Sharpe_95

I can confirm that keeping the INS knob set to off for at least 10 seconds does allow for a re-alignment attempt. -Please delete post - no bug-

Sorry if this has already been posted, or if this just inst in the F16 module yet. I was messing around with the velocity switch as I needed to fly to a G/S rather than an CAS when I noticed there was no readout at all. I have added a track but the issue is very repeatable. I assume this is something ED just hasn't got round to yet in the F16 EA rather than a bug? -S Gnd Spd Error.trk

[OP edited on account of replaying the track and noticing that the issue does not appear to be linked just to extreme altitude - could a MOD please update the title to remove 'at extreme altitude'?] I cant imagine this is very important (unless it speaks to a slight/imperceptible error at lower altitudes). I noticed today when flying the F16 at extreme altitudes there was a noticeable mismatch between the speed readout in the HUD and the airspeed/mach indicator. I have a track (but its necessarily long so I have not uploaded it), but I also took a screen shot (attached) to show the mismatch. I set the DED to show the INS page so that the G/S could be seen for reference. My AoA is not completely stupid (about 6-deg, so only about 2-3-deg off normal). I would add that clearly this is not a mismatch between the CAS and TAS. Examples from the track (taken while sim paused to be sure of readouts, G/S taken from the INS page of the DED, some of the airspeed indicator readouts are approximate as it can be hard to get an exact figure): 12:15:24. A16 GS=492. HUD=388. Airspeed indicator=400. F2=391. (Afterburner applied c.15-degree climb). 12:15:46. A20 GS=501. HUD=361. Airspeed indicator=373. F2=363. (No afterburner, c.2-degree climb). 12.17.04. A25. GS=501. HUD=332. Airspeed indicator=347. F2=333. (No afterburner, c.2-degree climb). 12.18.56. A30. GS=605. HUD=367. Airspeed indicator=390. F2=367. (No afterburner, c.1-degree climb). 12.21.15. A45. GS=695. HUD=297. Airspeed indicator=339. F2=296. (Afterburner, c.1-degree climb). 12.26.25. A55. GS=787. HUD=256. Airspeed indicator=300. F2=254. (Afterburner, c.0-degree climb). -S

Hi there, I think I have found a bug relating to the IFF. The issue is as follows: - Once the jet is aligned and ready, I turn the IFF master switch to 'NORM'. - This has the effect of putting the IFF status on the CNI page of the DED, showing mode, channels etc in the bottom left. However, the bug (I believe) is that if you move the IFF master switch to 'OFF', the CNI page does not change, it keeps the same IFF status information (mode, channels etc in the bottom left - as it was when it was set to 'NORM') - despite the IFF Master Switch being set to 'OFF'. I would have thought if the IFF Master Switch is set to 'OFF' it should display no information in the CNI page, as it does when it is originally in the 'OFF' position? I have tried to see if waiting a period of time (over two minutes) resolves the issue, or if moving out of the CNI page to another page resolves the issue, or turning MIDS and/or L16 off changes the page - it does not (see track). It might also be worth investigating further to see if this has an impact on the IFF interrogation of F16s in general (do they still operate as if IFF in 'NORM' when it is actually set to 'OFF', or if the IFF master has never been turned to NORM in the first place)? I have sent a track file to BIGNEWY via email as the file is 1mb to large to fit as an attachment. -S

Rgr thank you. -S

Hi mvsags - I appreciate the document is not relevant to our F16 (as per my OP). So your saying our F16 definitely does not have this type of DLZ and therefore its a question of whether or not ED choose to add it anachronistically? -S

Hi mvsags, Yes I agree its hard to tell which ones get which. When you say 'may not apply to our F16' are you certain it does not or speculating? As I say in my OP I suspect a Dev or Mod may need to answer this to get a definitive answer less someone has something solid to go on - so many flavours of F16 out there as you say :-S -S

Its obviously very hard to keep track of which F16 has what so I apologise to the Dev's if this is not for our F16 (or if this has already been covered and is WIP). During the late 1980s the A/B variants had a series of 'tapes' (updates) as part of a mid-life update (MLU) program (finished around 1997?) that (as far as I can tell) bought them more in line with the software and equipment that would be on the C/D block 50s. Part of the M2 tape update included a DLZ with more information on it than the original F16s. Including markers for RAERO, ROPT, RPI RTR & R-MIN. See the document linked 'F16A-B Block 20 MLU Pilots Guide' Pp54-57: http://www.airwar.ru/other/manuals/[aviation]%20-%20[manuals]%20-%20F-16A-B%20MLU%20Pilot%20Guide%20Part%202.pdf Can one of the Devs/Mods indicate if we are expecting to get this enhanced DLZ in the DCS F16 at any point or if we are stuck with the limited one we have ATM? Not complaining, would just like to know if there is more on the way? -S

All, I dont pretend to know very much about this at all so I apologise if I am way off - but it strikes me as odd. I was just messing around with some different ranged shots in the F16 Instant Action 'Intercept' mission to get an idea of the AIM120 performance relative to the DLZ when I noticed this (see acmi - sorry no track). Notice how the 4th missile pulls an excessive lead on the target jet. To my mind this is well over what I would expect to see under the circumstances. The missile was locked all the way in, I didn't snip it at all, even when it would have gone active. The excessive lead seems a little odd to me? I could understand if the target pulled G to kinematically defeat the missile, or it decoyed it using countermeasures, but I would have assumed the missile would have gone behind, not ahead of the target? Is this a bug or normal behaviour? (Sorry, drop box link as TACVIEW not an acceptable format for upload here). https://www.dropbox.com/s/cynxi3zeq5yqlfm/Tacview-20200429-155511-DCS-F-16C%20-%20Caucasus%20-%20Fighter%20Intercept.zip.acmi?dl=0 -S PS: Sorry - I have posted this in the F16 thread as that is what I was flying - I dont know if it qualifies as an 'F16 bug' (if it even is a bug) or something else.

Rgr thanks. - S

Thanks for the notes guys :) I will look into the second issue and see if I can replicate and make a track. -S

I dont know if this is a bug, correct as is or is simply not implemented yet? (Appologoes if it is one of the latter two options). I have noticed that when the steerpoint diamond is off the HUD it does not show in the HMCS when looking at the steerpoint locations through the HMCS (yes the HMCS is in). Again, sorry is this is correct as is or just not implemented yet. -S

@ Mods: sorry I posted before I put the full title. Would you mind editing the title to show the following for clarity: Bug or correct? Alignment fails if selecting alignment before power to avionics first. Hi guys, I have noticed two linked 'issues' and I wonder if they are a bug or deliberate? 1) If you start the alignment (or turn the alignment knob to Stored Heading/Normal align) BEFORE the power has been applied to the other navigation systems the alignment fails. 2) If the alignment fails in this situation, turning alignment to Off and either re-attempting a stored or Normal alignment the alignment will still fail. Is this deliberate or as intended? -S

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/docs/16v5.pdf Pp, 239-250. -S

As title really. I was running through a series of HARTS last night with a VFW buddy and we both noticed that the horn did not sound - so ARTS more thank HARTS :megalol: Just thought I would post in case it was a bug, but I suspect this simply has not been got round to in the dev of the jet atm. -S

I might be in a minority here but (some quirky behaviour notwithstanding) I think the release we have of the F16 is better than the initial release of the Hornet? Patience, it will come. I know we want our 'fav stuff' ASAP, but ED consistently knock out good stuff - its just a bit of a journey to get there. Much better this than no F16 at all surely? -S

+1

Thanks Newy

Hi Fredef, Thanks for the info. Can I ask 3 questions and direct one point at the Devs/Newy. Fredef: Any thoughts on why this is so in the F16 but not the A10c or the FA18c - they are broadly of the same era? How does the F16 reconcile its time (manually, and likely with some degree of inaccuracy) with the time that I assume the GPS equipment needs to use? How comes the aircraft does not take its system time data (ie, the one displayed in the DED) from the on board GPS equipment once it is turned on? Surely that seems like something of a limitation? Newy/Dev team: Please be aware, I have made a track and the analogue clock is also not correct to the sim time. I think it only comes alive at the point the battery in the jet is turned on? This does not stack up with Frederfs point about using the analogue clock to set the time but it is definitely not reading the same as the in game time -S F16 System Time Test.trk

Might this have something to do with the Data Link inconsistency? -S

@ MoDs - please could you move this to the bug thread? Guys I dont know if this is a bug or as planned so I have put it here first to test what people think. But I cant help but think it may have knock on effects for the Data Link and particularly for (when we get it) the ToT/Carret. I noticed today when I flew with a sqn buddy (from a pause start mission that I was hosting), we got into the pit, un-paused, then about 1-2 minutes of mission time elapsed. When the engine started and applied power to the DED (and other aircraft functions), the clock set itself to 0800 local time. HOWEVER: The mission starts at exactly 08.00 local time, so after a minute or two getting the engine going, the time simply could not have been 08.00. Further, when I cross checked the time with my Sqn buddy (also flying an F16 and joined the mission at the exact same time as me), we had different times (separated by about 15-25 seconds or so, I cant remember the exact error margin). Is this correct? I cant help but think it really cant be right? If two aircraft have different times on thier clock, how are we going to fly to ToTs correctly. If I start my jet and it thinks its 08:02:30 and another guys starts up a bit slower or comes in a little later and his jet thinks its 08:04:15 then or ToT will never sync or work correctly if we are flying the same flight path to the 'same' ToT. I also wonder if this has a knock on impact with the Data Link as this is synced by time. If jets are showing the wrong times, will it/can it be working correctly? Just pondering guys, I might be wrong. Does anyone else see this behaviour? Is it a bug/error? -S

Originally Posted by Deano87 View Post We have auto-rudder and takeoff assist for warbirds, we also have the Maverick Realistic Slew option in the F-18, so how about a Special Options tickbox for the F-16 which says "Precise Roll Trim" which ads a slow speed trim period initially so small dabs of stick trim do small changes and it allows people to actually trim the thing out. People who want absolute realism can keep it off. +1 I would add that having set my mouse roll to 1 line per click I still cant trim the aircraft using the mouse wheel on the trim roll. Nor does single left/right clicks fix the roll. I just dont have a way to make a fine enough adjustment to make the aircraft fly straight and level when it is asymmetrically configured. If EDs position is "you may not be a able to trim the aircraft for straight and level flight when asymmetrically configured because that is how it is in real life" then I can accept and understand that. However, it is a royal pain and this isn't real life and as Deano has said, a player aid (like has been added for aspects of other hi-fi modules) for those that dont want a wallowing aircraft all the time when its asymmetrically configured would be nice. If on the other hand EDs position is "the jet can be trimmed perfectly for straight and level flight even when asymmetrically configured" then at this point I (and others) do not have the means to do this using any combination of trim hat input of roll wheel insight. In which case maybe something more could be done to smooth this out and make it possible for those that clearly cannot do it through no failing of their own? -S

Do you use your mouse wheel left handed too? ;) IRL a pilot would have muscle memory as to where the trim wheel is and would use the left (throttle) hand to operate the wheel (probably without even looking down, or of looking down, only to locate the wheel while operating it 'head up'). On the other hand, we will need to take our hand off the stick to operate the wheel by mouse clicking. We will have to take our view off the horizon and look down at the wheel, adjust, look up, adjust, look up - all with the hand of the flight stick. Hardly a perfect reflection of real life? I get the commitment to real life but there is something to be said for pragmatism and helping out virtual pilots enjoy the sim. I hope ED provide an option to help with the trim in the settings. Making a 'true or fine trim hat coarsness' option in the special settings would be a true compromise as it allows the hard core to do what they want while helping out those that cant fly with their mouse hand of the stick fiddling with the trim wheel. Fingers crossed. -S

Yeah +1 on this devs - we dont have the blessing of a roll axis for a trim wheel and where as a pilot would feel for the wheel we have to look down take our hands off the stick to click the trim wheel look back up see if it worked and so on. There is realism and pragmatism. I really hope pragmatism will win out here as this a making the F16 pointless to fly as is. -S