's score is held separate from the coalition they are affiliated at any given time, and when they score, that score is added to that of the coalition they currently are aligned with. But since we live in today's world, there's always the possibility of 'griefers', people who revel in childish behavior and spoil other people's fun. To prevent that kind of behavior from impacting a coalition's score, PlayerScore only adds a score to a coalition if it is positive, and discards negative player contributions. Thus, a player's anti-social behavior cannot negatively impact a coalition's score. Of course, if you can ensure that you don't have to deal with that kind of people, turning this feature off, and allowing unlucky players to ruin their coalition's score is just one attribute away. All Changes Documentation Main - Sitting Ducks documentation (new) - Various updates - Sitting Ducks in a Barrel Demo Documentation (new) - Caucasus Hangar demo documentation (new) QuickRef - Sitting Ducks (new) - Various updates Demos - Sitting Ducks in a Barrel (new) - Caucasus Hangar (new) - Later Score (update) Modules - cfxOwnedZones 2.0.1 - allow #RRGGBBAA as color definition - cfxPlayerScore 2.1.1 - coalition score - noGrief option - coalition check of touch-down zone - cfxPlayerScoreUI 2.1.0 - access to coalition score - soundfile control cleanup - cfxZones 3.1.1 - Access to RGB and RGBA attributes - owner clean-up (global) - dcsCommon 2.0.8 - new RGBA handling methods - new coalition handling methods - missionRestart (experimental) - sittingDucks standalone 1.0.0 (non-DML) - sittingDucks 1.0.0 - initial version - stopGap 1.0.5 - improvement to triggerMethod Enjoy, -ch

M3 Corsair updates /index.php?/topic/302022-Corsair-update#entry5232125 Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk

AviaStorm - DCS Panavia Tornado FAQ: Quelle: AviaStorm Discord

Сравнение F/A-18C и F-16N от летчика-испытателя ВМФ США, лейтенант-коммандера Джона "Тунсис" Тугаса, от 2005 года. https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=37909 Разный способ мышления летчика: кроме того, что F-16 - одноместный, у "Вайпера" только один двигатель, так что летчик быстро усваивает "взгляд ящерицы": один глаз всегда на приборах двигателя, другой - наблюдает за всем остальным. По сравнению с "Хорнетом", кабина "Вайпера" более компактная и очень удобная. Катапультное кресло со спинкой, отклоненной на 20 градусов, удобно на всех фазах полета, кроме воздушного боя, в котором тебе постоянно приходится нагибаться вперед, чтобы оглянуться назад. Большой цельный каплевидный фонарь с отличным обзором - это именно то, что отличает "Вайпер" и то, чего не хватает на "Хорнете". При этом приборные панели F-16 организованы не так хорошо, как на "Хорнете" и некоторые кнопки труднодоступны, но не критично. У "Хорнета" ручка управления самолетом расположена по центру и для интерпретации пожеланий летчика компьютер анализирует ее положение, а "Вайпер" - имеет боковую ручку-джойстик, и компьютер анализирует силу, приложенную пилотом. Боковые рычаг управления двигателем и ручка управления самолетом у "Вайпера" - это просто чудеса эргономики, особенно когда у тебя нет в задней кабине парня, который управляет радаром и вооружением. Самая сильная сторона "Вайпера" - его мощность и просто фантастическое ускорение. "Вайпер" может на разгоне опередить почти все, что летает по воздуху, включая "Хорнет". Даже при двух двигателях, "Хорнет" не может тягаться с "Вайпером" на коротких дистанциях. Hа "Вайпере" летчик может хоть целый день гонять на 350 - 400 узлах и иметь еще кучу топлива. Если поднимается вопрос экономии топлива, то "Хорнету" лучше оставаться на 300 - 350 узлах. Полное отклонение ручки в сторону приводит к выжимающему слезы вращению "Вайпера" в 360 градусов в секунду. Здесь "Хорнет" может делать только 2/3 от "Вайпера". Система управления "Хорнета" в крейсерском режиме имеет настройку по перегрузке: летчик постоянно испытывает 1G, какой бы маневр не выполнял, в то время как "Вайпер" даст пилоту "повиснуть на ремнях". "Вайпер" может травмировать тебя запросто - он без проблем держит 9G, особенно на малых высотах. "Хорнет" - програмно ограничен на значении в 7,5G, но зато скорость маневра я "обмениваю" на точную позицию носа. Hет самолета лучше для ближнего воздушного боя на малых скоростях, чем двухдвигательный F/A-18 "Хорнет", за исключением "Супер Хорнета". При этом не надо беспокоиться о срыве потока или устойчивости. Хотя "Хорнет" теряет скорость очень быстро и очень медленно разгоняется - на нем нужно хорошо постараться, чтобы не заполучить позицию для стрельбы первому в ближнем воздушном бою. Мои коллеги по "Вайперу" говорили мне, что, когда они ведут бой с "Хорнетом", у них нет права на ошибку. Hекоторые пилоты ВВС США называют F-16 - "lawn dart", то есть "пахарь газонов", так как он имеет высокий процент контактов с поверхностью. Имея мощный движок от "Дженерал Электрик", очень легко перебрать со скоростью и выкатиться, чиркнуть соплом по бетону на большом угле или сильно ударить шасси с последующим козлением. В противоположность этому, "Хорнет" - очень прост при посадке. Еще одно достоинство "Хорнета" - его способность получить зенитную ракету в сопло и дотянуть до дома на оставшемся двигателе, как это было во время Войны в Заливе в 1991-м. Меня часто спрашивают: "Hу и какой же из них лучше?" Здесь я всегда привожу аналогию: F-16 "Вайпер" похож на автомашину "Додж Вайпер", а F/А-18 "Хорнет" по сравнению с ним - это "Лексус". Летать на "Вайпере" куда веселее, но "Хорнет" - именно тот самолет, на котором я бы хотел идти в бой. С другой стороны - хорошо бы иметь скорость, и я хотел бы ее побольше на "Хорнете". Как бы там ни было, если бы я был "плохим парнем", я бы не хотел столкнуться ни с одним из этих двух самолетов.

null null

Thanks for putting this together. Hopefully the radar update doesn't include more arbitrary performance penalties like the currently existing look down penalty in DCS. Excited to see a well made radar update for the Viper & Hornet.

https://leatherneck-sim.com/2022/06/01/2022-summer-update/ corsair status update. Big surprise is we'll get japanese ground assets.

ZBD-04A AT with AFT-10 ATGM (antitank version of HJ-10).

Not even close, use your TWR advantage, use a vertical flow, go uphill against fighters that cant, extend when you need to. You can load the G on and do a very tight turn, then extend and regain hundreds on knots in seconds. Not many fighters can do that. Not to say things like the mirage and hornet don't have their own strengths. Like I said, use your strengths and don't let the adversary use his. BFM isn't just lets rate at 9gs for 30 seconds around the circle. The f16 and f14 also have VERY different wings. I'm not getting into that here, however yes I fly against plenty of humans. Try it out yourself.

The earlier variants also had significantly less thrust. Weight is only one part of the equation. For example, the F-14B is heavier than the A model, but the B outrates the A because the B has more thrust. I suspect you are flying against AI or some very weak human opponents, but I will keep an open mind. Can you post a track or video to back up your claim that the DCS F-16 is a "dominant" energy fighter in BFM? Against a decent human opponent of course. Thanks.

Can't wait for your model on the Strike Eagle!!! I did hear that Oregon is now getting the F-35A instead of the EX https://www.airandspaceforces.com/f-15ex-f-35-oregon-base-training-unit/ I can only imagine the insult to injury when a confrontation in the South China Sea occurs and an element of two F-15EXs, of the Louisiana ANG forward deployed out of Kadena start lobbing AIM-120Ds or 260s from 100+ miles away at a swarm of (undisclosed country of origin) J-10s, J-11Bs or J-... whatevers. Using the "family of systems" "data-link synergy" "buzz words." Death by Mardi Gras pastel colors and JaZz hands!

I think a lot of people compare our Viper to earlier models that weigh less. In addition people compare our Hornet with 404 EPE with the more common standard 404 found on most navy Hornets. They are different beasts. Our Viper can be dominant in BFM if flown correctly as an energy fighter instead of just trying to rate everything like GS against paddle pulling F18s and Mirages alike. Flight your fight for whatever aircraft you are flying, know your adversary and their strengths .

From almost every missile You will die, 8/10 small missiles exploding even near engine will kill pilot.

First post updated. AGM-182A HACM v 1.0 added. Example mission added.

This is an F-15E, not an EX, but I imagine the same store locations apply.

@Geschirre Looks like the Florida, Oregon, California, and Louisiana ANG will be getting the F-15EX if you need livery ideas, but I'd wait until the Razbam F-15E is released so I can swap the model over.

Так если он для этого и создавался. Или что ? Миг-25 должен был в маневренный бой с F-15 вступать ? Какое то сравнение несравнимых вещей происходит.

Same here. When I get a new plane or am learning a new weapon, I always go to Groom Lake. That's my testing zone.

Agreed!

In leasurely cruise the drift is about under 1 NM/hr. My understanding is heavy maneuvering should cause more drift, but haven't tested it in DCS. Let us know if you test this with GPS disabled, heavy maneuvering, and say 1 hour of flight time. My guess is it's still around 0.8-1.0 NM/hr. The GPS cutoff is in 1994 (March 28 1994 per some older forum post). So basically pre-1994 missions have no GPS available, unless "Unrestrictd SATNAV" is on. You could also just turn GPS off in plane. If you have GPS available in mission and enabled in Viper, in practice it doesn't drift because of the constant GPS correction.

Does not support PC, nor will they attempt to.

ChatGPT may be able to pull "information" from the internet, but it is far from reliable. ChatGPT has no way of knowing what is fact or fiction, it just filters and parrots what it finds on the internet. As an example, websites like Wikipedia, globalsecurity.org, fas.org, and deagel.com are all "circular reporters." Meaning they post the same crowd-sourced answers that are aggregated from various places; and then when each of these sites have the same "facts", it appears to be corroborated by multiple sources when it really is just a bunch of websites repeating the same thing that the other is saying. An AI program looks at this and sees corroborated sources as evidence and then outputs it as fact, when in reality it is nothing more than a really fast internet search engine that aggregates and filters data. But like any other computer program, if the data that is input is wrong, so is the output. I bring this up because there have been several occasions recently where users have quoted ChatGPT as evidence. But caution should be used before any information on the internet is treated as fact, regardless of whether it comes from a human or an AI program.

I think that someone who can give you a detailed answer probably won't lest they go to prison. In general, in a pulse doppler system analysing any individual returned pulse can give you a velocity, but if you want to look at range and velocity together high pulse repetition frequencies drastically limit the range - there is the phenomenon of aliaising, in lay terms the radar can't tell whether the return it's looking at is from one pulse retunred from far away or the next pulse much closer. The pulse has to be transmitted, reflected and received before the next pulse is sent. The problem with cold targets is that doppler relies on velocity difference between the transmitter and the target - the transmitter is moving. So if you have two jets moving at very similar velocities and the target is nose cold/low aspect, the velocity difference is close to zero. These are problems that also affect medical ultrasound. When you want to look at blood flow, Murphy dictates the only view you get will have blood flow at 90 degrees to the probe. Effectively the blood flow notches itself because Murphy.

Существует мнение, что пехота в ее нынешнем состоянии как раз более напоминает зомби, чем разумных людей Остальное можно сделать скриптами. Интересная идея кстати для вертолётчиков особенно.

The product launch seems delayed for too long

Never trust Wikipedia when it comes to aircraft armament. It’s about as accurate as the ground unit damage modeling in DCS. No, operational USAF F-15Es do not and can not employ AGM-88s or -84s. Only select export F-15s based on the F-15E can (e.g. F-15K)

USS Lewis Puller ESB-3 is conducting Flight operations in the North Bound channel of the Suez Canal. I would like to thank Marroux for making it possible to land four birds on deck along with the possibility to land Harriers as well. Your assistance is always appreciated. Big Thanks.! WIP. Stay Tuned!! Few Snapshots.

Aviastorm Tornado IDS FAQ: Q: Who is AviaStorm? A: Team of dedicated DCS pilots who wanted to see the Tornado come to life in DCS. We are very excited to bring the most realistic version possible to flight simulation with a detailed 3D model and a hyper realistic flight model and are working hard to bring that experience to the community! Q: What version of the Tornado are you bringing to DCS? A: We are going to be bringing the IDS version of Tornado as seen in service with the German Air Force. This version includes a large number of unguided weapons ranging from the MK-80’s series of weapons as well as European weapons such as the Matra 250ED. This version was in service in the GAF up to the early 2000s until it got the ASSTA 1 Midlife upgrade, so we will be covering a quite substantial amount of the Tornado's service history Our Tornado will also be equipped with a few weapons new to DCS such as the Komoran Anti ship missile and MW1 cluster munition dispenser. We are also excited to include a reconnaissance pod, this should introduce a whole new aspect to planning DCS missions for virtual squadrons and adding another mission set to the world of DCS This will take all our attention for the time being so we have not planned to include RAF exclusive weapons with our initial release of the module however we will include liveries of every user nation at initial release. (GAF; RAF, IAF, RSAF) Q: Are there anymore variants of the tornado coming to DCS in the future? A: We don't have anything specific planned, however anything is possible Q: Will there be an Backseat AI like Jester? A: Yes. At the moment we are not sure about how we will implement that since the job of the backseater is actually more challenging than that of the pilot. Q: Is the radar being built from the ground up? A: We will have to see what existing technologies are actually usable for us. If there is nothing suitable for the radars the plane has (AA/AG, TFR, Doppler), then yes. Q: Specific IRL bird? A: We will be using multiple reference birds, The primary aircraft we are scanning is 44+56 it is now painted up in a commemorative scheme “Bunte Kuh” (Colorful Cow”) to acknowledge the service of the Tornado with JaboG-34. The plane is currently on exhibition with the Traditionsgemeinschaft JaboG 34 Allgäu. The second plane is the IDS/RECCE Tornado 44+97, currently on display at the Flugwerft Schleißheim near Munich, Germany. That Tornado went into service in 1985 and went out of service after reaching the 4000 flight hour limit in 2008. it spent it's last 2 years as part of the ISAF Troops in supporting operations in Afghanistan. Q: When will we get this in our hands? A: We don't have a specific timeline for the aircraft to be released, We don't want to rush ourselves with deadlines. As we stated, our goal is to bring the highest level of Tornado simulation to the virtual world, but this can take some time, It's a very complex aircraft with lots of subsystems to model

When you drop a unit in the ME you can check/uncheck the option to "Hide on MFD" for the group. If it is unchecked, the group will show up in the pre-planned "threats" category in the TSD. It's been a while since I have played with it, so I can't recall if only some unit types show up, but I know it works for SAM units. You can search for "threats" and find the pertinent threads. In the future, when/if ED implements the Data Cartridge feature you might be able to plan out a mission and then preload points into the TSD at mission start. Edit: Found these threads: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/319135-placing-targets-in-the-editor/ https://forum.dcs.world/topic/301194-option-for-automatically-importing-mission-editor-targetthreat-control-measure-points/ That second thread is older, and I think some of the issues have been improved upon, but still not perfect

If possible, I'd very much like to get post Vietnam versions of almost everything in the list, which is thankfully what's happening for the most part. After that, yeah sure why not. A Vietnam era Cobra as the first and only Cobra would be as bad as a 2000s+ Cobra for example. 75+ to 80s maybe at most early 90s is where it's at for DCS imo. That said, there are some aircraft which I'd be very interested in, and Vietnam was basically their last hurrah, so with those I have no problem with getting 'Nam era versions. These being F-105 and F-100. But for F-111, A-7, A-6, F-4, give me post 'Nam versions please, and that's what's happening anyway.