Harker

Exactly, well written. To add to that, the L+S option on the FLIR merely means that the FLIR will be slaved to the radar when it's not auto-tracking. This is also why we don't have a RDR SLAVE option with the ATFLIR - the FLIR should be able to create its own MSI trackfile, which can be selected for radar tracking via the RDR ATTK or AZ/EL pages, like any other MSI trackfile.

Yes, you can't accidentally turn off your engines by the axis alone. Also in the real jet, you need to lift the finger lifts. For flight idle and ground idle: in the real aircraft, you can't move the throttle all the way back with weight off wheels, in order to maintain a minimum power setting - there's an additional physical detent with WoffW. With weight on wheels, you can move it further back. In DCS, this is simulated, you can see the in-game throttle move further back on the ground, but of course it doesn't affect your physical throttle. Instead, the axis is active from 0-100 on the ground and from 5-100 (or something like that) in the air. That's also why you shouldn't land with your real throttle all the way back, because DCS will not update the in-game throttle without input once you land, so you'll be rolling down the runway with ~67% RPM instead of 65%. So either touch down first and then go to zero or, if you are already all the way back, bring the throttle forward and back quickly.

You can't go past idle with the axis. The 0% of the axis corresponds to the lowest the throttle can go (flight idle is higher than ground idle). You can only go past Idle to Off if you assign a key bind for it.

Yeah, I'd be surprised if the TOO box was as accurate IRL. The resolution of the HARM seeker should be the limiting factor here and at larger distances, the error could potentially be quite large. There was another discussion about this some time ago, I had suggested that ED adds an RNG error on x and y, around the actual point of the emitter, that gets lower as you get closer. Incidentally, it's what they seem to have done with the HTS pod on the Viper and the effect looks pretty nice there.

Yeah, I hear you. I'm famously bad at keeping things concise, so I appreciate where you're coming from. I think it's because I've developed the professional habit of being exhaustive when it comes to details. You didn't miss any of the Cage/Uncage functions, just that the button both cages and uncages stuff. But it might be a better idea to just name the button Cage/Uncage, instead of just Uncage and leave everything else as is. But again, I'm hugely nitpicking now, as you say, it's just supposed to be a reference, not a first-time guide.

This looks nice, thanks for making it. I'll probably use it as reference for new people in our squadron. Also, if I may add to it: TDC Depress and Hold for RWS/TWS = Spotlight, for A/G Radar = slew designation/EXP selection. TDC Depress can be used to select several items on the MSI displays, like a computer mouse. NWS steps through ranked targets or L&S/DT2 in both RWS and TWS. RAID only enters RAID, not EXP. Cage/Uncage acts like a toggle for the AIM-9, MAV, HARM as well.

Pretty much what @GGTharossays. This behavior would be appropriate for significantly older missiles. It's the same story with chaff and notching. And the same behavior can be observed in look-down cases where the target is not close to the ground, just lower than the missile or aircraft. Indeed, they're going for correct-ish effects here, but they are massively overdone with respect to modern missiles. And they have apparently added an RNG-based aiming error mechanic, which further exacerbates the problem in other scenarios. Keep in mind that this implementation is likely WIP and probably pretty difficult to pull off correctly, so things will probably change in the future. I invite you to take a look at these threads: https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/285109-aim-120s-all-aim-120-api-missiles-in-277/ https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/283107-active-missile-look-down-notch-width-seems-excessive/ https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/287345-the-aim-120-in-278/ https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/290014-amraam-120c-when-fired-upwards-at-close-range-5-7-miles-targets-are-missing-randomly/

Check out the ReadMe, only the part of the mod that goes into the main DCS directory. I'll paste the installations steps here, with the relevant part in bold. The cockpit textures are just a cockpit re-skin, but you can convert them for OVGME use if you wish (to combine them with another cockpit texture mod, for example).

IIRC, you need to be in the A/A master mode. It works on the ground for me just fine.

+1 that'd be very useful for mission scripting

The patch status thread was just updated, OB patch planned for today.

Actually it's not, IRL it's about which frequency bands (channels) the jammer is allowed to operate on. Hence my question, since we don't have frequency bands in DCS, what's the difference in ECM effectiveness between Pos 1 and Pos 2? Shorter lock/burn-through range? Limited/infinite/higher numbers that a lock can be broken? Based on the literature I've read on the subject and, it is my understanding that Pos 1 (Pos 2 +AMRAAM)/Radar priority would allow it to operate only outside the channels the radar is currently operating on, so it might be less effective/useless against a hostile radar on these frequency bands. From what I understand, the FCR should be minimally affected by the jammer and the jammer should be limited to operate around the FCR. Since we don't have different radar channels in DCS, this compromising effect is instead represented as a 40% radar range penalty. Pos 2/Jammer priority allows the jammer to operate on any channels it wants to, potentially jamming your own radar if it's operating on the same channels or more likely, forcing the FCR to automatically change channels, potentially messing up its effectiveness, especially against another jamming target. The SPJ would be at its max effectiveness here, with the radar operating "around" the jammer. It'd actually make more sense to have 90% perf. radar + 60% jammer perf. for Pos 1 and 50% radar perf. + 100% jammer perf. for Pos 2. That's why I'm asking. I understand how the real system is supposed to work, I don't understand how the difference between Pos 1 and Pos 2 in DCS, because in my understanding, ECM is an on/off flag in DCS. Unless there's no difference now and it'll be important later, if DCS simulates any sort of EW.

I'm sorry if I'm missing something in this thread, but I don't see any info on why Pos 2 would be preferable to Pos 1, in the context of DCS. Is the SPJ working better in Pos 2? Why wouldn't I choose 60% radar range + SPJ with Pos 1, over 0% radar range and SPJ, (assuming the AMRAAM is not selected, I get that Pos 2 + AMRAAM is effectively the same as Pos 1)? Or just go Pos 1 + RF Quiet if you want to specifically silence your radar while transmitting with your SPJ (as should be the correct mech if you specifically want your radar to be silent). Again, only in the context of DCS.

Anyone has any idea about the difference that positions 1 and 2 have in the effectiveness of the jammer? Does 2 offer improved SPJ performance, to offset the cost of completely inhibiting radar usage? With the current implementation, why wouldn't I want to always use position 1? I mean in DCS, not IRL. The IRL explanation of the system is pretty clear.

IAM terminal settings don't require an engine rework. The Hornet has had terminal settings for JDAMs (but not JSOWs) implemented for a while now (although the HSI zones do not reflect the changes) and the JF-17 has had terminal settings, with correctly changing HSD zones, for its LS-6 glide bomb, which is equivalent to a JSOW, also implemented for a while now.

Currently, if you have the FLIR on a tracking mode (SCENE/ATRK or AUTO/PTRK), but the TDC priority is assigned to another page (say, the Maverick page), pressing the undesignate button does not exit the FLIR tracking mode and thus does not remove the designation, which means that you cannot manually slew the Maverick. The current workaround is to move the TDC priority back to the FLIR page, undesignate and then move TDC priority back to the Maverick page. The correct behavior would be that any designating sensor, including the FLIR, will exit its designating mode when the Undesignate button is pressed on the stick.

That's why I specified that we can get solutions without active ranging. I ran some tests in the Caucasus mountains. Radar Off, RADALT Off, INS to NAV (no GPS altitude), wrong pressure setting for BALT. I still get correct firing solutions for bombs and the gun, even when targeting steep slopes. This shouldn't be possible without DTED. The only remaining source of elevation is DTED. Also, the BALT pressure setting does not affect the firing solution at all, which makes sense since DTED should be higher ranked than BALT in elevation calculation. FA-18C_CCIP solution without source.trk Edit: @BIGNEWY, here you can see how we get correct elevation data without any other source, implying the existence of DTED and thus TAMMAC.

TAMMAC was integrated in all Lot 12 and above aircraft in our time frame, with AFC 327. A lot of things we already have in DCS came after AFC 327, such as JSOWs or the current HMD page, for example. The voice callouts we have (Roll Right/Left) also came with that update and TAWS. You can look at page 40 (45 on the PDF) of the NATOPS flight manual. Plus, we clearly have DTED, as we can still get elevation data for firing solutions without active ranging. And DTED came with TAMMAC. Everything on our Hornet is pointing to the fact that we have TAMMAC, except for the HSI layout/options and lack of different map options (which is what this thread is about).

Hi BN, After seeing that the Apache will actually have the option of changing between the three map types on the fly, maybe this is something that can be done for the Hornet as well? Seeing as the capability is now possible in-game. Any update on the TAMMAC situation would definitely be appreciated. Cheers

It does affect the TGP picture. It affects all picture-in-picture displays, so mirrors, TGP video, Maverick video HUD NAVFLIR (for the Harrier) etc.

It occurred once, could've been an one-off. I haven't had it happen before. I'm pretty sure the missiles hadn't impacted, they still had more than a minute to go. I had pressed F6 and couldn't see them (not a mission setting, worked in the same mission before). I'll keep an eye out in case it happens again.

This is probably either part of the problem or the whole problem, yes.

DCS 2.7.8.16140 Open Beta When selecting the TWS option on OSB 10, while in STT, the radar should exit STT and enter TWS AUTO the L&S. It should not drop the L&S at any point. In DCS, it exits STT, drops the L&S and enters a TWS AUTO scan centered in the middle of the tactical region. If the previous L&S is inside these limits and is detected, it will be automatically re-designated as L&S and TWS AUTO will be centered on it. If the previous L&S is not inside these limits, it gets dropped, doesn't get detected again and the pilot needs to manually adjust the radar in order to detect it again and manually designate it. This is likely caused by the fact that the L&S is dropped upon exiting STT and thus TWS AUTO does not have an L&S initially. What should happen is a smooth transition from STT to TWS AUTO, where the L&S is not dropped after exiting STT and TWS AUTO starts on it, not at the center of the display. Track attached. STT to TWS AUTO not centering on L&S.trk

DCS 2.7.8.16140 Open Beta While testing for another issue, I noticed that two HARMs I fired in PB mode disappeared mid-flight. Track attached. HARM disappear.trk

I ran some tests that show the problem. Seems like the HARM's seeker gimbal limits are not simulated, since it can see and turns towards SAMs that should be outside of them. It also seems that PB mode shots do not respect the distance limitations around the designation point, as emitters were placed a little more than 20 NM apart. PB HARMs go for emitters more than 20 NM away from des_2.trk PB HARMs go for emitters more than 20 NM away from des.trk