gekoiq

What you need is the 'sensor select depress', *not* the TDC depress, 'Sensor select depress' is a new function that you need to map, it's un-mapped by default.

Get some of the TM MFDs, makes switching WPs more natural when you can push a button and skip the mouse. There is an "AUTO" feature on the HSI as well, somewhere, can't remember where specifically as I don't use it.

The way I understand it, based on info I can find, the missile is still tracked optically with radio command link. The Blindfire is a surveillance radar to find and cue the operator onto targets. I might very well be wrong, but in DCS it's optically guided despite the presence of the blindfire. Per old posts from Nineline and such.

It's optically guided so the key is to: pick up the launch visually as soon as possible max performance turn to beam it to increase the LOS rate making it more difficult for the operator to track you Optical missiles also generally fly pure pursuit and are not efficient in energy use so just beaming it will often run it out of energy failing that an orthogonal roll is very effective against optically guided missiles.

Also curious about this, being able to construct your 'flight' some way other than groups in the ME seems like an important feature.

R73 is how: high off-boresite heater...

I also noticed this. Previously SA-6 would bite on chaff readily and you can visibly watch them arc away once it has been decoyed by chaff. Current beta version the SA-6 will not get decoyed no matter how many chaff are dumped, 30+chaff released in testing and the missile still tracks toward its target.

^ That. In DCS a lot of people have come to the conclusion that CCIP = more accurate because you put the thing on the thing and hit the button and off comes a bomb. The thing is, in DCS most people fly at VERY low altitudes, and a lot of people struggle to fly the ASL precisely in AUTO mode (which is obviously crucial to getting good accuracy in AUTO). In reality most fighters aren't pickling bombs at 5000' these days, they are doing it at 15000-20000' to stay above the numerous serious threats. If you did a comparison of Mk83 deliveries from 20k'+ CCIP vs AUTO you would start to see the benefits of AUTO (Level, Dive, Loft, etc). It gets real hard to put the CCIP cross on a precise target and hit the button at precisely the right time when you are at 20k'+, when as long as you can fly the ASL precisely, all you have to do is hold down the pickle button for a few seconds as the cue drops and the aircraft performs a very accurate release. It's still a dumb bomb from 20000', you shouldn't expect super precision, but I've found it's much more *consistent* than CCIP from high altitude (I've scored insanely good hits in CCIP from high altitudes as well, but they are the exception not the rule).

CCIP relys on the pilot to hit the pickle button at exactly the right time. Auto pickles for you at the exact perfect time, as long as you can fly the ASL accurately AUTO will be more consistent against a target that is pre-designated.

SEAD/DEAD is not defined by the weapon used. HARM is a great tool, but not the only tool. It's actually, historically, very poor at killing things if you look at it in terms of how many launched vs how many actually hit something. But it is an effective suppression weapon because SAM operators have to respect the threat and turn off their emitters and/or not leave them emitting continually. So it's quite common to use HARM to suppress a site, and then other bombs/missiles (Rockeye and Maverick were choice weapons of SEAD crews during the first Gulf War) used to actually destroy the launchers/logistics/RADAR (if the HARM didn't actually connect with it) The F Maverick in the Hornet can be effectively used at 6+ miles if you are good at it, which is far enough to kill most of the SHORAD in game (SA8/SA19/SA15/Shilkas/etc, be aware: some of those SAMs can shoot down HARM and Mavericks)

I pretty actively read these forums and have not seen that. Could you provide a link? Genuinely curious. I've seen several Hornet pilots here state they carry the ATFLIR only on the cheek station, but not the LITENING.

Yet the centerline station offers the best FOV and allows more symmetrical loadouts, what's not to like? I'm pumped, I don't get why people are upset, we're also getting the ATFLIR on station4, we're literally getting the best of both worlds. A long time before the Hornet entered early access, there was a thread where people were kicking and screaming at ED to include the centerline LITENING pod because the USMC used it, now ED is giving us exactly that and people are kicking and screaming that they want the LITENING, but not on centerline... *confused*

What basis do you have for that statement? Source? Its obvious that there is an ability to mount it on any station through an adapter (see all the photos of USMC hornets with LITENING on the cheek and wing stations earlier in this thread, or the other LITENING thread), if they wanted to use it on a different station they could, yet they seemingly chose to use it on centerline. The USMC even had to add additional wiring to allow use of the LITENING pod to the centerline station, I highly doubt they would go through the effort to add that capability to use the pod on a station they didn't want to.

Well the F22 can supercruise at something like 1.8mach at altitude, with a full load of internal weapons. No other fighter can really touch that, it's still special.

A lot of us just want the most realistic sim possible, however it is IRL I will be happy with it and learn to work with it in game, if we get unrealistic options as well I'll still be happy as long as I can do it the realistic way. But contrary to some comments in this thread, the hard-line "as realistic as possible for a specific year/lot/ofp Hornet" goal has largely come from ED themselves, it's been their stance since the beginning on all features related to the Hornet, this is not a case of noisy community members whining for more realism and getting it.

Because ED is trying to *accurately* replicate a USN/USMC Hornet to the best of their ability?

Hey I'm more than willing to admit when I'm wrong, that is the first time I've ever heard of or seen a LITENING on any other station beside center-line. Read a lot of books and searched long and hard on the interwebs and have never seen that, so cool! If that was a real thing, actually used operationally (I've still never seen a picture of a deployed marine hornet with it anywhere other than centerline) then I hope we get it, if it was just a mock-up and not used operationally I still wouldn't expect to get it in game.

Re-read my statement: the USMC never mounted it on the cheek station. The navy doesn't use the LITENING at all. Other countries might have developed a mount for the cheek station but the US, specifically the USMC did not. ED is modeling a USN/USMC Hornet, not a Spanish Hornet, not an Australian Hornet, not any other Hornet beside a USN/USMC Block 20 Charlie hornet, and the USN/USMC never mounted the LITENING pod on the cheek stations.

Centerline only. The LITENING was never mounted anywhere else beside centerline on USMC aircraft and never used at all on USN aircraft.

The accuracy might be realistic, HARM isn't a magic bullet with perfect accuracy IRL, what would be great is if we got the proximity fuze that it should have, this would alleviate some of the pain of the missile sailing over the tops of RADARs. What I have found is if you can get the missile to come down at a steeper angle it will help up the PK. For instance, against SA-6 I like to fire from 35k' and about 15nm from the launch site, this keeps me out of the SA-6 WEZ and maximizes the dive angle of the missile, meaning if it goes long, due to the angle it wont sail as far away from the radar before hitting the ground. This increases the chance that it will detonate close to the unit and do critical damage to the radar and take it out of action.

Indeed, good correction! Density changes not mass.

So fuel capacity is measured in lbs, the weight of jet fuel changes based on atmosphere. So on different maps or with different weather conditions, a full fuel load while having the same volume, will have different weights.

Why on earth did this get moved to wishlist? This post wasn't asking for new effects, its demonstrating that the delay fuze is reducing damage for some reason vs instant.

Tested Mk84s against ammo bunker, it seems with Delay fuze they do less damage, which seems illogical against a hard target like a bunker, if anything delay fuzing should *increase* effectiveness against a hard target wouldn't it? With Instant fuze 2x Mk84s will consistently destroy a bunker. With Delay1 fuze, 2x Mk84s will consistently NOT destroy a bunker. Track attached. mk84fuzeVsAmmoBunkerTrack.zip

Make sure all units are set to "Engage air weapons=True" in the ME, otherwise they won't engage incoming missiles. Put them all on excellent as well.