GumidekCZ

Absolute not true, why you guys not going to test properly the thing your want to discuse before you do so? Because if you did that, you could notice how big difference is between these two (CBU-99 and Mk-20 by effect on target (believe me, its big). I have done test with whole range of RU made vehicles present in DCS. Some of my friends didnt belive me, but when I teach them how to do it right, they were amazed, how Mk-20 could be leathal. Sure, it is not wind corrected munition, but if no SHORAD presented, you will leave columns of armoured vehicles in flames. One thing about these two CBU we are now waiting to be fixed are incorrect fuze types and store page settings, this was presented by ED as temporary solution untill they will have time to fix it ... I hope will be soon. If you would like to se my track... will attach it this weekend.

When I tried to evaluate TWS/LTWS shots with guidance D/L, I tried to compare it with shots from STT. Than I found what seems to me like a bug. I hard locked one of AI targets flying in open (0,7nm separation) formation. When intercepting from long distance, the Lock jumped few time from plane to plane, but when get close (25nm) for AIM120 launch a shoot all 6 missiles, I found that STT lock jumped randomly. Sometime more often sometimes less. Can lead to dangerous situation: If I fly as a Leader and direct my wingmen to SORT targets (for AIM-7 launch for example), there great risk that some launched missiles will hit wrong plane (may be the same). Track: _120C-STT_Taget_Switch_BUG.trk

2.5.6.50793 open beta hot fix, same as previous update. Experiencing AIM120 guidance bug presented to some of 20% missile releases. Seems that these missiles lacking D/L guidance. Track attached: 120C-Guidance_BUG.trk

After yesterdays very famous update release :doh:, I wanted to se updated textures on external 490l fuel tanks, loaded all 3 of them (wings + center) plus 2x Kh-66 GROM plus SPRD boosters. When SPRD was attached to the MiG, main wheel dug deep into ground and plane tilted to back. Did I something wrong, or is it a bug with accidentally too much weight assigned to SPRD in Lua script?

BOL mode, UFC BRG defined by heading readed from HSI on waypoint where ship is staticly located. AGM-84D shortly after parameters typed in, missile will fly on TRUE heading. on HSI the line was dipalyed as the BRG was MAG value. So the is TRUE typed in UFC (missile will fly) but HSI display missile line of flight in MAG heading. Manual says: "Flight Bearing (BRG): (BOL mode only). As with the SRCH function, the player will select the BRG option on the UFC. The magnetic or true bearing relative to ownship that the Harpoon will launch along." My additional question than is which heading AGM-84D uses, or how to switch for missile, where? AGM-84D-BUG.trk

Thanks very much Kate for promising Roadmap. But I missed somewhere note about CBU-99 and Mk-20 Rockeye proper fuze options implementation. Now we have fuze - non existing in RW, already promised by ED to finalize that.

Sorry for little Offtopic. Just saw new textures at FB: I have some small note about the rivets lines. Dont know if texture is still WIP, so.. Hope released model with texture will look AWESOME :pilotfly:

According to NATOPS chart acceleration with clean pylon, present on wings acceleration from 200IAS to 500kts at sea level, with defined weight, DCS Hornet accelerated almost exactly as chart time line. To speed of clean plane with pylons also according to chart. Was BLACK hole reported by me are the adapters. Also big question to ED team is combined drag effect when less space between payload. ED have drag index calculations for C Hornet also for E/F with more precise weapon drag index info. What's been replayed to me, that's this is WIP and we should wait,... As always ;)

[MOVE TO BUGS] Please Find this problem at many vehicles when driving them, cant accelerate against slopes definded in vehicle Lua scripts. Will add more tracks when back at home.

Delete AGM-154B from F-16 weapon list: All available sources say same, even those from Russia: http://militera.lib.ru/tw/0/pdf/valetsky_ov02.pdf "ВВС США отказались от ракет AGM-154B в пользу CBU-115/B WCMD-ER." Translated: "The US Air Force abandoned the AGM-154B missiles in favor of the CBU-115 / B WCMD-ER." http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-154.html "The USAF pulled out of the AGM-154B program because it selected the CBU-115/B WCMD-ER (Wind-Corrected Munitions Dispenser - Extended Range) as its future standoff anti-armour weapon (the CBU-115/B can carry ten BLU-108/B compared to JSOW's six), and the Navy couldn't afford to fund the AGM-154B on its own."

Unble to view your track now, but can it be same problem as I already reported? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=269104

Now, something else: How can be according to LSO screen, WOD 20 knots with 2 knots cross wind component if in weather is only 6 and ship 11 = max 17 knots. Where are these 3 knots from? When in F14 or F18 on deck, I get correct speed at external view bar of 17knots.

Reporting wrong speed values at second waypoint for all Supercarrier and regular carriers missions before. First WP speed defined as 20kts and second as only 11 knots. So from good initial speed of wind over deck around 30 knots is slows to only 20 knots only few soconds after mission start. This is not problem of every Stennis or SC mission, but there are some, for example: F-14B_IA_Caucasus_case_1_supercarrier.miz F-14B_IA_Caucasus_Quals_supercarrier.miz Hornet 1989-Alert 5.miz Hornet 1989-Fighter Sweep.miz Caucasus FA-18C Case III Carrier Landing.miz Caucasus FA-18C Carrier Cold Start.miz ... some more... will not scan all Stennis missions in DCS. Wonder why missions are not defined as described in SC manual:

Ultimate answer from anybody of ED, give us publicly accessible official document. I have been scanning DCS Lua code for some time, found many unrealistic things, some of them already reported, like AWACS and Hawkeye vertical scan limits. But these are OK-AS IT IS? Let's calm down and start to behave reasonable. ED team, I DON'T WANT module based on official documents only. You will NEVER find all these data to every system to every plane, ship, vehicle in game. This is simulator game! SA10 missile rocket engine burning time based on launch video of damaged missile? This kind of proof material is good? Really? t_acc = 25.0, -- Corrected by https://youtu.be/7i-UMYNKwcU video And those who post screens from videos of US TGP are .... ? Think about it.

Reporting BUG not only connected to, but will use it as an example. HUMVEE unable accelerate against more than 20% (10°) slope from stop. According to available data HUMVEE have a 60% (31°) slope climbing ability, and can operate on 40% side hills. Only method is to accelerate perpendicular to slope or drive downhill to the flat area, accelerate there and than climb that 60% slope. In script is defined correctly: max_slope = 0.5, -- in radians Other vehicles like Russian Tiger with similar capability can climb steeper slopes, but still suffering from same issue.

Forgot to put note there, that was at night time. Update: I think I forgotten to switch one 3rd ground power switch to B , not A.

I don’t know how you, but I’m still having difficult times when trying to read symbols from AMPCD, when MAP is ON. I tried to click every (SYM) button so many times and turn every knob (Brightness) to any position, but still I need to zoom all the way in to be able read something. I’m writing about day condition, but at night mode, its even worse. This problem is from the day the Hornet was released, every time in cockpit of Hornet, I need to turn map off. :doh: Can this be caused by graphic card, or DCS graphic settings like antialiasing settings?

Im missing IFEI indicator, when battery ON. Is that correct that my IFEI turns on only after first engine is running? I dont think so.

Hello? Is there anybody out there?

I'm still waiting for someone writing here: "don't put any ship into your mission, otherwise you will see incredible stupid things and wait for any part of ED team to fix all these sophisticated systems and DM, when they are able to find time for it." ED can we help you any way with it? Btw: in RL ground based Phalanx able to shoot down mortar or artillery shells.

If you search the code, you will find a Life points for each of vehicle, ship in DCS and than equation how much damage the weapon can deal to it on basis of warhead type and weight. Very simple and easy way to deal with damage, but totaly unrealistic, especialy with floating ship and any unit with fragile system on it (SAMs). Luckily this is WIP and we will see new system in future... when? Never ask this question! Note: The ship are lacking any kind of damage model taking in account the hull of the ship and structures above it. You can hit structures and take out all of hit points and ship will sunk, even if the hull stays intact.

NOT [AS IT IS] Found it, wrong elevation limits values (only -15/+10 degree) in DCS Lua code, and found more things are wrong in code, like missile sensors FOV defined as full 180 degree. In real world, E-3C and E-2D have ground stabilized AESA radar in all 3 axes, so standard turn bank angle is not a limit. AESA radar have ability to set almost any elevation angle (like -70/+70 degrees). Even wings cant obscure target, because the radar array is much wider than length of wing profile. On top of that both E-2D and E-3C has an ability of detecting cruise missiles at long ranges. https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_old_pdf.cfm?ARC_ID=72 APS-138. This variant introduced the low side-lobe antenna (Total Radiation Aperture Control Antenna (TRAC-A)) first delivered in late 1982, and was designed to track cruise missiles at long distances (150 nm). Also I think, that E-2C in DCS should be equipped with AN/APS-145 radar, intstaled from year 1991. Now found, that in scripts DCS have defined E-2C with APS-138 UHF doppler radar , but in game and in Enycopedia it shows E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, equiped with AESA AN/APY-9. One small note at the end: Russia A-50 AWACS have in DCS defined vertical limits by -30 and +30 degree (vs E-2D and E-3C with only -15 and +10 degree)!!!

Still bugged, even if someone thinking opposite. Posting link for same bug report. Forgot, that I already reported this in past. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4298474#post4298474

Will do little spam here, where questioning Razbam devs about Tarawa defence systems: So I would like to use same questions here, except the different fire control system than SSDS Mk2. Adding here question about implementation of Mark 36 Super Rapid Bloom Offboard Countermeasures Chaff and Decoy ... (abbreviated as SRBOC or "Super-arboc") Edit: Why some advanced automatic aiming systems have in lua script defined same sensor accuracy as much older or simplier systems like Shilka and Vulcan? The numbers defined there are good for these two, but we are lacking much percise sensor defined in new WSN_9 for advanced guidance systems. No wonder that Phalanx can hit cruise missile only due to HUGE bullet spread (already reported as a Bug to ED). (Chinese DEKA CAP antiship missiles not able to be destroyed by bullets now).

Please I would like to hear answers to my questions fro Razbam devs, if they are ablo to. Dont want to read, how I need to put another 2 or 3 Perry or Ticonderoga class ships around Tarawa to protect it.