GumidekCZ

Yeah, IR seeker in DCS IGNORES FLARES before missile is launched. Above mentioned BUG proved to be an issue to all IR missiles. IR_seeker_IGNORE_FLARES_BUG.trk

But there is huge huge difference between up/downdraft which make you sink or raise and some invisible pitchup force which changes your AOA violently. Even if you have this wake effect off, there is a reported -long time unfixed effect of sudden nose down effect just before touchdown (even on airfield, confirmed no so long time ago).

IT IS A MESS, I hope somebody from ED team will look at it and fix it, at least till the end of the this year hopefully.

DCS Flare rejection simulation is still BIG FAIL to me. Im glad that I can hear birds singing when standing be a tree on ground, but the simulation of DCS countermeasures - by which I mean all three of them Flares , Chaffs, ECM ... it is on level of other fighter planes simulations, may be even worse. For example the simulation here is so simple, that it even doesnt matter if your engine are at IDLE or MIL(Buster). In attached tracks I used all of 80 Flares in one single program to decoy IR guided missile ( I was out of burner and pulling into a missile or close to a beam aspect to create high angular speed to missle seeker ), but without success. I tried more variations of released Flare time sequences, but it didnt have any noticable effect. null 80-FLARES_not_enough_1.trk 80-FLARES_not_enough_4.trk 80-FLARES_not_enough_3.trk 80-FLARES_not_enough_2.trk

When aircraft is releasing flares as pre-emptive countermeasure, all IR seekers in game shouldnt be able to lock on the aircraft, unless most modern seeker I assume, and even after seeker locked, it should have a chance to be decoyed before launch (for human controler in CA, AI units fire missile with ZERO delay after seeker lock). AI units will everytime fire a locked missile and just only after that the well known DCS Lua seeker value ccm_k0 = 0.5 comes to play. null My example of how it shouldnt work with me controling SA-13 equiped with 9M333 missile, engaging F-16 and F-14 defending itself by pre-emptive released flares. They will both be hit by IR missile because of this BUG. If pre-emptive flares are in the FOV as the seeker locks-on then they represent an immediate target in addition to the aircraft. Pre-emptive countermeasures are robust, even against more advanced MANPADs with counter-countermeasure (CCM) capabilities. DCS_PRE-EMPTIVE_FLARES_FAIL.trk

Are you sure that you don't have wake turbolence effect turned off in mission editor or gameplay tab settings?

The Burble Effect is WRONG - my comment to it in link bellow:

Like in already mentioned thesis, somebody responsible for small flares found, that even the small have good performance at least under some conditions and they found, that using small flares can be benefitial. In DCS, the FLARE rejection simulation is so simple, that can Not simulate such physics and the benefit of small flares is "Zero" in DCS. See the results of RedKite YT vid, not even 2 flare program matched the results of big flares. So in mission with IR threat, you need to use roughly 3x more flares to negate same threat as before. ED needs to change flare DEFENSIVE and PRE-EMPTIVE rejection simulation and create different flare profiles for each type used in DCS. Now the small ones M206 (for F-16/A-10) share same parameters as the MJU-8A/B, MJU-27A/B used in F/A-18C Hornet. M206 = explosive 130 grams / 195 grams total MJU-8A/B = explosive 154 grams / 270 grams total MJU-27A/B = explosive 240 grams / 360 grams total (almost weight of the "big" flare MJU-7A/B - explosive substance 261g / 370g total - https://www.tara-aerospace.com/MJU-7A-B)

I have just played a little with that mission last night in DCS editor a found some issues - but not single one related to mission scripting. 1) helicopter Search and engage in zone is broken somehow in DCS, at least for French army Gazelle / UH-1. They both didn’t found anything to open fire on. 2) helicopter AI is just dumb! AI helicopter was engaged by AAA, as soon as beyond the range of AAA, he will turn back in attack run on less threat ground units and will be shoted down because AI needs long aiming time and forgot that he almost died few seconds ago. In test I also noticed some suicide behavior of AI when attacking - diving on target with rockets like German Stuka smashing into ground and his wingmen colliding with civil building after he just evaded AAA fire. If the AI will not engage ZU-23 on first attack run ... they are DEAD! Strange thing is, that in first attack run I had at least partial success with UH-1 Huey unguided rockets, Gazelle cant hit anything, not even pilot with skill set to ACE by default in this mission. AI needs to see the ZU-23 from direction of first attack heading, if is hidden behind building or wall, helicopters are practicaly dead. I almost forgot, than Gazelle have some glitch in mission, not showing the arm - holding unguided rockets. After just setting same weapons in ME, the arm show up correctly.

Coup D'Etat #3 And I have to say, that I was quite disappointed with the comms I received from E-2 AWACS. not calling NEW PICURE, but "heads up" BULLs call called like: Zero-Six-Zero-Four-Two-Six (060426) - there much better way to call it used by US pilots and C2: "Zero-Six-Zero TwentySix" calling BULLs format but target direction of flight given as "HOT" and not as "TRACK" with cardinal direction. HOT used mostly with BRAA call, which I miss there because of ED script limitation I expect. mentioning 2 groups, but not the relative position of those two groups ("RANGE" with nm value). missing information about number of contacts in each bandit group - VERY important for such task to ensure, that there is none untargeted/non monitored bandtit posing major threat. call to MONITOR is just for to keep radar tracking of those groups - could be done on very long distances. It does not imply the readyness to open fire when declared as HOSTILE. Yeah you can open fire right away after HOSTILE declaration , but only when eqiuped with long range A-A missiles. not this case with just MAGIC missiles. The communication could be called like this: "Chvalier, heads up, picture, 2 groups tracking South, range 5, South group bulls 060 twentysix, tweleve thousand, bandit, North group twelve thousand, bandit." "Chevy 11, Chvalier, mission VID South and North group, South group (-BRAA call script-) 2 contacts, North group single contact." "Chvalier, Chevy 11, copy, mission VID South and North group" ("Chvalier, Chevy 11, contact BULLs 0-6-5, twentyfour, twelve thousand, DECLARE" /// "Chevy 1-1, Chvalier, South group there") "Chvalier, Chevy 11, JUDY, standby for VID" "Chvalier, Chevy 11, North and South group, VID Tiger" "Chevy 11, Chvalier, copy South and North group ID F-5s, mission SHADOW both groups, estabilish SHOOTER position North group." From the mission: "Phantom Lead, bandits are almost on us, we are bugging out!" - it seem that AWACS forgot to Retrograde/RTB Phantom group, may be the E-3 crew is bussy right now enjoying fresh hot coffe "This is Phantom Lead, we are taking losses!" - WHAT is this call??? its like from some Hollywood movie E-3 crew will face very serius consequences for not warning Phantom group when bandits reached at least the threat range or Merged if not the Retrograde call. Why the AWACS crew didnt declare both groups as HOSTILE when they manuevered in WEZ possition on friendlys? "Chevy 1-1, engaging Bandits" - Bandits, and which bandits? i expect that by common ROE, if the bandits engaged friendlys - now they are automaticly declared as HOSTILE! so no more Bandit call. Should be like this: "Chevy 1-1, engaging South and North group, both HOSTILE" "Chevalier to all players, bandits are bugging out" - Why AWACS call "to all players"? if he is not addressing the call with any callsing, we all know that the message is for everyone on the frequency. Why the hostile bugging out is call by AWACS? Chevy 11 or 12 should be the first ones noticing that fact and therefore call that for AWACS. "Phantom Lead,copy, Show Phantoms RTB." ?Show? which show? i thing I missed something. "Chevalier, Phantom 11, copy your last. Break, Chevy 11 you are cleared to RTB." - If you need to divide message for more than one flight leader, you need to call it twice! "BREAK BREAK".

Coup D'Etat #3 SA-342 Gazelles not engaging, they just flying around and keep getting punish by AAA. Some of them shoted down, one of the Gazelle lost its tail rotor, but AI was able to RTB safely = not fault of the mission No message about neutralizing AAA received, -> no engagement clearance received

I still wonder where the ED team responsible for this Burble effect on Hornet take the data to make this mess. I know that according to ED, this effect is still W.I.P. but I hope, that soon the will get rid of this attitude change nonsence. I have gone through most of Hornet/SuperHornet carrier landing on YT, but never saw any major or minor compensation by stick done by pilot to fight with sudden pitching up. ALWAYS the Hornet keeps the pitch angle VERY stable. Pilots are mosty just slightly adding some throthle when approaching end of the ship and than reducing it quickly to nominal descend value as it was in the groove.

Yeah, I know, they just have to learn to search if the bug is already reported before the write their own report. Problem is, that there is multiple places in forum, where someone can put the report in, that is why I first try to use forum or Google search. Multiple reports of the same thing is not helping to anyone

I have to agree with you, 2017 version color tint is much more realistic. I wish that somebody from ED can do something with that. And not only with color tint but also with blending real distinctive colors of rock, sand, river wash, bush covered areas into WRONG monocolored texutre as cen be seen on mountain texuture above or at PG map now:

Reported long time ago, I was told by BN or NL (I dont remember by whom exactly) that this is W.I.P. I hope that now, when solved adjusting bomb fuze editing in mission editor for WWII bombs, the same thing will be done for all "modern" bombs and cluster munition.

"Hello, is there anybody out there?"

"Hello, is there anybody out there?"

I know, thanks. But would be nice, if automatic PSTT enabled, Jester not constantly loosing lock.

The issue with AIM-7 and silly Jester loosing lock when automaticly switching PDSTT -> PSTT, it is still there. Simple question to @IronMike , if this will be fixed or tuned in future, or is OK according to you.

Todays update: Weapons. Fixed SA-N-12, HHQ-9 and HQ-16 params Where??, Seems that somebody fixed it but only in his PC and forget to send it to ED: ChinaAssetPack weapons.lua last modified at 28th January 2022

After Gun Lead angle pass by targets roughly abeam position (SON-9 position 80°degree off target heading) , KS-19 will than stop adjusting Gun Lead angle - firing to the same spot My test mission AAA_FLAK_Gun_aiming.miz Now when I think of it and watching guns aiming... it seems to me like targets notched the SON-9 tracking - KS-19 are firing than to the last know position. SON-9 dish seems still tracking though correctly. (KS-19 will stop fire when targets leave the threat circle) SON-9_lead_angle_BUG.trk, Tacview-20220728-125737-DCS-AAA_FLAK_Gun_aiming.zip.acmi

SON-9 refusing to track and guide KS-19 fire to target when Moonlight is lower than half-moon and lower to horizon. My test mission: AAA_FLAK_TEST.miz Mission I share is set to have barely enough moon light - SON-9 will track target when passing by - but instead of firing KS-19 will start to spin forewer: SON-9_barely_tracks_Moon_Light_BUG.trk When you edit the date to 1 day before (14th February) and to time 22:00, the moon light will be degraded to level, when SON-9 will be not able to track at all. SON-9_not_enough_Moon_Light_BUG.trk

As per title: Neustrashimi SAM Kinzhal (Tor SA-15) firing more missiles out of 60° FCR sector. https://weaponsystems.net/system/460-3K95+Kinzhal "Kinzhal - Original production model with 9M330-2 missile. Two targets can be engaged by up to FOUR missiles in the 60 degree sector of the fire control radar." In my example test mission, ship fired at one of the test (made multiple of them with various results), Neustrahimi fired 6 missiles at all four incoming Harpoons - not following limit of 3K95 Kinzhal FCR limit of max 2 targets engaged at one moment with max 2 missiles per target. l 3K95_Kinzhal_max_4missiles_on_2tgts_BUG.trk Tacview-20220727-034802-DCS-3K95 Kinzhal_Neustrashimi_TEST.zip.acmi

Can we see the manual, I mean the RW one? Link to it would be nice. Should be no problem for you to at least guide me, where I can find it. I expect that is not Classified, if you are able to use it for this sim.

You CANT just use some picture with gear NEVER SEEN MOUNTED ON REAL PLANE. Now, all available photos which are with high resolution enough, tell us, that Me and Dekas texure (If not been changed yet since my first post) IS correct Im sorry. - REAL JF-17 (empty) - DEKA TEXTURE