Tango3B

This could be one possible quick fix solution. But I guess it would make more sense to change the missile tracking logic in the way that it switches between HoJ and STT tracking. For the time being it should fix our "little" problem and it should not be too hard to implement or alter this in the "missile code".

@ uboats: Man, you guys really fixed this? Jeeez, I cant say how grateful I am you guys did this. Just saw it was moved to the "fixed bugs section". Big thank you to you guys working so hard for us at DEKA. Uboats can you please elaborate a little on how the avionics behavior changed with that recent fix?

Yup. Something needs to be done to address this a.s.a.p. because on a certain very well known PvP server certain gentlemen in their Mirages are kind of "invulnerable", recently. I do understand that these gentlemen do take advantage of the current situation but it is certainly no fun anymore as more and more people use this "exploit". And it gets to a whole new level fighting Tomcats sometimes. I mean, I can handle it fighting these guys but the problem here is pretty obvious. The question remains, though how difficult it is for ED to address this "bug" in the quickest way possible as there might be more to it then we know...

Sadly, that is not implemented yet. LaBise is totally right. Currently, there are quite a few things missing like NCTR print readout and so on. But we will get there eventually...

Seems more like a feature to me because it has worked that way since DEKA released the JF-17. But you´re absolutely right, I also think that it is really incovenient the way it currently works. I am also one of those guys who like having the radar screen on the left MFD. I always wondered why one would design modern fighter jet avionic systems to be intentionally inconvenient to operate. Especially since the the JF-17 is really quite intuitive and easy to understand looking at most other systems. And you do not see this behavior using the F-16 or the F/A-18, for example. You want to have a display showing a certain function - there you go. You are free to configure your displays and they stay that way unless YOU change what you want to see on the corresponding MFD. I think it would be nice to have a special menu option to configure the MFD behavior if the current avionics behavior is really intentional. This is actually the only thing I don´t like about the JF-17. Can we please have a statement by a DEKA member if this behavior is by design?

@DoctorVixen Yeah, I will make a short vid this evening. Actually, I do fly on GS's Caucasus server, too. I'm that Viper81 guy, by the way. Infact, I did fly there yesterday evening and it worked quite well to say the least. I am just curious does "your" TWS also drop the lock when auto-scaling? "Mine" does not and keeps a stable lock unless the bandit isn't notching or in certain other unfavorable aspects for TWS which would then be normal, expected behavior. Just asking because I heard that a few guys on GS's server see the same behavior in TWS as in RWS-SAM when auto-scaling occurs which is strange. So, basically what I am asking you here is might that problem with your TWS lock have been aspect related like the target is maneuvering hard, is notching, you having bad closure rate and so on? Or did the target even break the LOS because you mentioned those guys low in the mountains? As I mentioned before be aware that TWS in the Viper has it's problems in that scenario. And that is correct behavior. TWS is by no means that glorious silver bullet that many guys want that mode to be. So, if you loosing lock in TWS is aspect related then you would need to go back RWS-SAM, lock the target in RWS and switch back to TWS. Basically, you would need to repeat that procedure every time.

@diegoepoimaria01 No, I won't give any more details on that issue. But if you read GGTharos post right below yours you might actually find what you are looking for. Concerning that "fatter" pylon type your describing I guess you mean the one with Raytheon's glorious ALE-50 off-board towed decoys? Pretty helpful little buddies and part of the legacy IDECM suite. And yes, you are right these count as expendables.

No Spartan, what you mean is the EF-18G Growler. The Growler carries it's dedicated jamming pods on the pylons. That is a totally different airplane, though. The Growler is a dedicated electronic warfare aircraft though it can perform several other roles pretty well. Our F/A-18C has the ECM equipment installed right behind the cockpit. Ever noticed those two horn-shaped antennas behind your canopy? These are for your ASPJ. And no, what we see when jamming is in progress is no radar mode that performs some kind of interference but a certain self-protection function of the radar when using your own onboard jammer. I will not go into detail with that and why that is but keep in mind that some jammers are actually so powerful that you would also jam your own radar when transmitting with your SPJ.

Yeah, you're still good to go with that workaround. Just tested it with the recent patch and the workaround is still applicable. Let me know if I should post a short YT vid to showcase these steps in case you've got any questions. Sadly, as I suspected, though the recent patch did not include the long awaited fix for this bug so we have to deal with this a little longer. I hope BN keeps us updated on the progress made by the team. Fingers crossed for the next patch, I guess.

This! And check that the backup matches the main instrument if you reset it in flight. Then you're good to go.

@DoctorVixen: Well, BN said they could reproduce the bug and will work on a fix. They obviously had other priorities in the past few patches, though and apparently it took their team some time to understand what caused this problem. Again, I have absolutely no doubt this will be addressed in one of the next patches. I wouldn't hold my breath for Wednesday, though. And yes, the process of actually fixing this major bug is indeed painfully slow considering how much of a problem this actually is when flying in a competitive environment. For the the time being please use the following workaround if you are not already doing so. Briefly lock the target in RWS (quicker target detection / less problems with target aspect) before RWS auto-scales and then immediately switch to TWS while keeping your target locked and see if TWS can hold the lock. If yes then continue the engagement in TWS if not then repeat until TWS is able to hold the lock. This DOES work and you won't constantly loose lock. You also don't need to STT your target. Again, this is a bit inconvenient but you'll get the desired result.

It has to be the vertical maneuver component that causes OP's problem. I see the same thing when flying maneuvers in excess of 9G. Then the backup attitude indicator tends to develop drift. Wouldn't say this is a bug. This is more like a feature, I guess.

Well, I just tested this against the M2000 & F-15 in PvP and the same thing happens. And I would absolutely agree with you on the jamming effects if I didn't know that in DCS jamming is modelled rather basic and unless this hasn't changed recently it shouldn't really have any effect on an Aim-120 fired from close range. And then there is HOJ, of course. I guess, I need to try to get some useful trackfiles to showcase...

Yesterday evening I flew some sorties on GS's Open Conflict server and I can confirm your observations. And I also think it is related to the AMRAAM/SD-10 updates that came with the recent patch and that this is not a Tomcat bug. I had a situation where I was flying an F-16 and I was 2.5nm behind a slow, non-maneuvering but jamming Tomcat and fired 3 Aim-120Cs at it. Every missile did really weird maneuvers and in the end they were unable to intercept the Tomcat. I was literally fuming. Later on, I had a similar situation with the JF-17/SD-10 combination. Same thing happened. I did not run into any problems using other missile types against Tomcats, though. So, I strongly suspect it has to do with something that got broken with the Aim-120's/SD-10's guidance/tracking logic last patch. Another recent observation is that "my" Aim-120Cs seem to have problems tracking targets or guiding to them properly. All shots were supported till active and in correct parameters but the hit rate is abysmal even against guys that don't know how to defend properly. I don't know if this is a server sided problem or a general AMRAAM bug, though.

Thanks man. I'm already glad that you still have that bug on your radar and have not already forgotten about it. Let´s hope for next year then. And above all, enjoy your well-deserved vacation.

Guys, I really hate having to revive this thread, AGAIN. This incerdibly annoying bug is sadly still present in the current DCS 2.5.6.59398 Open Beta. Meanwhile, we had three OB patches since it was confirmed by BN that their team of testers has been able to reproduce that bug. This is a major issue and a real p.i.t.a. in Pvp fights, guys. The radar scan centering is completely borked and needs fixing. Apparently nothing has been done so far. Can we please have an update on this by BN or 9L? Can we hope for the next OB patch?

It depends, though. If you are deeply into A/A then by all means go for the Viper. In my opinion there is currently nothing in DCS that beats the Viper in A/A. But the F-16C is very limited in A/G at the moment and clearly lacks the system depth of the Hornet at this point in time. So, if you are more of a multirole or A/G guy that wants to fly a fast jet and on top of that likes carrier ops then by all means go for the Hornet. It´s a jack of all trades, sort of. You can´t go wrong with the Hornet if you look for a rather "complete" and complex module. But I strongly advice you to get the Viper, too. At least think about getting it. It pays off in the long run. Plus it is a ton of fun to fly and feels like a real fighter when compared to the Hornet. There is also a third module I want to recommend to you. It is the JF-17. It is absolutely worth looking at and it can do everything the Hornet can except for carrier ops, of course. Choose wisely and have fun flying in DCS...

It is a bug. And it has already been reported. I heard there is already a fix for it that currently undergoes testing in the development branch so we should probably see a fix for this very soon.

Actually, the F-16C has not been put on hold. It does recieve regular updates. What makes you believe ED did stop working on the Viper? I mean, just take a look at the recent changelogs. Also, you say that most features which are already implemented are broken and that the jet is an unpredictable, broken mess of an aircraft. Could you please explain that in more detail? Our experience seems to be completely different. Which systems do you mean exactly? I mean we can talk about missing or incomplete systems but currently there is no show stopper in Terms of broken stuff. Look, I do fly the Viper every couple of days in a very competitive PvP environment. It actually works really well and flying the Viper is a ton of fun. The FM is top notch. Most people I talk to online who also fly the Viper in that PvP environment completely share my point of view. What is it that makes you think the Viper is a unpredictable, broken mess of an aircraft? Can you please elaborate on that a little more?

No, there is nothing really serious I can think of. What we currently have in the Viper does more or less work quite well. Look, I fly the Viper very actively in PvP and I do this every couple of days. The aircraft works fine and flies just nice. I can really recommend the Viper module in it´s current state. Currently there is no show stopper I am aware of and you are good to go in the Viper.

And that is the point. The Viper in it's current state is perfectly usable. And that means in SP AND PvP. ED recently gave us better ground handling, Mavericks and HARMs as well as many basic, small fixes so I am a happy man. Furthermore, BN acknowledged that ED was finally able to reproduce the dreaded RWS-SAM auto-scaling bug. Now, if ED manages to fix that also in the upcoming December patch I am a really happy man and one can safely say they did a fine job on the Viper, this year.

I hate having to revive this thread but this rather annoying bug is sadly still present (see attached YT clips above). Over the last two days I had the "auto-scaling"-bug reappear numerous times while using RWS-SAM, again. This happened while flying on some multiplayer servers. Good news is, I did not run into this bug while using TWS since the last patch dropped. Anyway, something is wrong with the auto-scale logic of the radar when engaging a target in RWS-SAM. Please ED, have someone take a closer look at this, again.

Sorry for totally overlooking your post, veenee. Yeah, I am totally sure Jester switches back to RWS. If he just switched the TWS-A scan pattern the bugged contact would not be lost every time. This wouldn't make any sense. Instead, he goes to wide search RWS right after I get my first Phoenix off. Contacts are then shown as staples/unknown with any further IFF info. I can STT contacts this way but any TWS related stuff is gone and the first TWS shot is trashed. Turning cold and then hot again to see if Jester would use IFF to identify any new contacts showed he would not. Also, no furhter TWS trackfiles are generated. So, in my opinion it has to be RWS.

Sure, Mike. I'll try to get something for you this evening. I'll might try to get a track on GS's Caucasus server. It's usually the place where Jester performs the worst. I will report back as soon as I have something for you.

Looking at the last couple of sorties I would say I get it as soon as I set up for my first BVR engagement. I fire my first Phoenix and Jester then immidiately switches to RWS and I cannot get back to TWS-A for one or two minutes. Result: first shot trashed and I need to run pants down as I cannot fight back effectively. Happens 9/10 times. And even if Jester finds a way to finally chill back there he has this unpleasant habit of denying me a way to get back to RWS exactly the moment I need to build my SA, me then being stuck in TWS-A with Jester doing his own thing back there. Look, Mike I know it must be really hard to find the culprit and I know how you guys need to test this. That's why most people do stay calm when this happens and have found a way to deal with Jester. But sadly this bug is around for much too long, now. I hope you can resolve it soon. It really is a p.i.t.a. in the meantime.