nickos86

Hi, Issue still present in current OB. I can post tracks/tacview of a MP flight we've done where three of us shoot SLAM-ERs with predefined waypoints. Every flight member sees only his own missiles follow the correct path... ED, can you please give an update regarding this bug? Thanks.

How do you explain the Real life Vs PGU Vs MK50 pictures? You can clearly see that the 'MAX RANGE' cue is in a different place for the real life picture.

Hi, Can you please implement two features - change the carrier course and change it's speed. Until you'll fully complete the product and implement it in the way you really see 'proper', you can implement three commands in the F10 screen 1. "Set course into the wind" 2. "Set original course" Those two commands useful for ME scenarios - you may want the ship to sail towards a certain direction and turn into the wind only for lunch/recover 3. "Set speed to X/Y/Z" - change the speed to a preset (again, conferrable for lunch or recovery I think the implementation is relatively easy and can be a good way to bridge the gap until the product goes out of early access Thanks.

Hi, The following picture was published by Viktor Alksnis (per Wiki: Russian politician and former Soviet Air Force colonel). You can see the eTrex used on a SU-34. In the way it attached- can be used on every aircraft. Can you add the option to add your Garmin GPS to Russian aircrafts please? Thanks https://defence-blog.com/russian-pilots-use-us-made-gps-receives-during-combat-missions-in-syria/?amp&__twitter_impression=true

This statement is so so so "correct as is". That's just making fun of us The ATFLIR can't be tagged as [completed] and should get a priority. Those are some of it's vital features.

Hi, While there is no DTC - can you create some kind of a simplified system? Some system that enable you to choose PP1/2 per station in the mission editor? The DTC seem to be available only in a very long while if you do something generic for multiple platforms. A PP system can be relatively easy to do. For example - in the flight options create a tab for PP. In the tab, choose a station then right click on the F10 map and choose "create". Of course that can be done in multiple ways. Thanks.

screenshot attached

At the moment there is a video showing how it actually looks. If anyone got proof - doc/video showing it shouldn't be like that - please put it here or send by PM.

Perhaps. But think of it as a pilot. Would you use a system that give you such big errors? That you can't really trust to give you the location when needed? In this video it's still not 100% but it's very much like the A-10C_2 - there is some lag, it's not spot on but it very close and don't drift much... And a few updates back - it was actually the case for the F-18. It got bad again. Why not assume that the correct situation is as shown in the video instead of assuming the current state (for which you don't have a video or any other proof) is true?

Please take a look at 3:23 - note how the DL is close to the A/C itself... not 100% but very close - that's make sense... Current situation - doesn't. ED, please review it. BTW, Note how a sec earlier, the ATFLIR is in PTRACK mode and the operator moves the camera to auto lock on...

"my understanding is..." - your understanding based on what? Documents? regarding the " if you have NATOPS reference for the block 20 that says otherwise, i would post that here." - he suggested to show in a PM because you can't show docs in the forum. Thanks.

You can compare to the A-10C2... It's not 100% accurate and there is a delay... but both parameters makes sense for the A-10. They don't feel exaggerated. As for the F-18? Feels like a bug. Bad coordinates to show on screen due to a some reason. It doesn't really feel 'intended' I'll appreciate to hear the teams answer, thanks!

Attached a screenshot. The B of the wingman is way above him. Seems like the bug that was reported in the past and kinda got solved - reappear.

would you consider running the test again in BETA? Can you elaborate on how you ran the test? Did you setup WAYPOINTs really far from each other to verify all SLAMs navigate correctly? Replicating the mission WAGS used to demonstrate SLAM ER could be great (or at least the scale of it).

Also attached - the attack plan - one missile was programmed to go WAYPOINTS 2>3>4 and 5 is the target. The other 2>7>6 and 5 is the target. Pictures of my missiles midflight from the F10 view and an observer F10 view (I guess he sees the POV of the server) pic

Hi, We tried to attack some targets using SLAM-ER. Each pilot had two SLAMs and we setup the WAYPOINTS for each missile to go around a mountain at 700 feet. We launched the missiles from 7000 feet with an "IN RANGE" cue and full alignment. Seems like every pilot saw ONLY HIS missiles navigate correctly to the targets via the defined waypoints. At the same time - he's wingman missiles flew straight towards the targets, completely ignoring the waypoints. I've attached the SERVERs track and my track. Also attached the SERVER TACVIEW, my TACVIEW and my wingman's TACVIEW. Note how in my TACVIEW - all seems good for my missiles but wrong for the wingman. In my wingman's TACVIEW it is exactly the opposite. As for the server - from "his perspective" all missiles went straight toward the targets without any waypoints. server-20210523-211123_serverPOV.trk Tacview-20210523-211057-DCS-SLAM_ER_test_MP_NikosPOV.zip.acmi Tacview-20210523-211138-DCS-SLAM_ER_test_MP_ServerPOV.zip.acmi Tacview-20210523-211237-DCS-SLAM_ER_test_MP_ErlichPOV.zip.acmi My track SLAM_ER_test_MP-20210523-211048_NikosTrackPOV.trk

ED- (and 3D artist in particular) GOOD JOB! The models look incredible! Can't wait for the new soldier units. Beautiful beautiful work! Thank you for you passion! Keep it up!

From my tests, If you choose a WPT and then ALT - the SLAM will fly the assigned ALT at AGL (will terrain follow - not sure if it's the case IRL). If you choose ALT and then WPT - It will fly the FLT (5000 for LOW, 15000 for MID...). I've also encountered the problem of the camera not looking at the direction of flight of the missile. I guess it should try looking at the TGT... But it doesn't really work. Strangely, If you set a relatively high distance for the DL (around 20NM) - at least longer then the beginning of the terminal phase - it works fine.

Edit: Force Correlate. Topic can be closed.

Pretty much Every country uses under ground facilities. It would be nice to have them as targets in the sim. It require a 'destroyed' lod for big/medium/small targets. Will be nice to have in the upcoming dynamic campaign or simply as a target for single missions (penetrating bombs will have more meaning this way). Thanks.

Hi, at WAGS video he said the picture freeze whenever you designate and only then you can slew the cursor. In this video - it seems like the cursor can be slewed to wherever you want before the designation and picture freeze. Seems like when you press the designate - the picture will freeze and the actual command transmits to the missile. So, you can slew freely and then designate (picture will freeze). Or press designate, then the picture will freeze and you'll be able to slew. Both ways possible. The slew cursor movement not bound to pressing TDC.

This internal fix planned to be introduced in the beta patch today?

Any chance for a hotfix? It completely ruin the MP experience

It's useful at time and very not useful at other times. Could be great if we could toggle it with a keybind during the gameplay. Thanks.

Hi, 1. In Matt's video he could choose the CPL along with TGT designation only when a weapon was selected in AUTO mode . Is that correct? When simply selecting WPDSG via the HSI - the CPL option does not exist. Correct state? 2. For TACAN - when choosing an X band (distance + bearing are available both for the carrier or the tanker) - the CPL option is there. For Y band (only bearing is given) - the CPL option does not exist. Is that correct? Particularly handy for tanker situations. Without distance the CRS options should not work of course... But the A/C still should be able to fly towards a TACAN station, no? 3. Currently, when choosing a CRS line the autopilot will always overshoot and fly a 'zig-zag' pattern until reaching the waypoint. Is that a WIP? Should the A/C autopilot be able to smoothly reach the defined CRS line towards the waypoint? Thanks.