CaptPickguard

A moment of silence for the sea mines.

Just to comment on this, pretty much every module in DCS simplifies IFF and countermeasures. Flares and chaff are dicerolls (in most cases) and IFF is a simple game engine check (in most cases). There is nothing unprecedented about this. The difference is that Deka is mentioning this will be the case directly rather than just doing it without communicating their intentions.

It's mostly cursor stuff IIRC, so selecting things with the X/Y Controller kinda like how you can in the Hornet, just to another level.

I have seen nothing to indicate the Eurofighter's Litening implementations have any sort of full-colour features.

bumping because of Hot Shots :p

Is this on by default? I'm interested to know why an improvement to AoA buffeting was added as an option rather than just a change to behavior

Servers like Hoggit have been forced into the pure scripts setting to prevent griefers exploiting weapons. I think it goes without saying that servers shouldn't have to block all manner of scripts (cockpit exports, countermeasure programs, etc.) just to prevent cheating.

AACQ takes the highest priority trackfile and STTs it. AACQ is not an ACM mode, it is the usual manner in which you gain an STT. This specific thing you are mentioning is intended and correct behavior.

Thanks for the track. Having replayed it, I just want to note that the datalink symbols would have returned to their correct place if the radar were turned to silent and stopped picking up the jamming signals, as shown in the video in the initial post.

Hi Bignewy, my evidence is that this is impossible. Datalink info comes in, jamming signals come in, there is no way for the plane to know the two are the same. In DCS right now, the moment someone starts jamming, their Datalink symbol warps under the jam symbol, when the plane cannot possibly have any idea that Datalink symbol is the same as the jamming symbol. Jamming comes in, Datalink comes in, two separate things entirely. Right now the jamming takes over all the info we have on the target, when it should only affect the radar itself. Sent from my SM-F711W using Tapatalk

When the DCS F-16 picks up a jamming target, the datalink symbol for that target warps under the jamming symbol and you lose all the ranging information your datalink had for the target. In the video linked below, you can see the effect of the jamming on the datalink symbol as I switch from NORM to SILENT and back. The datalink info has no business warping to under the jam symbol. It should be entirely separate, as the jet would have no idea that the jamming target is the same target as broadcast on datalink. The jet lacks ranging information due to the jamming, so it would not have enough data to correlate the two tracks. The datalink should continue to come in displaying the information from Link-16, and the jammer symbol should show at the top of the display. The current implementation is just not logical. I'm sorry I don't have a track right now, but I sure do have a video showing off the issue and I hope it is sufficient to demonstrate it. This is 100% reproducable, and all you need to do is pick up a jamming target from beyond burn through range and look at the datalink symbol.

I think so, but I'm a bit disappointed that everyone jumped on the "no evidence" train when it was already functioning this way in-game. Understandable mistake, I get these kinds of things mixed up in my mind all the time, but this was definitely a bit of a slip up.

Are you certain the helmet we're getting is the Striker II? What gives you that impression?

It is highly unlikely they have any specifics they can share with us, but Harker's contribution definitely deserves a closer look. Misinterpretations happen, and many sources need to be corroborated to come to an understanding of the big picture.

I believe so, however I think Hulk's comment was more about LGBs in general than just the GBU-24. You definitely do not need to lase immediately when employing these weapons. This is a great find and I think clears up some of the confusion around what PW3's improved guidance entails. By no means does it look like it requires a laser off the rail. If anything it seems like PW3 has more flexibility in this respect.