Anubis_94

Maybe they should knock knock the PR of Raytheon

Hello, TLDR: While using the SLAMER in F18 with DL13, a fog seem to be present at 105Nm range from shooter. Details (and little history): at first the issue of a "blank", "too bright" DL13 was reported. We assumed the new FLIR would fix the issue, but we encountered again the issue in my squad last week. Investigation shown that, if the missile was far away from ~100Nm from the shooter, display was lighten, maybe in an attempt to indicate the missile was too far for comm. But the fact that, target was still visible and sharp when missile was about to hit (<1Nm) was odd: it wasn't a distance issue. So, next test: A hornet in active pause, 125Nm from a target. SLAMER activate at 60Nm, FLT LOW to see the ground. A fog seem to be present at 105Nm range from shooter. Attached a track/ACMI/Video showing the issue. The fog can be seen starting at 2.30, and range is mesured at 3.30 Target is, as previously, visible when missile is about to hit (<1Nm, at 4.13) Extract from the video, where the lake is masked by the fog Issue was observed on Persian Gulf and Syria, with various weather (incl. CAVOK) (EDIT: memory error from author) SLAMER_1msl_125_actv_60Nm.trk SLAMER_1msl_125_actv_60Nm.acmi

Yeah that's a side question. It seems odd from manufacturer to increase the range from B to C without providing the missile the battery to remain active during the time of flight.

Didn't though one second of this parameter... Attached here the screenshot from the linked acmi (120OK_42KO_39OK.acmi) above with the time of fire, and interception of the IL is the same for both missile. 42Nm missile have a 89sec flight, 39Nm 83sec. That's a good lead, thanks I just took a look in the F18 manual but I didn't see this information in it. Maybe I missed it ?

Hello For science, I tried the max range well beyond the Raero TLDR: The 120 has the kinematic to intercept a non manoeuvring target hot FL300 at ~80Nm, but the guidance law behave seems off. Tests ran with a F18 vs IL76, hot, FL300, TWS (because STT has its own issue to keep the lock at long range, let's not debate it here) On this first track/ACMI (attachment "120Miss*"): https://imgur.com/a/tL2J7w7 The first 120 shot at 80Nm range pull up at pitbull time The second 120 shot at 50Nm range intercepts well, but doesn't see the IL at pitbull I ran again the test at multiple ranges, even a ~40Nm shot result in a miss (attachment "120Miss_4*") : https://imgur.com/a/hJIN8NJ EDIT: I Did another test at 42Nm&39Nm (attachment "120OK_42KO_39OK*") : The 120 shot at 42Nm miss the target at pitbull, it is not guided The 120 shot at a range little less than 40Nm (39.7Nm ACMI) fit the target at pitbull Some questions a potentials bugs : Is the Raero correct ? The 120 can motor to a 80Nm range but the Raero doesn't reflect that (the manual indicate that the Raero is for when the missile can pull 5g to intercept, but such a precise indication for interception seems to be a Rmax description) Why the first 120 shot at 80Nm range pull up when passing the target instead of intercept the target (even without finding it. It is not the predicted intercept point) Why the 120 can't see the target when "pitbulling" with the target in the radar cone (in front of the missile)? Is it linked to a 40Nm range mark ? It is not Raero (Raero is 34Nm on last test, 120 shot at 39 hit) 120Miss.trk 120Miss.acmi 120Miss_4.acmi 120Miss_4.trk 120OK_42KO_39OK.trk 120OK_42KO_39OK.acmi

Yeah ... speaking realism in a topic dealing with the control of a ground crew maneuver from the pilot seat ... as for the decision to power up the AC alone, maneuver alone on the deck to align on the cat', order alone the rearm, ... (you know, all these decisions that you totally take alone as a pilot ... ). Joke aside, you want a radio menu? Here's one, for a later iteration : F8 -> Call ground crew <Gound crew in place> <Use bind to adjust> F8 -> Release ground crew But order a pushback via radio menu will be the best way to push AC above the deck with the input lag to stop the push.

Via radio menu you would have a hard time to stop the push with your gear close to the edge of the deck. I don't see any reason to not bind to a button a move an aircraft backward, the basics of this functionality request don't have to be over-engineered, especially if we want to convince ED to add-it.

Hello This issue is still present in current Stable. Is there any new on it ?

Hello, Researched and found this topic. A basic push, just a simple button to slowly move backward aircrafts, even without crew, would be great to park correctly. Even on land in hangars.

Maybe the same issue as this one ?

Slight update Tried to reproduce, but was only able 1 time out of ... a dozen when playing with the heading impact (via a STP) and the time. It seemed that the SLAM went through a cloud, DL13 view was partially then totally blank, and never returned to normal view. Here is a capture and a video of partial, then total blank Sorry, track not saved

Hello, Here is attached what we (some VR-people in our squad) see in our MFD while the terminating guidance of our SLAMER. While our flat-screened mate don't have any issue to see the targets, and the runway where the targets are placed. We cannot see any of them until the SLAM reach a distance around 0.5Nm. Attached 2 screen, one at 1.6Nm where we can only see some target burning (the only thing we can see). For the reader, targets are on a runway. The second screen, we barely see a target that I was able to hit by guessing its position. The FLIR revamp may solve this issue, but in order to wait for it, is this issue known? I cannot find this specific issue (HSI/SA brightness are not a problem here).

Hello, Any news on that aspect ratio ? Issue is seen here too

Sad. Thank you

Hello, From the LITENING and the LST that can be triggered via CAGE/UNCAGE. Is it expected to have the same behavior on the ATFLIR ? It is currently missing.

Hello, Any news from ED on the ratio fix ? Same issue here for recording. I gladly bypass the DCS mirror with OculusMirror with the rift. But now with a G2, this option isn't available with SteamVR mirror as they deliver half FPS for non-Index user.

Yes, we can change the binding, obviously ... We can also put the TDC press on the weapon release of the stick if we want, or I don't know, the TDC slew on the throttle axis of the HOTAS. We can do anything Joke aside. The point is not "change the binding and everything will be fine". The point is : there is an option "realistic TDC slew" that allow to NOT keep the TDC pressed to slew MAVs. It is great because for some HOTAS TDC (that aren't designed as the Hornet's one), doing so is a pain in the ass (x65 owner here, not pain in the ass but still not confortable) We may also think that with such name, this option should also act for in fact all the Hornet command that request to keep the TDC Press (ex: AG radar EDIT: in EXP modes). But nope. So either this option is intended only for MAVs (as it was at first), or it is intended for all "keep TDC Press" command. In the first case, option should be clear about "mav only" But the second option would be welcome

Tried this night the MSAA filter. There was less occurence with filter at 0.6, but still happened at start with 7/8 F18 on deck, mirror ON.

Hello, I also reproduced the issue this evening, for both eyes, when parked on the SC with the reverb G2. Multiplayer, f-18C, on the SC with 4, 5 other hornet. Playing with the canopy at the end of the mission, the occurence of flickering diminished when it was up but still happened. I tried collapsing the mirror, and it apparently stopped. EDIT: Exactly this too :

+1