Schmidtfire

Fantastic! Nothing against George, but sometimes it is nice not needing to tell AI what to do.

Technically, you could most likely put BRM-90's on inner pylons. But Deka would then need to simulate engine stalls when used. Easier to just remove them as no one IRL would use them from inner pylons. On a side note, is the BRM-90 fielded and used by any country IRL? Or did they just pass certification to be carried? Just curious as I have yet to see BRM pods mounted on JF17. From what I understand, the WMD-7 targeting pod is not even used operationally.

With the upcoming FCR. Is that controllable from the Pilot seat or is it CPG only?

Fantastic! But why has this fix been reported as a bug?

Perfectly fine? The RWR is an "Experimental Feature" that does not work properly in multiplayer. It sort of works in Singleplayer. Anyways, my feeling is that this thread will soon derail. Im a big fan of this module, so it just makes me sad that there is little to no ongoing progress on fixing issues. This module was released 8 years ago (with many issues known for years). Just to put this into perspective.

It does some odd things. If Im pulling too hard in a turn, it starts a weird flop back and forth. The wing rock and high alpha behaviour also looks and feels strange to me. The canned feeling came during the last updates the the FM, from memory it used to be more alive and less on rails. As for the flameouts, probably accurate but seems strange that it is instant with no audible cues or fluctuations of rpm before flaming out. But as you mentioned, the systems are the big elephant in the room.

Throw the MiG-21bis module around and you will se some very strange behaviour. Maneuvers not possible by any real aircraft. FM was changed over many years. It was a back and forth, with a lot of pressure from different "experts" on the forums. Not minor tuning, but big changes. There are also issues with some of the systems (as you mentioned). Realistic ASP pipper and Realistic RWR are optional under special features tab and doesen't work properly in multiplayer. Since when are core features optional and defaulted to off? The issue is most likely that the module is so old that it is almost impossible to make changes without breaking anything. Solution is to put essential features into the special options page instead of implementing it fully into the module? Very strange decision anyways... And what about the radar that kills the FPS at low level every other update? I do like the MiG-21, but it's in dire need of maintenance. I cannot recommend it at it's current state and several of my friends has stopped flying it because of the FM and other QA issues (sadly).

I think you are mixing things up. This is regarding the spinning propeller, an already see-trough item. It has nothing to do with being used as an "aid". In VR all propellers (except P-51D) messes with re-projection/motion smoothing. The result is that the gunsight in front of the propeller gets totally warped around and it's visually... well ugly and immersion breaking. If anything, an option to hide the propeller disc will make the difference between flat screen users and VR users smaller. It's not an aid, it's a visual fix that should not have any impact on multiplayer performance.

@BIGNEWY I have attached a track below. I also have a much longer track showing this issue with multiple flight members during a mission. Again, this issue seems to be specific to Marianas Map. _SteelFalcon_ very interesting find, we will test to see if it's part of the same issue. ssd2-20220725-013034.trk

As the title says. Two Hornets (multiplayer airstart) on Marianas, no datalink info what so ever between the aircraft. But the same setup on Caucasus works instantly.

I would like to see the pilot who has the ability to physically pull so many G's that the wing breaks.. It's nonsense. That effect is exaggerated and needs to be fixed. A pilot would g-LOC or loose strength making it impossible to maintain the extremely high G's necessary to do that kind of thing.

Seems like most info on LD-10 and CM-102 comes from different Arms Shows trying to get them marketed, sold and exported. Same with the Norinco GB-6. I love them as an addition on the DCS: JF-17 But out of curiosity. Are these weapons in operational use in real life?

It’s quite hard to find reliable sources on the LD-10. But Im pretty sure uboats is on the right track with the short range. It’s not a HARM produced by Raytheon with superb guidance electronics, rocket motor and a big warhead. So expecting a HARM like performance might be a bit too much. I might be wrong here, but maybe the LD-10 is more of self protective type weapon, more designed to deal with shorter ranged mobile threats?

Imminent. While it might take a little while longer, the word doesen't suggest christmas at the earliest. You are also comparing to very different teams, one has been quite focused on MFS2020 so that might explain the delay.

This looks awesome! Will give it a try.

So.. last thing I heard about the FRS1 on Razbams Discord (from a dev) was that it was... maybe not on hold... but there are challenges with getting information on the radar and some other systems. So the GR3 would most likely be first and maybe the FRS1 when/if they can get proper documentation. Would be awesome to get an FRS1, but I think it's good to manage expectations a bit.

There’s many videos of R-73 launches with audio. In that case it is a steady lock tone (like in the FC3 jets) not a sidewinder ”growl”. If this also applies to R-60M, I don’t know. MiG-21bis module has the steady tone for all missiles. I think it’s by design. Once a lock on conditions is met, the system feeds a lock signal into the pilot headphones. Not 100% sure, but I think it has come up during discussions over the years as correct behaviour. L-39 lock on growl has nothing to do with the R-60M feed. Tone was created for the R-3S on the L-39C. With the L-39ZA, ED just added the R-60M missile. It inherited all the features already implemented for R-3S. Same growl and even the rear-aspect only capability.

This is a mod that will do what you are looking for: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3318699/ IC compatible for multiplayer

Bring on the radar!

I don't think IndiaFotxEcho will bring that project to DCS. Two seater, very complex. MSFS and DCS are two completely different ballparks coding-wise and what kind of accuracy is expected.

Depends on who it's supposed to help. As I player, it can be difficult to track what is reported or not. If I encounter an issue, where do I even start finding out if it is a known bug? Ask around? Spend hours digging through the forums? If a new player purchase a module, how does he even know the current status and what is working or not? We are giving a lot of our precious time to ED by testing and reporting. So in my mind, a clear and concise list is not unreasonable to ask for? Or we can just move along as usual. But there's better way to go about reporting and lessen frustrations both for ED and it's playerbase.

It's not about balancing, it's about available time and priority to get it right. Usually there is some sort of synergy in the development cycle. For example Super Carrier updates will most likely yield Hornet updates. So when ED turns back into navy stuff again and advertise the big Super Carrier features we will likely see more progression on the Hornet (as a Hornet in good shape will sell more Super Carrier DLC's). Common sense really.

It's well known that the Hornet radar underperforms and is acting strange in a lot of situations. Not only that, but the missing MIDS system (that makes Hornet a 4th gen) ain't helping either. It's not user error. Hopefully ED will adress some of those issues when the big Super Carrier update is released.

Thanks! EN2 did make it a little bit better. Not great, not terrible.

Is there any plans to rework the current warning sounds? Bitchin' Betty (and Rus naggin Rita) has a lower pitch and monotone sound compared to the current EN/CH voices. Might be a bit silly, but I know a few players who have stopped flying JF-17 mainly because of the warning sounds annoys them in a bad way I tried to convinced them to download soundmods, but they won't do it. Here is a very short example of the J-10 warning (in the beginning of video) In the first seconds, you can hear a lower pitch and monotone warning sound being closer to other voices such as Betty or Rita.