okopanja

It was actually removed recently on October 19th 2023. with 2.9.0.46801 releases: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/openbeta/2.9.0.46801/

Is this still active thread?

I think you misunderstood me: Chuck is great! It filled the holes from official manual pretty good. However I was having second thoughts if this should be reported as JF-17 bug, and figured out it was more sensible to comment here.

Well, perhaps this is a point for updating the manual, but it appears that a number of A-G weapons in Jeff stopped working properly with 2.9. So maybe it is premature to update the manual. I wish in general that such technical decisions would be more clearly documented along the reasons.

If you carefully look into the Chuck's manual you can see that the target is tracked with radar in STT mode, the WMD7 is slaved to it with no actual lock. At some point this did work for sure the question is why it was removed? One answer could be that construction of WMD-7 prevents slewing it above the line of horizon (e.g. for targets on above own altitude). Still I see no physical reason why it could not be used for target that are below the line of the horizon. I was tempted to create a bug report, but have realized that this was likely removed intentionally. And yes, BRM-1 is very cool weapon, e.g. I actually was able to utilized it to target slow flying helicopters (below doppler notch) utilizing GMTI -> WMD7 -> BRM-1. In this case as soon as I locked it with WMD-7, GMTI was freed to search for other ground targets. GMTI presents some interesting options, including maddog-ing SD-10 at short range against helicopter.

Inside mission file I tried this with no effect: null

Even if Mike patches the server (which is not really needed), this needs to be rendered on client side. The mod itself can work on vanilla server/client as long as miz file contains the correct payload. @uboatsnot sure if arg_value can be specified in miz file (mission)? null

One question related to the Chuck's guide and using WMD-7 with A-A master mode. https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/jf-17/#pfe9 1. I turned on the WMD7 on ground and waited for alignment to complete. 2. The Pod can be used in A-G mode just fine 3. I switch to A-A and configure the left MFD to display WMD7 of pod supage 4. I can see the POD is Idle and I can not uncage it How do I use this feature? I this feature dropped or is this a bug?

I am prepared to buy it from you at $1. The product released in 2020 will be dropped from support, I do not think this is ok. I was close at some point to buying and I am glad I did not, but the culprits here are both Microsoft and vendors who did not watch for this.

I think the following might stop working (with the little help of ChatGPT): Acer Windows Mixed Reality Headset Dell Visor HP Reverb G2 Lenovo Explorer Samsung HMD Odyssey/Odyssey+ Asus Windows Mixed Reality Headset Unless the vendors of headset provided the alternative software support.

I would say you need to reach the vendors of VRs, they are supposed to support their products. It is not uncommon that new OS arrives within 10 years of product release.

Is there any indication that vendors producing these VRs would make effort to port this to the new platform? This is not cheap peace of hardware to be dropped just like that.

Sorry just to clarify this. I did not mean that the crew of F-15E did dot need to employ great level of skill and coordination, especially since they acted to preserve the unit on ground. Cheap it becomes sometimes in DCS, when it becomes too easy.

We may talk here about processing and processing, there are 2 known facts: we have example of the F-15C detecting hinds at 50nm in Iraq we have a number of flights occurring in 1999, where no detection occurred. Surely they would have used to opportunity to score a cheap kill. None of these cases can be disputed. Clearly there were factors that prevented the F-15C from finding the helicopters in second group of cases. We should take into account both common and differing factors. Common factors in both case: same aircraft pilots receiving comparably similar training or often the very same pilots who flew in both places. presence of AWACS in both cases flat ground in Iraq vs flat ground in Northern of parts Yugoslavia and Kosovo (mixture of flat on one side and and hilly/mountainous relief) . Some of the most obvious differing factors could be: desert vs continental large difference in humidity in Iraq pilots had prior knowledge of helicopter flights and their rough location, provided by AWACS which observed helicopter ingress toward the point of USA special team Yugoslavia is relatively evenly populated resulting in pretty decent coverage of human originated objects, at almost regular interval. different helicopters were utilized. In Iraq Mi-24 is alleged, in Yugoslavia Gazelle + Mi-8. Note: fenestron construction on Gazelle would largely hide the signal coming from these blades. some of the helicopters flights (but no all) were conducted in areas where terrain masking was feasible and this was in fact used whenever possible, however they still had to cover stretches from 10-20km of flat exposed ground. If I have to guess in Iraq F-15C had more favorable SNR to track helicopters in Iraq than in Yugoslavia.

Not really a solution to go back to legacy release, 8 years old.

Report the bug with trk file in FC3 area for now this is Mig-29FF and lets keep it that way.

An interesting possibility would be 9-12 with upgraded radar computer The original Ts-100 would be replaced with Ts-101/102 would be use which would eliminate the overload of targets (hello-TWS-not-dropped-with-ECM), introduce new modes as well enable compatibility with R-77, Kab-500. Given the fact that overhaul of the 29s was due after ~9 years, these computers were available just in time when large of these fighters was supposed to be serviced.

At first limit the coverage might sound as degrading the present ECM in flanker. However if coupled with realistic modeling of what this ECM system is able to do, it would also result in additional benefits (described in the manual your likely using). I would say nerfing the coverage without giving those additional benefits at the same time would really be ethically questionable. With that said, given the fact that FC3 aircraft will likely not receive further development updates as they are declared feature complete , I do not expect there will be any change here. If I have to guess the ED's focus will be more on FF aircrafts. In this area we can say that the current behavior and options are too simplistic: basically offering you just 2 modes, when we clearly see there multiple possible combinations. Likely they meant improvements in this area.

For NCTR you would need to STT it first, which implies detecting it at least. However, I think identifying the helicopter probably does not need full NCTR, and basically amounts to detecting reflection with distinct frequency peaks (main body + 2 returns from blades) by applying filters for 2 frequency shifts caused by blades spinning in opposite directions. However, at this moment I am not aware of any of events where the F-15/F-16 demonstrated capability of shooting down low flying helicopter in clutter as of 1999 (both gazelle and Mi-8 did fly medivac/resupply missions during 1999 unpunished by combining the low level flying with terrain masking + there is at least one known SAR in gazelle for downed 29 pilot, while said aircrafts were still in air within relative vicinity). Hence the real question is when this capability was introduced and what were the associated limitations? Also the choice of material for blades can likely affect this capability. The capability is allegedly also present in some upgraded Mig-29s (not talking about the most modern radar variants), so I gather this is not really a rocket science in 2024. For the record DCS Viper/Hornet are capable of detecting helicopter flying below Doppler or even hovering at ranges 10-20km. Tomcat can do this by switching of the filter, but again it should detect the driving vehicles as well (I believe this is not possible at this moment).

This Yugoslav is Mig-29, photograph taken probably during 90s.

You think so? It's much more common then you think, in some cases it was crucial to the success. Perhaps one of the most famous examples are strikes conducted by IAF: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP71T00730R000400220008-7.pdf

Majority of modules has table based detection range modeling. This implementation takes into account range and altitude of both target and launch platform and calculates optical visibility and comparing with thresholds for given situation. However, this is not probabilistic and it also does not take into account s/n, aspect based RCS and many other things that could influence the detection range or even cause detection of false targets. This means specifically FC3 Eagle is not broken as you believe. Last large change FC3 Eagle received is the range extension some 3-4 months before the F-15E release. This was a simple enough change and nothing will change there anymore. As for competitor Flanker, missing is player-to-player DL and command options which will never be implemented on FC3 level. So more or less F-15C/F-15E do match when it comes to ~ range, save for the fact that F-15E currently along M2K has the best modeled radar in DCS. Simply put it defined a new desirable standard when it comes to fidelity. As for F-16C/FA-18C they got the buff in terms of range, but the phase 3 will place them to the more realistic setup, hopefully at comparable fidelity to F-15E. Last but not least F-15E will get a DL at some point, so average players will not struggle so much 1:1 against opponents (I gather BRA/Bulls calls are simply to hard for majority) with worse radar but advantage of the DL (e.g. viper/flanker/hornet).

In which year?

Interesting, I thought radar clutter has a rather bad effect on practically any radar?

LOL, this is true...