WHOGX5

I think we need to start a collective effort to archive every single ED post because so many things get smoke and daggered away and it's gone so far now that people are starting to question their own sanity and the overall validity of their own memories.

Oops, seems like I struck a nerve. First of all, I completely agree with Deadpool. Second of all, the reason we have an official forum is so that we have a point of contact with Eagle Dynamics. I don't mind ED being active on other platforms, not at all. But it's very strange when questions are answered on other platforms but not their own official forum. It's even stranger that they answer the questions in PMs but they refuse to reply in the actual thread for all to see. This time the information made its way from Steam onto the forum. Great. But how many unanswered questions have not been relayed to the forums? Do I have to be active on the ED forums, Steam, Reddit, Facebook and Youtube to get a complete picture and find the answers I'm looking for? I don't understand how you can be defending that. I hope you can cope with this "unleashing" onto you. Stay strong!

I completely agree! The Sniper XR would vastly improve the capabilities of the Viper, even without the advanced features like target recognition and stuff. I've heard of F-16 pilots being able to point track targets with the Sniper XR at over 80 nm. I'd be happy if they developed an initial trial version of the Sniper pod, when it had the same software as the LITENING. Alternatively, they could guesstimate the systems like they do with so much else.

Are you daft? Why is it weird that people want confirmation on the official forums? I don't own DCS on steam, why the hell should I have to go there for information about DCS? I don't know if you've noticed, but this thread has 53 posts and none of them is an answer from an ED employee. They stealthily removed it from the road map, and now they refuse to talk about it. It's like Stalin photo shopping people out of photographs. But you can be damn sure that if I posted a picture of classified manuals or something, they'd be here in a flash. It's not that they're not listening, they're just choosing to completely ignore us. Par for the course as an DCS F-16 customer though...

This dude would have been brain dead after 3 seconds if DCS G-modeling is correct.

*"...at least we have something to forget on startup" FTFY

Amazing performance, superb avionics design, and most important of all, the appearance! Sooo beatiful!

Pretty much everything you mention is in the real jet, it's just not implemented yet in DCS. You also have to remember that the A-10C has the same stick has the F-16, but the F-16 has to provide HOTAS controls for the radar systems as well so that's why there wasn't room for markpoints and the likes on the HOTAS. However, all you have to do is press 7 on the ICP, then TMS up to mark. Then if you press ICP 0 you make that markpoint your active steerpoint. If you haven't bound the ICP to your numpad already, you should really do that. Once you get used to the DED and how it works you don't even have to look at it when inputting stuff. All you need to do is let go of your throttle for two second and you're good. I even input stuff while banking in fingertip without any issues. Also, about the SPI thing, I'd argue the F-16 is more effective. In the A-10C you need to designate SPI manually and then slew sensors to the SPI manually as well. In the F-16, everything is SPI all the time. Move your ground radar and your TGP moves with it. And if you want to move the SPI back, just press cursor zero. I'd imagine the reason you SPI stays offset, even when you change steerpoints, is so that if your INS drifts and you have a steerpoint at some sort of recognizable feature (a building or something) you don't have to realign the entire INS to account for drift, whether large or small. Instead, you can simply "align" the SPI and then it stays at that offset which is much quicker. And yes, it's 2021 and we have GPS nowadays, but in a real full scale war, GPS satellites would probably be the first thing to go so flying solely on INS is still a very important ability. Also, I think you're underestimating how incomplete the DCS F-16 is. I'd say we've gotten about 15% of the way so there's still tonnes of stuff left to do for ED. It's definitely a rough transition coming from the A-10C which is the most complete module in DCS.

All of those things can be done or worked around when only using HOTAS controls. 1. Radar range is controlled by the cursor. Move the cursor to the top of the display to increase range and move it to the bottom of the display to reduce. 2. Steerpoints can't be cycled per se using the HOTAS, but you can instead simply select your desired steerpoint using the HSD cursor and selecting a steerpoint. As far as I know, this functionality hasn't been implemented yet in the DCS F-16. 3. There isn't really a need to switch between modes in the F-16. If you're doing A-G for example, you press A-G on the ICP. If you need to switch to A-A mode you simple set the Dogfight/Missile Override switch to Missile Override. Return the DGFT/MRM switch to the center position and you're back to A-G mode exactly where you left off. That's one of the best features of the F-16. You can look at an area with the A-G radar (not implemented) and TGP, then you flip the switch to Override and the radar and TGP automatically goes into A-A mode and you can do whatever you want. Then when you cancel the override both the radar and TGP goes back to A-G mode and points at the same place they did before the override. As someone who has flown the A-10C religiously since before DCS World even existed, and who has flown the F-16 for the same amount of time (though mostly in another sim), I'm sure you'll come to love the F-16 once you get into the groove of things. The main upside of the F-16 compared to something like the F-18 is the avionics. They're incredibly efficient and very user friendly in my opinion, just like the A-10C. The F-16 has been neglected by ED though in favour of development of the the F-18, Mi-24 and AH-64 so there is an insane amount of features that haven't been implemented yet. Hopefully they can pick up the pace this autumn though as the F-18 gets closer to being feature complete.

This. I've simply bound my numpad and arrows to the ICP controls as I have a HOTAS and TrackIR, so I don't need their initial functionality. If you do this, you can input coordinates while you're in the F10 view. Just learn how to input everything without looking at the DED and you can input your coordinates in a flash, even for multiple steerpoints.

It's hard to tell if it's a bug or pilot error from just your description. Has the SPI been moved, are there strong winds, what's the aircraft position relative to the target, etc. ? If you could post a track file or something similar that'd help in figuring out what went wrong. The artificial horizon can tumble some times. It's solved by pushing/pulling the rotary to reset it and scroll to readjust the indicator.

A word of advice as I see you don't have a lot of posts: Don't ever mention that other F-16 sim or post pictures from it or anything like that on this forum. The moderators will remove your posts if you do and you'll probably receive warnings/strikes too. Regarding the issue at hand, pretty much all the moving HUD symbology in the DCS F-16 is broken to some degree. It's most likely going to stay that way for the foreseeable future judging from the patch history for the DCS F-16 over the last year.

Yes. It doesn't matter if it's markpoints or not, but markpoints are definitely easier if you don't have pre-planned target steerpoints. Just pickle, next STPT, pickle, next STPT, etc.

As I mentioned previously in this thread, if you move your default head position backwards to where a pilots head would be in real life, you won't have any issues seeing the RWR.

Request: Create a DiCE "launcher" which starts the DiCE software and replaces the countermeasure files, then automatically starts DCS as soon as the files has been replaced. This way we could just always launch DCS through DiCE and we'd never have any issues with updates overwriting files or anything.

Yes, you are completely correct but I feel like you've misunderstood me. An official API would be the preferred solution. What I'm saying is that a heterogeneous mess of bespoke solutions is infinitely better than what we have now, which is nothing. We literally have nothing at all. That's why I'd rather have a simple .lua file in saved games where you can setup your avionics with simple true/false statements and integers. They teased the DTC like over a year ago and we've seen ZERO progress since. So until we reach the year or decade when the DTC actually gets released with an official API or whatever, give us a shitty, convoluted stopgap in the meantime.

The issue isn't with anything obstructing the RWR per se. The main issue is the same we had in the A-10C where ED had placed the default view position much farther forward than a pilots eyes would be in real life. Hold R-CTRL and R-SHIFT while pressing the zoom/view bindings on the numpad to adjust your head position. There is some way to save a new default view position so you don't have to set it every single flight, but I don't remember how to do that unfortunately. If you place your view about a heads distance from the headrest you won't have any issues seeing the RWR. Doing this you might see a little bit less of the HUD symbology but you should still see almost everything. This is because a pilots eyes can see more of the HUD symbology at the same distance as each eye views the HUD from a different angle. And like others said, TrackIR or a similar DIY solution helps a lot. It doesn't have to be expensive, I know people who've put together a DIY tracking solution for under $20.

Thanks, I'll check things on my end then!

Is it just me or is the github download capped at 100 kb/s?

To be honest, a proper mission planner isn't completely necessary. All we need is a .lua file covering all the editable options that doesn't get removed after every patch, then a third-party software like CombatFlite could allow us to easily edit those options. If we have to wait for an official ED mission planner, I'm afraid that's going to take years until we see it implemented.

That'd be cool, but I was thinking only for multicrew modules where you fly as a single aircraft. IIRC the issue with flying SP Campaigns/Missions in multiplayer is that triggers don't work properly with multiple player controlled aircraft. That's why I was wondering whether it will be possible in the AH-64D where you're in the same aircraft and there won't be any issues with triggers and such.

Will all single player campaigns and missions for the AH-64D be playable as two player co-op with a human pilot and gunner in the same helicopter? It'd be awesome if you could do entire campaigns with a buddy in the front/back seat.

Don't forget cursor bullseye!

Auto Handoff is wildly unreliable in its current state. You're better off using Manual Handoff or simply slewing the mavericks themselves.

Congratulations. Who are you arguing against? Why are you in this subforum making nonsensical statements? Are you under the impression that anyone in this thread have ever propagated for the F-16 being given priority over the F-18? From the beginning of this thread people have been propagating for an end to the complete and utter neglect of the DCS F-16C module. That's it. And your whining about people whining isn't contributing to anything meaningful whatsoever.