Dr Zaius

So having not played DCS in some time I thought I'd do check to see if this old problem has been fixed and no, despite the internal report being updated (whatever that means) it still has the inputs reversed - can somebody explain why this hasn't been fixed please only it's been almost 6 months now since it was first reported, thanks

Why was it changed in the first place? If its because of a real life change in ammo usage then surely it would have been better to have both types available in the load out screen and give the user an additional option rather than force them to use whats historically correct, I know this is a simulation and things should be kept as real as possible but what if you want to recreate ops at a time period when API was the norm?

I don't think TP rounds are as accurate and I believe that's what we're seeing in the original video + a slightly further engagement range - TP muzzle velocities are generally quicker and I think that's due to them being a lighter (cheaper) round, in particular when compared to denser/heavier/slower rounds like API (DU/tungsten). In terms of it not making sense to train with a round that varies so much in accuracy I don't think there's much you can do about it, the pilot still gets to employ the gun against a target, which is invaluable and any inaccuracies due to the nature of ammo being used can easily be accounted for by the ranges 'score checkers'.

This is a good watch and gives you some sort of idea how accurate the gun was in many of the tests carried out:

Hey thanks dude, much appreciated!

@BIGNEWYI hope you don’t mind me asking like this but if a 3rd party developer cannot fix a problem because its deemed to be an ‘ED issue’ then is it down to the developer to report the issue back to you guys or the user?

This argument has pretty much come full circle - you've defended how you go about categorising posts then submitted to creating an additional [Future Implementations] folder that will help separate out the posts that ordinarily would be marked as [Resolved]. I don't mean to blow my own trumpet but I did suggest this a while back! If user opinions are what you hold dear then why not poll the forum to really see how people feel about its current implementation?

I thought it looked a little on the flat side, appreciate they wanted to show the map off at high altitude as thats the best way to get sense of scale but the low down stuff looked overly flat to me - perhaps it was the locations they chose to tease us with?

Surely then this would be easily fixed by creating different folders for both [Resolved] and [Future Implementation] and separate the categories from one another, unless of course your suggesting there’s something more sinister at play here? I say this because I’ve encountered a level of misunderstanding from Razbam recently that was so frustrating I started to believe it a deliberate ploy to ignore the bug I was trying to report - without a proper understanding of what the issue was my post was marked up as [User Error] and moved to [Resolved] where further dialog all but ceased and only got moving again after both myself and others re-explained the issue over & over and kept calling Razbam out to take another look at it, only then did they finally understand and moved the post from Resolved section and back into the Problems & Bugs. The point then I guess I'm trying to make is that with most things in life some level of perseverance and patience is required, I totally get its super frustrating when you feel ignored an/or misunderstood and know its made worse because ultimately you’re doing this to help them out as much as you want it fixed for yourself. I don’t want to play devil’s advocate but there a lot of factors at play here, however I do believe that lots can be done to improve the situation we’re all in so if getting ED involved is the only way to push for a better product then so be it, will be interesting to see what they make of it all. Good luck!

Yeah I think the gun does need a little spread, shame this clip doesn't clearly show the engagment range.

Its a shame the APU can’t be spun up to actuate the gun, not sure I’ll ever get used to diving towards the ground with power.

Having a working manual would prevent this sort of thing, you need perseverance to fly this module you really do.

Bingo!

I did look at your suggested review and can confirm that it has nothing to do with the problem we're having, if you don't understand how I've explained then please read the posts from both @dorianR666 and @lllcky In short it doesn't matter if you have a TPOD fitted or not and you could read the new HTS mode switch logic until the cows come home but if you try to use a keyboard press for INS slew (we don't all own a HOTAS) then that axis becomes inverted.

Hey @RAZBAM_ELMO, can we get a reply to this please, any reply will do - thanks

Interesting, it looks like the squeeze of the gun trigger sets a mark point for the targeting pod!

Thats a really good represtation @Fri13 and explains why I couldn't get my direction correct when running in on a bomb run. One of the missions that Baltic Dragon released for the excellent mini-campaign has you taking directions from a JTAC who wants you to run in from a specific compass heading, if you follow the targeting pods directional arrows you get told off for getting it wrong - how ironic that their own products highlight the error.

Can I ask please what the forum rules are / etiquette is regarding getting ED involved? I've attempted to engage with Elmo several times now asking that they take another look at a post that due to a misunderstanding has been marked up as [user error] and moved to resolved, since then and despite several other users reporting the same problem / reaching out for assistance all dialog has completely stopped - I don't want to resort to such actions but detest being ignored like that, it's both rude and unprofessional.

Well the post hasn't been marked up as [working as instended] and moved to resolved so there's hope yet!

That's odd, though not related to the same issue the below link does have a screen shot of another users export and all looks fine - have you any mods installed and/or maybe try to adjust the mfd resolution in the sim settings?

Are the FLIR images fixed as well? Along with the map brightness issue I found the DMT and TPOD to be a little too dark when extrating exports.

So I've just been messing around with the DMT slew feature to see if the hud icon was behaving itself as per the recent fix (it used to jump around and wasn't in sync) and noted that the initial movement of the icon is a little bit off what’s on the MFD, I wonder if this has anything to with the inaccuracies we're seeing? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-FUnbUqrZY&ab_channel=LeeSkev

Wow good work laertesson - to be clear my intension wasn't to curb your enthusiasm; I hope it didn’t come across like that.

@RAZBAM_ELMOdo you require further evidence to revisit this issue or has it become a moot point?

+ multible tracks, none of which were deemed to be 'concrete evidence' Apprecaite your efforts laertesson but user fixes make me nervous, if we start doing the work of developers then where does it stop?!