UWBuRn
-
Posts
183 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by UWBuRn
-
-
2 hours ago, lunaticfringe said:
The stalling loft illustrated in this thread undermines your contention that it isn't guidance, because it's proof the guidance logic doesn't see the kinematic change in the weapon.
I've been taking a couple of shots in a DCS Liberation mission with 54C without loft being involved that showed very poor performance - no real test, just looked for a while at the missile in F6 and it had 500-600 kts lass than usual for that kind of shot while approaching target.
Is guidance part of the problem? No doubt about it, but if that wasn't touched substantially then it's hard to believe it's the main culprit. Let's just say it's broken altogether... it just makes me raise an eyebrow on why those changes were rolled out in this state.
-
1 hour ago, Cobra847 said:
We do not believe the current performance to be realistic due to guidance issues.
Unfortunately, this turned out to be a multi-step process and we'll be working hard to rectify this with urgency.With all the respect for your competence and the work you're putting into it, it's hard to belive it's a guidance issue. Guidance was an issue also before, FM just seems to be off now.
Btw, any news on moving to the new API?
-
3
-
-
I even searched, i must be blind...
-
I'm looking after the correct employment of external lights in different situations from startup to launch, launch to fence in, fence-out to recovery, recovery to shut down, etc.
Is this described in any particular NATOPS? I (very) briefly looked at NAVAIR 00-80T-105 CV NATOPS MANUAL and NAVAIR 01-F14AAP-1, there is some information, but i couldn't get a complete picture.
Can someone point me in the right direction? A resume just like the one for flap/spoiler ops that @Victory205 wrote would be great.
-
6 minutes ago, Jayhawk1971 said:
Oh, thanks, missed it.
-
I tried looking for the failures, but i couldn't find anything related to engines. Were they left out of the update?
-
Happy to say Sparrows now sparrows works ok in all conditions (distance, target ECM, ACM cover) for all version (F, M, MH).
The TID it's a nice and unexepected addition.
Just tested briefly but so far the patch looks great! Tomorrow i will mess around with the failures and i also want to spam some Buffalo on some air-quake server, i wanna see if now that desyncs are ruled out something changes in the reaction of the average players or if they're just fine taking the 54s in their face!
Thanks for all the effort you're putting into this!
-
I'm experiencing exactly the same as the OP, discovered this while trying to drop some CBUs at night trying to follow JTAC lase.
I created a small track demonstrating it: the SPI is moved ONLY when i exit LSS and manually slew the TGP width the TDC.
Honestly i don't know if it's the expected behavior, if it is it's just odd.
Thanks.
-
I can confirm Sparrows are still quite bugged.
Tested against rookie AI Su-27 with and without ECM, always shooting around 18 nm.
- AIM-7F => ECM: no track - straight off the rail
- AIM-7F => No ECM: the bigger the distance the smaller the chances it tracks, over about 10 attempts just once tracked correctly at 18 nm, 16-17 nm it's more or less the limit for reliable shots
- AIM-7M => ECM: no track - only executes loft maneuver then goes straight
- AIM-7M => No ECM: ok but is lofting
- AIM-7MH => ECM: ok
- AIM-7MH => No ECM: ok
Didn't test thoroughly ACM cover and flood mode, but for sure 7F don't track jamming targets even there.
@IronMike thoose issues have been around for a long time now: are they being actively looked into or there's some blocker before them?
-
2
-
Here we go again...
@Csgo GE oh yeah to cut it short, some of your points are valid, yet i think that most of the Tomcat aficionados here can present you a list of what they think it's not fair about other modules - for what it matters, because not everybody it's so interested in PvP.
BUT... this is a report for an unconfirmed bug - maybe not even entirely on HB side, as the internals of the missiles API should be on ED side. You're just OT and ranting once again, take your time, open a topic in the appropriate forum section and bring your arguments about PvP balancing there.
-
1
-
-
Can somebody from HB say something about this? Strange behaviours from AIM-7s have been around for months...
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Skysurfer said:
Sorta. The de-loft and active transition are still a bit wonky but that's just the DCS missile API I guess and not much HB can do about.
IMHO it does VERY violently. AIM-120 doesn't behave that way, try to look at them in F6 view.
Not that it changed in 2.7, it was the same before, but some tweaking is definetely needed. Moreso, more aggressive AI maneuvering and evasion made things worse.
-
I tested just briefly yesterday evening and it seemed to me that AIM-54 guidance performed worse than before, pulling extreme hard maneuvers and burning up all the energy. Comparing to some 120C there was a very different behavior, just like if they had a completely different FM or guidance. Take this just as something to try out, i looked at them from F6 view after several trashed shots, i didn't make any accurate testing and can be very well related to changes in the AI.
On the bright side, internal engine sound in the A are a big improvement IMHO, there's still some kind of repeating pattern catching your ear but they are much better than before, and, at least in the ears of someone that never sitted in such a jet more enjoyable.
-
1
-
-
Try to approach the basket slower, you seem doing rather good, except that you lose speed control just before connecting. If you try to get in too fast, everything becomes more difficoult.
-
@HB, just a clarification, so enabling ECM from jester menu does the following places the ECM in RPT mode, meaning it will actually jam ONLY when locked up, correct?
4 minutes ago, GGTharos said:It doesn't just 'affect FC3 radar', it renders RF missiles 100% useless.
Oh, cool, i missed that part... well i hope ED address this together with Hornet ECM update.
-
Please look at latest update on the Hornet from Wags.
It will be just an auto ON-OFF on the ECM: honestly, i hope that if F-14 ECM behaviour (and F-18 will be the same shortly) breaks FC3 A/C radar the latter will be updated to cope with them, not that it becomes the reason to hold back improvements on the subject.
I very well remember when the 15 sec delay was introduced, it was just a workaround to avoid players manually turning it on and off trashing locks, probably radars should have been allowed to keep locks somehow or maybe was just more realistic to have to reacquire lock.
-
Happening a lot also to me, if the server list gets long it freezes and i have to kill DCS from the task manager.
-
29 minutes ago, Dannyvandelft said:
Discussion is fine, no problem with that at all. And obviously we all want to get better at flying this game. But since it's something we do for fun in our spare time, we can do without the BS in my opinion.
This isn't the Navy, or the Iranian Air Force, so no need for someone to get all "you should be able to do everything with the current HUD" and "why can't you fly just instruments" just because someone asks a simple question.
I'd like to get the HUD, because it was a part of Tomcat history. And I'd love to have the opportunity to try it out. I would like the D model too.
So next we'll get yelled at because we should be able to fly without the D's improved fly by wire system I guess
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Your question was legit, it should go in the FAQ.
Anyway i can understand that par of the discussion that sparked after your question (and i had my share in other occasions) might sound a bit silly for who did fly for real and put a lot of effort in the module.
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, TLTeo said:
And here I am being all weird thinking that there's too much crap on the HUD of the Viper and Hornet. I barely glance at most of what's on there, most of the time. Honestly given the choice, I'd much rather have those on the Viggen (except - show me where the Mav is looking at damn it! Best feature in the Viper HUD honestly) and Tomcat.
Oh, so i'm not the only one! I find Hornet HUD expecially annoying...
Having a more advanced HUD would be nice in some situations, i mean, i guess it was an inprovement IRL, it should be also in the sim. However, i think this was discussed many times before and it's highly unlikely to come.
As for all the debate... imho the sim allows you to switch too quickly from an F-16, to an F-14 to a MiG-29 (or whatever you like). So it's easy to start wishing for improvements on the A/C, expecially if you start playing in MP, where the competitive aspect gets relevant really quick. Someone would also like weapons that were not available. Many were expecting the Tomcat to be the ultimate A/C with the ultimate weapon to get easy kills online... then they take the Tomcat and find themself unable to do what were doing on the F-15 or F-16 and gets frustrated.
IRL it's different, you get assigned to a unit with an A/C, you must get the better of it. Plus you're placing your life on it, so better know how to fly it properly, there's no refly button (just forgetting that you will just not get there if don't know the basis or how to fly safely).
To the users discharge i must say that many DCS modules just don't have the depth to encourage you to improve how you fly. However i feel that for the first time in DCS with the F-14 I have an aircraft that i just find interesting to fly around even without shooting at something (and DCS sometimes can be somewhat dull if you don't shoot at something or if you don't fly with someone else). So yes, after many years messing around with flight sims, i find myself going after the points @Victory205 is listing out.
Someone might think of this as taking things too seriously... well, it's an opportunity to enjoy the sim from a different perspective, maybe when one it's tired of shooting everything that moves.
@Dannyvandelft i'm not talking directly at you, but your question raised some nice discussion!
-
4
-
-
Have you tried waiting for a while? They take a few seconds to go in overspwet position.
-
Once in TWS-A, Jester is not affecting things out anymore. It's all on the radar itself to sort things out.
As for the discussion that has been running for quite a bit, TWS-A will struggle keeping track of maneuvering targets. Also it will struggle when you maneuver: for example, when you shoot, if you want to do an A-Pole or F-Pole (turning from the target as much as possible to reduce closure rate), you have to maneuver gently or it's likely that the track will be lost. Maybe HB is still going to tune things a bit, but thoose seem to be realistic limitations and are likely to stay. (Also the Hornet int TWS has some resembling behaviour when maneuvering hard, expecially if the PRF is not set to the optimal option)
As for the TID range, from my experience TWS-A takes into account only target within TID range, so setting it at 50 nm will make it ignore the 70 nm target, even if the radar it's still detecting it.
-
On 1/1/2021 at 7:32 PM, captain_dalan said:
New year's eve was last night, and with socializing restrictions at hand, i finally had enough time to do some actual missions and test the AWG9/AIM-54 combo in action.
Only flew VS AI's, i don't feel comfortable with the new modeling to go MP yet. My impressions this far (about 8-10 hours of fighting):
- PD-STT is less stable then expected, but not more so then it used to be. Anti-notching maneuvers can work on occasion. More alarming is missile (AIM-54) performance while in PD-STT. The missile PoK seams lower in this mode, even if lock is held all the way to "impact", when compared to its use in TWS-AUTO. Combine this with the ease of lock and PD-STT becomes the least preferred method of employment instead of the most preferred. Maybe it's the way DCS treats FOX-1's? Dunno.....
- AIM-54 overall performance: about 50% against non-Ace AI's. These are shots in crowded environments, at least 2 tracks held (or at least attempt was made to hold them) at any time. Shots against ACE level AI's, even single targets are extremely unreliable. As of this moment, the hit ration is 10% and dropping. The AI's are set to actively evade and CM of course. I'm curious to read about reports against human opponents. Apparently, CM works differently for AI's.
- AIM-7's are within the area of expectations. If launched around the number or higher, from medium altitudes, at closing targets, ranges of 12 or less NM, the missile hits often enough. Launches from 8-7 NM or less are almost guaranteed hits.
- Haven't yet tried mad-dogging 54's in P-STT, ACM cover-up, or TCS locked targets yet. Anyone tried this yet? What are PK's if used as such?
Haven't yet experienced any engine overheats and explosions as such. Never been higher then 30000ft though.
EDIT:
Limited experimenting with target size inconclusive. Looks like leaving the thing in default works best for fighters thus far.Eh, we're with pretty tight restrictions also here, i'm getting "drunk" on flying DCS as i ad to expend some days off and i don't have much else to do, that's the only good side of the situation.
The PK against AI is really dependent on the AI level... i think that on the PVE server i'm flying upon it's at "trained" level, so missiles are very effective. Honestly i don't care about Ace anymore, they keep acting dumb in a lot of occasions and they cheat in others.
I agree that STT is not the prefered mode for engagement, and that's bad, because at some ranges would be just much better to lock on the target and have the possibility to fire maybe more than one round rather, than fighting the WCS in TWS-A. In general, i feel that STT is very sensitive to azimuth: this makes sense (at leats for PD), because as the azimuth increases, the target closure decreases and you get closer to the rejection thresholds. This is pretty evident when foing F-Poles, as you take max azimuth, usually the bandit does the same, so you end up in the worst possible situation with a closure speed close to zero. Nonetheless i have seen plenty occasions of lock lost without apparent reason (target above me, closure in the range of 1000 kts, hot).
I tend to agree that for DCS Fox1 are worse than Fox3, even if all the rest is the same.
What i'm really struggling on are Sparrows: i'm not fully understanding how the behave in the recent updates (basically after they were broken and fixed). They seem to go off the rail and go straight for quite a bit, then sometimes they steer on target, sometimes not, as if after going straight they are not anymore in a position and direction to see the target. Some times i had the impression they were missing the CW illumination as if they were fired in flood mode and i was not pointing straight to the target - even if i was rather sure they were fired in PDSTT.
BTW, Phoenixes in PSTT and TCS get the angles from the WCS and fire active off the rail, i'm unsure if they do get the angles with BRSIT, i think not. Anyway at active off the rails ranges they are pretty deadly.
-
On 12/29/2020 at 10:07 AM, *Aquila* said:
I think we need the Jester functionality to manage the MLC filter.
There's already the auto MLC in the WCS, the auto setting should be good enough in my opinion. However, and i wrote it on some other topic also, sometime looks like to me that even with the MLC off (antenna looking up because you're well below of the target) the radar it's still quite prone to notching. I will try to pay more attention to it.
Then there should be a whole chapter on Pulse modes, thoose need tuning to work, usually asking jester to go in PSTT results in a lost lock. Honestly i tried to play with them in the backseat, but i don't have enough experience on what settings are most effective in which situation... maybe @QuiGon can chime in and list a few of them (maybe also for PDSTT), as per other posts he seems to know them quite well.
Anyway, i wouldn't like to access many more additional setting through the wheel, it's impractical in my opinion. What i would like is to be able to define some kind of "standing" for Jester and let it act accordingly. Otherwise, if that's not possible/viable, maybe a a small buff on the radar/WCS when Jester is in the back seat could be a workaround... i mean, it's not that bad when you get used to him, but any improvement would be welcome.
-
Had some time to do some more testing, nothing systematic but i flew plenty of time on some PvE server with many different situations plus some SP.
Overall, in my opinion, this is the best update of the Tomcat since a long time:
- All the last changes brought in in the last 3 months seem to work coherently, the target size settings now helps mitigating the AI starting evasive maneuvers before pitbull and the working TTI is very helpful for deciding when to break off and keep the distance
- I never experienced Jester going crazy bashing buttons or switching to RWS just after firing
- Exiting TWS-A after firing seems more consistent (some update ago was rather messy)
- I spent some time comparing AIM-7 behaviour on F-14 and F-18, they seem more or less the same, some difference i noticed before was probably related in some shot taking place at short distance in PSTT mode (probably after PAL), with the missile going straight for a moment and then steering as if the target was not illuminated by Flood mode
- I know this is on ED side, but something has changed on the AIM-54 guidance (don't know if in the hotfix or in the patch of the 17th), they seem to maneuver violently bleeding a lot of energy and i've definitely seen more AIM-54 running out of energy than before (and i never shooted near Rmax)
- Probably for the first time since Tomcat release, AIM-54C outperform AIM-54A Mk.60, the better chaff rejection of the C and the guidance behaviour described above more frequently happening on the A (probably again related to chaff rejection) make the C behave more consistently, plus you have the smokeless engine
From a more tactical point of view:
- Against the AI, always setting the target size to large helps countering the early maneuvering that tends to screw up TWS, against lone targets i had a quite high PKs (i would say around 80%, mostly shooting at mid-high alt, 30-40nm, AI at pretty dumbish level i guess)
- Having to prefer the AIM-54C with a little shorter legs i had to fire closer to 30 nm than to 40 nm to have enough energy; if they missile fails, you are more or less in the "weak spot" for the Tomcat (with Jester, at least), outside PAL range and with the target at the distance where the time consuming steps to tell Jester where to look at usually end up in failing to re-engage the target; i need to try again forcing myself at shooting at longer ditance to see how it goes
- Trying to perform PDSTT engagements ends many times with Jester losing lock: i don't have enough experience in the back seat to know the tricks of ho to keep lock in edge cases, but i keep reading here and there that a capable RIO should be able to do so... Jsester for sure it's not. Even disabling the option to swith automatically from PDSTT to PSTT and commanding him to switch while most appropriate doesn't seems to help. I want to stress that with difficuilties with a stable STT i only refer to favourable conditions (targets above or high alt engagements, where clutter should not be too much of a problem)
- Even with all the limitations, i still prefer TWS for AIM-54 shots, the ARH terminal phase is just too good to not be used plus, as said, PDSTT (with Jester) has its slice of limitations too
- AIM-7 are garbage (also on F-18), probably it was too much time since i used them at mid ranges and maybe they changed somewhat since them but i was unable to score any hit outside 12 nm at mid altitude
- There's a large performance gap between the A and B 'Cats: with a heavy combat load (4PH + 2SP + 2SW) the A requires a lot of burner, struggles in climbs and at accelerating prior of engagements - probably also affected by limitation in the stores drag modelling as already noted
In the future, any improvement to Jester fizzling out with the AWG-9 settings to get the max out of it and maybe some "crew contract" to let him go after the highest threat by himself would be great.
-
2
Feedback Thread - F-14 Tomcat patch Jan 27th 2022
in DCS: F-14A & B
Posted
If, as you say, this was requested by ED, than it's more on their side, but the point still stands: from an user point of view i can't really get the reason why incomplete changes (FM adjustments without guidance) are rolled out, especially on an hot topic like missiles (see what happened on AIM-120s few patches ago).
Personally, flying mostly offline i care up to a certain point and for sure i'm not going to loose sleep about it, but yet i think some criticism is needed.
I say what i'm saying knowing that in the end everything will just be better than before, that you will work hard to fix the guidance just like a lot of issues before this. And please know that i appreciate it, i know maintaining this kind of product in the long run it' not easy.