RyanR

Phew. I thought I was nuts for seeing this before... and then it changed. Thanks for setting the record straight! -Ryan

Very strange. It's like the changelog.... changed..... in the last few hours. I swear it said there was an optional "auto" boresight, with the word "OPTION" next to it. Now it simply says:"Added Maverick and HMCS Auto-Boresight, automatic for hot starts. Cold starts require manual boresight". This latter is just fine. Aligning the HMCS is fun, quick, and interesting..... and it's one more thing you can do while the INS is finishing up. I got used to manual bore-sighting. Get it close on the ground, and then it's real quick in the air. -Ryan

According to the release notes for today's update, we should have working in-flight Maverick boresighting now, as well as the option to auto-boresight. Gotta test it out. -Ryan

All of the Maverick threads seem to merge. The current problem (an actual problem) is not the same problem (me, user error) that started this thread. Any word if we'll get a fix with the next update? Supposedly, that should be tomorrow, if the F-4E whining is anything to go by. -Ryan

Interestingly, "LOW" popped up again for a JDAM. Cycling through the A-G weapons made it disappear when I got back to the JDAM's. Could well be an INS-improvement related issue. -Ryan

Thanks for the explanation. That image is the one I had in my head. The whole system is fascinating in how it works in concert. -Ryan

Yup! But you have to be in GM/GMT to get the CZ. So if you CZ one sensor, all the sensors are "zeroed" out? -Ryan

I think this is correct behavior per one of the manuals. It'll correct a navigational offset. I noticed the sensor "mark" on the HSD is offset from the steerpoint until you Cursor Zero, at which point, the sensors will snap back to the steerpoint. Question I've had: is there a "master" way to clear the offsets/SPI's from NAV master mode without having to pop into A-G mode to CZ a sensor? Just to clear out all of the confusion one puts into the system during a flight. -Ryan

Does the HARM pod help with "post-fire accuracy" at all?.... or is it just that you're closer? When using the HTS, the HUD symbology seems really "optimistic" about the HARM hitting anything. Even with a steerpoint, you can often see that the specific radar isn't "on", and if is is on, it might as well be anywhere at PGM5. -Ryan

Yeah.... I've found it fidgety, too. You need to TMS-right once to upgrade them to system targets, and then a second right to bug one and cycle between them. A problem is that the first TMS-right "spotlights" the radar azimuth. So anything on the radar outside of the lines can't be bugged with the extra TMS-right. Also, the all the targets need to be within the radar's elevation. In short, this means that all the targets you want to cycle through need to be in a relatively narrow radar beam. Then you add jamming in, and it gets trickier. There very well could be a problem/bug with the radar. There are at least a couple significant known radar bugs since the last update. I wouldn't be surprised if something else was going on. -Ryan

This is a well known bug from the most recent update. I got an email from telling me that we get a pilot in the next update. Nothing about fixing the mavericks. -Ryan

Are you just not able to cycle through the tracks with TMS right? -Ryan

Thanks guys! I thought that's what the "LOW" was referring to. Again, something was just sort of.... glitched...... as it said "LOW" the whole flight. There was definitely a ramp rearm.... and I was poking at a zillion different things out of sequence. In one mission (the first), I definitely did a re-do of the INS align. That, coupled with DCC which probably stopped DCS from clearing some cache, caused the problem to permeate through a few flights. I can't reproduce it. Gotta be a user/mod problem. I'd just never seen the "LOW" symbology before. -Ryan

I played 2-3 quick figuring-stuff-out missions, and for some reason the word "Low" came up next to the flight path marker on the HUD in A-G master mode. The Plane was cold started with four 500lb JDAM's on it. Targeting pod was on the plane. I couldn't figure out what was "low". What might this mean? I can't reproduce it. I've done these DCC JDAM missions a zillion times without seeing it. Like an idiot, I cropped the image down to the HUD and saved over the original, so any other info is lost. The range caret just happens to be at the bottom of the DLZ in the screen grab. "Low" was there for the whole flight. On another note, I was too busy playing around in the cockpit to notice how beautiful the landscape was outside of the plane! Coming in to the landing pattern a little rain came through. DCS does weather quite well! Thanks! -Ryan

Wouldn't it be SOP for a real-life Viper driver to switch them all on? Maybe they just got out of a different production block? -Ryan

I thought the DL switch was indeed doing something despite the manual saying otherwise. -Ryan

The campaign is very good, I've been impressed with how the AI reacts to different scenarios over the radio. It would benefit from better maps to set the stage. I'm sitting here with the entire Syria map in Adobe Illustrator, slowly collating all of the bits (refueling, no-flies, and northern SAM sites) from the disconnected smaller maps in the briefings and SPINs. I finding it to be a very different picture then I'm getting from the descriptions. -Ryan

I read somewhere that disabling the auto flaps for certain maneuvers will help with energy retention. Dunno if there are nuances here. The F-5 was the second module I got. Not satisfying. It doesn't maneuver as much as it simply increases angle of attack. Back on subject, I found it easy to exploit the F-5's weaknesses with the F-16C. -Ryan

These missions are so much fun. I did tweak the guns-only air engagements to allow abbreviated labels. Usually, I only use dots, but I'm new to head tracking, and the gun engagements have been a great way to calibrate my real-life head to the in-game head. -Ryan

He ran out of gas well before I did, so I'm betting his fuel state was quite a bit lower. I've been really impressed with AI in DCS. Before the merge, the AI kept the plane perfectly at cornering speed, while I let my speed creep up past it. I was definitely making mistakes, and the AI was not. This thread has been very helpful. It's amazing how different guns-only ACM is with these planes compared to WWII prop fighters. A lot of similarities, but the differences are very different. I've been pulling lessons out of everyone's posts. Thanks! -Ryan

Here's a track. Totally reproduce-able: 3-bar TWS to RWS and you can just increase the number of bars all the way.... probably to infinity. radar issue 2.trk

All true..... but I've seen some weird tracks. In one example, I originally did a split-s, and fired a 9X at a bandit that got past us. In the track, the missile fired before the split-s. And I have a TRK file of it! Sigh... -Ryan

AI controlled F-16's are brilliant. They can pull 20 degrees/sec and not only sustain 450 knots..... they can still accelerate. -Ryan

The rub is that tracks seem to be broken. Each time I play a track back, I get a totally different result. The plane flies its route, but everything else that happens is like a different game. My favorite replay to date is when, in the replay, a SAM fired out of sync from the original, so my countermeasure and evasions (which originally worked) happened at the wrong time. The plane got hit in the replay.... but because it was a replay, this burning, broken, non-functioning F-16 *had* to keep flying. The game engine was trying to pull the plane out of the sky, but the track kept it in the air. -Ryan