GumidekCZ

OMG :megalol::lol: I just peed myself. They took MiG-21 design and added some of F-16 design, blended together with redesigned engine intakes + nose and you call it "no comparison"? This way I can say, that our Czech Aero L-159T2 Alca has no comparison on field of light attack and training jet planes, just because it was finished two years ago.

This should be our evidence and proof to jet plane lowest RCS value of 3.0 (shared with Viggen and MiG-21)??? Did PAF measure detection with all these airframes clean without loadout, or a similar one? We all know that loadout makes huge impact. M2000C now have RCS 5.0 in DCS. As a Mirage DCS pilot, I would be disappointed when compared with JF17. Just because somebody (PAF pilot may be) said some think, without trying to find a proof or evidence in even very simplistic measurement. I heard, that ED devs are discussing some of DEKA given performances to adjust its level to be at least believable. Hope ED will do good job in it.

Show us real picture supporting your statement. Behind WOODEN nosecone there is always radar antenna and behind it aluminium plate again, both perfect for reflecting radar engergy back to enemey radar. I have picture from MiG-21 service, and except of fibergalss antenna covers all around the plane, there is NON of compisite material. Now back to JF-17 RCS topic.

Im sorry to hijack this topic and noticing SD-10 missile here, was a big mistake. Also I edited my original post and added

Edited because missing = absolut irelevant to RCS = will help reduce RCS only from frontal direction edit:like 20° azimuth (as I already written) ? Weak up from your dream boy! Some minor panels may be made from composite + part of vertical stabilizer and nose cone from fiberglass. All other parts mostly from Alu and Steel. Watch the pictures from links: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4102558&postcount=704 https://defence-blog.com/news/assembly-line-of-pakistani-jf-17-block2-fighters.html :lol: :doh: edit: Same as SD-10 are ultimately better missiles than any other in DCS :mad: Almost every member of any nation which build or participated on production of a fighter jet, will claim his fighter is the best. If you can't step aside and look on design objectively, than do not try to at all.

Why JF-17 has three quarters of F-16 RCS? Any evidence for it? They are same size. If have better covered engine intake blades, but there it end. F16 has better designed clean engine outlet, lower RCS from from any angle than from front - JF has circular shape of fuselage, not very good if compare with sleaky Viper. From my point of view, they need to have same RCS value.

Just try to keep vertical limit of all screens same for all screen used for DCS and export screens. Exported mfds will be ok, but 800x600 was only good to resolution for old Flanker sim :D

Reported many many times before, now still status of [REPORTED] still waiting to be solved, but more important things has higher priorities. All text font and readability is about different screen vertical resolution used for MFD exports and primary DCS screen. Mine main screen has 1200 vertical and secondary MFD screen has 1080 - results in non-readable exports. When editing text lua scripts, than its affecting text on main screen. This is very annoying and should be resolved with high priority. When I downsized main screen vertical to 1080 to match secondary screen used for MFD export, than everything is OK, except low vertical resolution on main screen. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=226340&highlight=fuzzy

I hate FB, I delete my profile like 4 years ago and Im glad I did that.

RAZBAM, hello, ... wake UP! Can you please tell us what protection systems on Tarawa we have today and when we can expect to other RW defence systems like RIM-116 and mK 36 decoy launching system will be implemented? https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lha-1-up.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-116_Rolling_Airframe_Missile

Ability to achieve with MiGs delta wing as much as 20 degree according to real pilots, not possible. Maximum is around 15 degree which is even less than F-5 without delta. We want this fixed more than any other bugs or external 3d model or textures. Edit: Delete this post, found how to achieve such high AoA without big problems.

This is true only as your speed is decreasing. Initialy after touchdown, there should be ground/cushion effect present. As far as Im aware of most of DCS modules, no one simulates this effect and if, than incorectly (example Hornets inverted ground effect which will drag you down into ground). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_(aerodynamics)

I admit that I added to list some points Im aware of (like point 16 - RCS changing through different angles), but someone else may appreciate to know the answer. :smartass: Im not sure about exact answer, maybe with near introduction of SEA radar, different angle of ship (changings ships RCS) will result in different contact range. If you know details (that are 100% valid for current stable DCS version) about how actual system works, you can write about it here or make a vid about it. :smilewink:

Of course that improving Electromagnetic Warfare in future of our virtual world would be great, some systems really "must have". But before our rocket will liftoff into deep space, I would like to have clear idea of what we already have available at our space center and how its simulated. Today situation even for veteran DCS player is unclear with quite many questionmarks? Not talking about new players having absolute no idea whats going on behind EW curtain in DCS. They will than ask veterans, but even they mostly dont know. Its like a racing game with many many car tuning possibilities without knowledge of its effect on car performance. Simple answers from devs could bring day light into it and the game could be than much better. And that is the goal we all aimming for, hopefully :)

Discussion is always nice, but what I’m looking for are true answers to my points (graphics, tables, diagrams can be added). Bear in mind that everything in DCS World and all modules including, are unclassified data, therefore we can have access to it. Everyone wants to know how the game works. So many years some of these points are covered with shadow cover. Sometimes I seemed to me that this is purpose of ED devs, less data and explanation give us less topics to argue about or to demand updates/upgrades. My last experience was for example when I kindly ask to for explanation of simulation AESA radar on DCS E-3 AWACS and its scan limits angles (didn’t receive it yet, if ever will). I hope, that may be this time, someone from ED will be more generous and will share the knowledge with all of us.

I have an question for ED or DCS knowledge specialist. Why? Because many toppics mention down here are covered in kind of shadow in DCS to me. Or explanation of these will bring the light for some of new commers or anyone who had no idea of such physics/system/sumulation. 1) What is the current or near future (1 year) planned state of DCS Electromagnetic Warfare? 2) Which sources of electromagnetic spectrum are detectable, how they can be detected or jammed. 3) How the radars now emits energy? Is scanned azimuth (L/R, narrow, wide) and selected number of bars affecting EM emission of the waves? 4) How big are STT cones are how far can RWR detect other radar emissions and hard locked STT cone energy? 5) Can the RWR detected energy even when located inside of enemy radar limits, but outside of currently scanned azimuth and elevation? 6 ) Are the same rules applied to AI as are for human controlled units? 7) What kind of JAMing do we have in DCS? (Noise Jamming, Deception ECM -range/angle) -added __7a) How the Radar burnthrough range is calculated and how ECM effect detection range? -added __7b) Is communications systems JAMing planed to be implemented to DCS in future? -added 8 ) Which modules simulates negative effect of being jammed? 9) Which modules or assets can JAM others? 10 ) If ECM is used in DCS World, is here simulated limited JAM direction or adjustable JAM direction by advanced JAMing systems? 11) Are all these EM warfare things scripted same way for any of the module - FC3 including 12) Are all these EM warfare things scripted same way Human controlled machine, and for AI? 13) How is in the DCS World simulated the difference between AESA and Doppler radar? 14) What platforms together with what missiles can now shoot HOJ? 15) How is the RCS calculated for any of DCS world unit and how it affects its detectability? 16) Is the RCS value changing by different reflection angle of the unit? 17) Is in DCS World simulated equation between RCS and distance for all radar equipped units? 16 ) Do the DCS players have access to the detecting limits Range vs RCS, or will they some day? 19) How the Pulse Repetition Frequency is simulated? Is the some heavy equation mathematic thing or just simple multiply by an given coefficient. 20) How the Doppler gate is simulated? If I hang my a/c on tail pipes - almost sitting in the air, does it mean that I will be invisible to doppler based radars? 21) Does the Notch maneuver and slip through Doppler gate also in effect when flying in vertical? 22) How Chaff countermeasures effectiveness are calculated in DCS World? 23) What effect have the amount of Chaff released, how the release interval can affect its effectiveness? 24) Is Chaff corridor planed to be implemented to DCS in future? (Such a curtain can so confuse radars that they are unable to locate the real targets within the chaff cloud. Chaff drops so slowly that it normally takes many hours to reach the ground.) -added Little bit off topic, but since we have TV/IR sensors also involved in search for targets, I would like to post here also the question about it: 1) Are the optic sensors presented at any of the modules (CF3 included) affected by smoke or humidity presented in line of sight or just simply the size of the target? 2) Can IR guided missile guide itself thru the cloud (falling snow at winter) or can be confused by any burning (not smoking) ground fire?

+1 More shallow ramps and complete overhaul of Combined Arms human controlled vehicles. Some of them can climb mountains like Mountain Goats, some of them can accelerate against even slightest slope...(Reported but still without any comment from ED side). https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=274211 Will not talk here about different surfaces and its friction properties under different weather conditions (dry/wet, snow, sand, rocks).

I thought, that this toppic would create more discusion and interest, but apperently not. So I would like to move this toppic by admins into BUG report, because I think, that: Bullet explosions not following tracers. Missing 30mm round tracers. Ballistic drop of both weapons not following trajectories as drawn at attached diagram above.

Here is my test mission, download it and try it for your self. What a pitty, that Fw190D cant shoot at ground. Bf109K_balistic_tr_check.miz

I admit, I have difficulties to unzoom to long distance and decrease FOV angle still focus on towers, but still... I have some results. Unfortunately the picture shows something BUGy with Bf109 projectiles. Tracers (both colors white & yellow) we see on picture belongs to only MG131 projectiles. 30mm MG108 dont have any tracers in DCS. If shooting MG131 only , there are no bullet explosions. They emerge only when shooting MG131 and 108 together, on top of that the explosion are located on two areas. Question here is, if all bullet explosions belongs to same type of projectile on not. According to this graph, its clear that MK108 falls more rapidly than MG131 rounds (lower muzzle velocity,...).But if you see the little explosions from last picture in my post above..there it opposite - expolsion near last TV tower with high explosions rate belongs to MG131 and the most left ones to MG108.

For someone this could be an old thing, but I noticed this just 2 hours ago a looking for explanation why it is done this way, or is it a bug?-Me personaly I really hope it is and some day will be fixed. In Honet by pressing TDC directions buttons you are commanding TGP sight to move UP/DWN or L/R, but only if TGP is aimed more less 45° from axis of plane. More you go abeam with sight, more the TDC directions commands make no sence and behaves strange. If you are looking with TGP around >80° (to sides), here Im almost unable to control the TGP sight to directions I want. Operating F/A-18C equiped with TGP as a FACA pilot estabilished in Wheel over target area...Im screwed! When compared with A10C, there is no such weird and mad sight direction control behavior. Edit: I would like to post here a YT video depicting my problem with TGP axis control, but unfortunately I have bussy weekend with my family.

Thanks very much for some RW info. But I'm still more interested in how it's modelled in DCS. Did someone compared RW data with ballistic trajectories we have in DCS now?

This makes map little too dark. Bright green latters and symbols easyer to read, but not solving the problem with very thin black outlines. Working AMPCD cockpit adjustment buttons without bugs and black outline thickness separate sliders option in Hornet special setup for MFD and AMPCD could solve our problems once for all.

I searched briefly forum and manual for values of ballistic drop over the travelled distance, but found nothing about it. Is here somewhere any research and table chart I missed? Also are the MG 131 mounted in plane axis? Was Germans able to adjust its elevation angle? Why I need this? Would be nice to know how much milirads I need to aim above to be able to hit target from longer ranges (200m-500m).

The name of this toppic is really funny now,... should be renamed to "sooooo good only for someone". It would be nice to have kinda chat with ED dev responsible for Hornets displays and try to solve together, why its so difficult to make all displays visible for everyone. The rest of malfunctions are just ordinary bugs I hope.