Harker

In DCS, the laser has a max effective slant range of 8 NM. If you're dropping the bomb from 12 NM away and lasing immediately, it's either seeing nothing or it's seeing a point mid-air (the laser creates a "point" at the end of the 8 NM line, if it doesn't intersect the ground). It's probably the latter, which is messing with the first bomb. I assume that subsequent bombs are released closer and thus you're close enough for the laser to actually hit the ship. Try again, lasing only when you're closer to the ship. You'll need to drop in a manner that will ensure it's close enough, to the target when you start lasing. I'd advice you to do the drops in AUTO or CCIP, using the pitch to space them out and leave the laser to start automatically, at 10 TTI. Hold it down yourself after, until all bombs impact.

I'm not the OP and I can't help here, but I just wanted to say that you probably set a new record time for fixing something!

You don't want it appearing at all. The SA page threat rings are not dynamic. Think of them as marks on the map, for SAM sites that you already have intel on, before the mission. Either you have intel on a SAM site there and you have a ring, no matter what that SAM is doing at the moment (maybe it's not there anymore, maybe it's inactive, waiting to ambush with its radar off etc, you don't know) or you don't know there's a SAM site there (HIDDEN ON MAP), so whether the SAM is active now or comes online later, it doesn't matter, you didn't know about its location or existence before you started the mission. And there's no way to update the SA page by adding or removing threat rings, while in the air. Best you can do is use one of the MREJ profiles.

Good to hear, thanks, BN.

If you don't have a DT2, the undesignate button will step the L&S through the ranked HAFUs, in descending rank order.

Wait, the team is saying that a AAA platform can eat modern MBTs for breakfast? 30mm penetrating from any angle? Seriously? If that were the case, MBTs wouldn't exist. What's the point of all that thick, sophisticated armor and 120mm guns and shells like the APFSDS? Everyone would just run around with high RPM 30mm guns, much lighter armor and small warheads. I thought that this was a limitation of the game engine. If not, it's completely wrong. Please reconsider.

225 MHz is available only for AM. That's why the FM/AM option gets removed. As soon as you enter 225, the radio will automatically switch to AM.

I recall that someone wrote a script that'd tell you your flight member's fuel state, sounds like it'd help you. I don't remember anything more about it, but you might want to check it out.

I feel that you hit the nail on the head here. I've shown DCS to multiple friends, they expressed their amazement at the detail and complexity and yet none of them wanted to get into it. It wasn't a money problem either, it was an interest/commitment problem.

This is described mostly in paragraph "24.2.9.5 Coupled Auto Sequential Steering (MC OFP 13C AND UP)", page VII-24-47 (753 of the pdf), of the usual public NATOPS manual (A1-F18AC-NFM-000).

You can, special options tab for the unit in the editor, helmet mounted device. You can choose between JHMCS, NVG and none.

OP, for some other users that reported this, it ended up being an issue where they had the radar elevation (that also control the TPOD zoom) bound to an axis without realizing it. Make sure this isn't the case. As for the track, you can run a very quick session where you demonstrate the issue, exit and select the Save Track option in the debrief screen. Then, you can find your saved tracks in the Tracks folder, in the DCS part of your Saved Games folder.

+1 to all weather effects on airframes, in general. And it'd be nice if it was implemented globally, not in a case by case basis.

DCS should stick to aircraft. The scale of the game and the map level of detail only works there. Small missions with vehicles in CA are already possible, to the extent that it makes sense in DCS and you can already control "strategic" vehicles, such as ships. Implementing an actual FPS element would bring unneeded complication to the game code, which is already more complex than it should be. The game already doesn't run great on pretty much every pc out there, imagine if you add a whole new dimension to it.

OT, but on that note, is it possible to encrypt the radio and communicate with F-14s? We couldn't make it work with my squadron, I'm thinking that the KY-58 and KY-28 are incompatible.

It needs a rework. My main issue is that part of the "internal" AB texture is coming out of the exhaust nozzles and showing alongside the "external" AB texture. There are much better AB implementations from third parties, where the internal texture is confined to the interior of the nozzle and they also illuminate, giving off a much nicer effect. FWIW, I think the external AB texture is OK, more or less.

Keep in mind that you might need to maneuver to prevent the bandit from getting inside your radar's notch, which is something that can happen at that stage, if the bandit turns defensive. I watched the video and the bandit is defending horribly. And, well, I suggest you use better reference material, you don't need to watch a 21 minute video to just learn about cranking. There are several threads and even real manuals floating online with actual explanation of the maneuvers and the physics behind them. I can't post the link, but google "rokaf manual f-16" and it'll be the first result. It's for the F-16, but the relevant concepts inside apply to every aircraft with active missiles.

I don't recall the exact number now (8 I think), but the APG-73 Phase II should be able to attack more than 2 targets with AMRAAMs. Having a target as the L&S or DT2 shouldn't be a requirement, those are mainly interface aids for the pilot. Lower ranked trackfiles are treated the same way, with the exception of TWS AUTO, where the scan is biased towards the L&S. As long as a trackfile is maintained and a missile datalink channel is available, that missile will guide to it. What I've found is that in DCS, if the target is not the L&S or DT2, the missile will not receive position updates and even worse, it'll guide to the last detection point, not the last calculated intercept point, as it should. The first problem is a bug, the second is half bug, half due to the game engine limitations.

I use a keybind for the toggle, mapped to the U key on my keyboard, no issues here with either going to on or off. Are you in the latest version of the game?

True, I just felt like chipping in. I want capable red aircraft as much as anyone else, but not at the expense of what DCS is all about. The tag means that I'll try to help new players with questions, where I can, although I mostly do that in the Hornet side of the forums, as that's an aircraft I know well and can give accurate replies for. I'm in no way affiliated with ED.

The argument is that low fidelity modules are a waste of development time, for a product aimed at producing high fidelity modules.

You can absolutely track an A/A target without setting up L&S, with the LITENING right now. You just need to point the pod at it and transition to PTRK with the SCS. It'll work, if you are close enough for the pod to be able to track.

You shouldn't expect the APG-68V5 to be able to generate tracks at 60 NM out. The real one cannot (at least according to sources I've found), the one in DCS generally works a little better than it should.

The issue where the ground doesn't render is likely related to your drive and/or CPU. Are you using an SSD or HDD?

So, are we to assume that the Hornet will leave Early Access with all of these errors left not addressed? Is a new cockpit planned that will maybe fix these issues as well? Maybe to bring the Hornet on par with the Viper, for example, since the current cockpit looks rather old, at this point.