D4n

Negative, I posted the question, if anyone knows more about it...

Ok, yes, but the big issue here is the super sudden and unrealistic non-fluent turn that the SD-10 did in that video/in the tacview-file. Since air is compressible, a missile will definitely not turn as instant as a fast-moving torpedo probably can, for example.

that's what most virtual pilots assume, yes....

source pls

I don't understand this part, please correct it. you misunderstood. Of course that wouldn't make sense. What I meant is that modern RWRs could be tuned for both radar and IFF frequencies, it would be super useful to military pilots.

Okay, thank you for the detailed reply, made a feature-request thread regarding VR/Desktop mode.

as that message was requested solely by VR users (some time ago, to assist in seeing text in a light background, according to Elmo's post here), please keep in mind the thousands (or hundreds) of DCS Harrier pilots who are not flying in VR (either never, or just not in VR most of the time), and please make this message only appear if DCS.exe is running in VR-mode (programmability-wise there probably are several ways to detect if DCS is running in a "VR-mode" or with a VR-headset connected, or due to a specific DCS-window resolution, as the game-window has a different on-screen resolution when using a VR headset than when in desktop-mode).

Well no big deal... in my above post I managed to reproduce... didn't you read? ^^ But thanks for trying again!!

Yes, and for all we know ED might be fully focussing on Mi-24 and R-73-capable Ka-50-update instead, and it could take another 3-6 months for them to finish SLAM scheme... (I wish ED would tell us what they're working on right now. On the other hand, we've not seen another Mi-24 video in almost 6 months iirc, maybe Mi-24-development stopped due to some Mi-24 secrecy-reason? That would be awful.)

Rather at M1.55-1.6 fighters? This is about the missile, not the fighter. TacView only displays what it receives from DCS server, and for that moment where it shows G-force indication, it all should be assumed to be correct data

Ok, here the new track, the title of this bug-thread even remains correct (issue-description: they all lock me although radar-using set to "never use". They ignore radar-using option it appears, when set to "never use".) AiStillHasRadarOnDespiteRadarUsingOptionSetToNeverUse.trk Source of your claim please. Modern (and expensive) RWRs could detect several bandwidths most likely, at least this would make sense from military point of view.

ah, interesting. Turns out it is related to the Flankers not having any route-point in my setup. Probably worthy of a new separate bug report, or?

source for your claim please?

So I wondered whether the DCS Flanker aircraft (J-11, Su-33, Su-27) can IFF the DCS Harrier (for example) from their EOS-lock (IRST) without the Harrier's RWR detecting an incoming radio-wave from that specific direction. One would assume an RWR to technically be able to detect the direction of the source of any radio-wave, now according to these two publicly available sources (a document and article) some (or all?) IFF systems are using C, D, E & I-Bands (if I understand the sources correctly), but does this also go for 1980-90s soviet/russian airborne IFF systems? If so, does anyone know if specific RWRs are at least able to detect the direction of the source of for example airborne 1960s/70s IFF-interrogations? (Is there anything declassified about such meanwhile-50-to-60-years-old IFF-technology?) Very interesting topic imo. *fixed 2nd source link.

See trackfile. RWR-spikes of the "never use radar using"-Flankers Ai stays. Also, they all are failing to do "search and engage", they are not attacking me (search me with their EOS for example, that is what I wanted to test, if Harrier RWR would detect IFF-request from the Flanker aircraft if they are in EOS, because afaik, IFF-requests are radio-wave transmissions that RWRs would detect. But am unable to test that in singleplayer now because of this radar-bug... ...Will try to find someone to test with in a multiplayer-server. ) second track is Ai failing to engage without the RadarUsing option. AiStillHasRadarOn.trk AiFailingToEngageWithoutRadarUsingOption.trk

When I slide opacity from 255 to 0, everything vanishes... :/

When I edit the cockpit texture (first picture, windows explorer) this is what I see (2. picture), any idea how to see the texture better?

Why not? Google drive is one of the most secure external sources, I don't get what you're worried about Don't you understand that many DCS players only fly multiplayer (because it's more realistic.....) and therefore most issues only occur after a long session (which is thus impossible to reproduce in singleplayer) and that therefore (long session) the MP trackfile is big??

telling you for the 10th time, impossible, due to insanely small ED forum limitations.... (cost reasons probably) why do you keep insisting instead of simply checking the trackfile???

Hi, did SME confirm that gunpod guncircle is quite brighter than rest of HUD? It's not been this way before a few patches, that's why asking. TooBrightGunCirclePossibly.trk

Reproduce: hover mouse over any thread title in this subforum for example. Then click somewhere else, that won't close the pop-up, only time will close it. Please make it close as soon as user moves mouse away from popup-box.

Hm. In that case, maybe it is time to adjust those aircraft to behave like all other modules regarding that aspect

Woooow... Matra Magic is affected aswell now... (it appears an OpenBeta patch in the past months changed the pre-flaring logic to not be 100% successfull anymore... either only vs. -9X and Magic, or even vs all heater missiles in DCS) SameB....sh.tWithMagicNow.trk who added the tags "missile evasion - dcs mechanics" btw? ^^

See trackfile. Possibly related to the code having defined that the engine does not use any tiny bit of fuel at 9.2%? (which would be unrealistic) Important as we want to repair our Harrier inside a Hangar if we're damaged by a player (from strafing for example) to the extend that our engine won't spool over 9.2% RPM (and engine-off being required for ground-crew to start repair.) EngineNotCutting9.2percent.trk

rather high priority, as very frustrating for us PvP players (probably also affects some PvE), as it's of no use currently to spawn at a player-contested airfield with players flying in the vicinity (easy targets for us good vertical AIM-9-Harrier-pilots) and of no use then to dump fuel on the parking spot to reach the vertical-takeoff weight, if the chocks are screwed into the concrete and the wheels