hotrod525

Yeah i side with you on that, releasing it to Youtubers while we are all waiting is... bad PR to me. Hype is already super high and most people who where going to buy it already did.

oh... that's why.. Thanks!

Had several uncommanded roll, those are quite, surprising ? to say the least haha!

If you lase and store a target, aircraft keep a 8 digit grid. So unless the system provide a 10 or 12 digit grid to the missile, i can hardly see how me reading a map and telling the missile to go to 12 A BC 1234 5678 is in anyway different from the TADS telling the missile the exact same thing. Regarding the INU's drift and GPS spoofing, laser would only provide a bearing and range wich may differ from what we would got in the other systems, i give you that. But i still dont get why one would make the other "impossible". MMWR range is roughtly 2500m (according to WAGS in the video, this most likely not reflect real life as many things move around IRL compare to what DCS-coded-sensor "pick up" as "something". ) lasing a target a 7500m would still not allow the MMWR to pickup, no ? Or it is that "active ID" is only to not lob missiles for the "sake of it" <<hoping>> it dosent pick up any civilian truck ? Cause technicly, as you throw something that can pick-up, lock and destroy on its own, that's a risk in urban / crowded envrionement, being it in 1994 or 2023. PS : This is not on an arguing tone, it is more on the "i clearly dont get it" one.

Then what ? i mean, the laser can only provide an accurate grid, just like a map would, aircraft already know where it is. Any more "in depth info" ?

Yeah, i'm also curious to know if we can lob missile at acq point behind cover, i guess we will be able. As i understand the video, the lasing only provide a "location to fly to" to the missile memory. I guess that IRL there is alot more involve, but DCS wise, i suspect the missile will automactly engage any vehicle IVO the acq on its own. Real issue is missile might all engage the same vehicle if your attacking a group at a said "acq".

Apparently some people did a paper on that in 2004, i havent read the entire thing but there is some info to dug in. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Aspects-of-NCTR-for-Near-Future-Radar-Miller-Shephard/b2246e004326f8065268e1a57d0f4a267f5b00c2

was woundering the same, i guess we can call this a "Fake News" lol ! (Its a joke.)

Anyone tested the 900 sec fuze ? 15 mins it's a looong time

Well, to your dislike, their wont be any for F15E.

Yeah "Release Date"... Unannounced release make way better results. Having dead-line only to have a community in rage when you miss or if the product is not up to their expectation is bad. Putting pressure wont change a thing. I dont expect Razbam to go "Well, since we had exactly 381956 date request, we met the counter here is the date". Once people got the module, then what ? they rush to download, they play few hours, three days later they are woundering when they'll play the Chinook ? Or whatever module ? And start asking "what the release date !" all over again ?

The F15E is in internal testing/debugging (As i understood from Feb 17th newsletter), we now have MT, F15E is litteraly around the corner.

Yeah well some of them need to learn that "in real life, mom and dad aint paying or plugging your stuff anymore" Anyway. OP talk about "how a free plane would bring more player". Base on my "humble experience", i learn about DCS in 2009, i was already familiar with LOCK ON but what bring me in is the A10C, wich wasnt free. I know many people who got in for a "said paid modules", they never even put a single SU25T in ME, ever. To me, what bring people to DCS is capability; - ED had a huge push on WW2, to bring a new breed of pilots... I think they are competing against another sim in that matter, - ED made F16, pretty much for the same reasons, wich bring no special capability, - ED made the F18, wich was a ground-breaking endevour for them, coding alot of new stuff into DCS (AG Radar, independant engine sim, etc.) the most eargly awaited module ever. - ED made the AH64D, wich was along the F18C, the most eargly requested module.... - ED remake core features, being EDGE or Clouds, and all those things in the background that arent eye-candy but play major role in the enjoyment of the sim. - ED / 3rd party made more "RedFOR" full fidelity modules, List goes on and on. Those things, bring people in. Having a free game with a free plane on a keyboard and mouse, with a learning curse even worst than a russian hardcore survival tactical RPG, wont.

There is the trial and there is tons of epicly done mods that are on par with paid modules. Anyway, enjoying DCS is "not a free thing" even if the game itself can be download for free. You neet a stick, a throttle, rudders, trackIR, etc...

I highly doubt all-aspect NCTR exist, may be for AESA radar but otherwise, from what i know the radar need to see the inlets to recognise their noise.

Pre-Order in October was already a push back... Anyway, no it's not a "Year" but Eagle Dynamics and some third party developper are well known to miss their mark. I dont blame them, im not a game programmer etc. But still, sometime it leave a bad taste. Would it be Apache delay, Hornet (i start playing DCS in 2009, and already then F18 was talked about), Super Carrier, Kiowa, etc. It take alot of time, and i get it, but half-baked answer like "we are missing promo stuff" or "we are sorry to push it back, once again" simply dosent help either.

My friend, let me introduce you to the AH64D by Eagle Dynamics...

Selectable loadout in the mission editor just like some Tanks / IFV got now would be awesome for ships, as you would be able to select how many of wich type you want to carry. Would reduce the overall size of the mod. I have absolutely no idea if it's feasable thought'. Any sitrep on 2D radar screen for Ships ? IMHO we are asking too much...

did they made a different 3D model or simply use the Litenin II and say "its a G4" ?

@currenthill i dont know if it have been report, excuse me if so. But the Type 45 right side CIWS is offset.

Well, the ordnance itself is in the game since.. a while... i cant remember how many months, but it's in the "atleast 5 month" ball-park as i pass throught encyclopedia pretty much every patch. So "that" plus the fact that ED is weapon master now in DCS, after all AGM130 is basicly a Walleye with more range and a different pod. I'm optimistic let's say that. Also, those are LJDAM GBU-54... i looked at the trailer in 4K for long minutes, and we can see the black laser-seaker at the tip of the bomb. *breath heavily* hYpE iS rEaL!

Hopefully AGM130 make it at release, we saw the bomb and the pod several time in trailers... hopefully in two weeks'

This is probably why we got 3 or 4 different circa for the F15E, because its "super duper dream". Same would apply to the F1 variants... Let's not even talk about Black Shark 3 Frenkeinchopper. I agree with Foggle, asking for antique only for the sake of it, is honestly not cool and will turn away alot of potential sell. Wich Razbam does need. Most downloaded mods have all something in common : modern era, modern things. Most selled module are also those of modern circa. Of course, "old is nice" but it dosent generate as much revenue.

If MAV was Lock, the cross would be full, it is definitly tracking my radar brick, just go try it yourself.

That is not true. Maverick seeker will slave and follow GMT radar lock. Just like the seeker will indeed follow TGP, i just tried it and i've record an instant replay, i'll post the link once YT is done.