Deano87

This topic is going nowhere. ED are in charge of weapons that get added to the core sim, they have said no nukes. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Probably the latter.

Apologies. I’ve just seen that this has been answered in another thread and somewhat on the discord. ”Maybe, If they can get enough info on the implementation.”

Hey all, As I’m sure all of you are I'm eagerly awaiting the arrival of the “dark gray” Eagle. Just wondering if it might be expected to have JHMCS at some point? I think the real jet got it in about 2009? But I don’t know what year of jet is being modelled? Cheers D

As per thread title. Anybody else noticing that the night lighting on the super carrier is tanking their FPS since 2.7? I enjoy night carrier ops and haven’t had an issue before now but in 2.7 my frames take a big hit, this happens in both screen and VR and is of course more noticeable in VR. Cheers D

Clear out fxo and metashaders from your DCS Saved Games folder.

I use PointCTRL in VR and I have no problem punching in data into UFC/ICP or CDUs in the current fast jets, Don't see the KU on the AH-64 being any different.

I assume this will show up once the F-16 starts getting more attention once the F-18 gets feature complete.

In the south west corner of grid CS69 is a large perfectly square town in the middle of nowhere with no access roads attaching to it. Looks like something temporary that got forgotten about.

I would imagine not. Air data in the real jet is redundant and if both systems became unreliable it would revert to "Standby Gains" which are fixed. With the UC up the gains are appropriate for ~600 knots at sea level and with UC down they are appropriate for ~230 knots. As far as I know Standby Gains are not currently functional in the DCS version or any failure modes of the ADC. Hence the pitch oscillations, as the "virtual ADC" is feeding eronious air data info to the "Virtual FLCS" when the pitot heat system fails to do its job. As mentioned previously pitot heat should be on automatically any time the wheels are not in contact with the ground. The switch in the rear left of the cockpit is only for ground pitot heat operation. With the switch in the off position the pitot heat should still be functioning once airborne, it is automatic - I don't know if DCS models this correctly.

It's a bug clearly if the anti-ice system doesn't stop the air-data system from freezing up, I think that is easy enough to agree on?

TY BIGNEWY!

@Hardcard, loving the Hotshots gif profile pic... Clearly a person with great taste.

Oh, Stop being so dramatic. ED have a finite amount of development capacity, and they are pushing to get the Hornet finished. It was after all released over a year before the F-16 so It only makes sense that it gets finished first. Patience, our time will come.

If you know how to run the mission editor, try setting up a simple mission to test it. Training missions can be weird for some reason. Specailly if they were made before a certain feature was implimented. You may have found a mission bug. If you don't know how to work the ME... Good time to learn You can also try opening that training mission in the ME and resaving it elsewhere and trying it, that might also fix it.

Huh? Yes you can. According to ED this is correct for the USAF/ANG Blk50 but I don't know why it wouldnt have that functionality. I'm not disagreeing with you btw, the Radar is def not finished...

Awesome. Thanks if you need any more tracks recording then let me know and I can.

Psst.. Its already got TWS, or are you talking about something specific?

Hi BN, Hot start on the ground is not bresighted. You can see it clearly in my track that its not boresighted when I lock up the helicopter with the TGP for the first time. I can record a cold start track as well, but to me this is superfluous and rather besides my point. Air starts are boresighted, correct. Either way it shouldn't really matter. Boresighting should be able to change a pre-boresighted missile to whatever the new boresight setting is, even if its incorrect. Currently the Mav seeker doesn't care where the TGP is looking, as long as the Maverick can lock something and you hit BSGT you get a perfect boresight.

Hey all. As noted in another thread, turns out that the boresighting on the F-16's mavericks is always perfect, even if intentionally done incorrectly. Expected Results: Boresight the Maverick incorrectly against a different target than the TGP is looking at, resulting in an incorrect calibration. When Slewing TGP to new target and handing off to Maverick, would expect Maverick to now retain boresighting error and not be correlated to the TGP. Requiring re-boresighting to correct error. Observed Results: Boresighting is "perfect" even if intentionally done against targets far away from the TGP Fov. Proper boresighting technique can essentially be skipped and you can just get a lock on any target and hit the BSGT button and the Missile will be perfectly aligned with TGP. Tracks attached: Airborne spawn, missiles pre-boresighted, attempted to ruin the boresight by re-boresighting incorrectly. Missiles retain perfect calibration. Runway spawn, missiles require boresighting. 2 parked helicopters placed on way to target for boresighting. TGP locked right helicopter (AH64D), locked the left helicopter (Chinook) with Maverick and then hit BSGT. Despite procedure error (hundreds of feet between the 2 targets), boresight is perfect. Recorded on latest Open Beta. F-16 Mav Boresight Ruyway.trk F-16 Mav Boresight Air.trk

Regarding the tripple rack, from my understanding they allow(ed) the use of the TER with the two outboard rails being used. The plume issue was when you loaded 3 mavs onto the TER, the inboard mav's exhaust plume/exhaust plug can impinge on the horizontal tail. With a chance of damaging it. Would the 6x AGM-65 loadout have been used in a Fulda Gap style situation where the main idea is "oh my god, kill all the tanks!!"? I dunno... Possibly?

I’ll put a track together and report that boresighting incorrectly somehow still works In the bug section.

Hmm, stores no longer being usable or in extreme cases like the M2000 already does, just ripping clean off the jet. Realistic? Probably not, but it does add a risk that needs to be mitigated against by changing how you fly. Which would be the ultimate point of it. As far as saying “well a real pilot would never pull 9G with heavily loaded jet” yeah, ya don’t say. Regardless of how career limiting that would be irl, sim pilots DO pull rediculous G with AG configurations. Since the release of the Viper I’ve seen people online pulling 8G-9G repeatedly on recovery from a dumb bombing dive attacks or evading SAMs while fully loaded, heck, iv’e undoubtedly done it myself at some point. A risk of damaging the jet or being unable to use the payload would add another thing the pilot has to be aware of and balance against whatever manoeuvre they want to do. Which imho gets us closer to the reality of real flying rather then just going “yeah 9G baby, woooo!” All the time. Specially in a jet like the F-16 which has no automatic G-limiter unlike the Hornet.

Or.. the most fun, imho.