PiedDroit

I know that (see my post about historical / predicted a couple of page ago). I personally don't think a predicted sight is usable as there are too many inputs involved, it would be jumping all over the place at every target (and own ship) direction change and too sensitive to computational error. Maybe with some heavy filtering (smoothing) it could become effective. That's why I was interested in a modern aircraft that's having it, to see if my thinking is good or flawed :)

What aircraft is displaying data about the target ? I'm curious to see what it looks like (a vector drawn from the target in HUD?). I'm quite sceptical about the usefulness of it but if you're better with it why not, I'm interested to know which aircraft implement it. Also if you don't like the snake the gun cross is always there so you can still use it as a fixed sight.

Actually it makes sense for the maverick, to benefit from the quick draw capability (next missile on the pylon will be slewed on previous target automatically). otherwise yes if you switch weapon it's always the same side that shoots first and that's annoying, it mean you always need to choose your pylon manually. A least in the A10 you can choose the pylons..

Don't know if this was asked before, but if you shoot a radar missile followed by an IR missile, will the control system automatically balance the load by shooting from the other wing? I'm asking this because pretty much every plane in DCS is always shooting in the same order so if you don't shoot pairs you can end up with a fully loaded wing and a a clean wing on the other side. Thanks!

Actually the prediction will yield worse results. Using the snake (or the funnel), you have a very accurate representation of where your shells would have gone if fired continuously, so you can use this to time your shots so they land at the correct distance. The snake itself isn't meant to be put exactly on the target, as if you're not in the plane of maneuver the shots will go off. It's intended to give you a cue, for example if you're in a left roll with your target, you'll probably want to put your target a little right of the snake. Problem with prediction sight is that they're very sensitive, as any tiny movement of the aircraft will make your piper jump all around. Also a bad velocity vector estimation will lead to bad prediction. An aircraft radar return is not a focused point in space you can use to make super precise calculations. The angle between two radar blobs might not represent the real angle of your target, and any computation based on very short interval will increase the error. To me the range input as is done makes a lot of sense. EDIT: Here's an extract I could find online - it's from a game manual, so, not to be taken too seriously, but it ahs some of the points I'm trying to expose: There's also some info in Shaw's book but I don't have the time to dig through it right now :D

If I understand correctly, he means that what is reported as bug might be closer to reality and people should not assume RWR is a "perfect" direction indicator. In real life a sensor array antenna is not perfect and won't work if saturation occurs (i.e. if the energy it receives is very strong).

exactly, the piper is not a "predictor" sight, it's only adding range to the snake. From what I read on the subject, historical sights were preferred over predictor sight, because more accurate, so I think it makes sense as it is.

Yes, they look like this (with velocity vector in the middle): . > --O-- < When he does hard turns the carets disappear at the bottom of the HUD, they reappear when he unloads. Which part of the video are you refering to? I can see in the beginning he had a piper but he was following in pure pursuit. What happens in the video for first kill is that he's so close that he uses the gun cross to make the kill. Check the second kill at 3:10, he starts with gun piper then the piper disappears (distance or unlock), then he uses the snake to estimate lead.

Tweaking can go back and forth you know :) I don't think it's going a certain direction without any hope of turning around. Your points are very valid, we'll see what they decide to do in the end.

I agree it needs some tuning right now, it's still being tweaked. I think it's only the second or third iteration in the beta.

Well, the world doesn't revolve around you, sorry to spoil your dreams :doh: If we were all exactly the same, everything would be so simple...

Game engine... Yes, FREE.

(joke)Thanks for the heads up! I pretty sure they will start fixing bugs now thanks to your kind message.(/joke) Well, now, seriously? Do really imply what you imply? What a disgrace... Please try to be supportive, especially considering the efforts of the dev are doing to communicate with us. Also remember that the core of the game is *free*. I can't believe what I read...

Sure, they *will*. But think about *now*, that's my point. I probably won't have a 4k display or high res VR before long (I will likely go VR so I might never see a 4k monitor at all :music_whistling:), so before that I'm quite happy the high visibility feature was implemented.

I strongly disagree... Having this feature doesn't mean the engine isn't geared toward the future. At some point you have to take the present into account. With such mindset, a developer would expect to be paid only with future money and followed by future players (translate: non-existent at the moment). Try release a sim like DCS in 1990, "it's the future guys, it will be awesome!" Maybe the feature needs tweaking and is not yet perfect, if you don't like it because you have super high resolution hardware from the future then don't use it, and let use benefit from it with our puny systems from the past :P

I think it doesn't take altitude into account, so it would be speed based (and attitude based). The goal is to indicate the pilot if he has enough thrust to guarantee maneuvering capability

Yep definitely. Maybe one day we'll have splitable and rewindable tracks too (my wishlist lol, it's rather high).

In that case, simply ask for a feature to work, period ;) You can't say something like "this feature works in sim X, make it work in DCS", it doesn't make sense. Of course a broken feature should be fixed, but how does it relate to the other sim, are they sharing the same engine?

There should be improvements in 1.5 ("fixed tracks" in changelog). And BTW, you can't compare two sims - it's irrelevant, as one would say ;) You can ask for bug fix (which is in 1.5) and features (wishlist), but who cares if it works well in another sim? Different, code, different engine, etc :p

Super video, I's really cool to have such updates, thanks! :thumbup: If we compare it with real videos it behaves like it should, maybe a little less smooth (esp. radar piper) but it's hard to judge yet. What's interesting to note is that this sight is of the "historical" type, i.e. it will plot the path of the bullets if you would have fired continuously. So the prediction is good when stabilized for a second of two. On the joke side, I was thinking, this reminds me of a certain game I had on my Nokia 3310 :D

You can put your target on the side of the nose, on the side you plan to roll (eg. 11 o'clock if you plan to roll left), this will help you to keep sight on the target while climbing and rolling. With practice you'll do it eventually ;)

Hello, you can use TrimDXAxis. There you go, here I mapped Joystick X axis to both X and Y, note that 2048 is the maximum resolution you can using this method: KeyAxis(&Joystick,JOYX,0,AXMAP1(2048, EXEC([color=DarkRed]"TrimDXAxis(DX_X_AXIS, SET(Joystick[JOYX]/32)); TrimDXAxis(DX_Y_AXIS, SET(Joystick[JOYX]/32));"[/color]), EXEC([color=DarkRed]"TrimDXAxis(DX_X_AXIS, SET(Joystick[JOYX]/32)); TrimDXAxis(DX_Y_AXIS, SET(Joystick[JOYX]/32));"[/color])));Edit: Joystick[JOYX]/32 is used to make resolution of the axis (65536) match the resolution of the trim (2048=65536/32). Read page 30 of the pdf manual. Edit2: you can even use a third controller axis that will be mapped to two other directx axis, here moving the slider on the throttle will set both joystick X and Y, with less steps (512 instead of 2048 ): [color=#a52a2a][color=Black]KeyAxis(&Throttle,THR_FC,0,AXMAP1(512, EXEC([color=#a52a2a]"TrimDXAxis(DX_X_AXIS, SET(Throttle[THR_FC]/32)); TrimDXAxis(DX_Y_AXIS, SET(Throttle[THR_FC]/32));"[/color]), EXEC([color=#a52a2a]"TrimDXAxis(DX_X_AXIS, SET(Throttle[THR_FC]/32)); TrimDXAxis(DX_Y_AXIS, SET(Throttle[THR_FC]/32));"[/color])));[/color][/color]

Most extremely probably not. That would be equivalent to shoot a 30mm shell in one's foot.

Lol nice, thanks for sharing the solution :lol: :thumbup:

Also, disable the hotkeys for actions you don't use (uncheck "enable"), as TrackIR software will trap them, which can be problematic (F7...).