59th_LeFty

This may only work if a technology is unique only to your country, like S400 but then again, a pilot should be aware of that :) And to maintain such information up-to-date, is quite hard. SPO15 has no sophisticated software background like western types, but in theory I guess ou are right. Also, think with a pilots head. In an already complicated EW environment, what would you like? 1. To learn difficult method of RWR selection and match it with your SituationAwareness every time you look at the RWR, or 2. don't filter anything and you rely on your own navigation and intel you just had before takeoff? Ideal would be both, but that only applies to cutting edge EW systems on 4+ gen. aircrafts

This is a LOMAC serie 'issuse' since the beginning.

True, the annoying part is that in mode '3' vertical scan the KOLS follows all the the aircraft's axis, so this lack of feature could be done.

Please give me a thump up for not creating another thread for this. Jut had a multiplayer game crash in a nice multiplayer mission. Run on a dedicated server, server worked fine. Three of us had "DCS.exe stopped working" thing, I got out of it without problem. All four of our log files are zipped, along with the mission file. Please confirm that someone receives it, thank you. DCSexe_121215_secondwave.zip

Sorry I remembered wrong. This occured when I tried to takeoff with NOT the latest build on the updated server :) :) :) Not even .7570 days, but one patch before. So no BUG there. Tried to replicate, fail.

I think I've experienced Manuel's problem a few times, and yes, it is about wind speed. On high CROSS-wind, the aircraft tends to 'stick' to the ground, I can make a track a few hours later. Isn't it on the list?

Same happened to me, against non-manouvering target, AIM-7, launch right after red lamps lit - launch authorized. 1-2km before reaching target it fall down. Target didn't even climb or turn. Sorry, no track.

Probably they are not programmed to consider any missile as friendly. And I guess they are right, given the number of blue-on-blue cases :) However in the mission editor you can setdefault values to their alarm state as Green or Red. Green sets them to go R&R and don't give a dump about what happens, while RED keeps them scanning all the time, regardless of activity.

One thing I'd comment on this - I've tested, and the AIM120C and R27ER hase EXACTLY the same time of burn-out of their fuel (what a coincidence... I doubt IRL thats correct), and this is 10 seconds. Apart from that, only thrust and drag values can alter their range, if we count on a non-maneuvering target, and we don't count in loft trajectory, which differences would be enough to give the mentioned advantages to the amraam.

Sorry, misinformed. I flew a mig-29A and it was still the incorrect 4.5=3.2 tape, so in conclusion: I don't see any of the fuel tank amount in 29A or 29S. No center, no wing tank amounts. Also - 67 - Mig 29 flap extension animation incorrect no change:

Version of server and client verified 7570 For me it works like a one-bit display. Until the center tank is not empty, the full ctrl+internal amount is displayed. When Centerline runs out of fuel, the lamp lights up and the gauge drops to the full internal amount. Haven't tested it with wingtanks. For the rest of the list: "112 - SU25A/T takeoff flaps is shown as landing flaps on client aircraft" - now I don't see the full extended flaps in a Su-25A. It only shows as takeoff flaps.

Wow, thats quite a quick job! Keep up! Few Q: "15 - R27ER no loft trajectory" - this was stated '"as intentional", so its just basically removed from the list right? Or ED touched anything? "18 - EOS scanning not functional in elevation" - same question. Touched anything in values or just removed?

Don't forget, You are comparing total different gun types. 25mm Bushmaster is 180 rpm, the 30mm Gh-301 is 1500 rpm while the M61 is 6000 rpm. So different total effectiveness should vary. Of course we can talk about each hit effectiveness. IMO the M61 beats everything in A2A gunnery, but against fighter size targets, I don't think there would be so much difference between each hit as both is fatal. HEI rounds both in M61/GS-301, not much needed to crush a sophisticated target like a fighter. Againts ground targets, a whole different story. As conclusion I'd prefer FC2 ways of damage: few hits and you are dead, at least in a fighter. If we want more, a detailed damage modelled would be required, DCS level.

Well spoke. Not a bug, true. Feature request. So we keep on dreaming :)

Su-25A, and her lamps are in the wingtips.

Different angle. It is a three-stage switch, and two of it works the same. In this case, give us a radar-eos joint ooperation switch, and a radar illumination master switch :) This would also eliminate the problem that if eos loses lock, radar automatically try to lock it (even is not switched on), so your cover is blown. Put this to the list if you want.

Today's list: - MiG-29A fuel indicator TEXTURE is the same as the C version, this is incorrect. But the gauge still moves in the original, ergo you see a fake amount. This WAS CORRECT in FC2. But since ricardo pits . . . (there should be different fuel indicator in 29A / 29C) - I don't know if this is the "115 - Floating Ghost Missiles in Multiplayer", but in F10, in multiplayer I saw some ghost missiles stuck on the map, screenshots attached "map missiles" 1&2 - Condensation is visible through clouds (for me, since FC3 thats why the toopic) screenshot "trails" -#60 - Multiplayer datalink not functional for Russian aircraft - only for clients. - I ran a test and MiG-29 centerline fuel tank (dunno about wing ones yet) seems to not have drag (like f15). - Finally some "HUD" imagery showing related target through HUD, displayed on EOS. Definitely not +/-15°, - and EOS displays "AP" indicating active radar frequency jamming, well I don't think I have to comment this one. (but my guts telling me there is some sneaky conspiracy is behind this)

IIRC this comes from an argument that sometimes overlapping informations displayed on the HUD are not clearly readable. In that case, not a bug, its an IRL HUD design feature :D

But why you even need Fi0 for releasing the R77? If you have the target visual (which you need anyway for Fi0 mode) you just maneuver your nose towards the bandit and release in any R77-able mode. Your missile will 99% lock the target off the rail. I cannot imagine a situation where an indication of lock would be required to release my R77. It will not replace your radar within 25km, if that's your intention :)

With override release? (Alt+W)

Also does not effect smoke markers Some new bugs too: - MiG-29A can be rearmed with 27ER and 27ET in ingame rearm menu - Smoke effect at landings of clients are visible only the first landing, and with different texture - Su-25A has no difference between taxi / landing lights - Su-25A and 25T after first rearming, client's drogue chute cap remains open - Su-25A/T takeoff flaps position is shown as landing position flaps at clients' aircrafts - Since FC3 release F18C rudders are moving the other way they should (move to right in a left turn)

Another wish for my realistic MiG-29 (and in this case Flankers too) OLS (IRST) system has rangefinder, but only effective up to 10-15km. A B1 showing its fat 6 o'clock to me with full AB can be detected from 80-90km too, but laser rangefinder would only dream determining that range. Dunno if it can be done. . . maybe limiting the range scale up to 10km in IRST Scan mode? (it would disturb the combined radar-irst mode availability i guess) Thank you.

Corrected with red what is wrong, apart form that, right. Excpet the bottom with HMS that it is correct. It is not, in terms that it don't follows the target after acquisition.

Let's say you fly level. A contact at -8°, down from your nose appears on the IRST scan mode in the proper "-8°position" in your HUD. Thats the basic. But if you are in the same position relative to the target, AND your nose is not level but let's say -20°, nose down, you still see the target the same place in your HUD. That would be true for the radar, as it try to correct this (within gimbal limits of course) but not the IRST. So, if I climb 45° to intercept a high flyer, and I point my nose directly to the target (lets say i got visual by conning) I should see the target at the center of my HUD. So technically the scanning zone center is fixed to the aircraft long. axis.

nope, only for 9.12b. And not in digital format.