tae.

I would like to add that I experienced this exact problem yesterday. My Mi-24 was in the same state as rogo's, and yet I could not repair, getting "no can do" for 5+ minutes before I gave up. This is the first time I am encountering it, after flying the Mi-24 2-3 times a week since its EA release.

Perhaps, but when the Hind was first released in to EA, this was not happening, and there were no patch notes or comments made about this, furthermore we've yet to hear anything about it - it's also happening with S-13 pods, just doesn't seem right at all. Willing to accept any information showing the contrary but until then I will just continue to bump the thread.

Still an issue in 2.7.10.19473.

The openness and communication is not lost on us and is greatly appreciated. As various people in the thread have pointed out it is not like the missile is useless in it's current state, in fact far from it, and as you also mentioned previously I think a lot of the issue is tempering expectations of community members coming from the previous performance and capabilities of the missile. Looking forward to improvements and fixes for the remaining issues.

Great to see more realistic missile behaviour being implemented in DCS, it is always welcome. I ran ~40 tests last night and came to some interesting conclusions that I am not sure are helpful or not. The first conclusion is that the new flight model does not necessarily equate to a reduction in range or effectiveness, particularly regarding shots taken at higher altitudes. The longer the range the missile is fired at, the more time it spends in extremely thin air up at angels 70+, allowing it to conserve huge amounts of energy. Furthermore, the steeper dive caused by the extended loft allows it to retain even more energy. My second conclusion, related to the first, is that this results in an "effectiveness plateau" for mid-range shots (30-60nm), where shooting at a longer range may have actually made an equally deadly or in some edge cases MORE deadly shot. There is a certain point in the range that changes depending on launch + target aircraft flight parameters that I will refer to as the "burn through point". Passing this burn through point (usually between 25-40nm at higher altitudes) is where the missile effectiveness starts to break away from this plateau and steeply increase again as the flight parameters reach a point where the rocket motor is burning for the majority of the missile trajectory, offsetting the difficulties encountered by longer range shots. Please refer to my mid_range_mk47 and long_range_mk47 tacviews, both missiles were shot under similar parameters, one at 40nm and one at 60nm - as per my previous point these missiles perform *very* similarly despite the big difference in range - I think primarily due to the time that the 60nm shot can spend higher up, and the steeper dive angle. Note the drastic reduction in loft angle on the 40nm shot as well. When using the Mk60 motor, you can exacerbate this behaviour to extreme degrees - see 75nm_mk60 tacview as an example. Pay close attention to how well the missile retains energy at 87400 feet (its peak altitude) and how much energy is retained on the dive due to how steep the angle is (assisted by gravity). Making similar shots at a lesser, medium range all the way down to the "burn through point" I mentioned, I found typically results in very similar missile performance, sometimes even worse missile performance, due to the less effective loft trajectories at lower ranges. To conclude my ramblings: It is not for me to say whether this behaviour is desired, or realistic, these are simply observations that I have made. In my opinion, the missile can still be coerced into performing extremely well against a target flying purely hot if fired under the right conditions. From what I read about the missile basically being "useless" compared to my tests I was scratching my head a little bit. The missile seems to suffer badly at lower altitudes but there are still some crazy shots that can be made. I think that the part that appears to be hard to grasp is that unlike other missiles in DCS where the effectiveness increases linearly as you improve shot parameters (reduction in range, increase in speed and altitude), this linearity is not necessarily true for the Phoenix in it's current state, at certain intermediary ranges. edit: forgot to add that I did one last test for a laugh - target changed to MiG-31, sped up the F-14 to Mach 1.7 and raised it's altitude a little..and was able to achieve a 95nm kill with a Mk60. The shot had some very deadly energy in the terminal phase too, so this could probably be stretched even further. I've attached the tacview of that one too. Not very realistic to replicate outside of testing, but just goes to show some absolutely wild shots are technically still possible. 75nm_mk60.acmi mid_range_mk47.acmi long_range_mk47.acmi 95nm_mk60.acmi

Still present in 2.8.9.17830.

Further update to this issue - it seems as though there is always a double-pulse on the first salvo, regardless of the left/right selector position - behaviour occurs even when switch is in middle position. For example, short burst selection with S-13 rockets results in 4 rockets being fired, when it should be only 2. Selecting left/right would cause 3 rockets to be fired, instead of 1.

Hi, This has been a bug for at least a couple updates. The Left/Right firing selector for all rocket types except S-24B has an issue. When trying to use the left or right side, both sides are fired on the first pulse/trigger depress. Additionally, the side that was selected is usually pulsed twice instead of once. This is very problematic for rockets like the S-13 which are very limited - three rockets end up being fired instead of one on short pulses. It is worth noting that this bug only occurs for the first salvo. After which, everything works normally. This bug can be very quickly reproduced by loading the Mi-24P with S-5 rockets, any S-8 rockets, or S-13 rockets, and attempting to fire only one side. Please see this video demonstrating the bug, and please let me know if more information is required for this one. Thanks and keep up the great work on this module!

What a fantastic idea. I can't wait to see what you guys do with the module.

I can confirm that this works well. Cheers!

Sweet, thanks for the info! It might be worth mentioning that the only other script that does something similar is the Zeus script in Through The Inferno, and I noticed there was a patch for that a few months back that addressed the exact same issue of aircraft not being aggressive enough (or more accurately, at all). Unfortunately I don't know what change was made that fixed it - and in fact it seemed to still be kinda broken for us when we tried it. Loving your work on this even in the current state though, and the issue isn't that bad since we have someone playing dedicated game master. Cheers!

Hi, Really cool script, can't wait to try it out in our missions. I just have one question - how do you make the air units that are spawned have an "Open Fire" ROE by default? It seems that all aircraft we spawn will not attack anything unless they are ordered to via Combined Arms. I feel like we're missing something, but we have scoured the documentation and can't find any sign of an answer. Right now if we spawn CAP aircraft of opposing factions and send them to each other via waypoints or orbits, they just ignore each other. Even spawning on top of each other they completely ignore both enemy AI and players. The only time that enemy CAP planes do not ignore the player is when they are literally merged on top of each other, at which point the enemy attempts to fire at them in self defense. But that only works for players, and any BVR or pre-emptive engagement is non-existent.

Since the release of 2.7, the player's own F-16 engine sounds completely different to other F-16s in the mission while on the ground. This can be easily reproduced in both singleplayer and multiplayer by starting an F-16 on the ground and listening to the audio, and comparing it against other F-16s in the mission by spectating them. The player F-16 will have a higher pitched and louder sound to it, and other F-16s have a lower pitched whine. The difference is not small whatsoever; the sound is completely different. I recorded a singleplayer example here but the same thing happens in multiplayer with other players sounding different: https://streamable.com/yhvtv0 The question is, which one is correct? All F-16s made the higher pitched sound prior to 2.7.

To answer at least your first question, what you are describing sounds like you are overspeeding. This is intended, just slow down and it will go away.

If I install this mod and run a server, do players wishing to join need to also have the mod installed?