Machalot

I know all that. I can't tell what your point is.

That's interesting. I wonder if the radar numbers are given in terms of Mean Sea Level, which is a commonly used geometric altitude (what you probably meant by "true"). MSL altitude is calculated using data from the aircraft's INS. You could try turning off the INS to see if it makes a difference.

I was flying with the altitude mode in RHM (radar altimeter) and the radar in Terrain Avoidance mode, and looking at the Central Indicator (CI, the radar display) representation of the horizon reference line, pole track, and 100 m reference line to try to use them for head-down low altitude flying. I noticed when I hit the Reference button, the 100 m reference line on the CI updates its vertical position, but it then remains fixed there and doesn't move if the aircraft changes altitude. The CI pole track does move up and down as the radar altitude changes. I don't have the ability to take a screenshot or track at the moment, so I'm first wondering if anyone else has noticed this. I couldn't find a post about it using the forum search, but I don't know if I used the right search terms.

What do you mean when you say manage to guide? They are guiding to the end of the 8 nmi laser. Are you asking how any of them hit the target? Most likely you fly within 8 nmi slant range of the target before the bombs impact. If you're asking why they were pointed at the target even though the 8 nmi laser was short, remember that the laser is pointing directly toward the target along the of line of sight even if it doesn't reach. So GBUs will appear to guide toward the target even as the actually guide to a point on the line of sight.

It's an artifact of how it's modeled. Imagine an 8 nmi long stick of laser beam originating from your TGP. If the tip touches the ground, it shortens to fit the distance. Otherwise the end of the laser stick just flies through the air somewhere 8 nmi below and in front of the jet, and that end point is what the GBUs track.

What I'm stuck on is that to fly a particular AoA in general you will need to change the thrust setting, which also means change altitude and/or airspeed. And that depends on weight, drag index, and atmospheric conditions. So what combination of thrust, altitude, and airspeed gives max range or endurance at 4.2 and 5.6 deg, respectively, for a particular weight and drag index?

Is the NATOPS publicly available? I am still curious about the assumptions behind these AoA approximations.

If you want to fly low in low vis, consider trying the Viggen during the next free play period.

Seems like there are a lot of assumptions built into this. Whether a given AoA is compatible with level flight depends on weight, altitude, and airspeed. For example, if it requires afterburner to fly at 4.2 deg AoA I don't see how that could be best range. Do you know what the assumptions are?

Have them roll out the forklifts and flat bed trucks to retrieve ordnance crates from the magazine and drive them to the staging area, where they plug the ground test equipment into the connectors on the crates, update the ordnance firmware and software, load GPS crypto keys, and run the BITs, before extracting the ordnance from the crates to put on the loader.

I did not know that, thanks for the tip! I am generally less familiar with the Hornet than the Viper, and I find it kind of awkward to use the Hornet OSBs for things the Viper HOTAS can do. I guess there are some hidden conveniences.

I assume "updated manually" in this case doesn't mean type in the time, but more likely to press a button to initiate a time sync of system time with GPS time.

Thanks for writing this up. I previously complained about the drift rate and accumulation of error in another post.

Any idea how much coupling force and torque the real boom provides? I would be worried that if it grabbed onto the receiving aircraft too tightly, it could easily over stress the boom as the pilot flies out of the green/green zone (or due to wind shear).

I hope we all prefer realism, whether it's better or worse.

I was definitely foiled by not knowing that the other day. According to Chuck's Guide, "REC : Receive Mode collects information on radars scanning your aircraft but does not transmit jamming signal". This would be for ELINT purposes.

It might be called Tiger II because there had already been an aircraft named Tiger (the F-11) when the F-5E came out. The US military has reused other names in this manner, such as the A-7 Corsair II, F-4 Phantom II, A-10 Thunderbolt II, F-35 Lightning II, C-17 Globemaster III, etc.

It does take some flying skill because flying low level and fast while dropping unguided ordnance doesn't leave a lot of margin for error. I have found it an enjoyable and sometimes frustrating challenge that required me to practice and pay close attention to maintaining the speed and altitude envelope during attack runs.

Another way to retry after a failed handoff (Mav in Break Lock mode with a large gap in the crosshairs) is to: 1. SOI to Mav (DMS down) 2. then TMS down to reslave the Mav 3. then SOI back to TGP (DMS down) 4. then reattempt the handoff with TMS left.

If the handoff doesn't work on the first try, you need to follow @Furiz's advice from a few comments up:

I'll just add, it has the closest thing we get to a terrain following radar in DCS. And the HUD symbology combined with the radar altimeter is designed to aid the pilot in high speed, low level flying, being almost entirely geometric with ground-referenced markers and almost no text or numbers.

Yeah, I think TERNAV is working a little too well in the Persian Gulf. Last night I had a consistent 5 while flying over the extremely flat peninsula in the center of the map northeast of Al Dhafra.

I don't dispute the formula is correct for 1000 lbs of fuel and above. The reason I read it the way I do is the fuel weight modification is stated as "if remaining fuel level is more than 1000 lbs", and only mentions adding speed. There's no statement about subtracting speed (at least in the quoted text; I don't have access to the manual at the moment).

I interpret the instruction to omit the fuel term if less than 1000 lb remain. Otherwise you end up reducing the calculated speed by 1 kt for every 200 lbs under 1000.

You could also have a switch or something mapped to the radar elevation. It's implemented as a zoom rate command, not absolute zoom, so as long as the button or switch is depressed it will continue to zoom to the limit.