Raptor9

I've heard anecdotally that some foreign militaries have used TACFIRE in this manner, but I don't know when, how often, or whether it was simply proof of concept or an actual operational practice. In any case, TACFIRE isn't planned. As for the AFAPD, the AH-64D and the F-16 are not compatible because their avionics don't recognize the messages transmitted by either platform. It's like if I called you on the phone and we spoke different languages; being able to communicate doesn't mean we can understand each other.

SCAS isn't the AH-64D's equivalent to AFCS. SCAS is just the term that collectively describes two of three primary functions of the Flight Management Computer (FMC), which is for all intents and purposes the AH-64D's AFCS. Stability Augmentation System (SAS) + Command Augmentation System (CAS) = SCAS. The two functions of SCAS + Hold modes = FMC; which would otherwise leave out the Hold modes and all of their logic for each flight control axis and flight conditions. AFCS and FMC are just terms to describe the same thing: the system that generates flight control inputs independently of, or in coordination with, the pilot's physical control inputs.

In the AH-64D roadmap it is mentioned Air-to-Air and RMAP modes are currently in development, with a TPM mode planned for after early access. Just to be clear, the Ground Targeting Mode is the only mode currently implemented at this time, but here is an excerpt from the DCS AH-64D Early Access Guide:

I am quite sure no one from the ED staff said that these features would specifically release on May 3. Friday (May 3) was the release of the Kola map, it wasn't part of the regular update cycle.

The DL switch powers an older datalink system that is not simulated in DCS F-16C, therefore it is not functional, in accordance with the DCS Early Access Guide. The TNDL datalink, which is simulated in DCS, is enabled using the MIDS LVT knob on the same panel, and managed through the DED.

There is nothing to be disappointed or upset about. This DCS update was just for the release the new Kola map. Yes, a few hotfixes went out along with it, but this has no bearing on the update cycle. This sort of thing has occurred many times in the past when a new aircraft module or map was released.

Some chart scales are intended for specific TSD scale settings. The same thing happens when you zoom in too far, you might loose the chart underlay. But you can manually assign different chart scales for a given TSD scale on the MAP sub-page and pressing the SCALE button at L3.

The AGM-65 logic has already been updated internally to separate the logic of the IR- and TV-guided variants to have unique behavior in this regard.

There were still many aircraft in the fleet that were not equipped with M-TADS by even 2010, that were still equipped with the legacy TADS. This switch position was used for switching between the different cameras in the M-PNVS turret, but prior to the additional sensors being fielded it was an unused switch as a growth position. It definitely wasn't there in the AH-64E.

Whenever M-TADS was fielded to any given fleet, so ~2005 timeframe onwards as all aircraft were refitted.

So was I. This function was removed with M-TADS.

As BigNewy stated above (marked as the solution in this thread), the B/S position of the BS/PLRT switch has no function in this version of AH-64D that was equipped with M-TADS. The boresight function was re-located to the MPD and used in conjunction with the Collective cursor (or MPD button), to permit the addition of different functions altogether in later versions of aircraft. But in this aircraft version, the switch position had no function.

The automatic waypoint sequencing in reality is much, much larger, like in many kilometers. It's very permissive. This too has been reported and last I checked was still work-in-progress due to the logic involved (it varies depending on which direction you are intercepting the route and at what speed). But that is another topic for another thread.

The whole "rotor acts like a beacon on radar because of Doppler" idea is sort of a misconception that has taken on a life of its own in modern military gaming, and is generally treated as a catch-all explanation that helicopters are always easy to detect on radar. Reality is much more complicated. A radar is a sensor, and like any other type of sensor out there, each type of radar is designed to perform a specific purpose within one or several specific environments. When you start using a sensor outside of the optimal conditions it was designed to operate within, and in a manner it was not designed to be employed, you will typically get sub-optimal performance or results. A radar on a fighter, a ship, a long-range SAM battery, or a short-range air defense vehicle are all quite different in design, characteristics, and employment. Within the context of these systems detecting an aircraft with radar, each of these systems rely on a set of assumptions in their design. What type of aircraft are we anticipating that we will be detecting? What speeds and altitudes are we expecting it to be flying? At what range do we need to detect and/or engage it? What environment are we expecting to be operating in? (open ocean, look-up angles, look-down angles, background clutter, number of potential targets, heavy jamming, etc) What sort of weapon system, if any, are we planning to employ against it? What RF power requirements are necessary to achieve this versus how much can we generate onboard the aircraft, ship, or vehicle? Others.... Based on all of these variables, the rotating rotor disk of a helicopter will often times have no effect on increasing the chances the helicopter will be detected as a target for a given radar system. Even if the radar is designed to detect low-flying helicopters amongst terrain clutter, unless that radar is specifically designed to exploit the radar signature of a helicopter's rotor system, it is not a given the rotor disk will have an effect on the helicopter's detection rate. Having said that, many modern radars have multiple modes of operation that they can switch between, due to modern electronics, processors, and advanced antenna design. So even if a radar is not originally designed for detecting helicopters in a high-clutter environment, it could be equipped or upgraded with various sub-modes that change how the radar works or how the targets are processed based on selectable target parameters; and one of those parameters it may exploit could be the signature of a helicopter's spinning rotor. But again, the fact that a helicopter rotor spins at a high rate of speed does not universally determine how easily a helicopter can be detected. _____________________________________________________ With that out of the way, we are always looking at and working on ways to make target detection by AI more realistic. But at the same time, it must be done in a way that does not bring DCS framerates or CPU processing to a crawl.

Hello @felixx75, this issue was previously reported internally on a prior date. EDIT: Oh, that must have been you.

No worries. These aircraft are hard to learn.

From the DCS F-16 Early Access Guide, the BNGO DED page, page 129.

Both the M60 and M240 machine guns are planned for the DCS CH-47F.

@Tom P, posts that are in violation of the forum rules will get removed. Specifically, if it is in violation of Rule 1.10, meaning it is non-constructive, insulting, or condescending, it will be removed. If feedback is provided in a constructive and mature manner, it will not be removed. Simple as that, and this is nothing new. ______________________________________________ In regards to this entire thread, the flight dynamics team will continue to work on the flight model to ensure it meets the quality that is expected of DCS. We understand the frustration with the lack of progress updates, but the lack of updates is not indicative of a lack of progress or development. The complexity of any simulated flight model of a helicopter cannot be over-stated. These things take time, you will need to be patient. If anyone has anything constructive to add to this conversation, then by all means provide it. But if this thread is simply going to turn into a rage against the development process or the ED staff, it will be promptly moderated and closed.

@Furiz and @Opesher, I was able to reliably reproduce this issue internally during cold starts and air starts, with several combinations of A-G sub-modes. This issue is now reported. Thank you for your time and assistance; this was a little obscure.

So just go straight into EO-PRE without touching the FCR modes or anything? I'll give it another go in a bit. Thanks.

@Furiz, thank you for the track. Do you have any mods installed? I tried to reproduce the issue following your steps during a cold start but I could not get the FCR to go to CRM when entering EO-PRE.

The device used for recording and the conditions of recording makes a big difference in comparing such things. It's why the EUFD looks green in modern digital cameras when in fact it is more yellow colored in reality, as seen in old film-based photographs, which is reflected in DCS. To answer your question, yes it is authentic, in that if you were to actually wear a real helmet around your head and listen to it in real-life, there would be no detectable difference. However, depending on the quality of your computer audio output device (speaker, headphones, VR headset), it may very well sound quite different from a Youtube video that was recorded on a smartphone while being heard in an open air environment like that. Such comparisons are far from ideal.

You must press the SLAVE button any time you are trying to slave the TADS, or any sight in the CPG seat, to the selected ACQ source. I guess that was an implied task that wasn't as known as I thought.

Select TADS as your sight, and select FCR as your ACQ to slave the TADS to the FCR NTS target. Alternatively, press the CAQ button on the TSD page and cursor-select an FCR target on the TSD page, which will set T50 at that location, and then slave your TADS to it.