drPhibes

It's the fancy new type of nuclear weapon where a conventioal explosion in Achinsk causes radioactive material to be released in Nenoks, 2800km away... Joking aside, is it time to introduce a "No conspiracy nuts allowed" rule on the forums?

A metal (or other conductive material) fuselage does shield the pilot to a certain degree. Electromagnetic waves can't pass through a metal surface; instead they induce surface currents in the outer layers of the fuselage panels, where they are either dissipated through resistive losses, or re-emmitted from various parts of the fuselage. Some aircraft have canopies with thin metal films deposited onto the acryllic (PVD), which provides some shielding. A good example is the hinged canopies on the EA-6 (as opposed to the clear forward facing part), where this is done in order to shield the pilots from emmissions from the EW pods.

This is incorrect. The reason "our" Harrier uses ILS and not proper AWLS/ICLS is because ED hadn't implemented it when AWLS was added to the Harrier. Hopefully Razbam will correct this at some time in the future. The current solution is simply a workaround. And technically, ILS and AWLS/ICLS are not similar at all (other than the fact that both are radio landing aids). AWLS is a scanning beam system operating at ~15GHz (similar to MLS, but in a different frequency bad), while ILS is operates at 108.1-111.95 (LOC) / 329.15-335 MHz (GP), generating a radiation pattern where the DDM (difference in depth of modulation of a 90Hz and 150Hz tone) varies depending on the distance from the course line.

Which number is largest? 30 or 0,000350?

I'm nitpicking, but: longer, not shorter. At X-band frequencies (8-12GHz) the wavelength is 4-5 orders of magnitude longer than that of visible light (~350-750nm).

Except for the best known RAF aircraft of all time? https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/spitfire/

However, they did provide a solution to the problem:

Ths should literally be the absolutely last thing on ED's list of priorities. If you can pretend to be flying a jet you can pretend there's a blue stripe on your missile (and not press the pickle button).

I did some tests. All in the same map, same altitude, speed, meteorological conditions, with targets designated using the TGP. Having a nav waypoint nearby, with WYPT boxed or unboxed (WPDSG not used) causes the GBU to be at an altitude of approximately 3000ft + WP elevation at TTI-1 sec. With no waypoints in the mission, the GBU hits the target. With a waypoint nearby it misses if the WP elevation is too high (with a nav WP @ 6500ft it never picks up the laser). The distance to the target at the time of release is the same (~5.3nm flying at 25k ft @ 350kt) for all tests.

Try opening \DCS World\Mods\aircraft\FA-18C\Missions\QuickStart\Caucasus FA-18C River Run.miz in the mission editor. Then just switch the F-18 with the F-14 and save the mssion with a new name.

The sign is part of the china asset pack, not some new unannounced map.

Please read up on how pulse doppler radars actually work instead of just making stuff up. As an example, in X-band (10 GHz), a target approaching at 50kt (25 m/s) will give you a frequency shift of 1,7kHz. Detecting this using FFT is trivial.

Apparently the GP frequency has been copied over to the localizer. The correct LOC frequency for a 333.8 MHz GP is 109.9 MHz. As a temporary fix (while we wait for ED to fix it) you can open the beacon file (\DCS World\Mods\terrains\PersianGulf\Beacons.lua), find the section { display_name = _(''); beaconId = 'airfield2_2'; type = BEACON_TYPE_ILS_LOCALIZER; callsign = 'IBND'; frequency = 333800000.000000; position = { 113693.740992, 5.776140, 13154.132035 }; direction = 28.001016; positionGeo = { latitude = 27.198930, longitude = 56.367921 }; sceneObjects = {'t:200671295'}; chartOffsetX = 4544.000000; };and replace 333800000.000000 with 109900000.000000 Note: Make a backup copy of the file before changing anything. The multiplayer integrity check might be an issue.

Isn't Super always better? Just imagine how bad a film "Man IV: The Quest for Peace" would be...

The manufacturer's data says nothing about the test conditions. Bolting the gun to a solid test bench is not necessarily comparable to firing it from a plane. Vibrations from recoil doesn't change the dispersion of the gun itself, but it does change where the gun is pointing.

The file is part of the China asset pack. \DCS World\CoreMods\aircraft\ChinaAssetPack\Shapes\Static\biaoyu.edm

Someone obviously didn't catch that Fleet Aviation Gazette is basically The Onion with planes. https://fleetaviationgazette.com/2019/04/16/squadron-loses-joint-strike-fighter-after-maintainers-forget-to-unbox-invisible/ https://fleetaviationgazette.com/2019/04/20/p-8-to-be-armed-with-dick-glitter-bombs/

Actually, you are under-thinking it. Altitude AGL makes no sense for a GPS guided bomb, since the bomb has no idea where the ground is below it. JDAMs, JSOWs and all other GPS guided weapons use HAE, Height Above Ellipsoid, which gives you the height referenced to the WGS84-ellipsoid. Altitude in MSL can also be input, but this is converted to HAE by the avionics. HAE input is always preferred, as it avoids potential errors from rounding or truncation when converting between the two.

The AV-8B+ never carried the AGM-88. Wikipedia is wrong.

I'm guessing there's some 1.11 going on. The anti-zhukov vitriol kind of gives it away...

It's probably a quality/cost issue. For a grip like this you'd want to use a high strength plastic like fibreglass reinforced Nylon (the stuff you'll find in everything from power tools to Magpul Pmags). The disadvantage, from a production point of view, is that GF Nylon is quite abbrasive, and it wears out the injection moulds relatively quickly compared to other materials, increasing the production cost. Using die cast zinc is most likely a cheaper option.

Is there any real evidence (i.e. not propaganda *cough*qaher313*cough*) that the IRIAF has ever fired any of the missiles they claim to have modded the F-14 to use? Ground mock-ups or captive carry tests prove nothing.

To quote the brilliant B.O.M. guys: "Yes, boot, not trunk. It's not a tree or an elephant"

A new shot of Beirut, with some cockpit blocking the view...

I think they should just name the forum "DCS: F-(No, you can't have CFTs)-16".