Tango3B

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.

Concerning the radar overhaul…I just saw that APS mode for the radar is not mentioned in the to-do list. Is that just an oversight? APS mode can be quite useful when used correctly so I hope it is also still planned?

What you describe can occur when you first switch to BPZ and then enter TEL mode afterwards. Until we see a radar overhaul and/or AERGES implements BPZ mode correctly I think it is probably the best to just unbind BPZ mode in order to not run into the above problem. Thanks.

Congrats, ED. Personally, I am on board since the glorious days of Flanker 2.0 so it was quite a journey for me, too - it has not always been an easy journey, though. However, joy and fun in the simulator far outweigh the negative. So, are there things I want to see in the very near future? Yes, mostly ATC improvements, a vastly improved EWR/AWACS with much higher/customizable update rate and of course the completion of the F/A-18C and the F-16C. This year has not been that rich in content for these said modules so there is also a bit of room for improvement, right? Right. On the other hand, though DCS is basically a wellness trip for my mental wellbeing. The sim has become so beautiful in 2023...I mean, just look at DCS Syria, DCS Sinai or DCS Marianas. Choose the right ambient settings and it´s basically like being on holidays. What can I say, I wish you the best of luck for the next 15 years. I'm here, we're here and I think it's going to be a wild ride. Just like in the last 15 years. DCS...what can I say...I just love it. Thank you for all your achievements for our communtity, ED.

Okay, so my problem is I just made a Luftwaffe livery for the Mirage F1. It looks actually very nice and I intend to make it a publicly available. It is the first time I ever did it, though and here comes my problem. I used the "ALA 14 NATO Skin 1 (CE) 1990" as a base skin to create that livery and now my problem is, I cannot get rid of the original spanish-style bort numbers. It basically drives me insane. Guys, please! What do I have to edit in the descrition.lua to get rid of the original spanish bort numbers? Your help is immensely apprecited...

You ask for evidence on that system? Okay, then open up your -1 manual, go to section 1 and start reading from 1-98 thru to 1-104. These pages deal with the EPU. You also want to read the section before that starting from 1-82 thru to 1-97. That very section deals with the electrical system and said power distribution diagrammes in general. There you will find all the evidence needed and you will also see that GumidekCZ is absolutely right about the EPU. Thank you.

Thank you very much, sir! And a big thumbs up for altering „fixed“ to „reported“ in the thread description. Have a nice week.

Here you go. You get two tracks from me. I just made a track of that issue showcasing the Viper and another track showcasing the same problem in the Hornet. Test environment was SP, Caucasus Map in MT, latest OB version. So, I want to focus your attetion on the moment when I achieve the first lock. In both modules the first lock on seems to be rather stable. Then however, due to maneuvering, when lock is briefly lost and you reacquire lock the problem starts to appear. You then lose lock every few seconds. Wierdly enough, in MP even the first lock is unstable so the behavior is definitely different for in SP/MP environment... Viper track:Viper ACM bug.trk Hornet track:Hornet ACM bug.trk 9L, I also made two very short vids also showcasing the issue so you can see what I see... Viper vid: https://youtu.be/qkf0li6ulhU Hornet vid: https://youtu.be/ogPwmDJ738A This issue is NOT fixed in the current OB. As Lord Vader said, this might be fixed internally but it certainly isn´t in our OB version. Again, a hotfix on this would be very much appreciated. Thank you.