okopanja

Maybe this helps, but sadly no trk/tacview from me. About 2-3 months ago, there was a player flying the hornet. He would take of steeply with high AoA, G, climb, launch the missile and than land to refuel/rearm. Meanwhile his missile flew in: his client, server, all other clients. The missile in his universe finally arrived and hit me (he targeted spawning slot). The later examination of the server tacview showed that Tunguska's did destroy in server universe all missiles. This was true for the I recorded as well TRK as well. So in his own universe the missile kept flying and hit me. I do think that this desync can be triggered intentionally, and it seems that hornet client is especially prone to this (aggressive paddle use?). Sadly I can not contribute with TRK/tacview since I deleted it, and still it's his TRK that would probably matter in this case. About the TRKs: I observed that they do not recording 100% accurately what was happening. E.g. try driving through the grass while taxing and most likely you will never be able to get the accurate reproduction of original flight. I am pretty sure that within simulation you have some randomness in some parameters that do not get recorded within the TRK files.

LOL: If it takes 9 months for a lady to give birth to a single baby, how much time will it take it when 9 ladies do the same? But for a SAM site, unlike the ladies following should be considered: 1. a single launcher can be reloaded while others are still active. 2. you can have multiple reloading vehicles and reload in parallel. IRL: it all depends what kind of the unit formation is applied and how many vehicles are available. E.g. you can have a SAM site in a very barebone configuration with a single launcher and simply move on to new prepared position after the launch

I think there is an issue with all missiles on old API. The new API is not affected by this. PL-12 is a testbad in DCS for SD-10 that will likely transition in future to new API. Here is the relevant comment. If you did not upgrade please upgrade, if it still does not work probably it did not yet make it to latest release. @uboatsplease confirm.

You will also notice that these missiles do not have 3rd set of fins, which means they are not really R-27s as we know them. This on it's own creates the ambiguity. BTW: this is 9.12 SM+ https://tangosix.rs/2022/03/05/kako-je-lovac-postao-visenamenski-borbeni-avion-detalji-novog-naoruzanja-na-premijeri-modernizovanih-mig-ova-29sm/

Dear Irisz, First of all your effort to improve the representation of RED airplanes has not gone unnoticed. I feel the great passion you are bringing here. Some of your posts are indeed interesting and realize rise the interesting questions, however in many of these posts you have already demonstrated incomplete knowledge while confidently claiming something for a fact. As I stated the OLS in its original state can not be used to sample an image. For the laser guided missile some plausibility is there, however there would need to be manual update pages specifying at least the loadout if not a detailed section dedicated to the weapon employment. For Kh-29T we know already that it can be deployed on modernized Mig-29 9.12. In order to do that it needs to be able to display the image and I believe that in this case the not-so-mythical MFI-55 was used. However, this leaves the question on what was used to que the missile/bomb. If I have to guess the most plausible explanation is the video from missile/bomb itself. Perhaps there is a variant of OLS that has actually replaced the simple rotating detector sensor with some CCD chip, but I did not find any evidence of that. As for the Kh-31P, yes it can be fired,there are 2 possibilities, either it uses some improved RWR, e.g. Pastel, or it can be simply launched on azimuth or pre-programmed targets. This missile is also a part of 9.12 upgrade package. As for the computer you are mentioning, C100 which was original used on both 29s and 27s indeed had the problem with saturation with targets, and as a result also was vulnerable to some of the ECM attacks. This replacement was completed around 1991 and was being offered even to the foreign customers. I am aware of one such offer in 1996, which along other things offered Pastel, R-77, Kh-29T and many other things. Your concern related to this topic is certainly something that should be taken into account, but there is certain ambiguity and without proper documents I would not jump to early conclusions. Lastly: it will not hurt if your behavior would be somewhat toned down. I do respect your energy and passion, but within this topic you have actually offended a guy who is well known in community for contributions in MODs, liveries, bug testing and even providing of the bug fixes to the official DCS. Calling him uninformed will only undermine your own personal credibility, so once again I kindly ask you to be polite, respectful and not to jump on conclusions solely based on photos. You can read the forum rules, and among other things they also specify on what you can post here (e.g. in case you get tempted to slam me with full-up-to-date manual for J-11A ).

For your information: the IR detector in OLS is a segment cross shaped detector which can be utilized only to track the target. It is incapable of producing the image. As for the laser guided missiles: OLS has the laser range finder. It could be perhaps used to iluminate the target or receive the illumination from another target, but this is nowhere near the SHKVAL and note that its position obscures the lower half sphere to large extent.

my mistake, was watching over phone and miss-judged the aspect of target.

Depending on the range SA-5 launches ither with proportional navigation or a loft. Loft is very steap and during this time the seaker does not see the target. During this phase there is no need to go into STT. After reaching certain altitude the missile will turn toward the target and radar will activate STT once it gets close eniugh. This is why you do not get warning on launch itself.

GPS MODE page is empty for me. I am working with Vanilla mod, I gather you use combat version...

You need to provide more context. I personally had issues with involuntary TDC movement until I set axis to be less sensitive near center, thus allowing more precision and less jitter when pressing TDC.

Still it tracks the aircraft with radar pointing into opposite direction. You can can claim this is due to the backlobe, but, there is sizable amount of metal in between and I think this should not take place.

I did not use the collective, I meant the ANS-128B (navigation console in the middle) Yes, however, in this case I implemented in MOD the entry of nearest place for better SA. Player can still override. Still text spilling over is a likely a bug of the mod. I have to remember to report this.

I played extensively yesterday and could not trigger the bug. This guy claims a workaround: https://discord.com/channels/1141862757805867180/1203821223226642472/1235513058537766952 I did not try it yet, since I could not reproduce

It would be nice to re-read the topic, but I will try to recapitulate the topic. In short the number of modules is growing and each time they get larger and larger due to liveries that get delivered no matter if the player bought the module or not. IMHO: in 99.99% such high visual fidelity is not needed, since you would need to get really close to them. Therefore it would be interesting to address this disk usage growth somehow (few ideas were given). At the end we ended up with 2 opposing groups: those that ask for optimization and those that believe priority should be elsewhere. We are all aware that ED will do at the end according to own priorities, but we would like to ask you what is your view on this problem?

The less people have configuration, the less content will be sold.

Well this is a matter of preference. I do not mind you having full pack of liveries. My preference is not to store the liveries which I can not see properly 99,99% of the time.

Well this topic is about liveries and while there are other optimizations to be discussed (or even acknowledge/welcome) I would prefer to stick to the topic. The rest of this reply is more or less off topic. We both play at same resolution. Your spec GPU better than mine (RTX 2070 Super), with me having advantage in CPU (i7 10750h) and RAM (64GB). With no optimizations that occurred last year I am pretty sure we would be both in the market for a new PC. We are talking here about ~3 years old gaming PCs and we both feel that these machines do not cut it completely through already now. Surely you can observe this yourself. So already now it's desirable to do the full upgrade. Also note that liveries not only take your disk space but also VRAM. 8GB is not much today. You will notice that immediate effect of multi-threading, was that major servers switched to new frameworks for more "fidelity", which was in my opinion a colossal failure, since these optimizations were not implemented on server side. Interestingly enough some of them managed to drop client performance from acceptable 60-70 FPS to below 20. We had examples of popular servers becoming very quickly abandoned by players.

While I appriciete the work you have done I must say I do not agree with this reasoning. The trend of developers including all livereries that there were and those that did not has way more impact than just space. We see a trend where you will be expected at some point to replace your PC every 2 to 3 years which can be expensive and not sustainable for majority. We are not talking here just disk space: cpu/gpu/ram also play significant role here. I have already seen very devoted people drop off the scene. Ultimatly its a difference between being a niche and mainstream game. Therefore its actually very important for ED to keep the base footprint of this game lower, so the user base can expand. I can not see anyone in sales want to shrink the userbase of the products. In most cases you will never see these the liveries in the first place, unless you cycle them through F2. In addition even if you can afford to "race" and replace your PC every year, the more money you spend on PC, the less money you will spend on modules, maps and other content. Therefore I do believe the DEVs need to think hard about optimizations. E.g. have at least basic pack with few high res liveries and rest low res. If someone wants it let him download the full pack. This is just one way to do it. Other possibility is to implementing LRU livery cache.

You meant: 3D? (no 3D glasses on my side)

tried to replay as server results in crash as in screenshot. This error means they used non-sanitized lua environment to interact from mission editor scripts with local filesystem. Meanwhile I uploaded trk files here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1sWUguBPYF0sQRcm0d7k1MHACej9NPISb?usp=sharing Likely not usable, I have to interrupt now. I will try to check with guy who runs the server if he can upload trk from server side...

The smallest client trk appears to be empty. They last one (200MB) crashes DCS when I try to replay it.

At least one where I entered was in original state before I entered and shot like 4-5 minutes on it's own. After getting into this state they do not fire anymore even as AI. All client tracks I have are fairly large, and I am not sure which one was the one not touched by me or other players. On tacview I can see that objects get de-spawned and respawned over time. This is puzzling me, since they should technically be separate objects, but the state persists (it may have to do with mission scripts) null

@BIGNEWYplease move at Bugs and Problems, I accidentally posted one level higher

I noticed that SAMs often get stuck in reloading and hence become useless. Observed in SA-13, SA-8 and SA-9 in MP. Others are likely also affected. no TRK yet, since this occurs on large MP server (Contention) with lot's of despawning/respawning.

In the case you have suggested under current rules in ME you would need to have at minimum 19 waypoints to have FP-B, This comes from DCS not from Deka. Your suggestion would work for F-10 maps I think.