CaptPickguard

The Su-27 special options menu does not include a section to select a custom cockpit for the J-11 and there is no special options menu for the J-11 itself. Users that purchase the Flaming Cliffs pack will not encounter this issue as the special options for Flaming Cliffs does have this option. This issue impacts users that wish to apply a custom cockpit on the J-11 but only own the module individually. As it stands, there is no way to select a custom cockpit for the J-11 when the modules have been purchased individually. The solution to this would be adding a custom cockpit option for the J-11 under the Su-27's special options menu.

Sad to see the site down. Great product.

I can't help but notice the GBU-39 SDB is not named on the FAQ. Is the GBU-39 impossible to model given the information you have access to? It would be very nice to see that weapon in the game finally, especially after we were so close with the F-15E. Also, due to the F-35's limited internal bay, it would be a massive force multiplier.

ASRAAM is far from a given. Every time they spoke about developing the missiles for the game it has been IRIS-T and Meteor. Not one mention of ASRAAM directly. It would be cool, and they haven't explicitely said they will never do it, but don't expect it as a 100% confirmed item. I think it's as likely as PIRATE, maybe less because of extra CFD work.

I expect to see the plane in the video but don't expect to get your hands on it for another at least year or two. Still, very exciting!!!

Which springs does everyone use with the dampener installed? Low strength, high strength, or both?

TRDs are planned as far as I can tell for the Typhoon. Any specifics on air to ground weapons though is unknown at this time.

Bumping this topic as it seems considerable work is currently being put into fleshing out the Hornet. Would definitely like to see this be tracked internally and eventually added.

Outstanding work, everyone. Can't wait to hear more about the Eurofighter! ;)

WRCS seems to work decently in some conditions. Still need to test more. The small warhead really highlights the inadequacy of the current vehicle damage models though... I recall a change to ships that disabled their radars when hit with a HARM. Maybe ground vehicles can get this change too, permenantly disabling their radar when hit with an ARM.

@MrWolf The Hornet actually doesn't utilize its radar antenna for IFF interrogation (aside from NCTR prints of course but that's not what we're talking about). It is a separate antenna array mounted on top of the nose (the bird slicers as many call them). You can read up on the APX-111 here: https://www.baesystems.com/en-media/uploadFile/20230124201524/1434555671810.pdf I appreciate the contribution to this thread, but since the CIT is its own thing and not bound to the radar in any way, just like on the F-16 which is behaving correctly in DCS (https://www.baesystems.com/en-media/uploadFile/20210404040301/1434555677018.pdf), it just doesn't hold up.

This issue is still present in the latest version of DCS. Hornet still only picks up CIT returns from trackfiles with radar contribution.

Especially hoping for the offset behavior to by fixed someday. Cool to see the Kiowa with a similar feature. Can a staff member please confirm this is being tracked internally? BN has confirmed to me in Discord DM that the offset behaviour issue is being tracked internally. This is excellent news. Hopefully the ACQ box will be added too.

Would also be very interested in an F-4 version.

Does this mean you could fire from below 18000 feet downwards and it would activate guidance, or does it have to fly a bit over 18000 feet first for the guidance to activate? If the latter, for how long?

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