nickos86

Hawkeye_UK, I totally agree with you. I've bought the F-16 to support ED. In the end of the day they are pretty much the only company creating military sims and I want them to keep going. With that said, - I'm very disappointed. As an F/A-18 costumer - there were no updates for weeks. And just as you've said - myself and the community don't necessary look for the "next toy" - AGM-62 or the Slam. Rather, we want the already WIP items to be finished - the markpoints for the HSI, TGP, autopilot, TWS and rest of the the A-A radar function... Moreover, yesterdays F-16 release was disappointing. While the 3D model and the cockpit are really work of art - the avionics are not ready. The DED is almost empty, the radar don't work well, even the gun don't work (no tracer or aimpoint). There is still a LOT of work to be done on the Viper before it will be a solid module.

BIGNEWY, I think that WAGS done an excellent job so far to communicate the status of the development. With that said, a few month back he would post what every eng was dealing with. It was very interesting and gave us as costumers a really good sense of progress and what to expect to. If possible - please return updating us this way. It's AWESOME and answer a LOT of questions. Thanks! P.S Congrats on joining the ED team. Your answers quantity, quality and speed of response is very appreciated!

Thanks!

Hi, ED, can you update the community regarding state and upcoming plans/timeline of the airborne jammer (AN/ALQ-165) and the countermeasures (low flare count)? The F18 needs more protection in the hostile environment :) Thanks!

Thanks

Thanks

how do you slave the tgp to steerpoint?

I thought for more than once before opening this thread. I’ve expected the possible reactions of users like 98abaile who will be outraged of this “progressive” and “hypocritical” request. I’m glad to see that there are many who think the contrary – it’s a low hanging fruit that require little time investment and got a potential to make the game more immersive for major non male/white audiences. I think it’s funny that users post their priorities in this post like it’s the absolute truth. Defend them and prove how the developers should first do X instead of Y. Meanwhile, I’ve seen no response what so ever from the developers. What I did see is multiple development photos of the carrier deck crew. There are colored personal there… in HD. Meaning – the developers DO see the importance and put some work into it. Moreover, RAZBAM had even put the time to create a very detailed pilot model. Meaning – the developers do see the pilot model as an important item. Bottom line, this thread was intended as a request for the developers (and I'd appreciate their response). If you don’t like the idea/don’t care about this – don’t waste your time on mentioning how much you don’t care. Instead, open a thread with your own request for the developers.

ATIS is optimal, if not - at least the option to request the QNH. I think that at least the second request should be fairly easy

Is there any kind of response from the developers?

There was no update in this week beta regarding the MSI feature that was suppose to be last week. WAGS, can you please give some details on where it stands? Thanks!

In the recent update it was said that "Added Multi-Sensor Integration (MSI) mode for Latent Track While Scan (LTWS) radar sub-mode", but in the bug forum WAGS admitted that the part of getting contacts from donors is not implement yet (or did not pass to the OB build). In case what we got is not the final MSI, are those statement are true for the final MSI state? 1. MSI will give us an overlay from all of our donors. Even if our radar is in SILENCE mode? It will show contact just as the SA does but on a radar scope? 2. In case a donor contact is shown on the radar screen but my radar scan properties not tuned in a way that this contact could be 'naturally' detected (antenna too high/ scan angel too narrow, etc.) - If i'll put my TDC on the contact and try to lock it - will the radar automatically slave itself to the target? Or i'll have to manually tune it until a FULL HAFU will show (A sign that my radar 'see' this contact as well)? 3. Is the full MSI implementation planned for next week OB? Thanks!

added track AGM65F_timer.trk

After completing a mission with JSOWs I've landed on the carrier and rearmed the plane with 4 AGM65F. After takeoff I've choose the weapons but their timing counter were stuck on 3:00 Thanks.

Hi, looking at the great models of the carrier crew - It would be nice if you could create 3D models of a female pilot and a black male/female pilot. Sure it would fit a valuable part of your users who would like to see "them self" sitting in the cockpit :)

This kind of clear and honest communication helps establish you guys as a great company. Thanks for the hard work!

ED, take as much time as you need. Even if it mean to postpone the patch to next week. We'd rather have a good, clean and un-buggy rev. Take your time, no pressure. We appreciate the complex work involved.

I'll use this thread as well to thank Ranger79 for the AWESOME campaign. Worth every penny (actually worth much much more). It's by far the most immersive and interesting campaign for DCS. Dude - keep the great work!! Can't wait for additional campaign for the A10 or the F18. I've bought this campaign on a sale - next time i'll be the first to buy full price! It's really a great work!

We already got other module for reference... At least with the A-10, the feedback both in planes reaction and in noise fells better. At the moment your release a JDAM from the F-18 and can barely feel it.

Ordinance release is done with very little feedback at the moment - almost no sound to it. Not sure if it's as it should in real life or you can hear the weapon being released from inside the cockpit. Could be nice to have a better feedback

Hi, In the NTTR map, the laser maverick mission is challenging because the JTAC is always being killed by the targets right when the mission starts :)

First of all - thanks for dedicating your time for that! Really appreciate that! Perhaps you can elaborate more on the expected 'normal' behavior. I mean, a few seconds after the enemy aircraft were destroyed they've disappeared. It make absolute sense for them to stay on the screen for a few seconds due to the D/L refresh rate. But at least for myself they've reappeared later as I've shown in the attached picture. Maybe I don't understand how much time it should take for the contacts to vanish... E2 scanning the sky+ distributing the data should take 15 seconds? 30? 60? Again, thanks for your time and effort! Keep doing great job ED!

added a track file ghost_contacts.trk

It's always nice to watch old movies that you've seen as a kid and retrospectively check their integrity :) For "Clear and present danger" - it's seem they've done a good job filming at the correct cockpit... but when it's clear the plane is still on the ground with it's engines OFF. Still interesting so see the differences between the in-movie cockpit and DCS cockpit. Is that a F/A-18A? or C with old lot? Here's a pic from the Weapon Officer office that have similar characteristics. https://nara.getarchive.net/media/the-cockpit-of-an-fa-18-hornet-aircraft-showing-the-display-and-control-console-14aa05

Quick technical question - when trying to interrogate a contact, how does it work? I mean - your transponder unit should send a "question" to "the world"(It should be like a 'ping' in an analogy to the sonar world). It's should not a be sent to a particular contact (right?). Then, every unit that got a receiver should "see" the "question" and respond if it can . If it respond the correct code - It's a friend. If it fails to respond (need Mode 4 for instance) - the contact should be considered as "unknown". So, if a friendly aircraft shutdown it's transponder - it's also should get an "unknown" state. Additional question, if I send an interrogating request - should not the "other" side get a notification that It was interrogated? Thanks.