[PTF]Ali

looking forward to Mirage 3 module, Any update?

Its true same here we have shifted to the f16 for BVR only because of this SD-10 issue, We can see how the weapon issues can change influence and also module impression to users. I also think this can also hurt goodwill of Deka Iron Work since everyone think that missile parameters are under Third Party Developers.

Second TRK also shows problem of SD-10 radar, F16 was getting missile launch warning even missile was fired in TWS mode. I confirmed with Deka Ironwork they said it is not problem of Radar so it clearly is SD-10 glitch indeed.

Chaff resistance is the main problem i'm facing its completely unrealistic...

I'm also SATAL Player and Group leader so these little things matters.

I'm also concern with 2nd track file where F16 was getting missile launch warning even missile was fired in TWS mode. So definitely something seriously broken here.

I'm looking forward to new api thing. Also reported more issues about SD-10 here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=281145

You can review TRK and Tacview file, ED also aware of this problem and looking forward to update API: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4422104&postcount=37

f16 flying at 0.6 mach, sd-10 should hit at this speed, Plus missile is guided by radar. And also shouldn't the sd-10 radar resist these chaff, it do pretty well in 10 miles or 20 miles, why it won't work on 40 miles distance..

Hi Uboat, How much time for SD-10 scheme?

i tested SD-10 on every settings but its behaving same even on STT lock

Never mind, I'm also interested about SD-10, Is there also big change to SD-10 guidance etc?

New Test after update. Missile Acting Stupid... (Tacview file) Video: SD-10 Acting Stupid.rar

But you guys should worry about these people coming from no where, not even for JF-17 discussion? Because of some reason or jealousness they just force people to change their discussion and pick a fight.

New research on SD-10 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=281145

i feel sorry for your J20 which will never come to DCS... Fly Jf-17 :megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol:

Every ground unit disappeared when game started... Sorry but i have just this TRK file

What world exactly you sir live in? I live in reality thats why JF-17 is here on DCS which is hard to believe for me still. I believe things with facts and with all perceptions and comprehension. When we talk about real life things are difference , In DCS everything is simulation of reality nothing is real here you should know that.

yup multiplayer mission...

I apologize, Link updated sorry. Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L24TMe4823t2CA8LzPEl58LYNtuKchSY/view?usp=sharing

So we did group mission but when mission started, Every ground unit killed itself at the beginning of the mission. It has happened many times... TRK: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L24TMe4823t2CA8LzPEl58LYNtuKchSY/view?usp=sharing

I'm not in intelligence nor you i believe, Sorry but your claims are also false, If you talking about real life then you think what Russia showing is complete picture of its military, I guess your claim are superficial as other guys who has no idea how upgradation work in real life and block numbers has no relation with upgradations similar to DCS block 1 JF-17 which is descended into block 2.

JF-17 block 2 has one the most advance datalink, Link17 which is advance than Link16 F16 block 50 in DCS, So DCS jf-17 is early access but when you look at the f16 link in dcs you will get a better idea what datalink can do (Even it is not properly simulated) It is 100% possible block 2 can launch PL-15 with the guidance of Datalink, You don't have to rely on radar and also DCS simulation, I have no idea what you mean but J-20 is not cost effective nor it is project to be cost effective. 3. It has many citations but multiple times as many facts, maybe five times as many or more. Sure not everything needs citation, but there is some ridiculous stuff on that page. So Not everything is cited as they should be. There is no individual citation to back up claim of the majority of weapons listed including PL-9, PL-15, A-Darter, Ra’ad, ALR-67(lol), AIM-9L, Exocet(seriously??), I could go on. The only air to air weapon that even has a citation at all is SD-10! So don’t trust all the “facts” on webpage just becuase a few things are cited. I could go line by line and point out what’s cited what’s not and what’s cited incorrectly but I won’t becuase it would take forever and I already know how bogus a lot of the information is on it Now to also be clear, I am always the first person to argue that Wikipedia can be a good “first step” for research and information, that it can be reliable for education as long as you look at the citation for an individual claim. Things like JF-17 are so complex so unknown have so many false information and perceptions out there already that you’re always going to have more misinformation then the average Wikipedia article. It is just not something enough people know about for there to be someone to edit the Wikipedia articles and actually be correct It is just the nature of these information wiki conglomerates, to put up any info online and just wait for it to get corrected, which may never happen I would edit but I am lazy and not interested You are the first guy i ever seen who believe on citation than classified information, Element of surprise exists in warzone you should know. If you care about citation more than classified info then everything on Wikipedia is fake and DCS as well.

so discussion was about PL-15 and Darter, And you care about this plane which is most successful fighter and combat proven jet... It got proof but what you sir have other than superficial comments. so plz discuss what title of this post is thanks.

Sorry sir but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC/PAC_JF-17_Thunder has complete citation list and references.