Napillo

to replicate: create a mission where the jf-17 has no or 3% fuel. start in multiplayer, jump in the jf-17, and hit the rearm and refuel screen. Set fuel to 100%, and load a loadout with external tanks. What happens is they will not refuel, they will just populate the hardpoints. You have to have your hardpoints filled with your fuel tanks before you refuel. expected behavior: they fill up the plane before adding the external tanks and weapons

You probably interrupted the ground crew as they were re-arming. If you do weapons, then fuel, then after they do fuel, they always seem to check weapons again, and if you interrupt that, unexplained things happen and some of your weapons don't work.

are you talking about the LD-10? And have you tried it recently?

read the whole thread - it's correct, even if the texture isn't.

JF-17 cruise altitude is between 24k and 26k ft so somewhere in there is good, but if I'm going to SEAD, I fly at 30-40k personally. lol - the SD-10 is reliable at any range, just have to hold the lock until it goes pitbull. You can fire before the "max" if you loft (pitch up at least 9 degrees) I've gotten a kill at 45nm before. Basically, you want to get the most speed (preferably mach 1.2 or above), and the way I do that is by taking only 1 SD-10 on each wing, and the 800l center tank to get up to altitude then drop the tank, and get up to speed. Set your weapon to "small" target if you want to try and get that kind of long range kill. If you're chasing someone, yea maybe 5nm or so you could possibly get a hit with it. Also, if you're in a dogfight and on someone's tail, the PL5E is good, but the SD-10 is better. It'll surprise you how good it is in a dogfight. LD-10, forget about it, not reliable, lucky to hit. Try within about 15nm or so. 10 if you can get that close. Anything 9 degrees or above is a loft angle - choose what works best for you. It'll auto-loft on active mode. It depends, if they're far away, loft at 9 degrees, if they're within NEZ, then don't loft it. I loft the SD-10 most of the time, because it comes from high up, it can sometimes get into the RWR blind spot. I won't loft it if the enemy is 10k or lower than me.

Look at the map, or ask GCI. That's what it's for. It will load all the airports near your last waypoint, so set your WPT35 to near where you plan to land.

I try to get my descent rate to -2 or 0 right as i touch down, that usually protects my gears. It does take some practice, but it's definitely worth it if you don't have to waste time for a repair.

isn't that what active mode is for? like I select a ground target, and launch it, and it'll get to the target, or the nearest radar emitting source?

It's multiplayer, I couldn't provide a track - it's too big.

yeah, I have tried from all ranges and angles, nothing hits anymore.

yep, I would hope they can fix the return size

it's called 'open beta' for a reason. it's really an open beta, it's not got all the bugs worked out. they probably did test it within say 20nm or 30nm and seemed good, give them a break. play stable if you don't want such game breaking bugs.

that one makes your canopy fog up if it gets cold, allows your pilot to suffocate / suffer hypothermia

I believe you can 'take' the radio and punch in a manual frequency, and use that while it is took, and then untake it to switch back to the com1 radio, not quite as convenient, but an option. You could also program in channel 1 with the main frequency, channel 2 with the other frequency, and use the +/- button to switch between them.

I've seen this where I taxi to the runway, and the E gate is showing waaaay up high in the hud or waaay low in the hud where I have to get my head at a weirdly high or low angle to see it. It also seems to go off to the left or right quite a bit and then correct itself jarringly.

idk why this is posted here, if you have a problem with the F-16, then that should go in that forum, not here. You're assuming the F-16 and the JF-17 essentially have the same RCS, they do not. They have different radars, different computers attached to those radars, different frequencies used, get out of here with your 'i cant shoot down a JF-17 so something is wrong with it'.

I've flown a bit since the last patch, and it's worse than it was before - I can't lock an f-16 with a vc of 1200 kts or more within a distance of 40nm??? I see it on scope when it gets within 50 or 60, I can try to lock it at 40, but it locks then drops immediately, locks then drops immediately, even though its showing properly in each scan that passes over the target - is there no history kept for the tracks then? within 35 or so i get consistent locks that don't immediately drop, but there's no radar in the world that would behave this way irl. The only thing I can think of is that it was "balanced".

nope, it happens. Sometimes the ground crew forgets to check the battery level, and they do their checks and leave the lights turned on. Sometimes the batteries they put in just die.

Jeannie (named after the first female fighter pilot - Jeannie Leavitt, who flew the F-15E, coincidentally). Maybe Kari after Kari Armstrong - the first female WSO on the F-15E.

if the 63 could do it, I don't doubt the 70 could do it as well, but it may have been one of those things the engineers tested and worked well, but might have had no practical use operationally.

According to what I read about the radar preceding it, you can multiplex between ag and aa like interleaved mode and you won't notice much if any performance difference.

The APG-63 has a range of 100nm for small sized targets (according to the ADA publication), curious what the range of the APG-70 is, but since part of the design philosophy of the F-15 is having the most powerful radar, it makes sense it would be at least the same or more range. 8 kilowatts is nothing to sneeze at.

I'm not a radar engineer either, but there's radar software and algorithms, and tests that you can look up and see that that's not how radars work at all. There should be a difference between detection and lock, but it should be that you can lock things faster than you can see them on the radar. In other words, an STT should be able to aquire a lock even if the range is greater than 60, the radar won't show the contacts until they're confirmed / obvious. Check out Skolnik's radar handbook.

where is this 'VS-STT' documented? because it sounds like BS, you can't get an STT from VS.

the latest changelog mentions a few fixes: Fixed: AA radar unexpected target unlock Fixed: AA radar antenna stabilization Fixed: AA radar RWS auto mode behaviour Fixed: AA radar target course render on B-scope screen tried it out since the update?