DSplayer

I wouldn’t mind any of the modernized E variants like a Japanese F-4EJ Kai, Greek F-4E AUP, or Turkish F-4E Terminator 2020. Outside of modernized variants, I think Israeli F-4Es with their specialized payload options would be cool.

I should’ve clarified. It’s the button bindings and not the axises that aren’t working.

IRL the AIM-9B has a length of 111.5 inches[1], AIM-9J have a length of 121.9 inches[2], AIM-9P-4/5 have a length of 120 inches[3], AIM-9L/M have a length of 113 inches[3], and the AIM-9X has a length of 118.8 inches[4]. Currently in DCS the models when compared to each other feature vastly different lengths from their official stated lengths. Some examples in DCS include the AIM-9J is roughly the same length as the AIM-9X (even though the 9J should be over 2 inches longer) and the AIM-9P-4 and AIM-9P-5 is slightly shorter than the AIM-9B even though it should be almost 9 inches longer. Screenshot of the major AIM-9 variants in the model viewer lined up (Top to Bottom: AIM-9B/GAR-8, AIM-9J, AIM-9P, AIM-9P-5, AIM-9L, AIM-9M, AIM-9X): Screenshot of Armaments Coproduction at a Crossroads: U.S. Policy Options After the Cold War by Frans Nauta showing the lengths of the AIM-9L/M/S vs the AIM-9-4/5: Image of the AIM-9B, AIM-9E, AIM-9N, AIM-9P-3, and AIM-9P-4 guidance and control sections next to each other showing the length differences of only those sections: Sources: 1. AIM-9B Standard Missile Characteristics 2. Project Checo Southeast Asia report Combat Snap (AIM-9J Southeast Asia Introduction) Page #18 3. Armaments Coproduction at a Crossroads: U.S. Policy Options After the Cold War by Frans Nauta 4. AIM-9X Sidewinder Further Reading: AIM-9L Standard Missile Characteristics

Currently the AIM-9JULI uses the AIM-9J (aim-9j.edm) model while it should use the aim-9juli.edm model (both located in Bazar/World/Shapes). Picture of AIM-9JULI currently: Picture of what the AIM-9JULI should look like if it used the correct model: Screenshot of "aim9_family.lua" showing the "aim-9j.edm" model being sourced for the AIM-9JULI: Image of CATM-9JULI:

For me TEL works but never at 7nm. It always takes until like 3nm for a head on lock even though it should automatically lock a target a max of 7nm.

Ah. I was under the interpretation that it showed up when you turned off oxygen with the switch on the left. It also didn't help that the cockpit texture mod I was using didn't get updated.

How does one make a custom flare and chaff pod that is similar to the SPS-141, Eclair, and KB pods that can augment the amount of flare and chaffs that a plane can carry (and then allow the aircraft to use those new countermeasures)?

MirageF1EngineFailure2.trk I decided to try to stop the surge by cutting off the engine and doing a midair restart (utilizing the track from the prior video) and that fixed it and didn't result in a complete engine failure:

Issue: The "Cannon 300-600m and missile lock/unlock button" keybind does not work if you compare the change in HUD/pipper symbology to the RedKite video discussing the radar.

Issue: After pulling high AoA and causing the engine to start surging, it will eventually shutdown but you'll be unable to do a mid air restart the engine as its stuck at 0 RPM. You also cannot restart the engine on the ground if you're able to land in time and try to attempt a typical cold start engine start.

Issue: The new F-14 Liquid Oxygen gauge doesn't have an indicator showing if its on or off like its supposed to. Current gauge with the blank rectangle where the on or off indication would be: Liquid oxygen gauge on the older F-14B renders with the liquid oxygen gauge with an off indicator: The "Slight inaccuracy in the Oxygen Indicator?" thread has a lot of images showing the Off indication for the liquid oxygen panel:

Issue: The "Wheel Brake Left" and "Wheel Brake Right" controls do not work. Only the "Wheel Brake On" controls work.

I wonder what the tacview would look like if you repeated the test with the same firing distance and AI defensive maneuvers on the new patch.

This is the same for the radar modes knob. Pretty annoying since it makes that keybind actually useless.

Issue: The radar antenna elevation on the Mirage F1 elevates and depresses too slow compared to when in difference mode where it moves a lot quicker.

You have the Clickable FC3 mod installed and probably an older version. Uninstall it and you'll be fine.

So I decided to rerun the tests that @Whiskey11 had conducted last month utilizing the tracks that he had provided and basically the prior extremely noticeable tendency for the missile to not lead enough then do an arc to catch up to the target is no longer a thing (lateral guidance issues). Also, like what IronMike had said, the missiles had a lot of terminal energy. The only thing I noticed in my own testing (and not using these tracks) is that sometimes the missile will lead too much, especially against a maneuvering target, and could cause the missile to drain some more energy than it really needs to. I've included some tacview files so if you can compare the performance of these tests to the ones that Whiskey11 conducted last month. Tacview-20220721-115503-DCS-F14MissileGuidanceTest54AMk602.trk.zip.acmiTacview-20220721-115904-DCS-F14MissileGuidanceTest54C1.trk.zip.acmiTacview-20220721-120203-DCS-F14MissileGuidanceTest54C2.trk.zip.acmiTacview-20220721-120552-DCS-NOWWhatIstheAIM54ADoing.trk.zip.acmiTacview-20220721-120841-DCS-MissileGuidanceTest2.trk.zip.acmiTacview-20220721-121159-DCS-MissileGuidanceTestF14AIM54C.trk.zip.acmiTacview-20220721-115148-DCS-F14MissileGuidanceTest54AMk601.trk.zip.acmi

Tbh with what you guys have been doing with the AIM-54 prior to addition of the "PN_gain" line still made the missile extremely potent. So even with that sorta "handicap", you guys were still able to make an extremely potent missile.

I think @Whiskey11 will like this change a lot. No more understeer that contributes to an self notching scenario.

Yeah it seems like you could mount the LAU-138s on station 1B and 8B but you couldn't access the coolant bottle which would make it useless when trying to carry an AIM-9 but could be helpful when you just want the additional countermeasures. A forum post from a modelling forum (could be hearsay without photographic evidence):

I guess it’s more of a DCS limitation thing where chaff isn’t modeled in such a detailed manner where you can change variables on effectiveness or how big the charge is. Yeah it does seem like the BOL-IR system would be a new type of flare countermeasure in DCS that act and perform a lot differently than our normal flares. I do think a solution to this conundrum of BOL-IR implementation can definitely help out with the possible implementation of SDS on an RAF Eurofighter later on (if you guys plan on doing it) which appear to use a system based upon BOL. Video of BOL-IR being used at night in Iraq (not NVG footage):

Big thanks for you accommodating me and the other fellow rivet counters and people that have nothing better to do than gawk at new features and bug fixes.

That bit about weathering came from the F-14 - Pre Order / Gameplay Reveal Trailer you guys had put out about 3ish years ago: “The cockpit of your aircraft will change depending on the aircraft you’re currently flying. Panel locations, weathering, details, and even the type of seat cushions will change…” Maybe that was the only instance where you guys mentioned weathering in relation to Forge.

15:47 is when you can really see an obvious use of the BOL-IRs with 2 distinct flare deployments from the wings btw.