Joker328

You basically got it right here. This is all you can really do for now, but it's very high risk. The SA-19 is basically designed to kill low-flying helicopters, so you are better off avoiding them entirely if you can. Once we get the radar guided version of the hellfire (AGM-114L), it should be a bit more manageable. I believe the SA-19 in DCS mainly (only?) uses its optical tracking capability, somewhat unrealistically. So you don't get any warning unfortunately. If you stumble into its range and don't know it is there, you are toast.

You need a better joystick, friend

I don't even understand why it shows up on the monocle at all when you have the NVS mode switch set to off. Not being able to easily switch it off without losing the rest of the IHADSS symbology seems really clunky. I'm surprised this is how it works.

I think this is the way I'm going to go as well. I tried adding a bunch of curvature with the slider, but it's still really tough. The weird thing is that by default (zero deadzone or curvature), there seems to be this really non-linear jump at the slightest input, but then it ramps up more slowly from there. It's the opposite of what you want, and it is hard to be precise with a centering joystick even with a ton of curvature. I think a user curve (similar to the top one above) where it is super precise around center and then more linear after that is what is needed.

I've had weird things just like this happen to me with the A/A radar. It really needs some dedicated bug squashing time.

Can this thread be closed? It is completely useless. Inlet icing is not simulated in DCS. There is a longstanding bug that causes the sensor to go off in conditions when icing would never occur. Ignore it. It doesn't matter. Of course there is some minimal performance impact in real life due to use of bleed air, but it is irrelevant and not modeled in DCS.

This all shows what I think any of us who fly the Hornet could tell you, which is that the missile range cues are useless. My question is why they should be any different than the F-15 or any other aircraft that uses the AIM-120. If the cues are based on current state (i.e. speed, altitude, aspect) and missile performance, why don't ED just use info that is somewhat aligned with in-game performance (i.e. F-15 cues) for the Hornet while they theoretically improve both the cues and missile performance to better match reality?

I could be wrong, but I think in the future we will technically have 2 additional radios through the MIDS, one of which could be used for intraflight. Not sure if that is how it works or if that is even being worked on at the moment. In any case, is this a human wingman you are flying with? If so, I'd suggest some division of responsibility. Have your wingman monitor tactical while you communicate with the JTAC or vice versa. If AWACS is calling you or something, your wingman can let you know and you can switch over if needed.

It's a slow moving cruise missile. A handful of them are not going to take out a modern destroyer or cruiser. You are either going to need to take out their air defenses ahead of time somehow (i.e. getting lucky with HARMs) or completely saturate them with simultaneous harpoons from multiple launch aircraft (and potentially ships) preferably from multiple directions. One lone wolf with a few harpoons is not going to be successful against anything with modern air defenses or CIWS.

Assuming this is not how it functions IRL, my guess is that it's a performance issue. Every time it needs to update the display, it's going to take some CPU cycles to do the calculation of how each object should move based on the movement of the player aircraft (even if it's not updating the contacts). Multiply that across numerous contacts and multiple systems (SA, Radar, RWR, HUD) and it becomes more demanding. I assume the slow update rate is a way to mitigate this. Perhaps they will be able to optimize things in the future, but it may never be as smooth as we would like.

You could try playing with the volume mix in the settings. I think weapon tones are under helmet or cockpit (I haven't been in there in a while). Just do a little trial and error. It will probably make other things louder (e.g., RWR), but you can adjust them down in the cockpit.

Appreciate this analysis. It looks pretty reasonable except for the 4 AMRAAM singles at 591. I think that is probably just a bug/error.

I knew I recognized that guy from somewhere!

Does DCS actually simulate mission kill for ground units (i.e. the vehicle is not destroyed and maybe still maneuvers, but can't track/launch)? For well armored vehicles, this seems like the most likely result given the HARMs warhead/purpose, but I wasn't sure this was actually modeled.

I appreciate realism, but I'll stick to smooth air thank you very much. I can barely hit the basket as it is.