Draken35

@Recluse That mission uses the FAC-Engage group ... Which is different task and that task works for me, in different missions, but defeats the purpose of randomness - unless, of course, you are willing to add multiple tasks - one per each of the possible random groups (50+ in the case of the mission that made me discover this issue). I truly appreciate your answer, don't get me wrong! But I am not looking to an alternative way to do it, since I know the workaround already... Just pointing something that works for other modules but not for the Harrier. And, yes, I just saw the new update.... I'll test and report back later.

DCS 2.7.1.7029 .7139 Open Beta Started working on a randomized targets JTAC mission for multiple modules and when added the Harrier, I noticed, after much troubleshooting, that the FAC Start Enroute Task is not working (not sure since which version). Attached are a simplified mission and a track running it showing the issue. You will notices that the JTAC menu does not appears in the Harrier while it does in the A-10C II, F-16C and F-18C . Not show in the track but I've tested changing radio frequencies to match everywhere and still doesn't work. It is worth noting that the "real" mission, with the randomized targets and JTACs is a lot more complex and involves delay starts of multiple objects and works like a charm for the ED modules mentioned above. Edit to add: What is used as a FAC/JTAC does not matter... Tried with other airplanes and ground units and the behavior is the same. AV8B FAC Issue.trk TEST-JTAC.miz

Because we aren't real pilots (most of us anyway) and we do not know what we do not know...But now I know. I didn't want to open a can of worms with the topic. I just was looking for a number I could use for a mission that I'm planning and decided to share the results and methods. I can see in my near future a test of much does the empty bags impact there range at low, medium and high altitude...

I decided to a little experiment to test the combat radius of the Harrier. I've seen a quoted 300nm combat radius but no idea of what flight profile or loadout was used to get to that number. So, I decided to test a lo-lo-lo profile, carrying 2 bags, 2 GBU 32 , 2 Sidewinders, ECM & Gun pods. Flew in a straight line mostly, at around 500 feet AGL and at 110 FFPM, which gave me 330Knots/0.5M . I set my bingo fuel to 5900lbls. I jettison the bags when they where empty and the bombs when I reached bingo, then I turned back. During the return leg, I adjusted the FFPM to 100 for 360Knots. I landed with 1000Lbls of fuel left. 297mn was my measured "combat" radius... No fancy maneuvering to evade anything or throttle up to do a bomb toss or anything... Not bad... I thought the AV8B would have shorter legs... I bet that we could squeeze a bit more out of it with more careful flight planning and different flight profile and loadout. This sortie was about 1 hour 40 mins....

Attached is a track for my issue....Although I think I fixed it For the track, WP1 was set to 270Knots and 6xxx feet. As I watched the track, I noticed the AI struggling with its speed so I thought that perhaps it was some calculation issue between the speed set in the WP vs what speed the AI is trying to get to... So, I modified my WP1 to 370 Knots and 16xxx feet... Didn't save the track because the wingman did not crash... @HedgeSlammerwhat are your WP1 settings? Try to increase speed and see what happens. AV8B AI TO Issue.trk

Well... I'm working on a mission, simulating the time that the VMA-513 had in Afghanistan in the early 2000's. Using the Nevada map as a stand in for the terrain... AI wingman crashes after a CTO and trying to rejoin. Loadout and/or AI skill doesn't seem to matter... Haven't looked closely as its maneuvers before the crash but I will and report back...

In case anybody is interested, these are the current values I used for VR (Quest 2)

Haven't flown the 16 but can't argue against the Hornet's fonts been better. So, let me rephrase that "it seems that Razbam is trying to improve it" ... Happy now? I think that part of the issue, besides the gain being absurdly high before this patch (that is a bit better now) is the actual color/transparency/width of the font used in the MCPD. It doesn't provide good contrast. Perhaps, that's why the black outline is there... My problem with the black outline is that in VR (Quest 2, max resolution) it makes the symbols "vibrate" and unreadable unless you move a lot closer to the MCPD. It is even unreadable with VR zoom.

Well, well, well... Looks like an improvement was made.... Gain looks a lot lower and the Display_StrokesDef.lua file has some new definitions in it. The values might , still, need some tweaking but it looks definitely better. Of course, there is nothing in the change log . Razbam team, the work on this is appreciated.

Interesting... Didn't know that. Thank you

I got used to the 800ft (NAVAIR 00-80T-111) because of carrier ops. Is 1000 standard for airfield ops or just for Cherry Point MCAS?

I keep forgetting to try VNSL... So good thing you guys posted today! After my today's AAR practice, I dumped my painstakingly newly acquired fuel and stores and went in for a VNSL at 85% with auto flaps... First time I try it... The worst part was fighting the urge of stroking the throttle but It was very interesting controlling AoA with nozzle angle and trim... 85% rpm felt like a lot for a light and clean plane, every time I tried to slow down increasing nozzle angle I tended to balloon up ...Took me some time to figure it out. I assume you enter the pattern at 350knows , 800' ASL then break, then flaps and gear at 250 knows and then you work the nozzles?

@Dave62ndFF I don't think you missed anything... I don't do too many air starts (I have just one mission setup for it, quick AAR practice), so I haven't seen that before n I use the APKWS a lot! I see that the TPOD was on 1688 and so where the rockets (kneeboard) but they behave like they were in a different code. Definitely smells like a bug to me. Two tests come to mind: 1) trying to fire an LMAV from air start after a failed launch of an APKWS 2) Manually setting the code to 1688 (perhaps, even setting it up to something else first and back to 1688) after a failed launch of an APKWS and retry

Well, I don't have it I only thing I can think about is that, somehow, you modified that payload way back them and since it was modified, it is keep after the updates....

How are you doing it? I just tried from the Mission Editor and from the Mission planner, latest 2.7 OB and I see the same options as the manual payload.

Well... I wouldn't trust the "manual" at this point but it says that the sequence starts at that time, not that it will continue it if you stop pressing the Weapon Release button... Anyway, you have to keep pressing it until all bombs drops. Works the same in several other airplanes . So, not a bug. Also, make sure you box "tone" in the stores page. It will beep to provide feedback on weapon release.

But it was in 3D so it cannot be a track-ir / pancake mode .... Nahhh... The VR Zoom Toggle keybind is mapped to the Hotas

I wish we have that quality of displays in VR.... Also, did you notice that they also have VR zoom???

Ah! I was hoping but since I was very aware that my case could be a coincidence, I asked for third party confirmation....

@hazzer @fagulha Yesterday I found that my flood lights and flashlight was rendering also in one eye. Found this thread: Turned out that I had the parser turned on... ( options.graphics.stereo_mode_use_shared_parser = true ) in this file [Drive:]:\Users\[user]\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Config\autoexec.cfg So I changed to: options.graphics.stereo_mode_use_shared_parser = false It fixed the flood light and flashlight issue... And since I made that change, I have not seen the flickering I reported in the first post of this thread...

Other that your fuse being on SAFE, the settings should be correct. Make sure you keep pressing weapon release until all the bombs dropped. Watched the track a couple of time and it is kind kind of weird... The Harrier seems to be rearming itself... Are you flying with unlimited weapons? Anyway, 4 bombs, in 2's with 0 interval will not feel too much different that 4 in 1'1 with 0. Repeat your test with 010 interval and, perhaps, uncheck unlimited weapons...

Good point. I wear progressive lenses and can't see s... nothing with out my glasses. It was really difficult to use the headset with them, so ordered VR Opticians adapters with my distance Rx only.

Just tested them too. They are very close indeed.

That is a cool feature of the Vive Pro! ... I don't think it can be done with the Quest 2. Yes, I suspect the real value is the IPD of ones eyes, despite all the posts to the contrary... But without a real yardstick (like in your case) , I have not not been able to prove it. My method gave me 55 and my pupil distance is 60.. To be honest, I don't perceive a difference between those two values... Most likely, my chair width is different to the Harrier's seat width and that is why I got 55 and not 60 or closer. Hopefully, if Bog9y finds the the real width, I should be able to take a more accurate measurement.

You mentioned that the ground crew ignored you...As in they did not answer your request? If recall correctly, before they answered "unable to comply) to the request to remove the chocks... Was this in a FARP or Airfield?