Zabuzard

A few things to mention after watching the track: * Let the aircraft walk the pipper into the target, dont hold it there with the stick * Wait a second after hearing the beep before you start your maneuver * You probably have to dive a bit steeper before you level, so that you level out before intersecting the radar centerline from the picture you shared * When releasing at level and expecting pinpoint accuracy (hitting a ship without ripple), it is crucial that you fly your parameters even closer. Your pitch was rather 1-2°, airspeed and altitude were slightly off as well - should only cause the drag coeff to differ by 0.01 in this case though... That said, unless it was the intersection issue mentioned earlier, the track looks a bit sus indeed. I am forwarding it for investigation, thank you! Also, very good track quality

Thank you, fixed for the upcoming update. Cheers

Thank you, this is a known issue. Also see here:

Ive put it on the list for the team to investigate and callback, cheers

This is on the list already, thank you

The hydraulic thing is known and is mostly bc not everything in the plane is properly connected to our "new hydraulic system" yet and runs on the old instead. Will be fixed eventually. The script error is new, thanks.

(duplicate thread)

yeah sure, ill put it on the list

In the context of a radar target that you have locked/focused, you mean? Not yet, but could be done easily. IRL this wasn't necessary as both crew member were trained to use rule-of-thumbs to estimate target altitude using the angle of the radar antenna and target distance as shown on the screen. Which btw is also what Jester does when he calls out the altitude initially after spotting.

This is expected behavior of CEFs multi-process architecture. You can see a similar behavior when you for example launch Google Chrome. Nothing to be concerned of. Not the reason you could not exit the mission.

Not sure I follow. Are you asking whether the Phantom has an autothrottle, as in an autopilot that can hold a set speed? It doesnt.

Im not sure if there is an unwritten rule to how "unlimited fuel" is supposed to be implemented. DCS-wise its just a true/false flag and the thirdparty has to figure out what to do with it. We decided to keep our fuel system so that even with the "cheat" enabled players can still experience the full system, including shifting CG during AAR. So for the Phantom we just set some form of minimum fuel level that would ensure you never run out of fuel, but otherwise keep the fuel system without cuts or simplifications

Right now he comments on how smooth or hard the landing feels, not on your approach itself. Former is based on the force felt on Jesters body, computed among other things using the shock absorbers in the gear system (OLEO).

The changelog had mistakes in it, kindly see our extra thread where we clarified whats actually included and what will be in the next patch instead. The BDU fix was one of those items.

Not planned right now. But might be done eventually, sure.

Thank you. The mission has unlimited fuel checked, which is why the Phantom will always magically reset tank 1 and tank 2 to full. The fuel threshold you found happens to be the sum of a full cell 1+2. Disable unlimited fuel and it will work as you expected, cheers

Cant reproduce, please send the mission file, thank you.

Planned, yes

thanks, known issue

Correct. Eventually. Actually, the next update will likely contain a first (but a bit rough) iteration of it already

How do you determine that? By looking at the fuel counter? If so, you are just running into its built-in inaccuracies of the sensor placement within the tanks. See here, everything is 0 if I select 0 in the Mission Editor: Also note that the indicated fuel in LBS depends on density (influenced by many factors, such as temperature) as well.

Its not easy to resolve it "once and for all". As the DLLs are rebuild on each update and hence have to be handed in for explicit whiteflagging to all creators of AV software again and again with each patch. Which is done, but often it takes them a bit to process the requests.

Yeah, there is nothing speaking against such an option for a quick check outside of what Jester already does by himself when he announces these parameters after spotting the bandits originally. The difficulty here lies more in how to make it easily accessible. Placing it somewhere in the Jester Wheel is easy, but no one wants to navigate around the wheel mid-fight. But sure, we can place something in the wheel for now and at least Voice Attack users will find it easy to use from there And in most situations its probably not that useful, as you only have a few seconds from spotting a bandit on the radar to being in gun-range already. So unless you are fighting a bomber, chances are you will probably immediately proceed to lock after spotting, follow the steering dot for a second or two, shoot your missile and then already proceed to Sidewinders or gun in a visual fight 8 seconds after spotting and locking. Engagement ranges are really low in comparison to a more modern radar.

This is not provided on purpose. We originally had similar questions but our Phantom SMEs explained and confirmed that this would be an unrealistic behavior. As a pilot, you are not really supposed to use this information and the Vc is all you need. According to our SMEs, they always always left the knob to display Vc while flicking it shortly to announce altitude to the pilot after spotting and after obtaining lock to verify lock quality. Afterwards it is always put back to show Vc. You have the heading of the target by the motion on the display, the speed as a means of Vc and the altitude can be guesstimated quickly by the antenna degrees, while also announced by the WSO after spotting. If you start messing with the Aspect Knob outside of Boresight, Jester will be confused as he uses the knob and the displayed information throughout his routines. Hope this makes sense, cheers :)

I cant comment on the proper AoA and speed, but the Phantom hook uses the same physics based model that our Tomcat hook uses as well. If you bump the hook into the ground, it bounces based on the forces reported by the sim. Similar for catching the wire. There is no code or anything trying to tune this hook for airfield landings, nor anything that specifically tunes it for a carrier landing only. I would suggest you go external view and make some sideways comparison screenshots of your plane with gear and hook down when you touch down. Do that in the configuration you think should be correct and repeat it for the configuration that seems to work. I wouldnt be surprised if the screenshots reveal that if you fly with the configuration that "looks correct" on the screenshots (angle-wise) the hook also catches the wire properly.