Ahmed

I hope

This is an old bug that happens the first time you slave the pod. Undesignating and designating again (after cycling waypoints too??) usually fixes it. I don't know exactly how to reproduce it but it has been there for a few months.

3.0 is the effective glideslope, due to the relative movement as you say. However, the LOS from the carrier to the plane should always be 3.5 regardless at all points, for a 3.5 B/E that is. In any case, as Swift said, the PLAT crosshair could be misscalibrated for a lot of reasons as it is not a primary reference. Also, it shouldn't pitch up/down with the deck as it currently does in DCS (as you can see in all the YT pitching deck footage available)

This probably belongs to the SC bug report section, but you are right, the crosshair seems to be set to 3.0º instead of 3.5º

Indeed, drop size and composition play a big role in its reflectivity (water being 5x more reflective than ice, for example). Airborne weather radar is tuned to detect precipitation and often misses big buildups still developing, or dispersing thunderstorms. The fact that fighters use ground mapping modes to avoid weather suggests that it must detect returns from water drops in a relatively similar way.

Hi, AUTO mode is tracking moving targets while masked. In the attached track the vehicle is even maneuvering while masked. IIRC this is also happening with the Litening. mask.trk

Indeed we are missing the "NO RDR" cue, the radar contribution circle, some MSI trackfile HAFUs (IIRC), and designating MSI L&S without radar contribution. There is plenty of OS evidence and documentation available for all of those, a some have already pointed out.

Hi, Currently it is not possible for one player to be the shooter and another one the controller for SLAM or Walleye attacks. This should be possible and is described in the TAC-300.

Bumping this to see if it can be added. Would be really handy for SRS and a very tiny fix for ED.

I saw this that apparently reflects what is going on normally at public servers. I reckon it fits as an example of what is currently possible in the sim and how it gets exploited.

Hi, this will probably get a WIP tag really fast, but just in case: the PLAT cam is not indicating the activation of the waveoff lights (flashing W). wo.trk

Same, I hope that this can be addressed in the future then, as all radars, RWRs, etc in PC sims are always quite OP in comparison with their real counterparts (no false returns/tracks, no mippling, no ambiguities...) to even make them more, but yeah that will require the devs figuring out how to overcome some technical limitations I guess.

Hi, I know that this was mentioned in some thread, but I coudln't find a dedicated bug thread or official response to it. GMT can detect and track through dense forests. In probably close relation to it, the land.isVisible() scripting function also seems to ignore trees when raycasting for LOS, as you can see in the attached track. gmt.trk

Hi, With 2.7 we got the working buttons in the LSO console, but it seems no key bindings. Can we get key bindings for them, as this is normally triggered from the pickle?

Hi, As in the title. Track attached. sub.trk

You can click the button on the LSO console. But I haven't found any key preset for it.

Deleted. No point.

Hello, Are there any news about this? As the BARO warning is, among other things, used to alert of the floor, the current implementatio where it goes off at the true ("F2") altitude rather than the indicated altitude, looks very wrong. It is described in NATOPS as "Barometric Low Altitude Warning" so it only makes sense for it to be barometric. EDIT: quick&dirty laptop+keyboard track attached showing it baro.trk

If airplanes could land anywhere we would have parcels of terrain, not airports with runways that cost millions to build.... Many aircraft can operate out of unprepared surfaces, that have previously been surveyed to make sure they meet al requirements for that. You won't see any Mig-21 out of the blue landing on a random patch of grass. The porblem in DCS is that the world is much flater and clear of obstacles than the real one. Oh, an that's before we factor rain over wet grass, etcetera. Additionally, our Hornet has the same braking effectiveness on grass than on a concrete runway.

Why not, instead of everybody pitching in as an expert here, don't you guys check the landing distances in-game vs the -200 (-210 if you are lucky enough)? If they are reasonably close, I guess there is no bug. Otherwise, then there may be something to unquestionably report as a bug.

Demo track attached. An additional thing to note is that the braking action is the same on the runway (concrete/asphalt) than off runway (grass) and that definitely is incorrect. offrwy_f18.trk

@BIGNEWY the OP has a point. The Hornet doesn't have any kind of off-pavement physics simulation. Overrunning the runway (in Caucasus) at 100knots has no discernible effects. If I recall correctly, this is not the same with the DCS A-10C (especially v1). This is what happens on a runway overrun irl:

That indeed looks very similar. So, well, if that's fixed internally, then the last paragraph only applies.

Hi, Noticed that the AI controller seems confused and switches targets multiple times. This results, in the example track attached, in the SA-2 not engaging any of the AI groups as it keeps alternating between targets every couple of seconds instead of commiting to one target. This also happens, in the same mission, with a single AI plane group (AI switches target between units in said group instead of commiting to one). If I disable all units but one, a missile is airborne within 40 seconds (expected behavior in all other cases I guess). -- Additionally (and pardon me for not opening a different post for it), the radar lock (with RWR mud indication) and antenna rotation animation are not in-sync (i.e., the radar beam seems to 'rotate' instantly while the object is still pointing in another direction with the turning animation still in progress). This is also visile in the same track. confused_sa2.trk

Hi, Still unrelased, but the CPL AP gains look way too agressive for both NAVBLIM and TACBLIM on the preview video (as if the AP was commaned by Peter Besenyei). As the specific roll rates won't be easily found in any public docs, it would be great if ED reviews this with their SMEs