Mike_CK

I’m hoping someone can recommend a good (updated) YouTube video or article explaining the F.A-18s radar in STT. I’ve been flying the F/A-18, F-16, Mirage 2000 and F-14 -all of them- for over 4 years. I don’t have this issue at all with the latter 3….but with the Hornet, I can’t keep a damned STT lock AFTER firing an Aim-7 until impact. as an example- today on MP PvE- I was at 10,000ft and STT locked a Mig 23 at about 12,000ft off my nose hot at about 38 miles. We were headed directly at each other and i kept the lock for the entire time. At 8.5 miles - with Vc of 1100 kts- I fired an Aim-7. One second after it left the rail, radar drops lock. I reaquire at about 6.4 miles, fire again and About 2 seconds into flight, I see he is beginning to turn into the notch as my radar drops lock (he had just started his turn). I finally reaquired him again coming out of the notch off his 4:30-5o’clock at 4 miles. I fire another AIM-7…it tracks…and about 2 seconds after launch, i drop lock! (We were both at 7k feet over the desert. I don’t know- still- what I am doing wrong. I don’t have this issue at all firing sparrows in the F-14, 530s in the Mirage or AMRAAMs (in STT) in the F-16. It’s only the hornet and it has been an issue since I first flew it fall 2019 any recommendations?

I was REALLY LIGHT. I had no ordinance and between 4,000lbs to 5,000lbs of fuel on both my landings. At that weight, I would think you could drop the damn thing from 50’ up and it would be fine. I’m sure that a perfect rate of decent won’t bend the gear. BUT…the Hornet’s landing gear (and that of all carrier based aircraft) is designed to be robust enough to sustain landings that ARENT perfect. I’ve never flown an F/A-18 and I’m not a Boeing engineer; but I’m pretty confident that both of my landings were well within the parameters of what the F/A-18 was designed to take. So maybe the “window” of decent rate the jet can take is a bit too small?

That’s just it: my rate of decent really wasn’t that fast. I was on slope and on AoA. And yes, I know to remain dirty but I had alarms going off after I hit so I pulled up gear and flaps until I could see what happened. im not saying it was a perfect landing and I may very well have planted a bit hard at the end…but I feel like the Hornets gear is plenty beefy enough to handle a landing “a bit” harder than perfect EDIT: I should add that both times I had a clean jet (except for pylons) as all ordinance was expended and empty tanks dropped. About 4k lbs of fuel first time and 5.5k second time. So, it was a very light jet

I’ve flew two campaign missions today which was the first time I used the hornet since the update. Hit the carrier the way I’ve been dojng for 4 years and boltered. Noticed left gear wouldn’t retract so put both down and went around. Came in on speed and pretty close to slope. I hit a little harder than I should (but not by much) hit the 3 wire and my wheels end up bent out at like 45 degree angles from the axel. Figured they got damaged first run Second mission I come in on speed and proper angle of attack, glide slope, etc. Only call I got was a “liiiitle right to left” after I called the ball. Hit the 4 wire. Alarms start going off and- when I look- the left gear strut was bent out. I’ve been landing the hornet on carriers for 3-4 years. I’m not a pro -and yeah- sometimes it gets put down a little harder than others but I’ve never busted the gear. Now? Busted twice in a row and the landing on the second mission was on speed/on slope/on AoA and I thought I put it down nicely

After the last update, I get the same performance on Syria that I do on PG and Caucuses…pretty amazed at how much VR has improved recently and especially on this map. I still have some slight performance issues flying warbirds on the Channel map for some reason. but man…at least turn forest details and terrain detail sliders to .5 and see how that helps. Terrain detail can be really hard on VR at low level. Personally, I can’t tell the difference between cockpit texture at medium and high (and I’m at max resolution for my OQ2 with PD 1.3) so I dropped that. I just think -in VR- you are getting diminishing returns on a lot of those high settings

I get it. I will say that after the December patch (I believe that is the one where the issue of AI aircraft dying when heavily damaged), the issue hasn’t come up again for me. I’ve seen several aircraft cruising with the prop not moving…but they don’t last long at all.

I find running the Quest 2 at 72hz (so 36fps) gives MUCH better performance AND visual quality while the difference in smoothness isn’t very noticeable. The terrain can load in and “process” much more smoothly whereas when I ran at 90 (45fps) the terrain could get “stutters”. Turn up quest resolution to max, get the OTT and increase bit rate and see if you can get to a PD of 1.2. I run terrain : high cockpit : medium and looks great to me

This old neck doesn’t turn very well either; stick to BVR

Well, I usually prefer playing 1980’s- early 90’s scenarios and servers; so no fox-3 (except Phoenix). I love the hornet because I can carry a decent A/G load AND aim-7s. I also much prefer air combat with just Fox ones and Fox-2s….watching that Sparrow come off the rails, with its smoke trail, and guide itself and is very satisfying. Can’t do that with the F-16; sidewinders only. So, the F-18s really the only aircraft that I can do both air to ground and air to air in during that time frame. I should say that I love the Mirage 2000 as well, but it only carries four missles and only two are Fox ones, so it only allows for a limited time in combat; although there isn’t a better (or more fun) platform to dogfight in.

Do you mean they start hitting before the impact point with the last one on the point? Or first hits on point and the rest hit after in interval? i asked about this same thing. Seems to continually change and is different between similar US platforms. I can’t seem to find any info as to how CCRP or CCIP places a string of bombs in real life for the F/A-18 (pipper/target cue marks beginning of string or middle)

Figures thank god for JDAM and LGBs I guess!

Been flying the Hornet since early 2019 so I REALLY ought to know this…but im getting mixed results. Can’t seem to find a clear answer. I would just go try it except my rig is down…but I’d like to know before I forget to ask again. When dropping a string of bombs in CCIP, I know you put the pipper where you want the 1st bomb in the string to hit (where the string starts). But what about CCRP? If I have it set to release 7 bombs over 7 pulses (so one at a time) with a 30meter spacing on a convoy of 7 vehicles spaced 30 meters apart (thinking 100 ft but we ‘muricans need to get with the metric system). Do I place the target designation box on the first vehicle or would I place it on the 4th vehicle (so 3 vehicles in front and 3 behind)??

Lol…yea. This let’s hope that after the fix at least I won’t see planes circling without moving props or living pilots. I’m fine lighting him up and letting him crash a few minutes later. I do also understand that difficulties with the Simple flight model and damage so I appreciate ED addressing it

Saw in the fox today that AI aircraft will no longer fly around with severe damage so looks like it got a fix!

Ok…but the game isn’t best experienced in multiplayer for ME b/c I’m not playing to blow stuff up; I play to experience the aircraft and their systems (and blow stuff up.) I DO play MP sometimes but often MP feels like a group of people all playing SP on the same map. I prefer the realisM of campaigns; specifically the professional/commercial ones. Frankly, I think most of us who play SP are happy with the damage modeling of modern aircraft and the AI behavior of all the aircraft; both BVR and ACM; it’s not up to a human behavior but it’s good enough to create the realism and immersion I want. So, since the vast majority of DCS players play SP only, I think it’s an issue worth addressing if possible. Hell, for all I know I’m the only one who sees an issue at all; that’s why I’m asking

sorry for the novel but I play single player a lot and am frustrated. I HOPE I’ve got something wrong here. I get that the AI warbirds have a simplified flight model; BUT, from what I understand, the AI aircraft systems DO take damage. For example, you can take our the engine. I’m GUESSING that the systems are modeled to enough detail that I can put rounds through the radiator and the coolant will leak out. My problem is that the AI aircraft don’t seem to NEED any systems - such as an engine or coolant- to continue flying. I can’t count the number of times I have unloaded half a belt of 20mm into a BF-109 until it’s trailing black and white smoke, only to later observe it still flying around. Or watch a AI plane with a non-spinning propeller continue to fly around for 20 more minutes. flew a liberation mission today. Hit an JU-88 with my .50s (P-47) until both engines were smoking. I continued on (thinking it’s dead) and emptied the rest of .50 cal into a BF-109 while watching pieces fly off until black and white smoke poured out. The BF-109 dove for the deck and I thought it was crashing. Nope. Pulled out and continued to fly around when, after about 15 seconds, the smoke stopped. His wings were Swiss cheese yet he continued on. I left. Ten minutes later, I observed he was still alive on F10. F2…and there he is, little buddy just cruising around. So, I flew back to base (passing the SAME JU-88 gliding around with props not moving) and ended the mission 20 minutes later. Got no credit for a kill. Checked the track and both the damn things were STILL FLYING!!! (20-30 minutes with no prop and about 50% wing) Just seems like the engine doesn’t care it doesn’t have coolant for a loooong time (if it ever cares), the plane doesn’t care it doesn’t have an engine and the wings don’t care more wing is missing than remaining. Is there not a way to make the RESULT of damage taken more realistic. or am I missing something?

Lol…found this thread googling DCS Warbird damage. I had to when -during my WW2 liberation campaign- I came upon an enemy JU-88 at about 5,000 feet flying (gliding) around with propellers not spinning. Made since when I pulled along side and noticed that it looked like Swiss cheese. I mean, this thing had been shot to hell, neither engine worked and you could see a dozen huge chunks of daylight through both wings and fuselage. No one else around. So, I eased my spitfire about 150 meters behind and slightly above the Junkers, dropped the nose a tad and proceeded to unload 6 seconds worth of 20mm and 303 fire into this thing from the time I started at 150 meters until I pulled off about 30 meters away. Pieces flew off everywhere with a dazzling array of flashes as damn near every round struck it….. And nothing. that thing continued gliding around with no power and -basically- 2 hollow wing frames. It still showed up on the F-10 map so it was still living. I watched it continue on for a bit -not losing altitude or speed- and got bored. Not 6-7 minutes later, I come across another JU-88 JUST like it (the other one was still on F-10 flying). Gliding with propellers not spinning and shot to hell. I returned to my base around 30 miles away and landed. Checked F-10 and BOTH of those little f***ers were STILL gliding around. id say there was an issue with AI warbird damage modeling

I can’t ever get it to work either. Seems to require some type of black magic or mastery of the dark arts.

I just leave all that crap off. In fact, I set all my MSAA and anti aliasing off. I take a big performance hit and - at least in VR- I can’t tell a bit of difference betweeen MSAA 4x and MSAA off. But I can 1.2 PD and 1.3PD, high textures vs medium or 45fps/eye and 35. Comes down to what works best for you and a lot of the new gadgets may not do much of anything for one guy but be a new experience for another point? I don’t feel compelled to mess with that stuff since it’s fine now and my 52 year old eyes can’t tell

Yes. This. I actually enjoy AAR and pre-vul refueling is pretty standard on missions. Makes much more sense to top off once you have reached altitude than to have to conserve gas so you can make it to the tanker on the way home

This campaign and its “sister campaign” Cerberus North are-by far- THE best campaigns for DCS. The intel, docs, briefings, the mil-sim like traffic/ingress/egress corridors, voice acting and missions are all amazing. Very realistic without being annoying about it (having to fly a certain distance off my leads wing or some crap).

If it’s blurry, go to settings and check out the new Anti Aliasing setting at the top. I think it’s like the second one from the top. Can’t remember the term (TAA or something)….but switch it to off. For whatever reason, mine set to on by default and I got the blurriness too.

Is there anywhere to download the documentation for the campaign like for Cerberus North? Or does the intel campaign, Spins, etc all apply just the same to this campaign?

I play VR so the whole DLSS thing is lost on me. And frankly….I can’t see a bit of difference between MSAA 4x and MSAA off..so I leave all aliasing off. I do run my Oculus 2 max res, pd at 1.3 and textures high/high and get 45fps…so any AA has a decent impact on my frame rates. Guess it’s good I can’t tell the difference. that said…I’m liking the new SSS shadow thing. You csn really see it on the caucuses map when you are over dense woods. The shadowing gives it much more of a realistic “full” look over previous. other than that, I don’t use any of the new settings and just hope for continued optimization of maps and MT

I had a consistent “stutter” in VR where about every minute I would get the dreaded Oculus spinning hourglass for about 5-7 seconds. When I would play track IR it would be a brief “freeze” (about half a second) every minute. turned out it was the Virus protection “active scan”. Turned it off and that fixed it. So maybe take a look at Virus scan or other programs. im assuming you have an SSD since you just built it so I can’t imagine it’s a “loading from the HD” stutter I used to get