blkspade

The AI doesn't usually flare if you've fired from 6 o'clock low, when there is no MLWS.

Its bad enough that the AI basically cheats already when it comes to missiles. While they adhere to LOS limitations, it seems to function with unlimited range. Even more interesting they know where a missile is and its energy state (I've seen the AI go cold and then barrel roll at the very last second). Them defending earlier would only make it easier, not harder. Unless your benchmark for difficulty is how many missiles it takes to kill them, forcing them fully defensive at range gives you all the advantage. The way it is now (if not accounting for the phoenix), actually gives them a fighting chance. They'll fire at Rmax or burnthrough if you're jamming and F-pole to support that missile until yours enter threat range. At that point they'll attempt a notch and recommit if the missile goes for chaff, otherwise turn cold if the missile is still closing. There are many times an AI R-27ER would have killed me if it held the lock a little longer. Even though they start chaffing on TWS shots as soon as it leaves the rail, when LOS is lost they more realistically rely on senors to make choices. Against an active there is no reason for them to go defensive before pitbull.

The one thing dcs already does is that missiles already fuse on each other. All aspect IR missiles will lock on incoming missiles with the motor burning and destroy them. You can shoot down your own MRMs by double tapping too quickly on the same target while accelerating. Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Flyable logistics aircraft would be the most sensible way to split the difference. Tankers, AWACS, and transports.

The AI just knows what and where missiles are precisely though if they have LOS with the cockpit. I've watched the AI pull a last second notch on the current AIM7 (in multiple tests runs) because it knew that it couldn't outrun it. I can't say I have ever seen AI fighters try and shoot down harms/Mavs that we know show up on radar in DCS. I know the mounting hardware is apart of the equation IRL, its just obvious that the A-A weapons are being explicitly excluded in DCS.

The in game A-A missiles don't seem to possess any sort of RCS, unlike A-G. Its apparent that A-G ones are specifically coded to have an RCS (no real radar modeling happening) solely so that they can be engaged by SAMs, but it allows them to be intercepted by fighters as well. I did bring up an argument many years ago though (before the F-14 was even gonna be a thing in DCS) that the AIM-54 should show up on radar if the big Russian HARMs do, as they have very similar dimensions. Heck mavericks even show up. I hugely doubt a 1970s missile with a huge smoke plume is designed in anyway to be specifically low observable. Certain SAMs also have a RCS as well, but its like a random couple that I don't even remember. We've all heard that external weapons effect a jets RCS, so to some extent on their own should have some type of RCS. It does border on implausible to expect to be able engage small AIMs though.

There isn't exactly any kind of rule that says you have to use a Cessna, or the like to learn how to fly. If you want to be limited to something that makes you rely on instruments, hop in the TF-51D, or any other trainer.

The CPU is always the limiting factor. It not being maxed out is a by product of the engine not being capable of using all threads. The GPU not being maxed out is from the CPU not being able to send it enough data, since the engine can't properly leverage its potential. Higher CPU clocks and IPC would boost GPU utilization. The points at which VR locks the fps to keep the experience smooth further reduces overall utilization, because the one main thread/core isn't keeping pace with the demand.

IDK about the Russian SAMs, but the HAWK on the US side does.

Tracking and guidance could/would still be handled by the launching SAMs sensors. The IADS is more about getting hostile aircraft in range of SAM that would otherwise be off to prevent them being detected and destroyed. Imagine an SA11 suddenly popping up under you while at 30k', and launching on you.

More accurately, most AI versions of jets that would have datalink do solely to contribute to the single player experience of high fidelity modules. AI hornets and falcons also show up on the A-10C datalink for example. When I asked wags about this in one of the youtube video, his response was that FC3 aircraft don't have DL, forgetting about the flanker. Though they don't get player-player DL,. The thing is though if ED could be bothered they could give the Eagle as much DL functionality as the flanker.

I think he mentioned it because the Vulkan API is a recent addition to that game.

It honestly sounds like it going to be an Ace Combat competitor, which to me would seem a bit off putting for those already in the DCS community. People already mock the FC3 aircraft for being "Arcade", when that term is what you'd describe Ace Combat/HAWX style games as. AAA would probably literally translate into "Appeal to the masses", which is what those games do. They are a great gateway drug into more involved sims like DCS though. The original Ace Combat games led me to Jane's sims so many years back.

PD is better solely for range, which is largely irrelevant against anything likely to maneuver (fighters with RWR). In terms of sparrow employment, max range of around 38nm won't hit most targets unless they are stupid. P-STT which results in CW, being notch resistant, makes it the better choice at any range you could realistically expect to get a kill against a fighter.

The key reason you should absolutely be interrogating still, is that the DL has a delay, and the radar isn't absolutely precise about the contact you lock up. If for some reason you have a friendly merged with that contact that isn't on the DL network, and possibly in a blind spot of donors/AWACS, you could end up firing on said friendly. I have had the F-18 radar jump from a know hostile to friendly that crossed the LOS that I only knew was even there due to being on comms.

Yellow simply means unknown, according to your own sensors. Red is confirmed hostile. All contacts initially are yellow, when they hit your radar before IFF is attempted. I'd imagine the 2-factor authentication, if realistic, is a function that would rule out civilian/non-military aircraft via NCTR.

That probably won't be needed. Apparently the only prerequisite is that the game shares depth data with the Oculus API, which in all likelihood is already happening.

Honestly, the AIM-54 seemed not to be guiding in PD STT at all on initial release. This might have changed in a recent patch, but when my crew needs a one to reliably guide with STT we choose pulse. Its best used as a fail-over option for a fading TWS contact inside of 40nm that you've already launched on anyway, as you'd be pretty hard pressed to get a max range STT kill on anything with a RWR and any degree of intelligence. The difference in range is probably even less relevant with the AIM-7 since its in-game effective range is pretty bad anyhow. I've seen the sparrow quoted as having 22nm max range with CW from an F-4, where as the missile should kinetically reach out to 38nm. The parameters for those shots are an especially rare occurrence though in DCS. CW range is almost never going to be your limiting factor.

That's something entirely different, and has to do with MSI (multi sensor integration). My statement was solely about interpreting SA page info, which is easily correlated now but will still be improved upon when we get HAFU symbols on the radar page. You can see the MSI options are there on various pages, they just don't do anything yet.

If people are running the server as admin, then they are creating their own security problem. Not having all of the drives exposed, in the event a vulnerability is discovered is more than just an obscurity measure.

Even in its current state its pretty easy to correlate the info between the radar and SA pages. The HAFU has top and bottom segments. The moment a datalink only contact is seen on your radar it gains a top HAFU symbol and usually transitions to unknown symbology.

It's also possible those are SA-15 sams Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

This must just be a problem trying to control your server remotely via ED's page, as opposed to locally. If it works from someone else's machine, it sounds like an ISP issue on your side. or a DNS cache issue on your computer.

I came here to report the issue as well. Another detail about this bug is that it seems to happen if the pilot has spawned the aircraft before the RIO has connected to the server. So even on the ground if the RIO connects the controls won't work.

Is the pilot experiencing it at the same time? I see this all the time in the hornet, especially when parked perpendicular to the direction the carrier is traveling. It likely has more to do with the carrier physics or netcode.