跳转到帖子

Shadow KT

Members
  • 帖子数

    2,692
  • 注册日期

  • 上次访问

最新回复 发布由 Shadow KT

  1. On 3/15/2025 at 12:50 PM, Flappie said:

    I cannot reproduce this issue with the T-72B3.

    Please tell me it wasn't a joke only intended to post that GIF. 😏

    T-72B3.trk 150.57 kB · 2 downloads

    I've just bumped the interna report about the Leo2.

    I've been on DCS for so long that I wish that I was joking anytime I had to post anything on the forums...

    T-72B3 helicopter prototype.trk

    Do enough of the above and it eventually turns into an actual helicopter, especially in multiplayer.

    As soon as you use the laser rangefinder, the issues starts protrudings through the curtains

  2. 13 hours ago, Tholozor said:

    The rearming menu doesn't take the wing and centerline pylon weights into account (although it does in the editor). I did a breakdown over here: 

     

    Then it would show less weight than the Checklist page, which as shown in the screenshots it did not.

    Also the answer by Vader in that post makes no sense to me... can someone elaborate? How does that work, is the checklist weight programmed, or is it an actual weight reading on the gear?

    If it's a sensor on the gear, how does it differentiate between pylons and actual "cargo", i.e. weapons? If the pylon is not part of the aircraft, then it's cargo as well.... what?

  3. Seems like this classic of a bug from time past has returned.

     

    Loadout menu and Checklist weight/ ME (small difference between Checklist/ ME) do not match.

     

    Discrepency changes based on loadout and weapons used/ re-fueling (air). I've seen from +2K LBS to -3K LBS.

     

    I've attached quick few tracks that display the issue at its basic, by demonstrating the difference in weight on a hot start with different loadouts.

     

    In all the tracks, the checklist weight shows higher weight than the loadout screen, which is not that bad. The real trouble is when your checlist page shows a lower weight than your actual.

     

    Was flying an op (shoutout to CVW-69), had to hit the tanker on the way back, before recovery, emergency fuel state (Was down to 1200LBS). Fueled up 35000 LBS indicated on the Checklist page. This put me at around 6K LBS fuel, which did make me rise an eyebrow for a moment, but checklist shows we are at 35000 LBS (will burn at least 1K by the time I get to the deck; CASE III), so we should be good.

    Well, ended up with a bent gear on landing, thankfully I trapped first try. I was rather surpsied that I damaged the gear, taking into consideration that this is a Hornet we are talking about, made to land on carrier, random failure must be was my first thought, even shut down the jet... 

     

    Then again... started the right engine just to check:

     

    image.png?ex=669f8f97&is=669e3e17&hm=9fc

    Checklist page shows 33.8K with 5.4K internal, two fuel tanks and a HARM on the jet..... Yeah, it is not adding up.

     

    Opened up the fuel rearming panel, which shows your current fuel level percentage, removed what was not on the jet from the starting loadout and the weight indicated near 3K above, what the checlist was showing.

    Reduced the fuel until I matched what was currently on the checklist page hit rearm and sure enough, crew started taking off fuel. Ended up with 2.4K fuel to match the previously shown checklist weight and as suspected the checlist page now showed 30.9K:

     

    image.png?ex=669f9021&is=669e3ea1&hm=413

    Weight 1.trk Weight 2.trk Weight 3.trk Weight 4.trk

  4. Its an age old .... gimmick might be the correct word here, that's present on most tanks. Game has a set max range for AP rounds - usually around 3200meters for most MBTs (2500m for M60).

    The Abrams also used to be a victim of this gimmick, but it got quietly fixed. The Chinese MBT, subsequently, as an Abrams copy, within DCS, also works similarly to the abrams.

     

    There was a thread about this somewhere, with the typical answer of... ugh, do you have proof, that the FCS can actually calculate for such a range, hurrr durr.

     

    I am sure the Challenger 1 which hit a T-55 from 5000meters was actually just blind luck and kentuchy windage, the gunner probably visually aimed the gun by looking out the hatch.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  5. On 11/19/2023 at 1:51 PM, Flappie said:

    Hi @Shadow KT . I need a Caucasus track. Could you please try and reproduce this issue over Caucasus? Then I'll report it right away.

    Although, I've seen it happen once on the Caucasus, I cannot seem to reproduce it. That said, I can reproduce it 100% on Syria. Is this not reportable, because it happens on a map different from the Caucasus?

  6. Some sort of a variation is still going on.

    Seems like ROE is playing an effect on what is happening when changing states. In Spot ROE.trk you can observe how if ROE is set to HOLD, and as an example you go from RED to GREEN, dishes will stop spinning, but the target will remain visible on the map and vice versa. 

    I have not tested what is seen from a pilot's perspective (RWR). @Flappie

     

    Spot No Radar 2.trk Spot No Radar.trk No Spot Rada On.trk

    • Like 1
  7. When defending against HARMs (I suspect the result will be the same against other weapons as well), the SA-10 consistently flies its missiles substantially higher than their target. Meaning the SA-10 missiles arc high, when engaging incoming AGM-88Cs (difference between missiles and target altitude increases with range). The delta can be in the tens of thousands of feet.

    I've attached two tracks (with stationary and mobile radars), as well as an example Tacview file.

    image.png

    SA-10 Miss High #1.trk SA-10 Miss High #2.trk Tacview-20231118-173404-DCS-VX NTTR .zip.acmi

    • Like 1
  8. With the new SA-10 models, we can now enjoy an almost fully mobile SA-10, with the exception of a Search Radar.

    The TELs, the TR and the C2 can move.

    For whatever reason, the new Big Bird unit is a trailer only unit and it is missing its tractor.

    Is this intentional, or can we expect the trailer in the future?

    image.png?ex=656b1ab2&is=6558a5b2&hm=e04

    ^ SA-10 on the move!

    image.png?ex=656b1b6c&is=6558a66c&hm=1b2

    ^ Old model with the tractor attached!

    image.png

    ^New model without a tractor.

    Also I am not sure if the illuminator on the new model is supposed to be offset from the center of the radar.

    So, bug/ feature, can we expect changes?

    • Like 2
  9. On 5/29/2023 at 3:19 PM, boerdi said:

    Has anyone else the issue where a tank (e.g. a M1A2 who is already present in the session when you join a server) has working engine sound and where a M1A2 that gets spawned in via script (e.g. CTLD) lacks engine sound?

    Referring to my recent experience that I posted in this thread (incl. video, log & track file of spawn-in test with unmodded game)

    At one moment I had the Blackhawk mod installed and did the manual config edit thing and engines of present tanks work fine in MP but are absent for those who spawn in via script.

    This problem also happens without any mods installed (c.f. the linked thread)

     

    Yeah, I think I am experiencing the same issue

×
×
  • 创建新的...