Robin_Hood

That's great to hear. Is the rest of the ordnance going along nicely ? If it can help, or show the extent of the problem, here's a table I made with ordnance weights from different sources (Checklist page, re-arming window, and real-life data*). * in a few cases I had conflicting sources about that one, or no info I tested all that by rearming an empty (fuel-wise) aircraft, with ground power, and cross-checking the weight given in the rearming window and the checklist page. It may not be entirely accurate, but it should be close (I had some discrepancies when I tried to verify some of the ordnance weight). Note that the difference I gave is between Checklist and Arming window, not real-life. In rare cases, the weight from the checklist seems actually closer to real-life (ex: GBU-10). Some ordnance do not have any "checklist weight" at all, or almost (ex: GBU-31/38, AGM-154, AN/AWW-13). There is also an ~115-lb discrepancy on clean weight. Anyway, I'm guessing you might already have all the info you need, but just in case more can help, there you go. Weight correction.pdf

PP works only with manual coordinates input (and with data cartridge input when it's available), you cannot transfer coordinates from a waypoint or designated target. Just choose UFC in the MSN page, and enter lat long (in dd°mm'ss.ss") and altitude. Only the TOO mode can use designated target from sensors (waypoint, FLIR, AG radar...) to create a JDAM target.

If you are looking through the loadout lists, there may not be a pre-made loadout that includes Harpoons, you have to make your own. Right-click on each station and choose from the menu (Harpoon should be at MISSILES => AGM-84D).

Yes, you need to declare a new weapons, something like this (my custom SA-7): -- 9M32M Strela-2 MANPADS local SA9M32M = { category = CAT_MISSILES, name = "9M32M"; display_name = _("9M32M Strela-2M"), wsTypeOfWeapon = { wsType_Weapon, wsType_Missile, wsType_SA_Missile, WSTYPE_PLACEHOLDER }; shape_table_data = { { name = "9M32M"; file = "9m32m"; -- this is the 3D model filename: 9m32m.edm life = 1; fire = {0, 1}; username = "9M32M Strela-2M"; index = WSTYPE_PLACEHOLDER; } }, Escort = 0, Head_Type = 1, sigma = {5, 5, 5}, M = 9.8, H_max =2300.0, H_min = 50.0, Diam = 72.0, Cx_pil = 2, D_max = 4200.0, D_min = 800.0, Head_Form = 0, Life_Time = 17.0, Nr_max = 14, v_min = 170.0, v_mid = 250.0, Mach_max = 1.3, t_b = 0.0, t_acc = 3.0, t_marsh = 5.0, Range_max = 4200.0, H_min_t = 50.0, Fi_start = math.rad(1), Fi_rak = 3.14152, Fi_excort = 1.0, Fi_search = 99.9, OmViz_max = 99.9, warhead = { mass = 1.265, expl_mass = 1.15, other_factors = {1,1,1}, obj_factors = {1,1}, concrete_factors = {1,1,1}, cumulative_factor = 0, concrete_obj_factor = 0, cumulative_thickness = 0, caliber = 72, }, exhaust = {0.9, 0.9, 0.85, 0.9}, X_back = -0.95, Y_back = 0.0, Z_back = 0.0, Reflection = 0.04, KillDistance = 2.5, --seeker sensivity params SeekerSensivityDistance = 10000, -- The range of target with IR value = 1. In meters. SeekerCooled = false, -- True is cooled seeker and false is not cooled seeker. ccm_k0 = 1.5, -- Counter Countermeasures Probability Factor. Value = 0 - missile has absolutely resistance to countermeasures. Default = 1 (medium probability) } declare_weapon(SA9M32M); You will find the Igla definition in DCS World\Scripts\Database\Weapons\missile_data.lua Then you create the launcher, either directly or separately like that: -- 9K32 Strela-2 MANPADS Launcher GT_t.LN_t._9K32 = {} GT_t.LN_t._9K32.type = 4; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.distanceMin = 500; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.distanceMax = 5000; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.reactionTime = 3; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.launch_delay = 1; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.maxShootingSpeed = 0; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.reflection_limit = 0.22; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.ECM_K = -1 GT_t.LN_t._9K32.min_launch_angle = math.rad(-20); GT_t.LN_t._9K32.inclination_correction_upper_limit = math.rad(0); GT_t.LN_t._9K32.inclination_correction_bias = (0); GT_t.LN_t._9K32.sensor = {} set_recursive_metatable(GT_t.LN_t._9K32.sensor, GT_t.WSN_t[0]) GT_t.LN_t._9K32.PL = {} GT_t.LN_t._9K32.PL[1] = {} GT_t.LN_t._9K32.PL[1].ammo_capacity = 3; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.PL[1].reload_time = 120; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.PL[1].type_ammunition = SA9M32M.wsTypeOfWeapon; -- this is where you call the weapon you defined earlier GT_t.LN_t._9K32.PL[1].name_ammunition = SA9M32M.shape_table_data.username; -- this is where you call the weapon you defined earlier GT_t.LN_t._9K32.PL[1].automaticLoader = false GT_t.LN_t._9K32.PL[1].shot_delay = 0.01; GT_t.LN_t._9K32.BR = { { pos = {1, 0, 0}, drawArgument = 4}, } GT_t.WS_t.strela2 = {} GT_t.WS_t.strela2.pos = {-0.071, 1.623,0} GT_t.WS_t.strela2.angles = { {math.rad(180), math.rad(-180), math.rad(-45), math.rad(80)}, }; GT_t.WS_t.strela2.drawArgument1 = 0 GT_t.WS_t.strela2.drawArgument2 = 1 GT_t.WS_t.strela2.omegaY = 1.5; GT_t.WS_t.strela2.omegaZ = 1.5; GT_t.WS_t.strela2.pidY = {p=40,i=1.0,d=7, inn = 5}; GT_t.WS_t.strela2.pidZ = {p=40,i=1.0,d=7, inn = 5}; GT_t.WS_t.strela2.reloadAngleY = -100 GT_t.WS_t.strela2.LN = {} GT_t.WS_t.strela2.LN[1] = {} set_recursive_metatable(GT_t.WS_t.strela2.LN[1], GT_t.LN_t._9K32) GT_t.WS_t.strela2.LN[1].PL[1].shot_delay = 20;You will find the Igla launcher definition in DCS World\Scripts\Database\scripts\missile.lua Now you can assign your launcher to your unit definition: -- weapon systems GT.WS = {}; GT.WS.maxTargetDetectionRange = 5000; GT.WS.fire_on_march = false; local ws = GT_t.inc_ws(); GT.WS[ws] = {}; set_recursive_metatable(GT.WS[ws], GT_t.WS_t.strela2); -- here you call the launcher GT.WS[ws].pointer = "camera"; GT.WS[ws].cockpit = {"IglaSight/IglaSight", {0, 0, 0}} GT.WS[ws].LN[1].BR[1].connector_name = "POINT_LAUNCHER"; GT.WS[ws].LN[1].sightMasterMode = 1; Hope it helps !

There aren't any arresting gear at any airbase in DCS currently, right ? So it would be pretty cool to have the emergency hook working, but not really useful atm.

Here's a small bug I found on the Walleye. If you call both the Walleye and the Datalink displays (eg. WEDL on the left & DL13 on the right) and you release the Wallye, not only do you get the datalink picture, but you still receive the picture (ungarbled) on the WEDL page. Surely the WEDL page should either go blank or switch to another Walleye station ? If indeed it does let you display both pages at the same time. Track and a screenshot are attached. Walleye_DL_bug.trk

What I do for setting waypoints on the ground is simply entering 0 (in MSL), and it automatically snaps back to terrain elevation (any value lower than elev will do that in fact). I frankly think I had never even tried the AGL option until just now ! And indeed, it seems it doesn't let you go to 0 AGL.

I suspect that whole "TOO is forbidden due to insufficient accuracy" thing may have been related to the old AN/AAS-38 Nite Hawk FLIR, that was replaced by the ATFLIR. The source I have at least is dated from before the ATFLIR (AFAIK). I don't know if this is still the case with the new pod (maybe somebody in the know has the information - provided it can be shared at all).

So in that logic, we shouldn't have the Litening at all, right ? That was the plan, USN aircraft with ATFLIR, no Litening. They chose to add the Litening as an interim measure because the ATFLIR is/was a long time away. Playing the devil's advocate here, cause although I would like to see a cheek-mounted Litening, I don't care that much after all. Anyway, AFAIK what is holding up the ATFLIR is the new shaders for IR Imaging, so I doubt it would be affected.

Except the Litening was never carrier approved, AFAIK. The USMC use ATFLIR when deployed on the boat. It doesn't mean it couldn't be approved if they wanted to, but from a logistical point of view it is simpler to only carry the ATFLIR aboard, so approcing the Litening for carrier ops is not Worth the effort. That is my understanding, anyway. I have found a comment by Wags on the , from 2 weeks ago, saying they may add cheek station for the Litening, but that it is low priority. I don't know if there have been more recent comment on that subject.

Where did they say that? Have plans changed? It was initially announced that the Litening would be available on cheek station (https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3930032&postcount=156)

I'm interested in why exactly would Tacview be less reliable ? For one thing, it gives more than one decimal for the g-load (note that I do not rely on Tacview for turn rates, but calculate them from G and TAS). By the way, my tests were done without removing the unused wing pylons.

Phantom453 was likely talking about IRL, not what is currently in DCS. Per the NATOPS, there are indeed two detents, Etirion is correct. First detent triggers HUD tape, second detent launches missiles and generates a mark event in the tape. That is all the NATOPS says, which doesn't mean that's all there is to it, of course, because weapons systems are not described therin.

Here's a thought: we know there's a bug in the weight calculation, and that this weight is fed into the FCS. Could it affect sustained turn rate ? Now I can imagine how it wouldn't (because we are talking moderate Gs here), but I like to be cautious around these issues (instantaneous turn rate is obviously affected because of the g-limit). Unless we are sure it has no impact, wouldn't it be reasonable to wait until this is adressed before testing turn rates again ? Also, I have seen concerns about weapons drag (https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=245521), which would definitely impact sustained turn performance. For what it's worth, I have obtained the attached charts in the current version of DCS (probably the stable branch).

By the way, it is not necessary to press CLR before entering a new frequency. As long as the scratchpad window shows the mode, channel or frequency, you can go ahead and enter the six digits (you cannot truncate the frequency) and it should take it, if valid.

That has been my experience as well. Although lately I have had no luck getting datalink after release (ie. I get the datalinked TV image before release, but lose it after release). This is starting on the ground and rearming the Walleye and pod. I might have to try different combinations of which store I select first to see if it does anything. I can answer that, as I have made the test. Turns out it is like the AGM-65F, three minutes.

Best thing would probably be a checkbox in the Mission Editor to deny GPS use to coalitions.

Actually, the bomb mass does matter whenever you have air resistance. Basically, two things will have opposite effects: the shape of the bomb will matter in how much air is actively trying to slow the bomb (therefore, the drag coefficient), but at the same time, the mass will matter in how "difficult" it is for the air to slow it down.* So, the bigger the bomb, the shorter it will impact; the heavier it is, the longer it will impact. Knowing which is the deciding factor for our Mk 80 series would need actually crunching the numbers (or perhaps it can be deduced from delivery tables). But with much heavier bombs that still keep a relatively optimized aerodynamic shape, I wouldn't be surprised to see them impact longer. * To explain it a little more, drag force does not depend upon the mass of the object, while gravity does ; so with F = m.a, we have m.a = m.g - k.v² (assuming a drag force in v², although it does not matter here), and therefore: a = g - v².k/m. Therefore, the higher k is (which dépends mostly on the shape), the more the object is slowed, and the higher m, the less it is slowed.

Interestingly, in the tactical manual pocket guide for the F/A-18 (A to C), both the Walleyes and the JSOWs are listed together with bombs, rockets and mines in the "air-to-ground weapons" category, versus the "air-to-ground missiles" category, which has the the AGM-65s, 84s and 88s (and, yes, the category names don't make a lot of sense, with the "missile" vs "weapon" thing).

They called it AGM when they started developing it, then they realized it didn't make sense, but the deed was done. I think they officially refrained from using that designation, though, using "Walleye" (I & II) and "Guided weapon, MK X" instead.

That is surprising. The NATOPS says that the launch bar switch returns automatically to RETRACT for aircraft 161353 through 161715, but that for aircraft 161716 and up, we should place the switch to RETRACT after we are under tension. Since our aircraft is 165407, the latter is what I would expect, (and works anyway - at least usually).

I believe it has been said that the current (new) engine doesn't support larger maps than what we have, so maybe new developments would aid towards that.

I just came across a strange occurrence, so I thought I'd report it. It is 100% reproducible on my side. Here's the thing : With the aircraft on the ground, engines shutdown, the fuel seems to increase slowly over time (as evidenced by the fuel indicator and the Checklist page gross weight growing in unisson), up to about 15 lbs more than initially (a small increase certainly, but it picked my curiosity). It might go higher than that, but the increase seemed to slow down and I stopped after 1 hour (it had gained only 1 pound in the last 20 minutes). Attached is the track file, and also three screenshots at 51 seconds (+0 lbs), 19 minutes (+9 lbs) and 1 hour (+15 lbs). I had ground power in order to have the indicators working, but I also had the same result by waiting one hour with no power at all. Hornet_Fuel.trk

Also, some aircraft have a display that show the magnetic variation (M-2000C, SA342, F-14B's kneeboard, Hornet probably - but I didn't check).

It should be possible when the INS and navigation systems are overhauled, hopefully. AFAIK, it should work like this: - Go to DATA page, WYPT - Select SLEW - TDC is now assigned to the map - Press and hold TDC, slew to where you want the waypoint - Release TDC to enter the waypoint data - You can also keep TDC pressed and press next waypoint to store the position ; this allows you to enter multiple waypoints quickly