Weta43

There are already some published if you use the search function

LOS calcs for targets would be quite an effort (& what if it's only half obscured by a tree ?). - A mask that turns the labels off when the object is occluded by the cockpit would be much easier.

Oh - I'd definitely rather have a tired leg than be dead in a burning pile of wreckage or sitting in a prison cell... :)

While the bug's in OB - they're not updates, they're just finishing the product. If you buy a product that is sold as feature complete, and you get an update - it's free. Bought the Ka-50 when it came out ? You paid for the original product. Any improvements you get after that without paying extra - are free. Updated cockpit for a product you bought 10 years ago - it's a gift. When TWS arrives for the bug - it's not free, you paid up front.

I read that thread - it seemed to make sense. Anyone with some relevant actual experience in a position to contradict this ? If not, shall we stop complaining about it ?

Cramp in your thigh from fighting with the rudder ???

Even if they just masked it from the standard viewpoint for each aircraft, and didn't calculate in real time that would be a start... Seems such an obvious thing to have as an option too.

Pretty sure nineline said all AI, but the effect was more obvious on WWII aircraft. See also: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=252283 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=252357

;) It's not possible for something to be "(…) mostly non-existent in reality" Things either exist - or they don't... Things can be common or rare, but to be either of those things they have to actually exist. The single instance of a Russian carrier that exists in reality is in the game. Remember though that the Chines also have one refurbished Russian carrier in service (the Liaoning), and 2 more on the same pattern on the way - all flying J-15 reversed engineered Su33, so the current Kuz / Su-33 combo stands as a prototype for 4 similar classed vessels & airwings. That's as many for the type as were built of the Forrestal class carriers.

So True !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe because there is no capricious weather god in DCS. In the real worl, the weather gods control the weather, and can cause unexpected conditions. Every mission that the AI fly in in DCS has been made by a user, and the weather conditions are set by the maker, and they're just relying on users being sensible and not telling the AI to take off or land with 100 km/h crosswinds ?

He said he didn't mean to offend and apologised - seems everything he can do for now...

I suggested a while back that they implement an 'anti-torch' so that you could put it over something that you wanted to remove the glare from.

Guess it depends how many of the target pod and FM programmers were working on the carrier FM and target pod

...OK - joke went over my head...

More likely to get replies - and be seen - if you put the wish for a AH-64 in the general wish-list, not in the Ka-50 thread.

Would you insult him like that to his face ?

IMO - if they're doing it for the F/A-18 or F-16, maybe they'll port it over. Can't see them putting that much time and effort in to develop that system for the Ka-50 only to replace a functioning system on a legacy module. maybe be careful what you wish for too.

Nice find. Interesting points in the conclusion: The returns from the hub fell below the clutter filter @ 200 KHz. (Only) the front edge of the main rotor was visible with a doppler frequency consistent with its diameter Both the positive and negative doppler frequencies of the tail rotor were visible only at several aspect angles. - but also worth noting that the radar used was @ 95GHz (as you said, mm wavelength - guessing ~ 3mm ?), while the AN/APG-65 radar family (F-18 / F-15E) run at 8 - 12 GHz (2.5 cm -3.75 cm ) so the results might not be directly applicable... *

...But you just made that "tiny dev team" sh*t up - you have absolutely no idea how many people are working on the Hornet at any given time, where the bottlenecks are, and/or the expected timeframe for development. I'll give you that if E.D. were more forthcoming then people wouldn't have to make up fantasy schedules, air them, then get everyone pessimistic about the dates pulled out of people's buts, but really - your statement is based only on you own imagination.

Which podcast did Wags say they'd crippled their modern aircraft ?

Seems maybe you haven't read all the thread...

Yes, I agree. I've suggested a few times over the years that they make the vehicles capable of their FARP/airfield actions independent, and make the mobile ATC vehicle an actual mobile ATC - even if it only gives range and bearing to a user defined approach point, range and bearing to vehicle and a cleared for visual when within some range. (though if you defined a touchdown point, and an approach vector, the ATC could calculate an inbound point for both players and AI...) Then you could set up FOBs for both fixed and rotary wings on roads, and/or grass fields etc

LoL - Yes, So true - $74,162,069,457,304 certainly outclasses anything the USSR did by an order of magnitude :) https://usdebtclock.org/

I know - it's crazy how they seem to prioritise keeping their business solvent over providing free content. I just don't understand their logic at all. !