Meteorlover

I've been engaged for a long time, a lot of times, using an aim-120 and I've noticed a strange phenomenon a few months ago After a particular patch *I don't know exactly when* As soon as the AIM-120 looks at the ground, it loses its target tracking or gives up tracking at all and falls to the ground. In most situations, there is a distance of more than 20,000 feet from the ground! It only needs a very 0.5 second or less BEAMING moment.Or not at all From what I've seen, the seeker on the AIM-120 doesn't filter out any ground clutter It doesn't head to the expected position, and there's a ferocious charge as if there's a target on the ground If you simply go down in a semicircle, you can avoid the missile And when this is combined with the DCS's notching decision In almost every situation, you can crash a missile into the ground Even if the target and missile are less than 3nm away If you place the M mark on the RWR in the direction of 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock, most of them will not be hit. Missiles without AIM-120 logic appear to be relatively less prone to this phenomenon. 8/3 8.3.mp4 9/7 9/7 here is TRACK 8/3 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KDK1qNTB7fS-1NwsBpR7mXtRfh7fumJp/view?usp=drive_link 9/7 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U0OzoZ3yfEprHYG3oQZFU5CI4xOLsG2c/view?usp=drive_link 9/12 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Oz5o84KLRPQsdqd3jQ7dg-osGS66RsFC/view?usp=drive_link THANK YOU

The release of the F-4 has been postponed officially and Eurofighter seems to have been discontinued. When will they launch the F-4 and start developing the Eurofighter?

Will AIM54C be activated in 10NM regardless of target size?

Isn't the guidance of all missiles improved in this patch? Does AIM-120 and AIM-54 use different APIs after patching? There seems to be no section where AIM-54 is more effective than AIM-120 when tested under all the current version conditions.The AIM-120 is also much more powerful over long distances (40NM). Is there nothing in reality that the AIM-54 can benefit from? At long distances, I thought the AIM-54 would be better, but it's a huge shock. After the AIM-120 patch, the performance gap of AIM-54 seems to have widened Is there an effective way to use the AIM-54?and Will there be any performance improvements?

Lower loft angle with booster nerf patch

All right. I hope it's a simple problem. this patch, the nozzle exit area of SD-10 has been modified, so will the nozzle exit area of all missiles of DCS be modified? Is this patch part of the missile's transition to a new schema?

After the last patch, I saw the missile go on a long journey around 360 degrees when it was lost lock This is happening 100 percent Are you aware of this problem? If you need a video, I can submit it

I know for sure that you guys base the performance of the AIM54C-MK47 on NASA testing. But what about MK60? I think the current MK60 is a meaningless variation, but can AIM54C-MK60 also present the same data as NASA simulation results? I wonder what kind of data the performance of the existing MK60 is based on, and what kind of data is based on the performance of the MK60 (tactically meaningless) based on the new data. Because HB doesn't seem to make anything without data. Therefore, I wonder why I judged that the new data among the existing and new data is much more reliable. I think I want to see it Like a NASA simulation. I don't think it means much, but it's obviously impossible for AIM54 to reach Mach 5, so I wonder why the maximum speed is known as Mach 5 I think the conventional wisdom that AIM54C has an improved motor and range in the scent is also wrong

No one is currently using Phoenix, so report to HB

That's because Phoenix received nerf.that lost 30 percent of its thrust in this patch. Do not use over 10 miles based on PVP 발음듣기 This may be because HB has been patching NASA's data on an absolute basis earlier this year.There are both good and bad sections.

Oh, I got a different answer than I expected. HB also said that the notching of DCS was heavily exaggerated, so he thought it was a 100 percent probability. Because the pilots and the people on the radar said it was too exaggerated, and I really sympathized with HB at the time I don't think there should be no notching because it's a concept that exists Because I've seen countless times that the missile just before the enemy's impact (probably 3 seconds or less) accidentally or intentionally at a 90° angle, the missile skimmed right in front of the enemy's nose and the proximity fuse also didn't work.It's not like we've done more than 100 experiments and got a 100% result I think reach 80 per cent. One of the things I've experienced recently is My Phoenix was tracking enemy planes flying low at higher altitudes than enemy planes. The moment the enemy plane and Phoenix were perpendicular, they crashed like a stone, lost the enemy plane for a while, and then they started tracking it again.The enemy plane, of course, was not at rest, so I had a question about this. (I have a tacview because it is a recent experience) In addition to that, I want to be sure about the nearest Proximity Fuze. It's common to all missiles, but I've experienced no close-up detonation at 36 feet. Because I thought Phoenix's warheads could do enough damage.Although most of the games know that missiles have a close-up of 7 (probably 7m) In addition, the operation of the Proximity Fuze is a laser or radar, and if it moves away from the minimum proximity to the enemy plane, it is known to immediately detonate it to cause as much damage as possible. We know that the mechanism mentioned above is impossible because the script does not exist.However, I think the operating range of the Proximity Fuze is too narrow. What do you think of this? Also, I understand that the C type warhead has improved I hope I'm not bothering you too much.

That's very good news I commend ED and HB for their efforts and hard work I think I can wait longer. To be honest, I thought the ED was not interested in this issue. How about notching? At 90°, 100 percent of radar failure seems very artificial, especially when it comes to missiles Are you working on this as well? 번역 저장

i used default.but write by smartphone.

I understand. I apologize for using an overly emotional and strong tone. Then may I ask a question? It's not just an AIM-54 phenomenon's Missile left or right or up and down even though the target is nearby. Or even lose all your energy while rolling(Even though it was a hit if it was guided normally) I've still seen a lot of that. It doesn't matter if it's a real missile's phenomenon, but I always think it's close to a script "error."Is this a problem with the API or is it possible to modify the anonymous script? Or there's no problem? I want to hear your thoughts It's a pure question that I've thought about for a long time.

Don't be too conceited. We know that everything about DCS is stacked on top of LOMAC's old, unrealistic script, and that certain missiles are excessively stupid and certain missiles remain unchanged with untested performance. The same goes for unrealistic notching In other words, most of them are ED's fault But if a particular person wins a long debate and accepts it and creates something that affects everyone, then the rationale and the process of judgment must be clarified That's the basic.