Jump to content

GumidekCZ

Members
  • Posts

    594
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS, CONDOR
  • Location
    Czech Republic
  • Occupation
    Gearbox development engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. (Some howitzers type have the Time to open fire showed in Combined arms control panel, some of them not.) But worst off all is, that even if you stop fire and than just press button to open fire just a second after on the same coordinates without any changes to setup... the counter to open fire will start all over. This is a huge nonsence, which equals to be a DCS CA Bug, @BIGNEWY If track Really needed, will add later, no problem.
  2. I crop the images to have same resolution as my screen have, but with result of smaller file size to not cross the ED forum size limit. Smoke is visible on original pictures above the tree tops.
  3. My test mission: Ai_sniper_skill_test.miz First two pictures from AI gun sight before I let him to shoot my Abrams behind sluster of tree. If you really focus, there is visible on track wheel under the black aiming arrow. sorry, no it was just a leaf. Yes even this is enough for AI to be able to see you and shoot through the trees. This really need some AI adjustments! Second two pictures after I have been hit and Im burning. Here the same wheel is Last picture with red dot place, where my Abrams is burning.
  4. I just finished another round of testing and I must appologize for designating this as significant bug. Its seems that its not at the end. Exactly as @rcjonessnp175wrote... "amazing loophole finding abilities" - any part of my tank visible through just smole hole in the trees (no matter if just tree cluster or forest) to hostile tank sensor point, and he will start engaging me. Problem with AI unit now is, that mostly only small part of your tank visible is enough to AI to recognize you. To human player this is almost imposible, or would take much more time than to AI times (AI seek time is also dependant on target bearing from unit 12 oclock). This results in very very unfair fight if you put human and AI and couple of trees in the middle. If you want to play Combined arms as ground unit, I highly recomend to set all unit to max only GOOD skill - not higher. This way you will set some inaccuracy to AI gunners and you will have at least a chance to recognize that you are under attack. ... but in most of the time if you are not close to cover... this will still endup in you death, because we are lacking any efective smoke screen defense deployed from turret capsules or by main gun smoke granade.
  5. Hi @Apocalypse31 and @Livers After small quick test in Combined Arms, I can confirm this bug. Im suspecting and need to be tested, that only trees which makes forest are blocking the sight. Any other cluster or couple of trees or bushes can by visible through by AI, not by human player of course. I have quick test mission where my Abrams is hiding behind big cluster of tree and shot from T-80 can make it trough the trees without exploding and it is blowing up my Abrams every time. This is very significant bug affecting most of ground operations. This diserve to be fixed ASAP. I also found these lines in old Detection.Lua code (DCS OB 2.5.6.60966 , 2021-02-10): visual_detection = { terrain_LOS_test = true, Earth_curvature_LOS_test = true, objects_LOS_test = true, trees_LOS_test = false, trees_LOS_test_T4 = true, I must admint, that I cannot confirm, that when this code was actual, the tree masking was working correctly. But I wonder, why the trees_LOS_test was set to "false" and what is "T4" Im also wondering if rule of vis detection like this one: recognition_distance_ratio_threshold = 0.25, --target will be recognized if ratio between the distance and the maximal detection distance is less than this value is somehow overiding above mentioned tree LOS test. I will try to add here test.miz with track later today.
  6. Right now? The issue is here for a very long time, and what I have heard, even before I did my test with many vehicles 2 years ago (I forgot to include track file there): https://forum.dcs.world/topic/234725-reporting-humvee-unable-accelerate-against-slope This is Combined Arms control problem, because AI unit can drive against the slope, but when you hop in certain vehicles, you are not able to climb same slope as AI can. When I did my test, I was surprised how steep slope can some of the vehicles climb, like Russia APC Tiger, Humwee on the other hand have problem same as above mentined M60 and others. Someone from ED need to check ALL the player driven vehicles if they can drive a same slope angle as given by Lua value for AI unit.
  7. Finaly I found old Lua scripts, where I can search reason for such miss. Its about AI skill in deed! And I found, what variables are in account to wind aiming error. I suppose that these values didnt changed. I will set A10C AI skill to EXCELENT and watch accuracy of CBU drop. I found strange thing, that there is not variable of SKILL which will give AI ability to stay out of SAM/AAA WEZ - detected or just expected in the tgt area. SKILL AVERAGE --AIMING [WIND_PARAMS_MEASURING_ACCURACY_IN_AIMING] = 0.6, [TARGET_VELOCITY_MEASURING_ACCURACY_IN_AIMING] = 0.6, --BOMBING [BOMBING_ALONG_RUNWAY] = true, [BOMB_AIMING_ANGULAR_ERROR] = 2.0, [STATIC_COLUMN_ATTACK] = false, [MOVING_COLUMN_ATTACK] = false, [COLUMN_ATTACK_REQUIRED_BOMB_QTY_CALCULATION_MAX_ERROR] = 1.0, SKILL GOOD --AIMING [WIND_PARAMS_MEASURING_ACCURACY_IN_AIMING] = 0.4, [TARGET_VELOCITY_MEASURING_ACCURACY_IN_AIMING] = 0.4, --BOMBING [BOMBING_ALONG_RUNWAY] = true, [BOMB_AIMING_ANGULAR_ERROR] = 1.5, [STATIC_COLUMN_ATTACK] = true, [MOVING_COLUMN_ATTACK] = false, [COLUMN_ATTACK_REQUIRED_BOMB_QTY_CALCULATION_MAX_ERROR] = 0.6, SKILL HIGH --AIMING [WIND_PARAMS_MEASURING_ACCURACY_IN_AIMING] = 0.2, [TARGET_VELOCITY_MEASURING_ACCURACY_IN_AIMING] = 0.2, --BOMBING [BOMBING_ALONG_RUNWAY] = true, [BOMB_AIMING_ANGULAR_ERROR] = 0.7, [STATIC_COLUMN_ATTACK] = true, [MOVING_COLUMN_ATTACK] = true, [COLUMN_ATTACK_REQUIRED_BOMB_QTY_CALCULATION_MAX_ERROR] = 0.3, SKILL EXCELENT --AIMING [WIND_PARAMS_MEASURING_ACCURACY_IN_AIMING] = 0.0, [TARGET_VELOCITY_MEASURING_ACCURACY_IN_AIMING] = 0.0, --BOMBING [BOMBING_ALONG_RUNWAY] = true, [BOMB_AIMING_ANGULAR_ERROR] = 0.0, [STATIC_COLUMN_ATTACK] = true, [MOVING_COLUMN_ATTACK] = true, [COLUMN_ATTACK_REQUIRED_BOMB_QTY_CALCULATION_MAX_ERROR] = 0.0,
  8. SA_N_12_9M317 missile performance not according to public available data and other wrong Lua code values. Some of my information sources: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K37-Buk.html https://www.deagel.com/Defensive%20Weapons/9M317/a003645 https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Buk_missile_system https://alchetron.com/Buk-missile-system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system "Worldwide Equipment Guide (WEG) Update 2011" The modernised version of the 3S90m is the 9K37M1-2 (or 9K317E) "Ezh", which carries the NATO reporting name "Grizzly" or SA-N-12 and the export designation "Shtil". It uses the new 9M317 missile. M = 685.0, -- should be 715 kg H_max = 15000.0, -- should be 25000 (improvement) H_min = 5.0, -- should be 15 D_min = 500.0, -- should be 3000 Nr_max = 19, -- should be 24 (improvement) Mach_max = 4.5, -- should be 3.6 (ALL three reported missile have higher max Mach and very short Minimum Engaging Range) Life_Time = 300.0, -- should be max 120 sec, 80 sec is lifetime of DCS SA9M38M1 (SA-11) missile Range_max = 40000.0, -- по верхней границе -- should be 42000 (improvement) exhaust = { 1, 1, 1, 0.5 }, -- should be { 1, 1, 1, 1.0 },
  9. HQ-9 missile performance not according to public available data and other wrong Lua code values. Some of my information sources: http://www.mdc.idv.tw/mdc/navy/china/hq9.htm http://www.mdc.idv.tw/mdc/navy/china/052c.htm http://errymath.blogspot.com/2015/12/hhq-9-naval-surface-to-air-missile.html#.YlyR49PP0wE https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/hq-9.htm http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-HQ-9-FD-FT-2000.html https://en.missilery.info/missile/hq-9 https://www.armyrecognition.com/china_chinese_army_missile_systems_vehicles/fd-2000_long_range_air_defense_missile_system_technical_data_sheet_specifications_pictures_video.html Overall, the technology and performance level of the basic HQ-9 is between the Russian S-300PMU1/2. Due to the late development of the Hongqi-9 and the use of terminal active radar guidance, it should have more advanced computer software and hardware than the S-300PMU1, and the anti-jamming capability and human-machine interface should be better. However, the range and anti-tactical ballistic missile performance of the HQ-9 should not be as good as the S300PMU1/2. mass = 1200.0, -- should be 1300.0 kg M = 1200.0, --missile mass in KG -- should be 1300.0 kg H_max = 35000.0, --maximum flight altitude -- should be 27000.0 m H_min = 5.0, --minimum flight altitude -- should be 14.0 (able to engage Skiming missiles alt 15m), 5m height not given by any document Diam = 340.0, -- Must be 470.0 mm (Dekas 3D model is 460mm - almost as it should be. Strange is why Deka is intentionaly decreases Lua diameter to reduce missile drag, do the ED supervising team know about that?). D_min = 800.0, --minimum launch range -- should be 5000.0 m (5km) Mach_max = 5, -- should be 4.2 M H_min_t = 10.0, --minimum target height -- should be 25.0 m ccm_k0 = 0.15, -- susceptibility to bait by CHAFF -- should be slightly better than DCS LRS (DCS S-300PS ccm_k0 = 0.5, DCS Patriot ccm_k0 = 0.5) l would expect value ccm_k0 = 0.3 exhaust = { 1, 1, 1, 0.5 }, -- should be { 1, 1, 1, 1.0 }, burning engine produces thick white smoke
  10. HQ-16A missile performance not according to public available data and other wrong Lua code values. Some of my information sources: https://www.eastpendulum.com/nouveau-sam-hq-16b-entre-service http://www.mdc.idv.tw/mdc/navy/china/china-vls.htm http://www.mdc.idv.tw/mdc/navy/china/china-sam.htm http://www.mdc.idv.tw/mdc/navy/china/052d.htm https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-threat-and-proliferation/todays-missile-threat/china/china-anti-access-area-denial/hq-16/ https://www.armyrecognition.com/china_chinese_army_missile_systems_vehicles/hq-16a_ly-80_ground_to_air_defence_missile_system_technical_data_sheet_specifications_pictures_video.html http://fullafterburner.weebly.com/next-gen-weapons/india-vs-china-military-balance-air-defense-part-1-chinese-sams H_max = 35000.0, --maximum flight altitude -- should be 10 or 15 km depending on soruce H_min = 5.0, --minimum flight altitude -- should be 13 (engaging skiming missile flying at 15m) Diam = 160.0, --diameter -- Really? DEKA devs cant recognize the difference between Diameter and Radius? Must be 340 mm (same as Deka 3D model) D_max = 40000.0, -- maximum launch range at 0 height -- should be 42 km or less (denser air > more drag = less Range) D_min = 500.0, --minimum launch range -- should be 3000 m Mach_max = 4.0, -- should be 3.5 Life_Time = 180.0, -- should be max 120 sec, 80 sec is lifetime of DCS SA9M38M1 (SA-11) missile Range_max = 50000.0, -- maximum launch range at maximum height (HHQ16: 45km) -- should be 42 km ccm_k0 = 0.15, -- should be around 0.3-0.4 (Original Deka value 0.5 DCS OB 2.5.6.52437), HQ-16A based on Buk-2M SA-17 'Grizzly' missile design with some improvements exhaust = { 1, 1, 1, 0.5 }, -- should be { 1, 1, 1, 1.0 }, burning engine produces thick white smoke
  11. Also want to join "big thank you" for an planned update. Also I hope, that fixing of RWR issue with picking Lock(SPIKE) from AI engaging other off-azimuth target and also adding the correct fuzes to CBU Mk20 and CBU-99 will tak place in future.
  12. Problem with all modules Ind DCS is, that the players don't have access to transparent list of BUGs (to solve and already fixed), updated list missing features and W.I.P. thing's. With the Hornet, I think that 99.9% of customers who payed their money for these products, they don't know what state of product now they flying and what will some sunny day the product look like. Without these updated lists, players are by no chance able to keep track of the state of the modules. This very frequently results in huge frustrations, when they found missing or not working things by flying their lovely MP or SP missions and campaigns. I recommend, that if you have important mission planed, try to fly it day/hour before just to check if everything is OK. Yeah, that's an idiotic advice and you also need to make sure that you will not make DCS Update in mean time
  13. No I dont have proof for this, and I was not serving at any artilery battery.
  14. Will do if. Strange that AGM-84H can do that. Seems that ED have the proof for much modern missile. PROOF, PROOF, PROOF, PROOF, PROOF, PROOF, ... if you dont have it ... dont bother admins. I will have that in my mind. Sorry, but Im sick of searching PROOFs for any idiotic DCS Bug. I you still need it, I will rather spread any DCS issues among the players comunity, than reporting it to be fixed.
×
×
  • Create New...