Hiromachi

But how do you destroy them with Mistral than ? If I'm not mistaken it only has air to air missiles.

Yup.

It doesnt. Its there merely for you to know that you are being looked at. Thing is that you dont always want to transmit jamming signal, especially during non-combat mission since there is a chance for jamming signal to be intercepted. This is a highly confidential equipment and even its operation was up until recently classified. Thankfully its not anymore. So Receive mode is just a way to observe without reacting.

1. I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, for me this is a bit weird question. But to try to answer, the reception of signal from scanning or tracking you radar is crucial for the SPS-141 to not only analyze but also create specific set of jamming signals, depending on the type of radar that is "looking" at you. And no, SPS-141 does not display any information on the type of radar that focuses on you. The above depends of course on the position of the switch Receive / Transmit. In first case it will only analyze signals, in latter case it will transmit jamming signal. And information whether enemy radar is operating in search mode or track mode is displayed in form of ОБЛУЧЕН light (in search mode it should be blinking, in track mode it should be constant light). But thats it. 2. I did some testing back in the day but I couldnt observe any differences, at least in launch range for HAWK system. In reality SPS-141 would operate in more sophisticated manner but in DCS system has to be simplified to the environment. 3. It should be possible. I will try asking our programmer how its intended to operate.

Actually, since helos are mentioned. What is the specific role of the SA342 Mistral ?

No it is not. This issue is confirmed and fix was submitted to ED few hours ago. It was an error.

Try Polish: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=266878&page=6 Posts 59 and 60.

Be advised, there is a quirk at very high altitudes. Above 8 km alt SAU Recovery and use of descend mode cause some oscillations. Its known and reported. Just wanted to keep you informed :)

No, I've asked Dolphin (our FM programmer), and no changes were introduced yet. Of course there is a possibility of a bug appearing but I don't see any difference at low speed at least.

Rudel is currently focusing on F4U but this one is acknowledged and he has planned already to look into lights.

I do fly CW every day as well.

Could you produce a little bit more constructive bug report ? I fly 21 every single day and test it. I did not experience any unusual wing rocking different to what we had 2 - 5 days ago.

The F-4 is not going to attack you right on. Under normal conditions if you takeoff in full burner and climb to intercept and launch about 4 km from the target, F-4s should be still 30 - 40 km away. But they should pursue you and if you turn back / you took too long to intercept, they will engage you with AIM-7. So if you do everything fine, you will be outside of their missiles and can safely fly home allowing SA-6 crew to take care of them. No, it is not specified. You can park in any free spot. Edit: I tested mission. It works as intended.

I guess its one of those DCS things :)

What engine setting ? Afterburner or Emergency afterburner ? Altitude ? Temperature and pressure used for test ? Also, I suggest to use M number since its quicker to compare with the manual.

SA-2 does not require P-19 but that reduces it engagement capabilities which in this case is fine. There is also SA-6 which is the real threat and in all my tests dealt with Phantoms if user carried mission correctly. As for Phantoms, they always engaged me. In the tests most of the time I launched R-3S missile and departed quickly, with Phantoms in hot pursuit. If it took me too long, they were within AIM-7 envelope and launched missiles. Only in the early tests lack of activation of F-4E was a problem. I will check the mission of course, perhaps something changed in AI or worse, trigger stopped working :)

No, not yet.

There should be in the kneeboard. I remember it was submitted. If its not, I will look for some temporal solution so you can use in kneeboard.

It was agreed between Blue and Red (for once lol) that only rear aspect missiles will be used to increase server dynamics and get more maneuvering out of every combat instead of front aspect shots that happened previously. Hence why R-60 / R-60M were removed.

Hey, glad to hear, those were my first missions I made for DCS :)

That's OK. We need all the feedback so keep it coming guys. If you can please keep submitting tracks and logs. That may help us as well.

No, its all other maps that run fantastic. This one requires tweaking. I reduced SteamVRSS by 40 %, turned down water to Medium, cut the preload radius as suggested by half. My settings are fine and were not a problem either over Normandy or Persian Gulf. I expect Syria, when finished, to be the same.

I have noticed the same. Every time I want to fly, I have to delete Fxo / Metashaders. Otherwise I experience heavy stutters / lack of fluidity over Syria. No idea why is it like that only with that map (I dont fly on Channel so cant speak about it) but I wish it produced as stable and smooth experience for me as Persian Gulf.

I have tested fix for the radar issue prior to the weekend and from what I was told it was submitted to be included in the upcoming patch or the one after. I hope for a good feedback from you guys :)

Most typical 1973 like combat would center around Golant heights. So BLUE gets to fly from Israel and RED gets Khalkalah AB, Mezzeh and Marj. It's not a large area but if we account for Lebanon than you can avoid combat around Damascus. Even though RED will have to cope with that on startup and takeoff :(