vincentb

Great news, a highly anticipated feature for many! In addition, great to see more mini-updates again, important to get some good vibes back into the hornet community.

I understand that ED needs EA to generate income and it gives us a great opportunity to wrestle with planes a little earlier. However, there seems to be disconnect between the expectactions of a part of community and the actual EA model by ED. Regardless of whether the community is overreacting/not understanding the EA model or whether ED is at fault, I reckon that a considerable number of EA sales are returning customers and already part of the DCS community. So the current negative sentiment within the Hornet community, again regardless of whether it is grounded or not, may also be hurting ED's future EA sales. There is a considerable number of people that have already mentioned they would no longer participate in EA in its current format. What I am a bit surprised though is ED's reluctance to nip this unrest in the bud. Throw some bones at the hornet community; for example, while there used to be frequent mini-updates these are now more or less once a month. The community manager's "we'll update you once we have something" is of course a bit easy. There is always something to update, it doesn't have to be a new weapon system every time; post a screenshot, do a brief dev interview, explain in a post why coding TWS is not straightforward, or why PB on the HARM takes longer that the PB modes of a JDAM, etc. Create some understanding and transparency in the community. Then again, it could also be that the unhappy hornet community is just a fraction of an overall satisfied consumer base and the current long EA period does not impact future sales, I guess only ED knows the answer to that.

Makes sense that indeed they have buddy spike checks in effect. By the way, it appears from a super hornet sim manual that there could be a PLID (Pilot ID) suboption in the SA-page that allows a pilot to classify contacts manually.

Yeah indeed, although as far as I'm concerned it doesn't have to be implemented in AI aircraft as long as it's in the hornet. If you have an unknown contact due to NCTR ambiguity, you'll know that they're hostile as soon as they fire on you. In case he doesn't fire it can be a neutral party or a hostile fighter not equipped for/or instructed to engage air-to-air. One other thing I was thinking about: a scenario where you fighting an enemy that has F16s, so ROE NCTR matrix would be set that F16 is hostile (all USAF and allied F16s would be Mode 4 positive and therefore classify as friendly regardless). In case you have a friendly F16 where mode 4 inactivates in flight for whatever reason, can you manually classify that particular contact as friendly without changing NCTR ROE matrix? Is this also part of the data cartridge that ED is programming or does the ROE/PROG page need to be set before every flight?

Great, thanks AvroLanc and Dudikoff! Indeed, that was the answer to my question. It makes sense that it's a dynamic rule set which can be changed based on the local theatre situation. For example, in Syria with the Syrian AF, Russian AF, and coalition AFs flying around, you may want to prevent classifying Russian SU35s as hostile to prevent an accidental international incident. Or in a hypothetical conflict with Iraq you may encounter Iraqi F16s but in the north you may run into Turkish F16s. I reckon that deconflicting all those contacts can be highly complex and part of the air-to-air challenge. Now it's hoping that ED will incorporate a IFF/ROE PROG page as it definitely impacts gameplay: e.g. it may prompt you to go for a visual ID in some cases (e.g. is the SU24 Russian or Syrian which may change ROE), drastically changing the chance to get into dogfighting vs BVR combat etc. Wags/ED, can you give any clarity whether this will be included?

Thanks for the replies guys, but this video is exactly where my problem lies: Wags NCTRs a Mig29 then subsequently interrogates mode 4 and the contact is immediately classified as a hostile in the HUD and LTWS. He mentions at minute 3:10-3:23 with it: "For hostile you'll need a mode 4 identification along with NCTR". As far as I understand, the mode 4 interrogation only helps determining whether it is friendly or unknown, and doesn't classify as hostile without NCTR. My question is: what is the NCTR logic to explain the switch from unknown to hostile (red triangle on LTWS and diamond in HUD) following his mode 4 interrogation at min 2:29?

Does anyone know what the hostile/friendy/unkown logic is based on NCTR in the hornet? I understand that mode 4 and datalink can provide this conclusively but how can NCTR? How does it classify a Mig29 from a neutral country (mode 4 negative)? Or an F16 from a hostile country? Is this logic dynamic (e.g. data cartridge based on the local air forces in the region) or fixed (aircraft type)? Does this really happen without a pilot's decision? And can the pilot overrule the classification? Thanks!

Hi guys, I hoped that Wags's vid would shed light on this, but not really yet. Does anyone know how hostiles are determined by NCTR if Mode 4 is negative? Is it purely based on foreign vs US aircraft types? Will foes using western origin planes ever be classified as hostile (if Mode 4 is negative) based on NCTR print? Somehow I always assumed that a 'hostile' determination would be largely a pilot decision based on ROE (e.g. if both the foe as neighboring countries operate similar planes, one would expect perhaps visual ID would be required to determine hostile/unkown). Thanks!

Very cool. Are these criteria fixed? i.e. If you are fighting an enemy equiped with F16s, I guess that means Mode 4 will be negative (e.g. foe) and NCTR will indicate an F16 (a potentially friendly airframe). Does this mean it will remain unkown or will it assume hostile? I guess a rephrase, is the NCTR ROE logic airframe specific?

Oh yeah, definitely on board with the U/S/H/MH-60. Loving the MI-8, but a western equivalent of a utility helo for SAR/troop insertion/extraction/etc would be awesome.

Thanks for the answers. I see, you'd think that due to the big speed difference between the jet and even mobile ground/naval-based radars that a rapid estimation whether something is approximately in range of the HARM would not be extraordinarily difficult to calculate for such a sensor. 1) Is there a way to get an accurate bearing using the RWR? 2) Do you also happen to know whether PB waypoints can be edited mid-flight? Thanks

HARM features Hi all, I'm a bit confused so far with ranging for the HARM. I understand that in TOO and SP modes the HARM will not have range information available. Is this true in all circumstances (I could imagine after detecting the same sensor for a while during flight that changes in direction of the contact during flight could permit range approximation by the HARM sensor)? Is there any way in which you can use the information of the HARM as sensor (i guess TOO mode) to train your other sensors to the area? In some youtube videos featuring HARM deployment in other sims it is mentioned that Handoff can also be to the ground radar giving an approximate position. Is this an actual feature of using the HARM as sensor or just an artifact of that other simulation? And is the pre-brief (PB) mode exclusively dependent on pre-programmed waypoints or can these be adjusted in flight based on information of your sensors/datalink? Thanks a lot in advance

Here is an example: i set the net and group id to 1. It was a rampstart mission. Still, no red triangle. no_data.trk

For me, nothing helps. Everytime i play devils cross I can't get a red marker. I do see my wingman on the datalink, i just don't get the data. I also don't get it in other missions. Changing my group ID doesn't help. In addition, accepting the mission without going into the planner also does nothing. The latest patch has been applied though.

thank you for taking the time!

Any chance of getting the transponder/IFF clickable (no in depth multiplayer functionality, just clickable) for immersion sake?

I concur. I was doubtful whether to spend my money on an unfinished product (first time beta for me), but I was absolutely blown away. I have been playing it for two weeks straight.