Creampie

wow

Also for some reason will track moving targets including helicopters.

What?

There are more "arcadish" things about DCS than not, but that's neither here nor there. I don't fly the MIG29; I don't care if something is adjusted on its RWR or not on a personal level. I do care for the experience of the users who are enjoying this video game and are massive enjoyers of the Fulcrum. It's sort of like a difficult setting, if you will. They want to have the clicky cockpit, the cool helmet, see the nice watch the pilot has, and the phenomenal textures they've put into the module. At the same time, they recognize it for what it is: a game. There being a "legacy" RWR isn't an absurd request or anything, probably not even a hard one (but I wouldn't know; I don't code anything). I appreciate and respect the desire to keep things as close to their intended design as possible. But there are too many examples of what is unrealistic with a lot of mechanics and modules to deem something like this as just out of the question. You are 100% right; there is an option for either, so I certainly see your point, but it tends to negate progression, which is the very last thing I personally want to see for future red of modules. I think it is safe to say a lot of us saw specifically this coming; Fulcrum enjoyers going back to the FC3 version after the new car smell wore off which seemed rather quick, honestly.

Thats a pretty small minded way of looking at this situation. At the end of the day it is a video game. Some people want to have that fidelity and little quirks the go along with it. But also want it to be practical for their gaming experience. It's just encouraging people to not buy it after all the hard work thats gone into making the module. "Red" modules need all the support they can have for the sake of having more of them. I respect the want of accuracy but at the same time understand it is a video game. There being basically something along the lines option wise of "FC3 like RWR" is nothing but a positive thing. Especially considering it could be changed then.

Seems this probably relates to ther other threads recently in this subforum about the R27. That's a lot of desync @BIGNEWY

If you have GPU scheduling turned on, Turn it off... It was causing me the same issues & once I turned it off it's been fine.

Suprised this hasn't been acknowledged yet. Surely it wouldn't be deemed as "working as intended" seem like a lot of desync? Maybe something else?

Just like the JF17, When Deka is ready to share, They will.

The missile will generate ground textures. At a certain distance (iirc 70nm) the ground textures disappear. If understood correctly, This is because of the host having such a far distance from the missile and is more of another problem rather than the missile. I am not sure if this is the same case with the SLAM-ER but I imagine at some distance it is. I don't want t specifically speak for him, But if this is what he is refering to I can get a track to show. I don't think it's weapon specific

Moving the TGP away from the initial SPOI and area tracking something else will deem the new location the TGP is looking at the SPOI. In order to go back to the original SPOI it should fix itself when switching between WPs while in NAV & switching back to the caged TGP. This can also be nullified by having the TGP in SP instead of SLAVE while slewing the TGP around. This is not a bug. This is replicating your SPOI on your HSD. Often times it won't designate an area track because of contrast, Adjusting that generally fixes the issue.

Why?

Thats at most of time very dependent on contrast. If you can't area track, 9/10 I bet you can with some contrast adjustments. Biggest problem is they took the weapon maintenance away from Deka. I am more than sure uboats and those guys would have it all working as intended by now.

Are you in the correct mode? Type 1, Jams on nails Type 2, Constantly jams I've experienced no issues with it.

Map

Are you using HNS? I've never had any issues with the glide bombs hitting anything... Pretty close to it

Is it possible to have your F10 preferences saved some time in the future? It saves for the time of the session but would be really cool if it always saved based on the options you have and don't have selected, View, map/alt/sat, weapon names etc

I just wish the floor would get fixed lol

Which is why I ran my tests on unlimted fuel, both with full internal and 51lb as the lowest possible rather than running until an empty state. Achieving that maximum ceiling in both enviroments to see what they are. Even with just 4x SD10s the top speed is 1.30-1.35 with a span of 220nm, depending on how many minutes after 1.30 you want to wait and test. (Again in an unlimited fuel state.) and roughly the 1.15 as demonstrated by you in a more viable situation. I understand why one gets to its ceiling faster than the other generally speaking. But not when a payload is signigantly lighter and according to LUA represents 45% of another ones drag. I could certainly see if we had been talking ceilings of maybe 5 or 6% but can't expect there to only be a 15% decrease in the ceiling of a payload with over twice the drag in the same distance. We're talking about 4x SD10s here and 2 pylons vs 2 extremely large cluster bombs 2x SD10s & 2x PL-5s. Does mass somehow have a play in this through the LUA? Help me understand what it is I am missing, you know this stuff far better than I do. I merely play the video game.

Same testing parameters, Only difference is 35k ft altitude. All have been done with full fuel & no fuel only to see if how much of a factor weight was and tested over a 40nm span, Which the differences in fuel of that have been incredibly insignificant. "2x PL-5 + 4x SD-10: Max Speed of Mach 1.15 before complete fuel exhaustion" This of them all is the biggest concern with it all, Now let me also say I am not questioning this in a sense of I am right and it is wrong. I just merely don't understand how a loadout similar to; "2x PL-5 + 2x SD-10 + 2x GB-6 SFW" Has a 45% higher drag value, weighs more (I will see exactly how much more later when I am home) and somehow gets closer to its top end much faster than the first loadout. While at the same time only reflecting a 15% difference in its top end.

Thats 6.16 per rack? If thats the case, 12.32 reaching its top speed of 1.33 takes 220nm in full burner, Which unless you're using unlimited fuel is not only impossible it's not viable. While reaching the top speed with 2 BRM pods and 2 PL-5s takes roughly 40nm with a drag of 23.2 nearly double, and is completely possible. Or reaching the top speed with 2 GB6 SFWs, 2 SD10s & 2 PL-5s with a drag of 27.6 more than double the drag & a higher weight still takes only 40nm. I am ignorant to understanding drag values and how they are presented in game. But seeminlgy, either something is wrong with the SD-10 double racks, or everything else. (These are all in level flight, no diving for profiles or anything)

So forgive my ignorance of understanding this but; Dual SD10 pylon itself is 6.14, Each SD10 adds an additional 2.2, Meaning both pylons & all 4 sticks are a total value of 21.08, 21.08 @ 35k, burner, will get you to 1.12 over a 40nm span. Single SD10 pylon itself is 2.6 each, Each SD10 adds an additional 2.2, Both pylons, both sticks & 2 800L fuel tanks have a drag value of 21 even If I understand this correctly, 2 800L fuel tanks and 2 SD10s have a slightly less drag value than just 4 SD10s & their pylons or 1.08 more drag than 2 huge BRM pods? lol

Shouldn't have any trouble with them so long as you have the correct size selected & radar slaved to them. I haven't had trouble with them in quite some time

Each ship has a different "size" they track just fine, But need to determine ship size. There is a chart somewhere out there. I will try to find it.