ring_H₃PO₄

You can see the approximate location in this image. It is difficult to confirm if there is no markings in this area. Also, the Dynamic Board Number is not affected because it does not overlap this location.

I am sure many skin makers and others are aware of this, but it is possible that ED has not yet fixed this or that no one has reported it. Along with the Dynamic Board Number specification change around April, several problems appeared with Hornet's Texture. The first is the disturbance of the UV in the nose section. The first image from a texture file, and the second is the actual display on the model. There are unnanullturnullal stretching and chippnulling, and there is a limit to what the user can do about this. The second is the distortion of the upper left vertical tail, as shown in the third and fourth images. Since the distortion is also displayed in the default skin, there is no way for the user to counteract it. It is acceptable that some unforeseen errors may occur with specification changes. However, the lack of any advance notice or patch notes for the Dynamic Board Number specification change, which has forced many users to edit their skins, and the failure to fix a small but potentially fixable problem like this one, are highly questionable. If the developer plans to make major changes to the model or textures in the immediate future, we expect them to give us a heads up, and if not, to fix the problem. PS: I wasn't sure if I should post this in Bugs and Problems or DCS Modding, Liveries/Skinning, so please move it if necessary.

The one in the in-game screenshot is an AIM-120C-5. The one in the real-life photo cannot be determined, but the shape of the front and rear wings and the two rocket motor markings suggest it is one of the CATM-120C. I forgot to mention that the position of the missile fixing hooks and umbilical cable connection shows that it is a mistake. The first image shows the connector position according to the manual and the approximately correct front-back position, while the second compares it to the incorrect position (i.e., the current connection position).

Comparing the actual photos with the screenshots, I noticed that the AMRAAM mounting positions on Sta. 4 and 6 appear to be shifted forward. The first photo is the real one and the second is the DCS screenshot. It seems to have little impact on the gameplay, but the correction makes the aircraft look more realistic.