Deano87

Can you maybe record a video? Are you flying in the Open Beta or Stable version of DCS?

I'm sure it's probably physically capable of flying in that config. But these configs take time and money to validate and test so configs that are never going to be used IRL don't get tested an cleared for use. I can't see any reason IRL why you'd want 8 GBU-12s on a jet with such a small wing, and so little gas. Staggering around with a drag index of 400+ is no fun for anybody and madness IRL. In DCS with our relative short range and often solo missions where going full bomb truck is more viable and fun it makes more sense. If you really need to put that many warheads on target then there are bigger and more capable aircraft for the job, like the Strike Eagle.

+1

I doubt anything is going bad. It’s just the state of the throttle not updating upon the sim loading you into the jet. So you have to move them before the sim will notice the change. Before startup every time I take my throttles out of idle cutoff, move it around to make sure the sim throttle is moving and synced to my physical one and then put them back in to cutoff, then I continue start as normal. if I forget to do this then during start I just have to cycle it back into cutoff and back out to idle again. There is an option to “sync HOTAS and cockpit on mission launch” or something like that. That will automatically poll all control bindings and set the cockpit of the simulated jet to match whatever your physical controls are set to. I turn this off to avoid things like me forgetting I have the gear handle set incorrectly before loading into a mission and either putting the gear up on the ground or even extending the gear as soon as I load into a air start mission. You can set this on and it will solve your issue probably but remember It can have unintended consequences.

Add that to my video thread!

@karasawa What config would make up a DI of 50? 2 tanks 2 Aim-120s? With the top graph you posted it should be fairly easy to verify the sim performance by testing that it can reach the max altitudes shown for each GW in Mil.

Tankers you're expecting to be using during a mission are going to be patrolling in a known location that will be briefed prior to the flight, so you'll know roughly where it will be relative to your planned route. And if not then their location can be passed via radio, either from the tanker directly or from other supporting assets (awacs etc). Once you're nose on, you have an air-to-air radar to help find them as well.

@skywalker22 While I agree there's an issue with the E3 blindspot. But that isn't related to the Link between aircraft without an E3 in the mix? All the aircraft in the link should contribute and should be able to see each other (Line of sight/range excluded obviously) without the need for an E3 correct?

You are waiting until the alignment quality reaches 10 in the DED and not just when it says RDY right? If you're doing a stored heading alignment it should read something like INS 01.8/10 RDY, with 10 being the alignment quality (lower number is better). For a full normal alignment you need to confirm the lat/long/alt lines with ENTR button in the first 2 mins and then wait for it to get to 8 mins, it should read INS 08.0/10 RDY. If you flick to norm as soon as it says RDY at a number above 10 then you're accepted a degraded alignment and while it'll be sufficient for basic flight instruments it wont be accurate enough for anything requiring a precise location... like the HAD & HARM.

A simulation that is trying to represent real life... no?

Hey All, On the whole I'm pretty happy with my VR performance atm, of course more would always be better but I've got my sim running in a way that feels pretty stable in most scenarios. However when I active NVGs my framerate absolutely tanks. Anybody else seeing this? Reverb G2, RTX 2080, 32GB ram, 4790K @ 4.7Ghz (Yes I know my CPU is aincent)

I love the idea. And I’d happily throw money at ED for another variant. The only thing I’d want ontop of that list would be a CDU screen replacing the steam gauges. I don’t however see it happening any time soon though.

While I'd like it... It's not a payload that's cleared IRL, AFAIK.

Was it after you had landed and re-armed?

Has it happened since, Or was this a random one-off? Have you successfully launched these weapons since?

I won't be able to look at a track for a while. Maybe try looking at the alignment procedure in the manual or Chucks Guide. https://chucksguides.mudspike.com/DCS/DCS F-16C Viper Guide.pdf

Sounds like you haven't aligned your INS properly tbh.

Probably a long shot. But you do know that to launch HARM and Maverick in the F-16 you use the weapon release “pickle” button, not the trigger. But like has be said. Record a short track or video of your issue and it’s much easier for us to diagnose your problem. You can save tracks after you exit a flight, during the debriefing. The shorter the flight the better.

Yes, it's because the jet is rolling to the right. The wingtips are deflecting in the opposite direction because of the weight of the 120 out in-front of the wingtip

Having 120's on the tips does introduce some interesting bending moments though!

There are various weird things about the way the F-16 manages its SPI (Sensor Point of Interest). In the Viper your current SPI is based on an offset from your current steerpoint. If you imagine you have a target at steerpoint 6, you set steerpoint 6 as your active steerpoint, it should then slew all sensors towards that steerpoint, including the TGP. If you then slew your TGP off that target to a point say 2 miles west and 0.5 miles south of steerpoint 6 and then change to steerpoint 7, your SPI will carry that offset over to the new steerpoint. So your TGP will be looking at a point 2 miles west and 0.5 miles south of steerpoint 7 instead. So how does one get the TGP back to the proper steerpoint location? This is done through the Cursor Zero or CZ action. This essentially clears any steerpoint offset. This can be done by hitting the CZ button on the TGP or AG Radar MFD page, or selecting the TGP screen as SOI and then doing TMS aft twice. This should zero any steerpoint offset and essentially slave the TGP to the currently active steerpoint. To get into Area Track you want to do TMS Right as far as I know from Point Track. The TGT button on the TGP MFD Cycles between TGT-OAP1-OAP2 where OAP is the Offset Aim-Point, this is a pre-programmed location for each steer point. The point of OAPs is to allow you to verify your aiming calculations when you can't actually see the target due to weather. It allows you to pick two local landmarks that might you be able to see to verify where you are aiming. All weapon steering and weapon delivery calculations stay at the TGT point, but by looking at the known landmarks you can confirm that your TGT point is in the correct place. I hope that kind of makes some kind of sense. I really recommend checking out Chucks Guide for the F-16. It's great for walking you through a lot of this stuff. https://www.mudspike.com/chucks-guides-dcs-f-16c-viper/

Asking on F-16.net might be good?

Ok, My curiosity got the better of me and I decided to open up the SC model in Model Viewer and take a look at how many lights the island currently has... Well, I'm honestly not surprised my frame rates take a hit with ~ 60 lights being computed. I think so many of these could be culled and replaced with very few lights, mainly the large clusters of lights above Pri Fly. I think each one of those could be replaced with a single emitter for each direction, and with that alone you could probably cut 20+ lights from the total. Again, I suggest this as a option for people who want better FPS and are willing to take a hit on how nice or realistic the lighting will look. I'd be absolutely happy to have lighting that just kinda sells the look of the night deck without it being perfect if it means I can start and taxi to the cat without wanting to vomit from the stuttering. I notice that all the animation Args that activate these lights are single sided, from 0-1, I dunno if you could have a thinned out version show at -1 and then have a Special Options tickbox for "Simplified Night Lighting" which would activate those instead. I don't know enough about the DCS animation system to know if that would work. Anyway just my 2 cents. D

This is still a big issue for me. In VR my framerate goes from a stable 45 being on deck with aircraft moving around during the day to mid/low-20s at night with the island lighting. I'd love to see a Special Options checkbox for the SC with "Simplified Night Lighting" as an option for people on lower-end rigs.

When it comes to an amount of a chemical compound (the same in both flares) burning, that's exactly how it works. The smaller flare gives off a smaller IR signature, so is less effective.