hotrod525

I'd think that Closed Beta comes with a NDA to kinda prevent all of us being annoyed by the "1337 Ub3R U2Br" pavaning around... But as many mentions, the AH64D release have somewhat been frustrating, push back over push back. Yeah i get it, COVID etc, etc, etc. I dont blame ED, but kinda feel disappointed. #F18Memories...

Yeah ofcourse, many high-end IFV does have that capability, well in fact, even old one. The real issue here is the platform is not as heavy and stable as a tank so you easily hit the elevation (relative to gun depression versus the hull) limit as you go trough the terrain bumpin around. Specialy for wheeled combat vehicle and older the Gyro... worst is the drift. Anyway. #LetTryToNotGoTooMuchOffTopicBeforeBigNewWarnUs lol

Also, looking at the Gun video, TADS look somewhat stabilised when the X mark in the crosshair come's on'

This is like the essence of being an armor crewman lol ! I'll wait to get my hands on the module, but i honestly have doubt comparing a LAV 6 FCS and an AH64 FCS, will see.

On the tactical side, yeah. On the sighting side, i have doubt. Yeah the mechanic is the same, but i've never roll, pitch and bank at "such a significant level" while firing on the move. Only MBT have the FCS to fire on the move at 50 mph and yet that still a far cry from the 180 knots we are gonna fly at.

I spended alot of time inside IFV turret, so basicly a Stab with a drift compensator with Mk1 eyeball and Mk2 right hand as tracking method...

Hello folks, In the TADS part II video ,Wags talk about a "Linear motion compensator". IF i get this right, LMC is a sort of "TRIM" for the TADS, and he "life-hack-use-it" as a sort of "Tracking method", then he mention its not Ground Stab and so on. Ain't the TADS "a fully stabalise" and capable of autotracking (just like you would expect from any target acquisition and designation sensors aka TGP) ? Or is LMC the only way of tracking ?

Acheiving AAR in that Helo is a great challenge, it's a superb addition in DCS

Well, we just got an awesome BlackHawk mod that will fit nicely along too

Pfft, few months, that's rooky number, remember when they start talking about F18 in 2012 xD No matter what we do, we are stuck in the waiting line so let's take it easy on "Reassurance"

You basicly ask for FC3 - F15C and it's available right now... lol

As i use to say, an opinion is worth another. I'd go for CAPABILITIES insteads of "particular aircraft". A Drone module would be awesome, whatever the airframe choosen, same for Battlefield Surveillance plane (JSTARS alike), i must admit, im into ISR... a bit... EW / SIGINT plane or things like that. I know, EW stuff and ISR as a whole might be tricky ISTAR / Classed stuff, but we dont need to have classified information to simulate a Bombardier Global Jet flight characteristics and strap it a AG radar on top with a totaly arbitrary range decided by ED* base on open source information. This kind of stuff is somewhat missing in DCS IMHO, and must of it can be "well-educated-simulated" without ever getting close to any real informations / capability, DCS is a game after all, sensor show whatever Devs tell them to show in said parameters. Looking at LotATC i'd also guess that an AWACS module would also be an instant-hit. Same goes for a "simulacre of" Air Defense system, Ship born CIC, i mean even Combined Arms have great potential. It's call Digital COMBAT Simulator after all...

The Mod Creator should make a dedicated post and update the first message with the most recent link and so on... would help a bit... BTW is deep air PENETRATOR variant plan ?

Dont you guyz recall how long before release they started to talk about the F/A-18C and how many time it was "delay"

Well, this went down the drain quickly... Bottom line : Tunguska can and will engage you trought SACLOS method in DCS. It will only been brought to RWR "lock warning" if it use the guns and we are most likely to die to pretty nasty SHORAD - IADS in the DCS Apache.

Aint the Tunguska missile SACLOS ? Meaning their are optically guided

I can guarantee that DCS : AH-64D will not be "officially release" by the end of 2021. It will be early access as mentioned plenty of time and like it happen with basicly all DCS modules, but dont worry that module might break record sale for ED, they know this and they also know that they can't really afford a second disastrous release, this will in turn take time. Anyway, how long did you hopelessly hope they announce the Apache before they did ? 1 year ? 5 ? 10 ? Having to wait few more month now that is it coming is no big deal This only make it more enjoyable

I was asking for the DCS variant, doing some "expectation management". But once again, thanks you folks @DaemonPhobos

Fair enought. Thank you for providing "real intel" So it is somewhat assisted by computer and it will (?) not being able to use datalinks with other assets (IE, A10/F16/F18/etc..).

I may have been mislead by wrong information. According to "GlobalSecurityOrg" (wich is not "the best" nor "the worst" source) : "The Apache Block III (AB3) Modernization was an incremental integration of block modifications providing the capabilities for the Longbow Apache to transition to the Future Force (FF), to increase survivability, and reduce the logistics footprint. AB3 satisfies the updated Longbow Apache Capability Development Document (CDD) mandates for modernization. Among other items, the Block III upgrade includes an open system avionics architecture, the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS), fly-by-wire flight controls, a pure General Electric T700-GE-701D engine fleet [common with the UH-60], a new transmission, and composite rotor blades. Block III was to include a series of structural, propulsion, and avionics modifications to the helicopter. The fire-control radar on Longbow Block III was the same fire-control radar that Block I Comanche would have used. " https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/ah-64d-3.htm Anyway, i'd rather have a super-fency-fbw-uber-flying-computer than having a steam gauge Apache. Such a vintage would better fit a Cobra made out of the Huey variant we have in-game. An opinion is worthing another. I'm glad if my ignorance made you have a good laugh tough'

That's nice ! I'm a bit sad that we wont have JTRS or FBW but we still have an AH64D so, it's a very little bit of sadness lol. Thanks for the information. Can't wait for Wags to present us that baby.

If you rename them to something like 01_F/A-18C_Hornet_KS_Day_01, 02_F/A-18C_Hornet_KS_Day_02, it will work the way you want it. I personally use "1-" "2-" "3-" for my customs page and it work.

Well, we could go for some sort of educated guess. Water is know to absorb radar wave and it is know that satellite rely on that to scan huge water area since anything (well okay, may be not you're plastic Craftman fishing boat ;))that float would make a radar return. If we use this as a ref, we can clearly see all the radar dots in the water, so we could assume that the hornet radar would also as it is closer. It might not detect a ship in some coastal condition, but if there is enough surrounding water around the vehicle, it should pick it up like it would pick up a plane in a clear sky.

here is the track, but as i said before it is super easy to reproduce and i'm talking about user set train, not the generic one in the traffic, altought it would be nice if they were picked up too. AGRNotDetectingTrain.trk

Title is self explainatory, i dont feel like i need to upload a track as is quite easy repeatable. Setup a moving train and try to pick it up with AG radar