Ballinger French

Wow, the current flight model of the Apache feels like part of the tail rotor has been shot off in terms of yaw stability at slow airspeeds. Transitioning from forward flight to a hover, especially in a high threat tactical situation, is a nightmare. This is simply not right. The flight model is not a little bit off; rather, it's in the realm of science fiction. Has anyone else noticed this? How can a three year old module have fallen into this kind of neglect?

I haven't found anything that a CBU-laden JSOW will take out, at least when launched from the F-16. Lots of smoke and fireworks, but I not even certain that JSOWS don't end up repairing targeted vehicles, lol, because they sure do not damage them in the least. Why haven't these completely useless weapons been fixed yet?

Hmmm, I may have completely misunderstood this situation then. I seem to be getting the TGP to properly handoff to the Mavericks in a recent mission I created, but I have certainly encountered the situation where the Maverick fails to look at the same area as the TGP after handoff attempt (this is what I interpreted as being too close in range at time of handoff attempt). It does get close as you mention, but far enough off that an auto lock doesn't happen. I'll attach the track file from my mission in which everything works like it's supposed to, although I now have no idea why it's working. Maverick PRE mode testing.trk

Hi, This doesn't actually appear to be a bug with the F-16, but rather a purposefully designed realistic limitation when using Mavericks in PRE mode with automatic handoff enabled from the TGP. Specifically, there appears to be a minimum range to target that the Maverick missile seeker head can be correlated with the target locked on the TGP in automatic handoff mode. If one is beyond this minimum range but within the Maverick missile's normal weapons engagement envelope, the Maverick seeker head will properly lock on the target designated by the automatic TGP handoff. However, inside a 'close range' to target but still within the Maverick's normal engagement range, there appears to be a minimum distance to target in which a TGP handoff to the Maverick cannot be accomplished (parallax error coincident with close range to target). This limiting condition doesn't appear to be documented in the official DCS F-16 manual, so I though I would point it out to others on here. I read through the F-16 bug list section, and one of the DCS Moderators participating pointed out that boresighting Mavericks with the TGP whilst airborne cannot be properly accomplished with a target in close range (3 NM or less?) due to normal parallax error. I assume the limiting range I described above is an extension of the programmed (correctly) parallax condition. Cheers.

Hi, With the very latest Open Beta, I'm encountering a bug with the Maverick (AGM-65D) when launching more than one missile during an attack run on separate targets. Condition: Mavericks are set to VIS mode. HUD target designator box slewed over target area and ground stabilized. First Maverick locked on a target, range scale appears properly on both HUD and on Maverick video MFD. After first Maverick is fired, subsequent Mavericks are locked up on separate targets, however the range scales never appear on either HUD or Maverick video MFD. As a result, it's not possible to determine missile in-range parameter after first Maverick missile is shot. Track file attached. Thank you. AGM-65 Symbology Error.trk

Overhead approach to runway 3L at Nellis, left break over the approach end. For whatever reason, I decided to actually flare this time.

Pretty sure there's a bump on the approach end of the runway at Tonopah. It might've helped if I flared the correct way too, but I'm sticking with the bump theory for now.

Left Closed Traffic runway 32, Tonopah, Nevada.

Aha, the culprit is already being hunted, thank you. Doesn't appear to be too high on the fix list at this time, so I guess the only viable workaround would be to carry an extra AMRAAM on a pylon and use it as a captive hostage to force the correct HUD symbology for the other missile(s) when they are fired. I mean, the hostage missile could still always be used for attacking a bandit at some point, just with the caveat that telemetry isn't possible after it's fired. I guess you'd be firing in FC mode (fingers crossed) in this situation.

Hi, When firing AMRAAMs, after the last AIM-120 missile on the aircraft is fired, the HUD symbology reverts to either Sidewinder missiles (if loaded) or simply goes back to basic air to air mode with no inflight radar guided missile telemetry displayed. The problem here is that the AIM-120 is initially data-linked to the firing aircraft for guidance to target before the missile's own radar activates and the AMRAAM becomes autonomous. Without any indication of when the AIM-120's own radar activates and the missile goes 'Pitbull', the pilot in the DCS F-16 has no reference as to when to break off tracking the target and must simply guess when the missile has either gone active or splashed the target. Again, this condition only exists after the very last AIM-120 is fired. When there are additional AMRAAM stores available on the aircraft after a AIM-120 missile is fired, the HUD provides time to missile activation and estimated time to impact. This information will however disappear after the very last missile is fired, leaving the pilot in the dark as to missile status. Is this actual F-16 logic or is the DCS F-16 perhaps a little bugged here? Thanks!

Thought this was one of my cooler shots.

I noticed that my credit card stop letting itself be charged for DCS modules that can't seem to get canopy reflections fixed once and for all.

Nah. I can put $$$ towards a RTX 3080 video card like yours, currently listing anywhere from $900 to $1000. Who needs a F-18 and/or food, right? Seriously though, the DCS rep in the above post just admitted the F18 is broken and it may take quite a while before it's fixed. Fair enough. That person is being honest and straightforward, which I appreciate. I don't want to invest a broken sim at this time, so the free trial worked out wonderfully for me personally in this instance. Additonally, I don't have to invest copious amounts of time learning the system and avionics of a sim that will end up disappointing me in the long run. The A-10II module I currently own is wonderful and when I sense one of the other DCS mods that are on par with the A-10, I will invest in that. Case closed. Have a nice day.