GumidekCZ

I have same thoughts, but not only about the magnitude, but also about coniclal angle of the influenced air volume. According to what I heard from real pilot, he thought that the cone is spreading to sides behind the plane too quick. But may be this can be also the result of the larger magnitude the is IRL. I would be nice option to have in DCS to actualy VISUALIZE the speed vectors of affected air volume to distances like 1-4 km behind the airplane. Bu my gues is that this would be too much performance drop to any PC.

1 Year after: This MAJOR BUG and DCS FLAW is still present today and was not removed/fixed. It posses major SITUATION AWARNESS confusion to pilot with FAKE RWR SIGNALS This results in pilot situations where pilot in SAFE situation is dragged away from his intened actions and force him to react quickly to non-existing (far) threats. Which can sometimes spoil whole mission.

Question is, how it should look like in the end in mission editor: a) add one more line to arming window with rocket pods fitted with additional front+aft fairings - my preferred option b) clickable option in group special tab ( like HMCS/NWG is)

The fairings are part of the ZUNI/Rockets launchers and should bepresent in DCS. Doesnt relly matter if it was used or not for cost saving reasons. Fairings are desribed in almost every rocket lanucher article I found on web. Like here: https://www.tpub.com/aviord321/31.htm Without fairings, the drag of the launchers is HUGE with high negative performance impact on long or fast fights to/from target. "Launchers can be fitted with forward and aft frangible fairings (as required) depending on overall rocket length for airborne configuration. "The forward frangible fairing disintegrates on rocket impact and the rear fairing acts as a funnel to direct debris away from the launch aircraft."

My pictures clearly show what is the distance ejectors push AIM-7 away from fuselage after which missile will rapidly accelerate forward. It's just roughly about 9-12 feet.

Bumping up with ask about the state of this bug. I hope for "Reported" and fix in future.

Same BUG as before: MAG BEARING UFC input is on the wrong side of true bearing. MAG BRNG = TRUE BRNG + MAG VAR (not "minus"). Tested on Syria map and also Caucasus and Nevada maps. Hornet_offset_BUG_Caucasus.trk Hornet_offset_BUG_Syria.trk

@BIGNEWY know about this more from our discussion on Discord. I hope that the team will make these things work in future, because this is big problem in missions where GPS is restricted.

Bumbing up! Hello, anybody there?

null The LAU-116/A guided missile launcher is a reusable launcher of the F/A-18 aircraft suspension and launching system for the AIM-7 Sparrow missile. The launchers are mounted internally in the fuselage structure. They are self-contained, gas-operated mechanisms, capable of suspending and ejecting the AIM-7 Sparrow missile. Ejection force is supplied by two CCU-45 impulse cartridges ignited by an electrical impulse applied by the missile firing switch. The rapidly expanding gases actuate the ejector pistons and release the missile from the launcher. Power is applied to the missile guidance control system through the umbilical plug. An actuator-operated safety device prevents inadvertent firing of launcher cartridges. Very simillar ejection launcher is on F-15C. In DCS AIM-7 released from LAU-116/A at 20°AOA in ACM combat against MiG-29 => Resulted in miss, of course (green vector = actual flight direction): The missile should be just pushed by force away from fuselage and in very quick succesion ignite its rocket motor. All this with its nose pointing at the same direction as it was mounted on fuselage. Same moment from different angle: Same action with F-15C: Real Life fuselage ejected AIM-7:

From what I found, proportional navigation was implemented to not only "late" models, but "F" version also: AIM-7F_Sparrow_CS_-_January_1976.pdf AIM-7F_Sparrow_III_SMC_-_January_1977.pdf @GGTharos Please, I have a question about Autopilot of "M" version (source https://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-7.html): The autopilot enables the AIM-7M to fly optimized trajectories, with target illumination necessary only for mid-course and terminal guidance. And also about radar uplink of "P" version: The AIM-7P features improved guidance electronics and on-board computer, has a new radar fuze, and has an uplink to the autopilot for mid-course guidance updates. Which I guess resulted in "P" ability of target necessary illumination only for terminal guidance. (I think that I have red somewhere, that R-27ER have something simillar.) These two major improvements make totally sense to me, and actually this can be an answer how the designers of the missile make late models deadlier in comparison with early models - shining on enemy RWR just from the moment of leaving the rail. The 1976 Kub-M3 (SA-6) with its 3M9M3 missile have also this ability required CW ilumination only on terminal phase. ("M" become operational at 1982 and "P" at 1987 as per Wiki)

What? Did you really watched the Trakc/Tacview BUG_3-4?: nullMe and hostile nose to nose under 6 nm with 4 AIM-7 hostile reflection still in its FOV of seeker. Non of them intercepted! Not even the 5th released AIM-7 at range of 4,5nm. Same behaviour can be seen on my Acmi file:AIM-7_BUG.zip.acmi This time targets are above terrain reflections to seeker.

Was originaly a BUG Report, but as position UPDATE is by Hornet manual "NOT IMPLEMENTED" **not even TACAN update** Im forced to create only wish post. Correct description is in detail described in *********-000 manual. AUTO Update - wp/oap overfly When next waypoint is selected and selecting position AUTO update mode - TDC depress when overflying it will not update position in POS/INS or POS/ADC. AUTO_position_update_overfly_BUG.trk Designation (DSG) Update - sonsor designated wp/oap When next waypoint is selected and sendosor (radar used in track file) is pointing on correct position of the waypoint, than the DSG update button press works -wrong- as overfly waypoint. Will not measure bearing and distance to it and compute position correction. DSG_POS_Sensor_update_BUG.trk

Can you please give me is single explanation or evidence of why that? According to me, when AIM-7 have no reflected energy detected, it fly straight forward, but than if any target emerge in FLOOD cone and reflect energy back into missile seeker FOV, missile will start to guide on it (if battery still provide energy 90 sec for P variant). Just to be sure, this whole report is about Hornet FLOOD /(F-14 BORESIGHT) mode.

There it is: Tracks and Tacwiev files have number added which points onto bug presented there. AIM-7_FLOOD_2-3.tr AIM-7_FLOOD_2-3.zip.acmi AIM-7_FLOOD_3-4.trk AIM-7_FLOOD_3-4.zip.acmi AIM-7_FLOOD_3-5.trk AIM-7_FLOOD_3-5.zip.acmi AIM-7_FLOOD_6.trk AIM-7_FLOOD_6.zip.acmi I can make some graphics, if some of my points are not clear.

6 Bugs related with AIM-7 now: 1) Undesignate button dont leave FLOOD mode back into RWS as described in manual. Undesignate now function as LTWS target designation/switching between more radar contacts. 2) AIM-7 is not guiding on target even at close distances or in 2g TURNS. (Edited: My note which may be not connected to this bug: There should be no notching efect by target on FLOOD mode released AIM-7) DCS Manual: FLOOD mode can be a useful mode in a dogfight when you cannot gain a radar lock. 3) AIM-7 unable to guide on radar energy reflection, when released more than 7nm from target. DCS Manual: "This is effective out to 10 nm." 4) FLOOD mode released AIM-7 unable to guide on radar energy reflection when on direct heading to target, even if distance between emitor and iluminated target is under 10nm. ( Missile released at range of 12nm, missile will fly-by headon target at 8nm without sensing the energy reflection). 5) FLOOD mode released AIM-7 is not guiding itself to the strongest reflection in FOV of its seeker. At same range AIM-7 choosed to guide itself to MiG-21 with RCS=3 rather than on Su-25 with RCS=7 (more than double). 6) When AIM-7 is released in FLOOD mode when target is outside of big circle, missile will not guide on target even if target will fly into big circle & in FOV of the missile seeker. Unfortunately I need to go now, will attach tracks later this evening. RED = Edited

"P" version same as previous "M" or export version "MH" have the same chaff resistance factor as R-27R: ccm_k0 = 0.5 The "P" version differs from its predecessors only by implemented radar midcourse guidance - so far I was unable to recognize the benefit of this in fight May be some more educated from ED can explain to us, please.

My new Czech #3367 skin (airframe in active service in CZAF) made on basis of my previous Czech #3361 - both Tiger Meet camouflages. Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3323159/ The link to the #3361 Tiger Meet livery: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3318237/

Do we have any progress here? We are still missing azimuth steering L/R on radar page by pressing TDC depress short in empty area on radar screen.

(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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.