Avio

While 2.9 has been awesome so far using DLAA / DLSS / Quality / 0.6 Sharpening / SSS On, but I noticed the F15E HUD, while mostly still crisp and sharp, shows up the PBL line, low altitude vertical line (on right), and JDAM In-Range / In-Zone bracket to be rather jagged, especially when flying in a bank. Pitch and Attitude lines are both still sharp. Anyone else noticed this? I do not recall there was any such issue previous when using MSAA 4x.

Trying out the JDAM using AGR but found that map image objects' locations seems to show up some inaccuracy. Small targets like tanks most time are likely to be missed by a few meters. Mapping using from 30 nm or less, altitude about 26,000 ft. Using EGI, which I understand do not need PVU updating. Was on NTTR map. Accuracy is perfect when using target Setpoint transfer method. Anyone else encountered this?

That is correct, but only after much intense internal debate, as I understand.

I suppose we would have to let it drift to a stop, as no amount of light touch on the pedals seem to be able to stop it straight. Wonder how the real ones do it. As for new missions, there were occasions when plane was able to stop straight too when slower than 15 knots. Seem to be some observed inconsistency. Edit - As observed so far, problem occured before whether at fast or slow speed taxiing.

Skid at any speed indeed, whenever the static friction is exceeded, like on ice for example. As indicated previously, what doesn’t square is why in some missions, usually in beginning, even full hard braking at much higher speed than that shown in that track, there was no veering off center when jet came to a full stop. Same environment settings, sometimes with full loads of fuel and ordnance even.

My understanding - a skid occurs when static friction is exceeded and kinetic friction takes over, so from wheels surfaces being static relative to ground when rolling properly to when wheels surfaces starting to slide (skid) over ground (kinetic friction region) when in a jam brake for example. The subject problem here happens even when plane already slowed to very slow speed prior to braking, that the friction should be well within the static region, and should not skid. In any case, how should we explain those occasions at start of fresh missions when even at higher speed, full standing on brakes brought the jet to a nice, straight stop with no veering of nose at all? Something just doesn’t quite square here.

Got a short track here -- this one hotstart on runway at Beirut. Brake stop problem right from the start. Couldn't be my pedals issue, because as shown, the initial brake slowing was perfectly smooth and straight. It was only the final moment when the plane came to a stop that the nose just had to swivel to one side, sometimes by quite some degrees left or right, seemingly randomly. Yet at other times, braking was smooth and straight with no problem. Really usual. Hope this could be looked into. F15E Syria.trk

In these scenarios, how really useful is the onboard A2G radar? Fix structures locations would have been known ahead, but random mobile threats would be too small to be spotted unless from way near, or with copious help from FAC. Has the AG radar outlived its heydays? The TPOD on the other hand is almost always helpful, for final refinement in aiming.

I know that, but i prefer as it is, as i fly others too, like the A10. Actually i meant in the real jet, that tactile feel would have been quite welcomed i believe.

Balanced, zero wind, full brakes. Not sure is it a Sinai problem. Will see if it still happens at other maps, if i fly them.

Totally agree it is about the sweetest handling module in the air or on the ground …. Until that last second stopping weirdness, as seen in the longer track i posted earlier. Not a deal-breaker for sure, but would be nice if that is fixed.

Roger that Rudel, thanks.

I read the whole of Smallwood, and all was good and inspiring. But the hypo case here refers more to the “what if” of a modern armed conflict, perhaps against a nearly worthy foe, not a battle from decades ago against lesser armed and trained combatants. How would the scene unfold? Thought it would make for an interesting discussion among us armchair military aviators, certainly not about macho bravado. Brings to mind too, about the debate over the expenditure over the new EX eagles.

Thanks for confirming that both PC1 and 2 should be 3000. That helps !

Maybe you could help advise what would be right?

Okay, so this is all hypothetical. Should there be a shooting war (better not !!), what's the real odds that the F15E would get the job done and prevail? It's at its best as a bomb truck, but the battle field is rarely cooperative, with thick air defenses everywhere that even SEADs cannot clear up enough. Will the eagles have to jettison often and turn tail and RTB empty handed? Are most assigned missions pre-assigned targets already? And if mission is to hunt for targets of opportunity, I could envision the eagles would have to loiter and hold somewhere while looking for the needles in the haystack via the radar and TPOD, like some 15 or 20 nm away in order to see well enough. That's only an arm's length from some harm, all the while lugging bags of heavy stuff. Or it just have to hang around and wait for some FAC feeds to come through, preferably with precise coordinates served up? Opinions, anyone?

Note to Rudel_chw -- I extracted this segment (see attached) from the checklist you posted before, and it shows PC2 after right engine started should read 2750 psi, but the PC2 gauge shows 3000. Which is correct? And if 3000 at PC2 is right, I am not sure how starting left engine first would make any difference, since PC1 reads 3000 as well after left engine started.

Yup I believe that's how the jet was designed. Would be nice though to have that immediate tactile knowing like in the F16.

No it is not skidding, more like the jet comes to a stop with the nose having to veer a few degrees to the left or right, instead of straight ahead as it should. And it becomes very obvious only after a mission has been flown for a certain duration. Hot starting and rolling about a little hardly shows up that problem, if any. Most usual bug, if that is one.

I suppose the feel has to be substantive enough to know that one has just gotten into the very initial part of AB, for it would be less practical if the eyes have to cast a glance at the flow gauge to check that it hasn’t entered AB if one doesn’t want to.

Anyone else noticed this brake stopping problem? Does not show up much in beginning, but becomes very pronounced after a longer mission. Looking rather positively to be a bug.

Wow ! Thanks much Ramsay. A picture tells a thousand words truly.

I mean, is there a tactile clicking feel as the throttle crosses into AB zone? I would assume it would be immensely helpful in the real jet to know right away when one has crossed into AB, like in the F16.

So for the mil / AB detent, is it just a “click” through, or must the throttles be lifted to bump over the detent?

In the attached pic, which is tank 1 and which is aux? And the two feed tanks, they are hidden below those shown fuselage tanks in the picture? *Edit* And what is the aux tank for? Any special purpose?