Harker

OP, they'll be X'd out if they're not done aligning. Although that's just for flair, since they both release and guide correctly without a completed alignment. Also, if that's my DDI mod, then it doesn't alter anything related to HUD cues or avionics in general, it's only cosmetic.

Great suggestions here and I'm 100% behind them. Having to deal with the AI ATC in MP is problematic for us that play in squadrons. An option to skip that or at least have ACLS work like on the free Stennis (where you get the symbology at 6 NM out, without the need for SC comms), would be a solution.

Hi, make sure you don't have the historical filter enabled, as it might limit the types of weapons that you can load. It should be the fourth button at the bottom of the display, which appears enabled in your screenshot.

Where? Both the Hornet and Tomcat only show green bombs for me still. Are you sure you're not using a mod or custom livery?

Press the D/L button on the UFC again, it will cycle between the MIDS and the L4 datalink menus.

Is there any chance we can get a reference for this then, from the team? I'm sure we'll be happy to lay this issue to rest.

Without sharing any sort of ITAR info, the name of the option is Radar/Jammer Filter Priority. It is merely a frequency filter. All modern radars can operate on several frequency bands, called channels. In the Hornet, Radar priority means that the Jammer stays out of the Radar's way (channel), even if it compromises the Jammer's effectiveness. Jammer priority means that the Jammer will choose the channel(s) it wants to operate on and the Hornet's mission computer will automatically switch the Radar to another channel, even if that means that the Radar's effectiveness will be compromised. To the best of my knowledge, the Hornet does not suffer from power draw issues between the radar and the jammer, so a reduction in radar range makes no sense (a reduction in power would not dramatically affect max range anyway). The option is just a frequency filter and, in Radar priority, should leave the radar completely unaffected. (Also, Radar priority is automatically selected with either AMRAAMs or Sparrows in the air, since shot accuracy takes priority.) In the context of DCS, since we don't have different radar and jammer channels, a reasonable approach would be: Radar priority: 100% radar range, but weaker ECM Jammer priority: Reduced radar range, but stronger/full ECM. I understand about the ITAR concerns, so I'm not posting anything. I'll just say that the above description is in no way specific to the Hornet or any system in particular. It merely describes the function of a frequency filter in the context of managing frequency channels between a radar and a jammer. PM sent, with a little more info.

Yep, exactly. Now, you just know, whether you like it or not. No need for a visual confirmation.

I actually don't mind this approach, as it gives us a wide range of possibilities. Maybe they can have some features that are mutually exclusive, so we can't have a single aircraft that does everything all the time, but choose the exact features in the ME. IMO it's a shame to leave out features and capabilities if they have enough data to model them.

Oh I believe you, I'm not arguing about it. I was merely pointing out that MAP should still show destroyed units, since they're still a large hunk of metal sitting there. It looks like the A/G radar implementation is kinda "gamey" and it shows only specific, predefined stuff, instead of what's actually there.

Destroyed units disappear from A/G Map? That's not correct. A large piece of metal is still a large piece of metal. It would be nice to see either some form of raycasting implemented (if there isn't) or a more detailed version of the current implementation.

If you're 100% sure you're using AGL, then it sounds like a bug. Otherwise, if you use ASL, typing 0 will then change it to the ground elevation at that point.

AFAIK, the most common scenario is that they use ACLS for the symbology, but still fly manually.

Hi there, sorry, your previous comment flew under my radar. Glad to hear you got it working! The installation should work as normal, I check after every DCS update. For the Saved Games folder, did you remember to create the "Cockpit_F-18C" in Liveries and place the mod inside? For the install directory of the game, if you want to use OVGME, then your top level directory should be just DCS World, my files are designed to be placed there. Anyway, I'm happy you got it working and sorry for not replying to your previous question.

That's true for every mod. I go through all the files I have mods for, after every update, and see if they were modified. If yes, I adjust my modded files accordingly. It's the only way to guarantee that you won't run into any problems.

I would still prefer that all waypoints default to ground elevation, unless manually changed, or keep the previous WP's elevation, if that was manually changed. If no manual changes are done, then the default should be the ground elevation. Much more logical than having it be 2000m, which is an arbitrary number, from what I can tell.

Yeah, that's what I wanted to test. In other modules, the HUD slews smoothly and continuously and I wanted to see if, in the Hornet, it's only a matter of sensitivity or a matter of the designation slewing in increments instead of continuously.

You put into words something that's been bothering me and I couldn't put my finger on it. I notice that small stuttering when I slew the pod around. To be clear, it has nothing to do with the TDC speed (as it's demonstrated already in the OP), it's just a general "un-smoothness". I'll do my own test when I get the chance, but I'm thinking these "jumps" might also explain the extreme imprecision of the HUD/HMD slew.

IIRC this currently works in SRS, if you colonize GRCV. You transmit and receive on the selected frequency and you also receive from Guard.

I haven't noticed it, but I haven't looked for it either. If that's indeed the case, it makes no sense at all, since we have both view distance presets and sliders. Why not let people who struggle with FPS lower their settings, while keeping the distances the same (or even increasing them)?

That would indeed be the best way to go about it. Have a default livery per unit and allow us to download from a pool of official liveries or group liveries by time period and/or country. I have little use for most MiG-21 and F-14A liveries, for example, because I don't really encounter those units in the missions I play. And IIRC, they have some of the largest livery folders in the game.

I'd actually prefer not to have more liveries, the game is bloated enough as it is. It's very easy to install liveries for personal use, for anyone interested in having more. Definitely in favor of fixing the mipmap problem though.

@BIGNEWYhas acknowledged the problem in another thread, can't find it now. I hope it's internally known already.

This may be a silly question, but did you try with the canopy spider clamp down? I noticed that I can't advance my throttle past MIL unless it's down, it looks like it's in the way of the in-game throttle, when in the up position.

This stuff can't come soon enough. We're trying to organize our group and it's impossible to do any proper flight planning live, because clients can't set up waypoints and CM profiles, without needing to input everything manually in the jet, which can take anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes, depending on the mission.