St4RgAz3R
-
Posts
54 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by St4RgAz3R
-
-
Did this make it in to today's patch? 9L said it was fixed internally and would come in to the next patch. Can't see it in the patch notes though.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Tholozor said:
Is it similar as to what's been described here?
Yes , i didn't see that post existed.. I see it was reported back in july 2022! Still no fix. @Hobel got it right. That's exactly what i recorded on my track too. Only flight members seem to get affected. On other flights the octagon stays on them all the time.
-
When designating a PDLT flight member through the HSD , the octagon that appears through the JHMCS starts to drift and lag behind the contact. That is only for flight members though. When you designate a member of a different flight , the octagon seems to stay right on that member and doesn't drift like when it's a flight member. Also it seems to be affected by distance, speed an movement. Which behavior is correct? Track attached
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:
But I applaud the approach they took and I wish ED would follow suit: start with an early ‘90s version first and then add in the shiny toys while allowing people the choice which era they wish to represent through Special Options.
I sure applaud it too. I wish more developers do like aerges did, and brought 3 variants of the same jet and now will deliver the 4th more modern one. It would be great in the f-15c too, to have both versions earlier and later and let the people decide what they want. But if that's not possible from ED's side i would surely like to have the more functionality of the newer version. People could still fly the flaming cliffs version if they like, it won't go away.
-
4
-
-
2 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:
Funny that you mention that: the Strike Eagle we have now is an early ‘90s version with some half-baked JDAM functionality slapped on.
This is due to the unfortunate events we all know. It was intented during development to get jhmcs , aim9x, sniper pod ,link 16 SIT page and many other modern stuff. And if there is no resolution and development sadly comes to a stop it would make even more sense for the C model to get this stuff in order to fill the gap left by the E
-
1
-
-
Personally i am glad they are making the newer one with all the bells and whistles like link 16, jhmcs, aim 9x . It's better to have them than not at all. If you don't want them, don't use them. If they made the earlier version it would be just like making the same flaming cliffs one with clickable buttons. Not a lot of people would be interested i think. Even the tomcat would be more modern now with the B(U) version coming. And it fits a lot better with the jets we have right now like the 16 and 18 and the strike eagle as well. The ideal would be to have a wider timeline that includes both phases but i don't know if ED is willing to spend so much time developing this.
-
1
-
-
A little worrying that the A-7 was not shown at all in the 2025 video. Maybe it's too far beyond than beyond still yet..
-
9
-
-
Is it gonna be this hour mark?? The suspense is building up..
-
1
-
-
Seeing the progress made in the coming mig29A, i would certainly ask for a full fidelity F15C built from scratch as well, surely not a remastered FC one , especially now that the F-15E seems abandoned and it's future unclear. I don't know if there any limitations in documentation etc but ED should really think about it seriously. I know a lot of people would want this. Maybe it is already planned and we'll have a hint in the 2025 and beyond video.. who knows.. fingers crossed!
-
3
-
-
As a result of this you neither can use the A-G radar modes when in A-G master mode because the radar defaults to AGR
-
On 3/18/2024 at 5:38 AM, RyanR said:
Try being in "PRE" mode for Mavericks (not VIS), or not "CCIP" for bombs.
For bombs, in CCIP, the FCR is "slaved" for calculating the impact point, so you can't use the FCR then. Change to CCRP, and the GM should come right up.
-Ryan
This is true but when you heve no air to ground weapons and you go into A-G mode the FCR defaults to AGR and the SMS page in ccip where you can't change it to ccrp because you have no weapons and so the FCR can't be changed to GM or other ground radar modes. Is this limitation in IRL too because it seems odd that you can't use the ground radar in A-G mode and can only in NAV
-
I tested to see how the lock behaves when switching from MRM mode or NAV to dogfight mode and although now there is no relock and the transition happens seamlessly, when you try to manoeuvre the aircraft the lock gets stuck in a fixed position in the HUD and then drops. If you get a lock from an acm mode from dogfight mode itself it retains the lock as usual even if you manoeuvre the aircraft. It seems to happen only when you have an STT lock and transition from MRM or NAV to Dogfight mode.
-
4
-
-
I can confirm this too , binding the NAV FLIR LEVEL and GAIN does nothing. Also the VIDEO HUD CONTRAST is bugged when bound with the +10% -10% bind. It does some weird things like turning the HUD brightness all the way down so you have no symblology. If bound to an axis it works although i get some random flashes in the screen.
-
15 hours ago, Skyhammer said:
I don´t know it seems odd that that the SAMs just fly close right by the MLRS rocket but didn't explode...they should have proximity fuses
yes you are absolutely right. I took some screenshots of how close the missile comes to the rocket and still it doesn't explode. The proximity fuze just isn't working on rockets. Just look at the pictures
-
3
-
-
17 minutes ago, Skyhammer said:
i reported the same but thre was no reaction to that ..and btw the 300mm at 45.000 ft are faster with ~1.9 Mach than the Uragan 220mm at the same altitude with 1.5Mach
So you think it's a bug? 1.9 mach is still slow compared to a HARM which can go about 3 mach and is half the size of a 300mm rocket. So it's easier for the SAM to intercept it one would think but no.. SAMs intercept the HARM missiles and can't intercept the rockets
-
So i 've tried with all the avaiable SAMs that are in game to intercept rockets of various sizes 300mm, 220mm etc from MLRSs with no luck. Most SAMs can't even track the rockets. Some like patriot , nasams , s300 and sa-15 can track but while they fire upon them they can't seem to hit anything. It's like watching stormtroopers firing..
all those missiles in the air and nothing hits. I don't know if they can't hit IRL as well but i would expect, at least those big 300mm rockets which are not too fast either, to be intercepted.
Any thoughts on this?
-
1
-
-
I get this too. If you get locked once the RWR is still beeping even when there is no threat anymore. Is there a way to reset it? only way for beeping to go away is to turn it off and on again
-
1
-
-
Sometimes when you get a lock with the radar in an auto acq mode such as super search or vertical scan, once you lose the lock you cannot go back in those modes with auto acq forward or aft. Instead the radar still believes it has an STT lock and pressing auto acq forward or aft goes in TWS mode or high data rate scan 3HDT. Only way to get back on the modes is to press auto acq down to go back to search and then auto acq forward or aft to get back in the acm modes.
-
When getting a lock with the radar having selected an aim9-p or j the missile is not slaved on the radar and doesn't give tone. The missile still looks on boresight despite being uncaged or not. Also the circle of the aim9's seeker is missing. The m and l variants seem to operate normally
-
1
-
-
Hey guys here are some graphs with STR and ITR from some tests i did. I made the tests in game and recorded the data from tacview.
All jets are clean no pylons with 2000 lbs of fuel and are flying at 1000 feet MSL.
I don't know how accurate they are but it seems to me that the f16 is losing by both f18 and m2000c both STR and ITR at all speeds
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, Spartan111sqn said:
Forget the comparison with hornet.
The key is that it is underperfoming versus the real Viper. The thrust, the drag, there is something not matching with the real one.
I don't think it's so far off from being close to the real one as diagrams and charts show. Maybe some excessive drag when you are in a A/A loadout or having stores in general. But i really think that the viper is being bottlenecked by the g effects of the pilot. At speeds where it starts to shine the pilot just can't keep up not letting it reach it's full potential. That's why we see youtubers dominate in the f16 dogfights with g effects off, i don't think they would do so good if they had them on. Maybe as others said ED could customize g effects suited to each aircraft accordingly taking in account g suits , seating position, or even pilots themselves in more demanding aircraft should have better g tolerances as it would be required IRL to be qualified to fly them.
-
2
-
-
26 minutes ago, Gungho said:
Best rate fighter My butt. Im constantly getting outrated by the f18. Doesn't matter what speed i hold or how i manage energy.
Same here . Holding anything below 420 knots at ground level the f18 will outrate you. Only when you hold about 430-440 knots you actually can outrate it but the pilot of the f16 will blackout in a matter of seconds
-
2
-
-
On 3/23/2023 at 10:34 AM, draconus said:
It is specifically for the free Su-25T version, not FC3 Su-25(A).
oh yes it's in the dcs core features section. Got it, thanks
-
18 hours ago, draconus said:
Already reported.
Thank you , i didn't notice there was a bug forum section for the whole flaming cliffs pack
AN/AAQ-33 Advanced Targeting Pod Discussion
in DCS: F-16C Viper
Posted
Does anybody know if the new sniper pod will have new flight and drag characteristics? As it is a lot more aerodynamic in shape and a bit lighter from the litening one i think. It would make sense to add less drag when equiped in relation to the litening