Tango3B

Wow. Well, then I do not have to worry anymore, I guess. Keep it coming...

For some who are a bit more anxious waiting for the F-4E that would surely be a feeling of certainty. Or even relief. Probably sadness. It would certainly help to manage expectations, right? Right. Does it change anything? Well, for some it means the world to have a certain degree of information about what’s cooking behind the scenes…

That’s basically my point. I am by no means mad at HB. I fully understand that these things take time. But on the other hand I think at this late stage of development a status update would be a tremendously good thing. And it doesn’t hurt as they do not need to give a date. They only need to say they are on track - or not. That would totally suffice. Helps to manage expectations if the set schedule cannot be met.

We have not even seen the WSO pit, yet. Nor did we get the promised development update which was apparently intended to address the remaining features that still need to be completed. Also, given the fact that YouTubers play around with an upcoming module roughly around one month before Early Access I think HB might be on a very tight schedule here. At this point I am a bit worried that HB is not able to deliver within the timeframe they set for themselves. I am not mad at them. Don’t get me wrong. The module will apparently ship with most features already available and this takes time. I know that. But at least a little status update would be tremendously appreciated. Look, I mean we do not even have the PRF tone library available, yet which is intended to be shared with the F-16C in some shape or form. Anyhow, I really hope I am wrong…

Bit late to the party but that´s just me! ;-D So, the Hornet...okay, some people around this forum might know that I am mostly a Viper guy but I really enjoy the Hornet, too. The Hornet is certainly all but a boring module. Actually, as a Viper guy, I hate to say she might be the better airframe. Why? Because she can do basically everything. And that is because of her awesome sensors and MSI, the ability to carry some of the most interesting weaponry in DCS and her extreme agility. And as a sidenote she certainly looks quite sexy. She is a true multirole fighter, a true jack of all trades with highly automated systems which is a good thing for modern jets. Okay, she is certainly not as intuitive as the Viper in terms of radar usage but practice makes perfect, right? Right. Actually, the APG-73 is an incredibly good piece of equipment if you know how to operate it effectively. Especially, if we will ever see the full integration of MSI features and ED´s effort to rework the radar model certainly helps, too. And what most people do not really understand in BVR: actually, she can be quite fast (like the JF-17) if you fly the right profiles to give the 120 just the right amount of "juice". Anyway, there are two things I strongly dislike, though. The first thing is the inability to store certain DDI pages (per DDI) as a permanent setup like it is possible in basically all other modern jets. The second thing is, that the radar cursor (+elevation reset) will stow each time I go SOI on a different DDI. In my opinion these two things are the biggest downside of the F/A-18C module. But yeah...would I recommend this module to my friends? Hell yeah, I even got some WT tryhards to finally fly DCS. Can´t be that boring, right? Right. Thank you.

Blinking is part of every modern SPJ. This is certainly no bug RAZBAM has to look at. And by the way, the M2k uses the same SPJ power as the FC3 Su-27 module. The problem actually is how ED chose to model the DCS Aim-120 seeker and how it reacts to any form of jamming. The same goes for the Sparrow, of course. There should be a thorough review of the entire DCS ECM/ECCM system…

Yes, I believe the drag values were altered and I think the overall changes were absolutely justified because what we have now appears to be a more credible missile simulation. To my test: I flew two scenarios which resemble a bit what you can expect on GS’s server. First I fired head on at an F/A-18 at 32k co-alt, my speed at Mach 1 and target speed at 0.92. I came in range at roughly 36nm (40ish before patch) and fired at roughly 22.5nm which was the „sweetspot“ between halfway down to Rne and Rne (around 26.5nm before patch). Second scenario was flown against same target at 15k feet. Same speeds. Came in range at roughly 21.5nm and fired at around 15nm under same criteria as mentioned above (again, before patch both values appeared to be roughly 4-5nm higher). So again, don‘t quote me on that. As you can see this is by no means a scientific approach to measuring exact data but it absolutely gave me a good idea of the current performance. Thank you. reason for edit: own stupidity

Source for your claim? It is not that I don‘t believe you but the official changelog states otherwise. Changelog states that there actually were adjustments to missile Mach, range and FM and not just cosmetic changes to the encyclopedia entry which only had a change regarding the Mach entry, by the way. It was changed from Mach 4 to Mach 5. The other values actually remain the same. And as I stated in my previous post…if I am not totally crazy testing on my end indicates a loss of roughly 5 nm max range. Please don’t qoute me on that, however. It is a rather rough estimation on my part. So yeah, I am rather curious regarding your source for your claim. Thank you.

I did a few quick tests yesterday and the „new“ SD-10A appears to have slighty shorter range, yes. On the other hand it still is a very fast missile (Mach 5) and from what I observed so far the missile maneuvers pretty smooth during its intercept profile. Especially during end game. Is the SD-10A on the „new“ 120 API? I don‘t know. But the rework suggests that it might be. Now, since these changes are to one of the main armament components of the JF-17 I think DEKA should give us a bit of a deeper insight into what was actually done there. Thank you.

Haven’t been following this thread for some time. Guys, the topic of this thread is a potentially wrong lead angle computation in all available A/A modes. Therefore it is completely irrelevant if anyone uses the gun to strafe ground targets with the 23-2 or if anyone feels the gun is mounted at a slightly awkward position. This is not the topic! Fortunately this thread is already marked „CHK“, so we should soon get an answer from DEKA. Thank you.

Yup. I saw that, too. That´s why I am asking. Anyhow, the main topic remains fixing the gun lead computation. We definitely need a fix here. @uboats Any update on this one? And before anyone comes up with "bro you need about a second for the sight to compute the correct lead"...I know. I really know. It does not. So we need a deeper look into the current mechanics. Thank you.

@uboats Can you please check this issue? As shown in the above track there is actually an issue with computing too much lead under certain circumstances. Something appears to be a little bit off. And while we are here…any chance for a tracerless 23mm ammo option? Thank you.

Really nice work on that helmet visor animation, ED. It actually looks pretty damn cool I have to say. The sad thing is, though that it is only an animation and you do not have an actual effect from the visor like in the F-15E or all of the Mirages. Does ED plan to add such an effect for the Hornet, too? And maybe even for the Viper? I mean it is all about the coolness factor, right?

Ah, okay. Interesting. Must have missed that…

According to the changelog this is the only thing that was changed related to the FM. Flight model: Slightly increased high supersonic drag to better reflect acceleration data While certainly noticeable for some people testing certain things personally, I do not percieve the FM to be any different. Maybe you have just gotten better flying our weird but wonderful french gal…

Awesome little bird. The F1BE is really nice to fly. She actually handles very crisp and the ALE-40 config panel in the back is quite handy, too. She will sure be fun on Enigmas sever… ;-D Watch for the gear lever, though. The simplified logic does not work atm - just a heads up for anyone wondering. Otherwise, awesome job AERGES.

Yesterday, I tested the new radar implementation in both the F/A-18C and the F-16C and I think ED has actually done a pretty decent job with Phase II of the radar re-work. The differences are very obvious. You guys are definitely on the right track there. Now, with Phase III then also adressing the dreaded look-down penalty and other related problems I think ED will finally be able to present a very credible radar simulation à la Razbam. While Phase II surely might have some issues I have to say I did not run into any weird stuff, yet. So, big thumbs up from me for the team…

Exactly, Aerges will simulate only what the spanish F1 versions had to offer and this was very clearly communicated from the very beginning. By the way, ED´s F-16C follows a very similar logic...no fancy Harpoons, Penguins or Sparrows. And just as a friendly reminder because it quickly gets annoying to have to scroll over all the F1 unrelated stuff posted above. This is the "F1 Roadmap" section and no chit chat or wishlist area so can we please stay on topic and talk about upcoming systems which we can actually find on the to do list? Thank you.

Copy that. Thank you for your quick answer & have a nice weekend…

This. But personally I think the most useful feature the F1BE has to offer is an additional pair of human eyes. An additional pair of eyes that can be on a lookout for SAMs, bandits and ground targets while you purely focus on flying low and fast. Also, you can do AFAC and RECCE. Quite handy on Enigma‘s server, I guess. The F1BE definitely has a very distinct place in DCS Cold War. Really looking forward to taking her out for a spin… @fausete while we are here a quick question regarding armament options. I saw that you completed the gun pods for the BE. Any word on Phimat status for the EE?

Excellent. This is just perfect. You guys must have been quite busy behind the scenes with 2.9. Anyway, DCS Cold War needed this, so thank you for all these changes.

Oh, wow. I did not know that. Yeah, by the look of it this definitely warrants a seperate bug thread in this subforum so I kindly ask you to file a bug report for the R-3/R-13 missile family based upon your findings so that this gets ED‘s attention and can be looked at. Thank you.

Thank you for keeping us in the loop BN. This is very much appreciated. Fingers crossed for next week then and good luck with all this testing…

Great news! Really looking forward to these changes…

Congratulations, you just wittnessed the AI in its full glory. By the way, go try against a MiG-21 at the same skill level. It will 2-circle rate you at 8.5G and 480kts without ever losing speed. Any questions? Right… So Pepin, you are around the forums long enough to know such stuff. It is definitely not an OP F1 on steroids but definitely an AI problem. The F1 FM is just fine and any (human!) self-respecting DCS F-16 or MiG-29 pilot will eat the F1 alive in ACM. Any day. Period. To wrap this up here is a final question from me because you were not clear on this. Do you even own the F1? Did you even fly it? If so and you have any doubts about what I just said I suggest you join a very well known dogfight server, hop in a F1 and go enjoy the experience against human pilots. Then come back here and tell me if you still think the F1 is OP. Thank you.