Sinclair_76

I deliberately botched the alignment by not entering the LL on the DED. After reaching 10 I switched to NAV. HUD as well as HSI show no range, but the JHMCS does. I think the latter would be a bug. Could you give us a track file to work with?

If NVG's are installed it would explain why the JHMCS don't work.

Beside the point risen by @Deano87An alignment can be disturbed by aircraft movement. This could happen due to the jet wash of other aircraft. What also disturbs the alignment is movement due to weapons loading. But then the countdown of the INS accuracy wouldn't reach 10.

Apparantly when the RF switch is in either QUIET or SILENT it will be displayed in the MFD's. At the moment it doesn't. If this is considered a bug pls move it over to the BUG sub.

Let me rephrase my question. I think there should be another HUD annunciation. Not NO RAD but either QUIET or SILENT to indicate the RF switch position. As I understand it your point is that there is a mismatch between manual and ingame and that it is not what I ment.

When the RF switch is set to quiet or silent. Shouldn't there be a quiet or silent annunciation in the HUD? For now it onlys displays no rdr.

AFAIK it has not been implemented yet. According roadmap set for 2022.

I think I have the same problem. Although I am not running a dedicated server. Port 10308 is forwarded. And I even see the server up in ED ( https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/personal/server/ ) and on X51 Squadron ( https://x51squadron.com/dcs_servers ). But in game it doesn't show. What am I missing?

ED should pin this because there is going to be a lot of JDAM's missing targets going around when TGP markpoints hit beta. Even better ED should actually cover that in the changelog YT video.

Played with it yesterday. Even found a simple workaround in using the TGP to create a markpoint. Aimed the TGP at a target and slave the FCR to it. Then SOI the FCR and create a markpoint from that. TMS down to reset the radar. SOI TGP, rinse and repeat. Used the STPT as SOI to drop GBU-38 at the locations and it was reasonably accurate (3/4 destroyed). Played with the overfly markpoint as well. It only works in A-A so far (not NAV or A-G so far). But is puts the markpoint at the exact 3d position, including altitude. It would make more sense to me that the overfly markpoint would mark the position on the ground. As in the 2d coordinate with elevation of the ground factored in.

Isn't that what EPLRS is meant to do in game?

Yeah, not really. I am too lazy to calculate the amount of energy / size of antenna needed to facilitate that. But rest assured it's more than the Apache can handle. I am going for, no it isn't. Maybe things have changed but a feedhorn and parabolic antenna don't point to AESA.

Still have a couple of flechettes which I got to pick after a live fire exercise.

Wut? No IFR in IERW?

Did ED by any chance correct the WING/TAIL vs FUSELAGE mix up? I did have WING/TAIL set to dim. But iirc dimming used to work in the past.

Boring, I want to see sparks fly.

Slightly different. In the civilian side you have pilot flying and pilot monitoring. The pm will check what the pf is doing and answer the radio's. But both pilots SA should be the 100% the same at all times. I imagine it's not the same for the -64. But then again I had a party yesterday evening and my mind is slightly foggy

I am not fully versed in the lighting of the viper. But for now it seems as if I can't dim the formation lights. Something I was able to do in the previous version of DCS by switching to COVERT and dimming the formation lights with FORM rotary knob.

You would use GBU-54 of course. But I otherwise agree.

As a tribute the pedals still are from Hughes. ED modeled it as well.

Oh....that would explain everything. Well it's only just the first foot in mouth moment today.

Oh the blasphemy! Unless you consider Top Gun an obscure tech geek movie. Then you would be absolutely correct. But be warned you will make me feel like a geriatric nerd if you say yes.

I honestly haven't seen anything on individually moving hellfire pylons explained yet.

Due to how it's coded in DCS, you could lock two different targets with the TGP and the AGM and boresight. It does'nt matter how you do it, the boresight function will remove the error. But because of that, close in it will seem as a botched boresight becuse the two LOS don't line up.

1st point This has to do with parallax. Especially while boresighting at close ranges the line of sight of the TGP and AGM converge. At first this seems ok as both LOS align on the target. But at different (larger) distances this will introduce an error. Therefore you would normally boresight at larger ranges so that both LOS are as parallel as possible. The AH-64 outfront boresight solves this by augmenting the problem with a known range to target, that way it can compensate and converge the LOS close in and set the LOS (near) parallel at larger distances. But it will only work with a distance to target. With the viper, the alignment at close distance would introduce a large error. But in DCS, the way it currently works, when pressing the boresight button on the MFD the error is automagically removed. At that time the TGP LOS and AGM LOS are parallel. (You can test it by boresighting the TGP on target A and the AGM on target B. Ater the boresight the TGP and AGM will seem aligned at large distance). But with the LOS paralleling it follows that at close distance TGP and AGM are not looking at the same point. (Technically both LOS are not looking at the same point at large distance either but the error is hardly noticable). 2nd point There are exceptions but most of the time when the AGM mode is stuck is because it is in a failed lock mode. IIRC the crosshairs are larger. You can reset it by TMS down. The crosshairs will get smaller again and you can change the mode.