Dr_Pavelheer

Bummer, but thanks for answering

I tested it recently and it worked fine. The caveat is you need to change your desktop resolution as well

Check out so called "circus method", in Nvidia drivers you enable DSR which allows you to render image at 4x the resolution (2x per axis, if you have 1080p screen it would be 4k) and use DLSS performance so real internal resolution matches your physical screen. Result is noticeably better than DLAA, sharper and TAA side-effects are less noticeable All credits to guys from /r/FckTAA

@paco2002 The bug where terrain isn't rendered in missile feed is as old as MT version of DCS, until recently you had the option to switch to ST version of DCS where it was still working. I just did a quick search, MT came out in May 2023, that's more than year and a half

@paco2002 Yes, you're right, I meant CM-802AKG, the MITL cruise missile

CM-400 has been broken for a very long time now, unfortunately it seems fixing weapons used by JF-17 is very low on ED's list of priorities EDIT: CM-802AKG, not CM-400

@LavaFlight One small problem though, F15E is no longer being developed and updated

@razo+r It's already in the game, just not enabled. I don't know if it's the final version or is it still WIP though

Make sure SATNAV is set to unrestricted in game/mission settings

I don't think you can use LSS in CCIP, wouldn't really make much sense tbh. In CCIP targeting pod becomes a laser rangefinder You can use LSS with JDAM set to PRE, haven't tested other options

That's what this forum is for

Multithreading in software and hyperthreading are different things

Try switching targeting pod between slave, snowplow and back to slave, it clears up some of the issues for me. I'll have to get around to trying to replicate them so I can post a track file

In DCS? Mainly zoom levels, UI and 3D model, maybe functionality like NVG visible laser pointer. F15E (RIP) and F14 apply some filters to convey worse image quality in older pods, I doubt anything in DCS goes as deep as imperfections in optical tracking reliability and gimbal precision. JF-17 is unique because its targeting pod "refocuses" as you zoom in and out and it has a limit to how far away you can be for area track

@falcon_120 It depends on how in depth you want to go. GPS denial could be fairly simple, just a trigger zone where GPS isn't available, but you could of course go more in depth like checking LOS from "jammer", simulate satellites being spread all over the sky and being rejected by receivers depending on their position in relation to receiver and jammer due to anti-jamming measures but for video game purposes I think that would be overkill

@Ronin_Gaijin In the 80s some Western fighters already had TWS, which means by the time radar switches to STT you're already evading, not shooting back. And in early 80s we're talking about base R27R and R27T, not some unicorn (at best) EP and EA models. By the way, Phoenix was a thing at the time and AMRAAM was only a couple years out so writing on the wall was already there. Everybody, even Russians, knew ARH is the future, the issue was making the seeker small enough to fit in a missile that weighs less than 500 kg, and against fighter using ARH missiles pure passive radar guidance would be useless

@Ronin_Gaijin I guess if target tracks you in STT (or maybe just when it's illuminating you for SARH missile?) it can work, but how far off beam axis can it still see the emissions? Good radar with low sidelobes combined with lower power of airborne radars vs SAM radars and much smaller antenna than in HARM might mean you have to be quite close for sufficient signal strength. AWACS? It takes multiple seconds to make a full sweep, so refresh rate might be low and missile would have to rely heavily on interpolation and coasting between sweeps, also good luck getting that close. As far as standoff jammers go again the question is how far off beam axis are you. It just seems to me like an awful lot of effort and a lot of maybes when you can just make ARH seeker and have a missile that works and doesn't rely on target not being capable of TWS. Even RIM-116 has dual guidance even though it's theoretically best case scenario for passive radar seeker because anti-ship cruise missiles tend to fly more or less straight at their targets

@Marsvinet Didn't know that, thank you for that information

To target fighters that aren't heavily jamming?

There is no IR window that I can see, there is no mention of IR seeker in the brochure either which leads me to believe that this missile might not feature IR seeker

So it's against standoff jammers like Prowlers or Sparkvarks, not fighters. Makes sense considering it doesn't have IR for terminal guidance

@MiG21bisFishbedL The thing is Su-25 operated by Russia isn't the same aircraft we ask for, we're asking for basic Su-25, not modernized SMwhatever with HUD, glass cockpit and RWR that actually tells you anything useful. And since it was operated by countries that are now part of NATO access shouldn't be a problem.

Tbh it's crazy it hasn't been done yet. It's an older aircraft, on the simpler side, no MFDs whatsoever, gunsight instead of HUD, was used in multiple conflicts, had multiple operators including former Czechoslovakia. We could really use it, hopefully along with either Su-17/22 (allegedly in production) or Mig-23BN, Mig-27M or maybe even Mig-27K to cover all our mud moving needs. It would also fit quite well with FF Mig-29 9.12, too bad Mig-23 MLA is dead because of the financial issues

Yesterday I booted up the game using ST exe just to play with the missile and image quality was serviceable at 80 nm, didn't feel the need to play with image settings or anything. But it's like Napillo said, you need to study your target area, also you need be reasonable with target type choice (as in there probably are better choices if you want to kill a single technical or BTR). If you're using MT exe then no amount of messing with contrast and gain will help you, terrain simply isn't rendered. Fun fact, you can still see manually placed objects, vehicles, even aircraft, even if they shouldn't be visible because there is a mountain between missile and target area

@sylkhan He's probably still using ST version of DCS, terrain rendering bug is just in MT