ricnunes

Recently I've been playing with the F-5E (FC version) for the first time and I'm now trying to use the CBU-52 cluster bombs and was going to report an issue with these same bombs when I stumbled across this thread and so, I decided to post here instead of creating a new thread. Basically CBU-52s are unusable since targets hit by their bomblets don't seem to get any damage at all. It's as if the bomblets don't do any damage at all. For instance I attach here the results of a release of two (2) GBU-52 where some of their bomblets hit 3 vehicles (SA-6 TELs) but absolutely no damage was done to the vehicles/TELs. By the way, this bombing was done by releasing the bombs at 6,000 ft (dive bombing pattern) while the vehicles were located themselves at a locating with an elevation of only 33 ft (almost sea level) so the problem shouldn't be not having enough time to fuse and I do see the bomblets explode using external view camera or looking outside the plane's canopy.

First, adding a GBU-54 to the F/A-18C wouldn't be dragging into infinity since and afterall the GBU-54 and its functionalities are already modeled thanks to A-10C2. And regarding your points: 1) Perhaps having modeled a 2012 F-18 would have been better in order to go along with for the example A-10C2 which you mentioned. But on the other hand, there's probably not much diference between a 2005 F/A-18C and a 2012 one, this apart from very small diferences such as carrying GBU-54 which is what's being requested here. 2) I fully and totally disagree with you and I can't see the logic of that reasoning of yours. There's nothing that prevents a 2005 F/A-18 to be fitted in 2012 with a GBU-54. At the same time there's no way on Earth that a 2005 F/A-18 could go back to 1989 (unless someone invents Time Travel!) 3) This argument isn't nearly bad as the ones you gave ("If you want the GBU-54, just get the A-10C2". "If you want the GBU-54 on the F-18, just play a different game"), not even by a long shot! My argument doesn't force you to play like I would like to but your argument forces me to play like you want to. Get the diference? Besides, if I wanted to use the GBU-54 with the A-10C2, I wouldn't be here in this part of the forum (DCS F/A-18)!

I know there was a thread about this wishlist but and since that thread is now locked and I would really like to add my 2 cents about the subject which I believe are sound and somehow backs up this wish (GBU-54 Laser/GPS fitted to DCS F/A-18C), I took the "liberty" of creating this one. The other thread was locked because ED (backed up by a few members) believe this to be unrealistic because the F/C-18C modeled in DCS is from 2005 while the GBU-54 was introduced/integrated on the F/A-18C in 2012 (some sources indicates sooner but lets stick with 2012) but I fully disagree and here's why: The weapon (GBU-54) was introduced in 2012 which is only 7 years from the service date of 2005 of the F/A-18C modeled in DCS. As such it's not far fetched that 2005 F/A-18C's could or did have been fitted with the GBU-54 seven (7) years later, this without the same F/A-18C's having received any meaningful upgrades in the meanwhile. Which is far more realistic having a 2005 F/A-18 carrying GBU-54s OR having the same 2005 F/A-18C flying in a 1989 campaign (Task Force Challenger), the campaign that comes with DCS F/A-18C? This is obviously a rhetorical question because the answer is clear: It's impossible for a 2005 F/A-18C to fly in 1989 (unless someone invents time travel) but again it's not impossible for a 2005 F/A-18C to be fitted with a weapon that entered in service with the US Navy Hornets circa 2012 (or 7 years later). Yet, ED accepts the scenario of a 2005 Hornet flying in 1989 but not the one that the same Hornet uses a weapon (GBU-54) that came a few years after. Puzzling, I must say! Some users have backed up this ED decision because of the reason above (Hornet being from 2005 while GBU-54 from 2012) but the truth is that if the GBU-54 was integrated in DCS F/A-18C then these same users would still have the CHOICE of not using the weapon. The same applies to mission/campaign builders that have this same opinion. However, having the GBU-54 in DCS F/A-18C CATERS to everyone! Who wants to use the weapon will/could use and who don't, won't use it. Simple as that.

@silverdevil, Thanks for the reply! I just tried it and it seems it worked, thanks!

First of all, I'm not sure if this is the right location to place this topic but if it isn't then sorry (and feel free to change it). Anyway, the point is I believe quite straightforward: Recently I installed a new SSD drive in my gamming PC and my DCS is still installed in a mechanical HDD drive and so my question is, is it possible to easily chance DCS location to the new SDD drive without having to uninstalling and reinstalling DCS (or any other hassle)? And if yes, how? Thanks in advance

Thanks for the feedback @Smashy! After reading your post, I decided to try right away my example test mission with the Mig-29 shooting AA-11 at the player's F/A-18C from behind and at first I was disappointed to find out the the results were unchanged. However and since your post made me wonder, I decided to modify/edit this test of mine by removing/deleting the player's F/A-18C and replacing it by another/new player F/A-18C aircraft and Voilà! It worked! I tested this modified mission (with a new player F/A-18 aircraft) and my results were in 10 tries, I survived 8 times (80%) and died 2 times (20%) which is much, much better and acceptable than what we had before. Great work! However, there's a thing that is making me wonder: Due to situation that I experienced above, will the F/A-18 pilot survivability fix work in existing F/A-18 missions? I still didn't have time to test the existing missions (probably only on Monday, I'll have the chance to do this) and as such, I'll report later. Anyway, this is great news indeed!

Here, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Speicher If you read carefully from the beginning you'll see that it's mentioned that the 100% player/pilot death issue happens when the aircraft is destroyed or if you will, goes totally out of control (with too much damage like losing wings). Or course when the aircraft gets hit in a way that the F/A-18 isn't destroyed but damaged and still controllable - which is extremely rare by way, when hit by missiles - that the pilot won't die, don't you think?

Thanks @BIGNEWY

If that's the case then why do we have a survival rate of 100% in the Mig-29 while in the F/A-18 is 0% when both the Mig-29 and F/A-18 are similarly sized? Actually that's the reason why I compared the F/A-18 with the Mig-29 and not with the F-15C or Su-27 which while having similar survival results as the Mig-29 are much bigger aircraft than both the F/A-18 and Mig-29.

That's not entirely correct or at least not the way to do a proper analysis. The shot down during ODS was the one where a F/A-18 was shot down by a Mig-25. During this event when the F/A-18 was shot down, it got hit by a large and powerful AA-6 (R-40) missile and the pilot actually survived the missile impact and managed to eject. It was only somewhere after the pilot reached the ground that he died and it's not know if he died from injuries or because of the elements (desert can be very cold during night which was the case) or due to both reasons which we don't know and will probably never know. But what is known is that the pilot survived the missile impact and successfully ejected. In the second situation this one during OIF, the F/A-18 was shot down by a Patriot (friendly fire) which is an extremely deadly missile where for example and also during OIF a Patriot also shot down a Tornado (also friendly fire) and both crewmen also died. So and regarding the F/A-18 it's actually 50% of the two only cases/samples. Moreover and during ODS, F/A-18s took direct hits from surface-to-air missiles and survived, something which is impossible with DCS F/A-18C. Source: https://www.military.com/equipment/f-18c-d-hornet

Oh and BTW, I just want to add the following to @BIGNEWY or any other ED member/dev: I'm willing and available to have a videocall with any ED member/developer in order to show what's happening here with the Hornet in whichever chat platform desired. Or alternatively, if you can provide me a contact of another ED member that I could present this issue such as Wags, I would also appreciate. I'm saying this because and again, I'm 100% sure about what I'm talking about here, which is not that often! (and of course, I paid for the module)

From what I'm seeing and testing, the missile will kill always kill the Hornet pilot independently of the angle that it impacts the Hornet. That's why my tests that I shared in this thread always involve the enemy aircraft shooting a heat seeking missile from exactly from behind and without me (player) doing any type of evasive maneuver (just flying straight), so that a rear missile impact is always ensured. But and independently of the reason (hit boxes or other) there's clearly a problem with the Hornet and that's why and like you, I don't play it in campaigns and only do one or two occasional missions with the Hornet, usually quick missions and all of them without using my main pilot profile (I have one created just to fly in the Hornet and "die" in it everytime I get hit by a missile). Actually I would like to watch the hit boxes of the Hornet compared with the Mig-29. BTW, I keep comparing the Hornet with the Mig-29 as their sizes and therefore pilot survivability should be very similar. The Su-27 and F-15C like the Mig-29 also don't have this problem but are quite or even much bigger aircraft and so it makes sense to compare the Hornet with the Mig-29 instead.

Thanks for both your replies @Lt.Turbo and @GeoS72! I fully agree with you assessments and if the values surrounding the Hornet pilot survivability are to be correct then they are clearly wrong! Moreover, I echo @GeoS72 words that's it's odd that the ED team considers the Hornet pilot values "correct" when in fact the chances of survivability of the Mig-29 pilot are much, much and much superior compared to the Hornet. All of this while in reality the likehood of a Hornet pilot surviving and ejecting after a missile impact shouldn't be any lower compared to a Mig-29 pilot. But currently in DCS, this is clearly the case!

@GeoS72, I'm not trying do any personal attacks here. Maybe I'm showing a bit of frustration which results in @BIGNEWY's constant reply of "I tested and everything is ok" which is clearly not the case as this is something that can be reproduced 100% and there's still no one else that concurs with Bignewy's "everything is ok" assessment. Actually 100% of all other users here reported the same that you and I are reporting here. This has little to nothing to do with the monumental task of supporting DCS. By the way, I also worked as IT support, supporting the software that the company develops and sells and if I replied to customers when they are all reporting the same issue/bug with Bignewy's "I tested and everything is ok" type of response, this in face of all and every costumer reports with evidence then I would have been fired on the spot! I also must remember that I paid for the DCS modules that I own, including the F/A-18 which is one of the most expensive that I own and as such I believe I'm entitled to not being satisfied with a simple "I tested and everything is ok" reply without any further evidence - for example no several tracks of the "I tested and everything is ok" were shown - and being left without any further support about the issue. And if you look at my post history, I rarely post/report issues here. I'm reporting this because I'm 100% sure (not even 99%, it's 100% all in!) about what I'm seeing here and I can reproduce this bug/issue 100% of the times (as well as you) which is quite rare with complex software suites like this. But yes, I agree to keep this in track in the hope that this eventually gets solved!

@GeoS72 and @Racoon-1-1, I'm experiencing this issue in single player (I always play single player) and I don't use VR. My framerates are good and even more so since most of my tests involve 1 versus 1 "F/A-18 versus Mig-29" or "Mig-29 versus Mig-29" without any other added objects. I also want to tank @GeoS72 for your extensive tests and examples. I concur with them and that's basically what I've been experiencing! @BIGNEWY Don't get me wrong but it's not ok! Are you ignoring all the posters here? Are you going to continue to ignore the FACT that there's simply NO-ONE else here - namely from the PLAYER crowd - that concurs with you?

Thanks for the feedback, @ruxtmp! That's exactly what I'm experiencing here! This only diference is that I don't own F-16, AV-8B and F-14. But the rest is the same. With F-15C, Mig-29, Su-27, A-10C I can always survive the scenario that I previously set. With the F/A-18, I can't survive any single time! And yes, I'm flying/experiencing this in Single Player. Don't know if this makes a diference but I don't play in multiplayer. It's simply impossible that no-one on the dev part notices this. This is one of perhaps few issues that I found in any computer game which I (and not only, it seems) can reproduce it 100% of the times!

After an hiatus from playing DCS and therefore after a few new updates, the issue that I reported here still persists! Moreover, I see that at least another user reports the same. Are you (from ED) going to continue to ignore this issue? Do you continue to say that there isn't any diference in pilot survivability after being hit by a missile between the F/A-18 (pilot always dies!) and the Mig-29 (pilot almost always survives)? Please, fix this issue.

@Smashy, I agree! I also noticed what your described in missions such as the "8 vs 8 BVR" quick engagement scenario that comes with DCS F/A-18. Often when I open the F10 map, I see that for each shot down (AI) Mig-29 or Su-27 there's often a corresponding ejecting pilot but when it comes to each AI F/A-18 shot down there's rarely or almost never an ejecting pilot. And of course, when I'm (the player) shot down by an enemy missile, I always die has well in that same scenario! Thanks for your feedback!

Ok, one more attempt: I recorded tracks of 10 attempts in a row with the F/A-18, always being hit from behind by a AA-11 and again and without surprise the pilot always died! I recorded tracks of 10 attempts in a row with the Mig-29, always being hit from behind by a AA-11 and again and without surprise the pilot always survived! I attach here in this post the 10 tracks from each aircraft (20 in total) together with the respective log files, compacted in two (2) .zip files. And I hope that this finally shows and proves without any possible doubt what I've been saying here even because it took me quite some time to perform these tests and put the files together! And again, this not a normal or expected behaviour! Not even by a long shot! F18_pilot_Always_Dies_when_hit_even_from_behind_10_tries.zip Mig29_pilot_Always_Survives_when_hit_even_from_behind_10_tries.zip

I could continue to add tracks but they would be exactly the same and like I said, this is something that happens me 100% of the times (it's not even 99%)! If you change the parameters of my tests then it's possible that some end results may present themselves differently but even then I'm astonished how you can claim that you don't see any different survival rate with the F/A-18 compared with other aircraft like for example the Mig-29. This is clearly not the case as other users also reported the same here. Anyway, I just showed you examples that CLEALY proves my post: - AA-11 hitting a F/A-18 from behind -> Pilot always dies! - AA-11 hitting a Mig-29 from behind -> Pilot always survives! This is NOT "normal behaviour" no matter what you may say! I don't know what else I must do because I proved this here and did it with a 100% certainty.

I guess it's now my turn to say "sorry". Sorry but that scenario you're playing is not mine or at least it's a modification of my scenario and/or its conditions! 1- For instance the F/A-18 in my scenario is Ukrainian (nation and paint) and in your case is US. Not that this by itself matters by any way but it shows that's not my scenario (or if it was then it was edited/tampered with). By the way, I also edited the scenario by having a US F/A-18 (instead of Ukrainian F/A-18) but and as expected the results were exactly the same as I always had (pilot always dies after being hit by enemy TRAILING missile) providing that everything else continued the same. 2- Another indication is that your F/A-18 is basically going away from Batumi. In my scenario and the condition that I urged you to replicate with the F/A-18 (as well as with the Mig-29), the plane is going directly towards Batumi! So either you performed evasive maneuvers in order try to avoid the enemy missile or the scenario was edited/tampered with for example planes starting from different positions and/or "god knows" what other type of editing/changes were made? Anyway, this clearly shows that there were considerable changes of my testing conditions. And I really wonder why you seem to "refuse" to play the scenario the exact same way with the exact same conditions that I reported?! Honestly, this is frustrating because this is not a matter of happening to me or reproducing "sometimes". It actually happens to me ALL THE TIMES, with no exception! It's not even "only" 90% of the times that I get killed, it's 100% of all times, as you can see in the track and log that I sent you in my last post! And don't get me wrong but I'm starting to feel like that this is another "AMRAAM issue" which for some odd reasons took you like 10 years to acknowledge plus something like 5 years more to actually improved it!

In the meanwhile, I was able to do some new tests sooner than I expected - which without surprise had the exact same results - and as requested, I'll send here the tracks and logs. I send here one track and the respective log one the F/A-18 test where the pilot always DIES upon being hit by a AA-11 from behind. And I also send here one track and the respective log one the Mig-29 test where the pilot always SURVIVES upon being hit by a AA-11 from behind (and manages to eject). I hope this helps and that this is what you requested. F18_pilot_Always_Dies_when_hit_even_from_behind.trk F18_pilot_Always_Dies_when_hit_even_from_behind.log Mig29_pilot_Always_Survives_when_hit_even_from_behind.trk Mig29_pilot_Always_Survives_when_hit_even_from_behind.log

What do you mean with being "correct"?! Are you saying that when you fly with the F/A-18 in the scenarios that I hosted that you die 100% of the times? Are you saying that when you fly with the Mig-29 in the scenarios that I hosted that you survive 100% of the times? Because that is what's happening to me, 100% of the times! If your answer is Yes to both questions, how can this be "correct"?! Anyway, I'll try to send you track replays in a later/next post as soon as I can.

But I have already provided you with evidence! I built two very, very simple scenarios which I hosted in the original thread but I'll host it here again in this post (just in case). Just download both files/missions, place it in your DCS install and play each of them an X number of times. NOTE: All you need is to keep flying the aircraft straight (don't turn, don't use countermeasures, don't accelerate too much, etc...)! This will ensure that you always get hit from behind (and therefore as farthest as possible from the cockpit position) by the enemy Mig-29 (which is armed with 2 x AA-11s) behind you! Both scenarios are equal with the sole diference that in one the player flies the F/A-18 and in the other flies the Mig-29. Honestly, I don't know why haven't you tried these scenarios yet? With them I (and anyone) can replicate 100% of the times the behavior that I'm reporting here (while flying with the F/A-18 you always die but while flying the Mig-29 you always survive!). Missile_Test_Mig29_FA18.miz Missile_Test_Mig29_Mig29.miz

Hit by what? It makes all the diference. - If I get hit by a gun then yes, I can survive most of the times and eject (with the F/A-18) - If I get hit by a very weak missile like the AA-8 (or perhaps MANPADS), sometimes I can survive and eject (with the F/A-18). But only sometimes! - If I get hit by a relatively weak missile but more powerful than the ones above like the AA-11 up to something quite more powerful like the AA-10 then I can NEVER survive and eject (with the F/A-18).