BlueRidgeDx

Counterintuitive as it may be, Maverick slew rate is most sensitive at 0.5 and least sensitive at 9.5. The same is true of the System slew rate, except the range of acceptable values is 0.1 to 9.5.

1) None. Maximum effective slant range and dive angle would determine a "max altitude", but there is no use for such a number. Use slant range instead. 2) None. The minimum altitude is driven by the pilot's Low Altitude Stepdown category. It could be anywhere from 500 to 100 feet. 3) MIN ALT is whatever you set it to be given the tactical considerations of the situation. Is it night time? Are you in mountainous terrain? What threats will you encounter? Are there SPINS that stipulate an administrative minimum altitude? MRC will be clamped to the top of the reticle when you're more than 5 seconds from passing the MIN ALT. It will move downward next to the reticle's 3 o'clock hash mark when you are at MIN ALT, and will clamp to the bottom of the reticle when 5 seconds beyond MIN ALT. 4) 4/8/12 gun cross is used when you do not have accurate elevation data and CCIP is not available. Instead, you have to manually elevate the gun for slant range, while IFFCC corrects for windage. Without CCIP you do not have computed slant rage info, so you have to use a technique called mil-sizing to estimate range.

Me too. I find that there are instances where it's easier to acquire targets in COH vs HOC, even though the simulated maverick doesnt care. Perhaps some day the IR aspect of the sim will be fleshed out so that things like thermal crossover, humidity, and attenuation/absorption will play a role.

Occasional duds and sympathetic detonations among other fuzing factors have been on the internal wishlist for a while. Some day...

Mmmmmm....pork chops. Nom nom nom!

Nonetheless, there's no good reason to setup poor habit patterns that will get you into trouble later. That's why you don't walk through propeller arcs even when the engines are off; if you do it all the time without thinking, then you'll do it by accident with the prop turning and it will ruin your day. The inability to get a steady pointing cross is a real limitation of the Maverick weapon system, and respecting the procedure of not firing without a steady cross increases realism and difficulty. I've come off dry on many a Maverick pass because that damn thing won't stop flashing.

You want to see a steady pointing cross after initiating track, not a flashing one. A flashing cross indicates a low-quality lock that will not likely survive throughout missile launch.

Lol...I write something boneheaded at least once a week. I attribute it mostly to making 4am posts on an iPhone. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. Word of the day! Interestingly, I've been working with the TERPS manual and there are some nifty tools and calculators available for calculating FAF/PFAF, Final End Point, Missed Approach Point, and all of the required imaginary surfaces and gradients. Pretty neat stuff if you have the patience for it. This.

Like I said, I don't think he's describing how he believes a real ILS works; I think he was answering my query about what people think is wrong with the ILS in DCS, since several users have stated that ILS is "porked" in-game.

I think ralfidude knows how an ILS works, and is simply pointing out that some ILSs in DCS erroneously lead to a point near midfield. I've heard this problem mentioned before, but I've never seen it myself. But since we're already down in the weeds - and because it's always easier to nitpick others' posts - i'd like to point a few things out. ;) The CAT I DA (not DH and not MDA), is actually predicated on several factors including glideslope angle, approach lighting system, and runway markings/lighting. CAT I minimums can be as low as 200ft and 1/2SM (or 1800 RVR), but are frequently higher due to nonstandard lighting or terrain considerations. Assuming 200-1/2 minimums, you would need to see the runway at the middle marker (sited about 2,500ft from the threshold), not the inner marker. The outer marker is usually about 5 miles from the threshold and, generally speaking, is within a few tenths of a mile from where you intercept the glideslope. The two points are not always coincident. Additionally, precision approaches don't actually have an FAF, they have a final segment which befins at the charted point of glideslope intercept. If an FAF is charted on a precision approach plate, it's because there is a nonprecision procedure contained therein - usually a LOC only approach, e.g. "ILS or LOC/DME". In the region of the world currently represented in DCS, the markers are not sited as they are in the West, so don't plan on using the outer marker for GS intercept.

And, since all the important reasons have already been covered, it's also used to help boresight the Maverick seeker. Before the A-10C upgrade gave the jet a TDC, it was also used as the LOS reference for taking Offset Marks, for CCRP target designation, and for INS HUD Updates.

I haven't methodically tested each ILS, but at the handful of airfields i regularly use, I've not observed that behavior. Can you duplicate that behavior at a specific airfield?

The (sometimes) incorrect relationship between regional Magnetic Variation, Mission Editor Heading, F10 View Heading, and CDU/HUD heading has been a thorn in the side for some time. It is a twisted web of misaligned 3D models, variable Magnetic Variation (go figure), a non-conformal coordinate system due to the flat Earth model, and ambiguity whether the ME shows magnetic vs true heading. I don't see it getting fixed any time soon, and the best bet would be to use approach plates created using data as it exists in DCS. My virtual squadron is undertaking just such a project; not to be confused with the "JaBoG" charts which are not instrument approach plates. Speaking of which, do you have real plates for the region?

I don't think that would work like you want it to, since GPS Vertical Error is never going to be less than at least several meters. You're probably better off setting ISA conditions in the ME and just reading the Baro Alt at 29.92 for each measurement. Still, if you're intent on trying it (I don't know how DCS handles Vertical Error), the GPS FRPA is on top of the fuselage just aft of the canopy.

No sweat. I miss the Flight Director myself; it used to work correctly, once upon a time. Having it makes flying an ILS approach much easier. Still, it can be flown without it.

That thread discusses the incorrect implementation of the Flight Director on the ADI. The FD is separate and distinct from the ILS itself which works correctly in DCS. Just turn off the FD and fly "raw data" until/if the FD gets fixed.

Yeah, there is a known disparity between the real world and DCS with regard to runway heading, so I am not surprised that there are differences between various community generated materials such as approach plates and IFGs. Obviously, It would be best if the DCS values were used in the various publications, but some seem to have been created using the Georgia and Russia AIP data. It's unfortunate that the NGA restricted acces to the DoD FLIP and approach plates for OCONUS facilities. As it stands, we have to guess what approaches exist in real life, and what terminal fixes exist around the region. If we had that, we wouldn't have guess whether approaches are LOC vs LDA vs SDF, etc.

Most ILS installations have a Far Field Monitor that...err...monitors the radiation pattern of the localizer and automatically shuts down the transmitter if it's out of tolerance. Also, every ILS is Flight Checked by the FAA on a recurring basis to ensure the facility and the approach are within limits. What are fog buster lights? The Nevada theatre has realistic ALSF-1 Approach Lighting Systems that are high intensity, if that's what you mean.

I'm out of town, so I can't test. Which airfields specifically have you noticed this? Are you sure they're not LDA approaches as opposed to an ILS?

What do you mean by "failed"? I don't recall the ILS working improperly in any DCS build, but I'm not sure that I've flown an instrument approach in every single build, so perhaps I'm wrong. But still, I'm curious what you guys specifically think is wrong with the ILS.

Why do you think that ILSs don't work right in DCS?

If the HOTAS (throttle) "pinky" switch is in the center position, it will black out all external lights. It is the Master Exterior Light control switch, and it overrides the switch settings on the exterior lighting panel on the right aft console. Make sure the pinky switch is aft, then the cockpit controls will work. The anti-collision light switch is held in the ON position with a solenoid. Since the pinky switch is overriding the it, it will not stay engaged. This is normal behavior.

Jordan, I used to be a VA resident (Dulles/Sterling) when I worked for the airline depicted in my avatar; that was back in 2003-2005. Our radio callsign was Blue Ridge, hence my forum name.

The lighting control panel is on the right aft console; look for a group of several dimmer knobs. There are two switches there - one marked Position Lights, and the other marked Anti-Collision. Makes sure they're both off. Alternatively, you can simply move the HOTAS "Pinky Switch" to the center position. The pinky switch is the Master External Light control switch, and it overrides the lighting panel (with caveats).

Just FYI, the landing/taxi light extinguishes automatically as soon as the landing gear begins to retract, so there's no danger of flying around with it on. Even if it was on, it would be concealed within the nose wheel well. No worries!