Hymlee

Hi, I've set up a simple mission (as attached) to test the functionality of the option "Restrict Afterburner Use". (youtube, track and mission file attached) 6 planes in the mission, all have their afterburner uses prohibited : 1. FA18C / F16C, not loaded with any stores 2. FA18C / F16C, Heavily loaded, set to orbit at waypoint 1 at 30000ft at 400TAS (about 250IAS and Mach0.67) 3. FA18C / F16C, Heavily loaded, set to travel from WP1 to WP2 at 30000ft at 400TAS (about 250IAS and Mach0.67) I expected the AI to fly well even with the A/B off as the flight parameters are nothing special and within normal envelope. But turns out not. Observation: When AI were climbing, they were performing as usual. When AI reached WP1 and start orbiting, the 2 heavily loaded aircraft could NOT maintain their speed and altitude and began to drop altitude. On the other hand, the aircrafts with empty stores performed well. I suspected if the orbit task is bugged, so 2 more aircrafts were sent not to orbit but to travel from WP1 to WP2. The heavily loaded FA18C could maintain speed and altitude, whereas the heavily loaded F16C could not. My Thoughts: Despite the FA18C and F16C were heavily loaded ( 3 fuel tanks + 2 x 2000lb bomb), the flight parameters (30000ft and 250IAS) should be well within the aircraft flight envelope, even without the use of afterburner. (at least that was the case when the aircrafts were flown by me instead of the AI). But it turns out that the AI do require full afterburner to maintain normal speed and altitude when fully loaded. Any chance or plan to tune the AI's flight modelling? Many thanks for your time and happy to discuss. AI cannot hold alt.miz AI cannot hold altitude.trk

@Flappie Thanks for the reminder. The SA19 are spawned using script after mission has started. I guess thats why the track didnt reveal those SA19. To illustrate the bug, I've recorded a video as shown below, where all missiles fired by the SA19 missed. Appreciated if you could take a look In addition, I've attached the mission file with the script that I wrote. To recreate the bug, you just need to place a marker on the F10 map near the town "Ein Elkorum", type "SRSAM" in the textbox. A SA19 will spawn and attack the AH64. Feel free to try and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. RTScampaign_Syria_1.0.miz

As the title suggests, in the attached track file all of the missiles launched by 2 SA19 against a AH64 miss. ED pls look into this? SA19 cant hit.trk

Another test here. bunch of aircraft each with different weapon : GBU10, GBU12, GBU16, GBU38, AGM65E/F ONLY the aircrafts with LGB (GBU10,12,16) are bugged. see attached mission file and track. only LGB is bugged.miz only LGB is bugged.trk

I set up another mission. 2 aircraft with identical mission (search and engage within zone) 1 loaded with GBU12 and litening pod 1 loaded with HARM and HTS. Only the 1 with GBU and litening is bugged. see attached file cas and sead comparison.miz bug.trk ok. another trial here. AI aircraft with mk82 and without litening pod is NOT bugged. So theres something wrong with the litening pod? litening is bugged.miz

f16 with agm88 seems not affected by the bug. only aircraft under cas mission is affected ? see attached mission file engage_bug.miz

Enroute Task "search then engage" is also bugged. See attached track file and mission file. engage_bug.trk engage_bug.miz

Bug found: Enroute Task "Engage within zone" is bugged. If there are still enemy units prevail within the zone after AI aircraft expended all of its weapon, AI just freezes, not responding, not continuing on its waypoints, and eventually crashed into ground after using up its fuel. You can try with the attached mission. Track file attached. Could someone from ED look into this? Update: This is in fact a weapon bug only affecting aircrafts carrying Laser guided bombs (gbu12 10 16). See thread #5 engageinzone_bug.miz engagementinzone_bug.trk

uh this makes sense. I tested by launching aim54 in ACM mode at 15nm from target. The missile flies straight until 10nm where it turns and tracks the targets. I used to think that the missile went pitbull at 10nm, but your theory is also plausible that the missile did indeed launch active offrail but only picked up the target at 10nm.

thanks for the clarification and it makes much more sense of the use of TGT size switch now. I suppose the one of the major flaws remaining to be addressed is that enemy AI aircraft still react to aim54 at exactly 10nm, regardless if they are equipped with RWR. Does HB know whether ED has any plan to address that? Another flaw is that, when launch in ACM mode, aim54 doesnt go active off the rail, but instead only go pitbull at 10nm. Please correct me if im wrong.

Yeah feel the same here. Is it normal and accurate?

But AI doesnt react to aim120 at 10nm. Does the 10nm reaction distance apply to aim54 exclusively?

I tested by shooting Aim54C mk47 in TWS at AI F18, target size set to small. In the cockpit, the TID flashes at 12seconds instead of the usual 16 seconds, but the AI still reacts at 10nm. Is this correctly implemented, or will it be corrected in future? tacview is attached. Thanks. Tacview-20230123-173239-DCS-f14 test.txt.acmi

Same thought here. So disappointed

@Flappiecan you help to investigate/report the issue please? Two youtube videos showing the bug (i.e. (1) cannot designate a trackfile into L+S target; (2) undesignate button cannot switch between primary and secondary target) can be found in the above threads. Many thanks.