Azrayen

Yeah, flight model is a bit over-sensitive in some areas. I'm sure the top-guys who made such a nice module will be able to tune it better soon :) ++ Az'

What about making your own measures? I guess with a properly framed screenshot or, even easier, with the VTB viewport feature...

Bonjour, L'AWACS ne te donne pas d'instructions mais t'informe sur la situation tactique, ou picture. C'est toi qui prends les décisions. https://translate.google.fr/?hl=fr&tab=wT#en/fr/to%20merge Il t'indique donc que, vu de son écran radar, tu es fusionné avec le contact indiqué : vous êtes en combat rapproché, débrouillez-vous. ++

Yes :) OK, then the video is wrong, this is not the correct procedure (as you said). I'm at work, didn't review the video. ;)

I didn't review the video but: - you have to ask for engine start (if you want to play it right) :) - radios work without engine running: -- UHF on GPU (AC power from the AC QRA bus) (buggy for now, this is known) -- V/UHF on battery (DC power from the DC main bus) Refer to updated manual for the bus shematics.

No idea. But I've logged (internally) several issue re: jamming display. In my mind it's still WIP. So perhaps best to wait a bit before drawing conclusions ;)

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1221006&postcount=8

Well, Mig-29As have no jammer.

I wonder how do you know you appear on their radar. I mean, you can't see their radar display, so what is it that makes you say that? RWR => wrong idea AI reaction (flight path) => maybe, but could be linked to your radar being detected by their RWR, so AI reaction valid only if your own radar is off. As it happens, I recently made several "max detection distance" tests. For the F-15C, following figures come up (head-on, iso-altitude 8000m ~FL250, HPRF scan): [TABLE]Target:|B-52|Tu-22|F-15|MiG-29|F-16 Detection at (nm):|134|118|63|63|59[/TABLE]

Seriously, it's the intercept angle.

Hello Yes. Bug ;) Speed limit (in km/h) on highways in France. :smartass: Sky police... :megalol: (joking) ++ Az'

Then you missed my point :) I'm perfectly aware (and totally confortable) with the fact that - you're absolutely right on that - no effort was made to change the Frogfoot. But ECM is not a "self-centric" system. By nature it works in relation with other radars, and other aircraft have other radars. So if you want "massive" change to ECM, that must apply to all aircraft because it's a "shared" thing. And I don't think the comparison you make is fully relevant, because A-10C don't fight Frogfoot (nor other aircraft). M-2000C does. I would add that A-10C ECM is not better than the other ones (it just looks more advanced, but to no specific effect so just eye-candy). They make a Harrier next. So, soon I guess ;)

Oh, already implemented! :) Good one, spiddx, forgot it.

Simply by looking where the + is displayed on the HUD. For numeric value, we'll have to wait for the INS (and no 10nm limitation here).

OK no worries then :)

OK this is one of the (current) issues. It's not meant to remain like that. WIP stuff and so on ;)

Oh, sorry, didn't saw your edit before posting (I begun writing my answer before going to lunch, and posted it only when I came back...):doh: I assume you were able to reproduce the issue? If yes, why not save & post a short track showing the problem, along with timings+explanations (e.g. "at time 12:02:18, I press the lock button but nothing happens"). That way we could look at it (or Razbam could, if need be). ++ Az'

@ Meiz: when I wrote "I don't have this exact issue", I meant on 1.5.3. @ Rlaxoxo: not sure what you mean... when you lock a contact, your antenna centers on it (and it sounds logical that it will then follow the contact if you and/or it maneuvers); so I guess the answer is "no".

Way too complicated ;) 1. is not modelized for now (I hope it will be possible), even without the PCM feature that is not possible in DCS 2. one switch is enough for ECM => http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2696349&postcount=4 3. useful, but no relation with ECM [nitpick]A-10C is not a FC3 aircraft[/nitpick] And more importantly, those profiles are "just" displays for the pilot. Nothing changes regarding the simulation itself, it's still the same basic music on/music off underneath. Rest assured that the current implementation choice is not undermodelling in the sense that you don't deprive the M-2000 of an advantage for the sake of balance (nor the other way around FWIW). Plus, those choices are not in the hands of Razbam. They can't change the way other aircraft react to M-2000 ECM. They can just change the way M-2000 (radar) will react to other aircraft ECM (and that's a topic they are working on just now, as shown in last patch notes). Finally, balance is not evil, I wouldn't discard it "by default". I certainly don't mean we should "sacrifice all" for balance, but on the other hand if we have too many undermodeled systems vs overmodeled systems we'll not have any fun anymore flying together => bad policy for all, community/customers and editors. I'm happy ED retain some sort of "quality control" for the various modules, so that we don't have a FS-like environnement (because in DCS we fly against each other and not just side by side). ++ Az'

Well I don't have this exact issue. So probably something you didn't notice explains why you loose contacts. But it would require more details (screenshots before/after, track or ACMI) to nail it ;)

Hi Perhaps with PID lock; I didn't had time to try to reproduce in this mode, but that's my feeling. On the other hand, I made extensive radar tests this past week end and have no issue with "dumb" targets in both RWS (Scan) mode and PIC lock mode. Given what you said it's probably not helpful to try to get around this (or to explain) just now. I suggest waiting a bit more (1 or 2 updates? I hope) for the biggest radar issues to be sorted out by Razbam's guys; then it will be easier to answer you :) Please do understand I don't mean to be "mean" or "harsh" at all, Meiz, it's just that I feel that in its current (WIP) status, the M-2000C is just a bit "too much" for beginners to use to understand how things should work (because, as a WIP module, they don't always work as intended ;)) Nevertheless, enjoy the module & the flying while the bugs are ironed out :) ++ Az'

House shown if: - airborne - in nav mode - d to wpt > 10nm (else house replaced by little cross at wpt posit/alt)

:D

40 kts. 46 mph if you wanna.

During your (or the contact's) maneuver, the elevation auto-follow feature (which is buggy) came into play; when you broke lock, elevation was wrong; you didn't notice; so you radar continued to scan very high or very low, where no contact was. - wait for a fix - and while doing that, map the elevation reset-to-center control on your joystick. Very useful those days...