nighthawk2174

Is it possible just to make it an option in the special options to switch between the old and new settings?

Maybe, but, there's not a whole lot of terrain. And if its the size of the detailed terrain area that's the limiting factor it could be possible. If I had to make a guess, WWII wise, somewhere more towards Oceania would make more sense or somewhere near the south china sea. edit: tbh the south china sea region is not as big as I thought:

All the vulcans are the same values. For now their all based off of the same LUA file: scripts/Database/Weapons/shell_table.lua

Yeah if that's the case I hope this gets looked at soon. Having a slightly faster round (and hopefully less heat effect) would definitely be good for the sabre.

CFD takes time so give them a bit. Until then if your curious what it may look like you can try out: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=257696

And this precludes using this solution why?

? my pics they're at full res 2560x1440.

As a tip for your testing which may help out for raw performance is if you set g effects to "none" it removes the blackout effects could help out your testing.

NP, now in the mod I did change the thrust values to match the 'Expected AIM7' performance but made no changes to drag.

ED's AIM-7 is just about spot on with what I have Their Drag matches: almost exactly The main difference is in the thrust which I have no clue where their values come from.

??? No i'm not, stop strawmaning my argument. A) This isn't a theory: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4050741&postcount=41 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4106908&postcount=80 B) me and habu (active duty A10 piolt) are good friends and we are in full agreement that the dispersion values for the guns in-game (gau8 and vulcan) are way too high. C)Its not a code rewrite its changing a few numbers in one lua file... edit: after looking through some F15 manuals found this: (100% circle as far as I can tell)

Yeah, I've looked to see if I can change it but I think it's in some locked file somewhere that I can't edit. For now though it's not too hard to just adjust based on the new performance. Its what I do with the default missile anyway.

In terms of a hud tape (as i've shown earlier in this thread) I use it to get a few details; firing range and the apparant dispersion when those shells hit / and the range whey I see the hits at. This then allows me to compare what I see in the video to DCS.

Well the R27 did come after the R24 and from my understanding had far more advanced digital electronics, which were upgraded latter in a "blk II" style program iirc. Plus the R27 body was more modular and the motor section was latter upgraded quite substantially. When I compare the 24R and the 27R from my mod I get these results:

No, unfortunately, the DLZ's for these jets seem to be hardcoded and I haven't been able to figure out how to change them.

AIM-7's have this capability from the M up for sure. Also kinematics wise I think the 24 and the 27 are very similar. The biggest limitation of the 24 is the 45 second timer on the missile which the 27 bumps up to just under 60sec.

Well that's up to ED and what they do shouldn't have an impact on what a 3rd party dev does.

Cool if you find any issues just report them here and i'll look into fixing them if I can.

Np

For the AIM7? For the R24 I ran two validation tests that you can see in the doc.

It was indicated in the razbam discord that this was the case, now of course if it isn't i'll update the doc.

Not sure what you have so it's hard to say. If you happen to have hud tapes where we see the impacts that'd probably be the best. Not really, yes they're different in size but the forces that cause dispersion are fundamentally the same. And I think this is best shown by the fact they have very similar dispersion values. Around 5mills for the 80% circle for both between 10 and 13 mills for the 100% circle for the two. As far as I'm aware there is one tornado variant with a Vulcan if I'm wrong then please do correct me. Not really, all of these guns have way to much dispersion and in particular, the CIWS which is mounted in such a way to have 1mill or less of dispersion. Yes they have barrel clamps but specific clamps to produce a shotgun like dispersion pattern haven't been used operationally on aircraft. I've really only seen one report on this and it was back from the early 60's as a test. And from these tests it was quite clear to produce specific patterns the clamp/muzzle device had to be shapped in quite a unique way. All the facts that my view is based on is present in this thread.

no problem hope you enjoy it!

Thanks for the input but this still doesn't change my opinion. We have not only strafing run footage, and piolts agreeing with dispersion being to high, but documentation. And now recently the test I performed all point to one thing and that is the dispersion in DCS is way too high (in particular for CIWS). I'm not saying the gun has 0 dispersion but significantly less than what it is right now. And I just can't come to any other conclusion based on all the evidence shown in this thread. The view that DCS's dispersion is correct I view as illogical in the face of all the previous evidence posted.

For now but hopefully, we can show that it needs to change because how it is right now is not accurate and in the case of CIWS detrimental to its effectiveness. And even then as I hope i've clearly shown that the values don't even get close to the values listed everywhere: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4106908&postcount=80