Jump to content

BrzI

Members
  • Posts

    284
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS World 2.5
    MSFS 2020
  • Location
    Vancouver Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yeah, still leaves the R-33 under performing in my opinion. But that is only my opinion. Will not be losing sleep over this though...
  2. Sorry - I am not buying this story. If you look at even the very first version of the R-33 it behaved better (in terms of top speed and range) than what we currently have in the sim. The example mission has 4 R-33 and nothing else. But when I add an R40R and R40T the Mig31 will actually launch an R40R first. There is no logic to this as the declared operational range for the R40R is smaller than the R33. There is something not right here - imho But as the devs seem content with it's current state we will just agree to disagree and move on. Thanks
  3. Did some thinking. It looked like the size of the building was too big to fit into the target designation square. So instead of designating the whole building I aimed at one particular window in the command post. Sure enough - it hit where I aimed it. So - it looks like a bug to me - or is this a real-life limitation for big buildings ? PS. a lifepoints bar for the command post would be nice... Thanks K500kr overshoot(not) .trk
  4. With the latest update I have noticed that K500kr and Kh29T both overshoot when you try to hit a big target like the bunkered command post. This happens even though you get AC on the display. I have added a .trk file with the TV bomb but the Kh29T also overshoots. It does not happen with smaller targets. Curious what others may experience... Thanks K500kr overshoot .trk
  5. Takes 6 Kh29s to kill this baby. Resistant as hell - for sure. As of May 29th 2022...
  6. Just to state that the issue is still present (unresolved) in today's version update... (May 27th 2022) Thanks
  7. Hi folks, just to mention that the landing view on the updated Kuznetsov (Alt+F9) has never worked for me since the release of the super carrier. Thanks
  8. Calling somebody that forces you to pay extra for energy a friend ? Hmm...that is interesting....
  9. Here is the recording and the mission that it came from....3 swans launched a total of 36 cruise missiles. SAM_Duel.miz Kh-65 overlap .trk
  10. I think you are missing the point. Spacing between bombers is not required as there is no lateral flight path drift. The issue is that a single bomber will launch all 12 cruise missiles which will eventually end up overlapping. That should not happen imho. Thanks
  11. I stand corrected. I forgot to throttle down. How about the landing view bug ? It works fine on the American carriers...but not on the new Kuznetsov.
  12. Hi folks, title says it all. After landing on the upgraded Kuznetsov the arrestor cables do not disengage. Consequently, I cannot taxi to parking. Also, landing view Alt+F9 has I believe never worked on the new Kuz. Thanks
  13. Here is the .trk file. Three Tu-160 launch 12 Kh-65 each. Watch them leapfrog each other on their way to target.. The swans start West of Sochi. SAM_Duel.miz
  14. Hi folks, the behaviour of the Kh-65 has been fixed. Thank you. But there is another bug that has shown up. If a full Tu-160 loadout (12 missiles) is launched the missiles start overlapping as they suddenly randomly accelerate or slow down. There is no damage modelling (no biggie) but they should not overlap.. Thanks
  15. Yes..sorry - it was confusing. SCUD was working fine. Looking forward to the Kh-65 update in the stable build. I removed the Beta - spent too much time looking at bugs at not enough time flying and enjoying the sim.
×
×
  • Create New...