Looney

Thank you for this information. Good luck with the rewrite of the code and looking forward to future updates!

The SLAM has a slightly bigger diameter than a Harpoon so the RCS would be comparable if not a little bit larger. The HARM is a bit smaller so its RCS would be a bit smaller. The NATO doctrine against ASMs is one of early detection and corrolation (emitter vs. launching platform), like in the Falklands where a Cyrano radar from a Super Etendard would be corrolated with the Exocet missile. Once corrolated, measures are taken to detect or predict a launch and take appropiate actions such as manouvrer to intercept or decrease radar signature, Chaff (SRBOC), jamming/deception or hard-kill. I guess we'll need to change those RCS values and see what happens...

The whole layered umbrella defense doctrine is missing from the ships. A ship, any warship, is a formidable opponent against any aircraft. Take the OHP for example, it'll engage from 40Nm out with its SM-1 or SM-2, depending on missile type and detection ofcourse. If that fails, it will follow up with the 76mm gun system, failing that, CIWS as a last resort. Other ships may have the Nato Seasparrow in between the SM-1 or 2 and the cannon / gun. Regardless, you don't just fire one SSM at a ship and expect it to hit, that's unlikely to happen. You'll need to saturate its defenses in order to score hits. I would fully expect a ship, either integrated into a sensor datalink network, such as Link-11/14/16 as any Allied warship would be, or use its own sensors, to detect and intercept any SSM fired at it with all the weapon systems it has available and not wait for the SSM to come into CIWS range and just spray and pray.

Mail sent.

Not to mention that everyone and their mother will know exactly where you are because you're shining a very bright beacon of RF energy into the surroundings, not really a passive system.... Laser guided air defense systems such as the british Starstreak do not use an IR seeker but are commanded using a Laser by the operator.

OB patch notes makes mention of this being fixed. DCS UH-1H Huey by ED Fix of left side gunner sound.

Thank you very much for the information!

In history, the code 1113 was used to guide the KH-25ML. However, it being a russian missile, it is highly unlikely the PRF for the code would be compatible between NATO and WARSAW/Russian equipment. The whoel thread is taking a direction the OP never asked. I don't know how the mission editor needs to be set-up to allow the KA50 to use a JTAC. I know that our wing has integrated the KA50 with its human JTACs just fine. If used in the correct way (usually type 3), it can accomplish amazing things.

No information available other than that what is written here, released by ED.

The moment I switch the NS430 to terrain mode, is the moment stuttering and freezes begin. I have no problems with the NSD430 when using any other mode besides map and terrain.

The lights are on the tail-boom, shining upwards. So you'll have to be a bit higher and tot the rear of the aircraft in front of you to see them. What basically happens is that when you see the lights, you're most likely higher and to the rear of that aircraft and can safely manouvrer. The trouble starts when you can't see these lights...

Does the Hind carry the same type and number of radios as the Mi-8? So R-863, R-828 and Yadro HF radio?

Eeehm, having served on multiple navy ships, the exact opposite is actually truer to life. Ships nowadays are designed without armor plating whatsoever. This way, a high speed (anti-ship) missile will actually have a better possibility to pass through the hull of the ship and out the other side before the explosion would do more damage than it already does. Especially when compared to a missile hitting an armored deck or side in which most of its kinetic energy gets absorbed AND the warhead explodes PLUS all of its fuel still left over will spill over the deck setting everything on fire. The explosive warhead in only part of the problem, once it detonates, that's it, job's done. The Sheffield finally succumbed to the fires started by the leftover fuel from the Exocet missile rather than the explosion itself (and an aluminium superstructure and other stuff). Nevertheless, with multiple redundant systems onboard a warship, there's bound to be a system or two still operational after a Phoenix missile hit and you bet the ship's going to be very pissed off. Civilian ships though, depending on their size, a container ship will most likely scratch the itch away from a phoenix missile hit and happily plod along its course whereas a ferry or yacht might get obliterated.

Two weeks man, two weeks .

I don't know your mission, whether human piloted aircraft shot at the neutrals or AI did. As Quigon correctly stated, the IFF system in RL shows either a friendly response or no repsonse. A no repsonse doesn't automatically mean it's an enemy though! With IFF mode 3 transponder, which can be used when using LOTATC, you can assign IFF codes to AI aircrafts. In such a way, you could set a certain band of IFF codes that airliners need to use and the LOTATC operator would know that it won't show up on IFF mode 4 but does show up as a "squawk" that would indicate a neutral airliner. Again, this wouldn't stop a human aggressor to use a code in that band in order to spoof a LOTATC operator. You're going to need to set up IDCRITS, or IDentification CRITeria for the mission. Example: If contact emerged from friendly airbase AND shows friendly mode 4 (after interrogation) -> Friendly If contact emerged from friendly airbase AND squawks mode 3 airliner code -> Neutral If contact emerged from unknown airbase AND squawks mode 3 airliner code -> Bogey If bogey contact adheres to published airlane AND altitude FL300 or above -> Neutral If contact does not adhere to published airlane AND altitude < FL300 AND does not squawk mode 3 airliner code -> Bandit And so on... I've made a flow-scheme in the 132nd for one of our campaigns, I'll see if I can dig it up.

Looking at the two dudes standing next to it, I suggest you have a chat with them :D :D Hope it gets sorted, otherwise, open the mission in the ME and remove the tugs, save and fly again.

Might it be related to the request join window and the placement of the yes or accept button in relation to the cockpit switches?

What happens if you move those files to the saved games folder?

Correctly implemented thermal imaging system?

Unusable? Not for me, happily shooting and engaging targets close and far away. Sure, it has a mind of its own sometimes but it's manageable. I can only imagine the outcry of the community if ED would change the current target tracking logic to contrast tracking, the howls of rage would fill nights of agony. From a programmers point of view, the current decision to make it track object IDs is a valid one as otherwise one would need to write software that will ook at your image every few frames and determine if you've still locked onto something with contrast and tell this to the server sim. Imagine doing that with multiple KA50s and targets, the server would go nuts! Tradeoffs had to be made to make the game playable. If you can do a better job, or think you can, provide evidence and calculations to back up your claim. Complaining won't get you far, providing solutions will.

A two page thread about a release date and nobody made the "Two weeks" remark? Amazing...

Any news regarding Relay's mods?

At what setting was the guinner set to in the ME?

If you're able to ship to the Netherlands please let me know and I'll order parts.

Perfect, thank you!