RPY Variable

Can't reproduce on Sigle player missions. It happes on multiplayer... for example DDCS on Caucasus map.

The bug is always on for me. Can't use AGM-65 neither TGP They are black 95% of the time. I also have no water at close range. nullnull

https://streamable.com/tly677 HP reverb G2 Operating System: Windows 10 Home 64-bit (10.0, Build 19044) (19041.vb_release.191206-1406) System Manufacturer: GIGABYTE System Model: AORUS 15P XD Processor: 11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-11800H @ 2.30GHz (16 CPUs), ~2.3GHz Memory: 32768MB RAM Available OS Memory: 32510MB RAM Card name: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU Manufacturer: NVIDIA Chip type: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU DAC type: Integrated RAMDAC

@Noctrach with the new update that: Reduced AIM-54 induced drag. Returned to original guidance parameters thanks to a guidance fix by ED. I test your tracks again: Your track: You made two shoots. One at 92nm that didn't hit, and a second one at 85nm that hit at 700kn. The same track with the new update: Both missiles hit, the second one, that didn't hit before, now hits with a speed of 1600kn, more than double the speed of the closest shoot before the update. I also was able to make a 107nm shoot at M0.9 with the AIM-54A and actually hit a maneuvering target. Imagine what can be done at supersonic speeds with the MK60. So @Noctrach are you going to make a post about the AIM-54 being broken and doing "magical physics defying death machine"? Because when I made this post, you stated, in a very condescending way, that the missile was working as the "real world test shots" and before "it was simply overperforming" and "people" (me) needed to "learn how to employ the weapon". Seems that we are back at >100nm shoots like before. _AIM54A 107nm boom.trk

No if you ask the DDD. Look at the screenshot attached. That's from your second missile at launch. The AWG-9 is the one that need to manage it expectations. I find them pretty accurate on other modules. If you shot even out of parameters to a non maneuvering tgt, it will certainly hit. At least on the F16 of M2K. It is not about making the shoot. Anyone can figure out that if I spawn at M2.0 at 50,000ft the missile will have better performance. And your missile didn't hit "absolutely fine", it hit a head on 30.000ft tgt on level flight with an impact speed of 650kn which is almost subsonic. One could argue that the missile is underperforming and and when I use to make the 40K ft subsonic 100nm shots to a orbiting target, it was performing accordingly. I'm not saying that's the case, all am saying is that if "everything is subject to change" the argument of "now is working fine, before was overperforming" is a little bit dogmatic.

Yes Yes I know but... is a non maneuvering target, and the launch zone mark is in the middle. In this case it (non maneuvering tgt) it should be pretty close.

Thanks!

Here is a 40.000ft level launch at 95nm to a head on 30.000ft non maneuvering E2. In the past I've done this shot multiple times with no problem. A flight path angle of 32° at 118.000ft seems quite excessive and 1200knots a few seconds after launch already tell you that something may be wrong. At closer ranges, like 80nm the missile may hit, it is a very inefficient trajectory because the missile arrives at a very low energy state. The main thing that concern's me is that for a target that is at 110nm, the launch zone says it is well inside range but the missile gets not even close. AIM54C 95nm.trk

Missiles just go way to steep until they run out of speed. One went vertical after launch. Here are the track files. It is not possible to make a long distance shoot. TWS launch works fine. AIM54C space 2.trk AIM54C space 3.trk

I bet it was already suggested, but please add as much Jester AI bindings as possible for use with Voice Attack, Is incredible how well does voice attack works. Please add: -jammer stby -jammer defensive -radar silent -radar on -radar center, middle right, middle left -radar middle, middle low, middle high (with new angles, the angles we have now are way to extreme there are not practical at all) -jettison ground ordinance -jettison drop tanks

Please consider doing this. I bet that no one ever uses the elevation function other than center, because al the others are way to extreme.

Try this I have a Gigabyte Aorus15P with a 11800H and a 3070... I started using openXR with the openXR toolkit with upsacling and foveated rendering.. I had trouble on the Syria map while on multiplayer, now I'm running with shadows, antialiasing. I went from almost non playable at low altitudes to ultramega playable. This was night and day for me.

A slider for external tanks or just add a "fuel tank (empty )" option on the load menu. Like it is now I need to do two reloads in order to reload the aircraft with the full fuel tanks.

If by any chance you are using fpsVR app from steam (the one that gives you some preformance data in VR), try not using it. I'm on a 3070 Aorus 15p and that app destroys my performance. A friend use the same app in his desktop without a problem.

You were right. It was enable. My bad. I switch it off and the problem disappears. I don't even remember when I did turn on that, I thought I was running vanilla. Sorry for the inconveniences.

I don't know if it is a VR bug or an F-16 bug but the green flood lights and the flashlight (alt-L I think) on the cockpit only works on the right eye. Landing lights and NAV lights are working fine. I use a RTX3070 with HP Reverb G2.

There is not much to add to the title. https://streamable.com/aexr9o

https://streamable.com/aexr9o

Yes, but when I TMS up on the TGP it is no longer a STT on tgt... it is a point track. I suppose it should be like an STT lock on an aircraft, where the TGP follows the aircraft, when it is on a ground moving target it should follow the vehicle. I assume it is a bug, but unfortunately I don't have my personal F-16 to try it myself.

I have another question regarding the same matter. Is there a way of making the TGP follow the GMT lock like on the jf-17 instead staying fix fixed at the floor where the vehicle was at the moment of the TMS up?

Case 1: If I see a moving ground unit with the ground radar on GMT mode and I STT it. Then I CCRP any bomb, the bomb will hit where the unit was at the time of the release, the system will not predict the unit location based on speed and direction. Case 2: Same as above but using the TGP on point track. The bomb will hit on the location of the moving unit at the time the bomb left the aircraft. https://streamable.com/1co9zh Is this the right behavior? Shouldn't the computer simply predict the target location based con speed and direction? The computer already knows where the target is going, in what direction, and how much flight time the bomb will have. Seems illogical to have so many systems (radar, gps, ins, laser, etc...) in other to gain those three parameters and then don't do a simple formula to get the impact on the actual target location.

I don't care about the voice. But 100% with you on the jokes. "use the force luke" while tanking... it is so bad as a joke that is almost sad. But it is also totally unrealistic. Imagine having a WSO throwing jokes at you while trying to contact. And then the landing jokes... glad to hear that there will be a "serious Jester"...

You are not going to get multiple versions of the Forrestal class.. be realistic.

Sorry for the quality and VR. This was today, trying to launch after a JSOW after a 250nm trip MP attack . You can se that I'm trying to change VIS mode and it wont. (you can se the "VIS" on the HUD). My loadout was one JSOW and one Maverick. https://streamable.com/21gg1o

Today I'm going to try to replicate. But this has ruined almost all my air to ground missions in multiplayer. It is very common for me. When I reaching the target, at one moment the sms gets stuck in VIS mode and it won't change. Even the gun is on VIS mode and can't be used. It happens with mavericks and gbu's also.