Santi871

Stepping aside from the technical discussion for a minute... The community is not interested in wonder weapons nor weird fantasy nor gamey mechanics. What we do want is (modern) missiles to be worthy of some respect. It doesn't go for the AIM-120 series alone. Put shortly, if you allow your modern missiles (again not just the AMRAAM) to be defeated by simple maneuvers with minimal effort which exploit rather large weaknesses in your seeker/radar modeling, all other R&D effort is worth nothing. What is the point in investing so much into developing higher fidelity flight models and guidance algorithms if missiles can simply be defeated well inside the kinematic NEZ with minimal risk? The takeaway from reading this thread is that it is the developer's intention for a lookdown split S to be enough to defeat the 120. We don't even need to use chaff. That is enough for anyone going up against that threat to not take it seriously. And that results in the current status quo: post after post complaining that shots are taken well within kinematic parameters but they are still easily shrugged off. I would be interested in seeing the results of a simple public poll: - Are you satisfied with the current gameplay and effectiveness of modern a/a missiles in DCS? yes/no The fact the posts in this thread arguing towards an improvement or bugfix of the bug in question have accrued dozens of positive reactions makes me inclined to say I have an idea of how such a poll would go People are frustrated because the NEZ is not a NEZ in DCS, it has not been for many years, and it is not showing signs of improvement. To clarify, I'm not saying notching or chaffing should have a flat 0% chance of success. But as it currently is, missiles are just not very deadly at all for anyone who knows how to exploit the seeker implementations. If this behavior is defended and upheld, it makes us all not very excited for any further work on missiles. The new FM and guidance stuff is amazing, and it's super fun to see all the details that have been modeled. Only for it to be soured and overshadowed by behaviors like the ones presented in this thread. /resume technical discussion

Can you help me understand why it's getting confused by the terrain returns that are 6 range bins away? (assuming 1km wide range bins)

reported, ty

The range at which it starts ignoring DL updates is variable and depends on "several parameters". This implies that after a certain point in certain conditions, the 120's seeker can get a much better track than a radar further away could hope to achieve. It also implies like GGTharos said that incorporating more updates makes the Pk no better (possibly even worse). Here's a public source that isn't ITAR controlled and so can be posted here. https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6680&context=utk_gradthes

The manual needs updating, since the game was corrected shortly after the feature was released. The lines should be green, also a PPLI's designation is shown with a dashed line, while a solid line means it's under missile attack. Similar to the F-16.

Yes, this is intended and ties into how the A/G radar is (or was) supposed to be used pre GPS to counter INS drift. You have a physically significant landmark that is easy to spot on the A/G radar, and you know your target is X miles in certain direction relative to the landmark. Once you get there, you pick your OAP, designate it by pressing WPDSG and then apply the offset by pressing O/S. Your radar will still be looking at the OAP. The idea is that by refining the radar designation by designating the physically significant landmark you'll be able to find the actual intended target. This is also why the OAP is called that... offset aimpoint .

This is not temporary or a bandaid. The maximum digital zoom for the variant being modeled in the Hornet is 3.5x in 9 levels. If you want to check what other modules are doing, probably best to do it in their forum sections

The radar is not that capable. Not a bug.

already fixed internally

It should be way less sensitive and it's been reported already

Yes, this is fixed already internally.

Yes, STT RAID is also called SAM. It doesn't have "two L&S" or anything like that, it just interleaves scanning and tracking portions centered on the STT target - in ED's implementation the STT target is also always the L&S, which isn't necessarily the case in the real jet.

Reported, thanks

This has already been reported.

This is a bug and it was correct how it was before. The TOO coordinates for TOO1 and TOO2 missions in each weapon are retained and can be recalled by selecting the weapon/mission (and having a designation while doing so will overwrite the previous set of coordinates).

CSS just means the aircraft's autopilot and/or FBW will adjust the flight surfaces to maintain the last pitch/roll reference when the stick/yoke was centered. You can have CSS (or similar) without FBW (737 CWS), you can have FBW but no CSS, FBW with manually enabled/disabled CSS (Hornet), or FBW that sort of behaves as if CSS is on (A320 in certain parts of the flight). Like someone else said, you can turn on CSS directly in the Hornet by pressing A/P then ON, and it will also fall back to CSS if another A/P mode is disabled/decolonized. In either case you'll get an A/P advisory. The only way to kick off A/P entirely without it falling back to CSS is to use the paddle.

This is because the OAP is the waypoint. Once offset data is defined for a waypoint, the waypoint is now termed OAP. The location defined by an OAP + offset data is just called Offset. I guess a picture is worth a thousand words: On the HSI with an OAP selected, pressing WPDSG first will designate the OAP, then pressing O/S will designate the offset (or add the offset data to the existing designation, however you want to look at it).

I agree. This is also quite noticeable when comparing to other modules (eg F-15C) where you can make fast movements if necessary and that looks much closer to what the real world video shows.

Reported as an improvement, thanks

Yes, radars are sensitive to rain/hail/snow not "clouds", although the specifics will vary with the frequency bands used. There are two weather related effects that can happen: weather shadows due to increased attenuation because of scattering (ie weather blocking the signal) and target occlusion due to weather returns (ie the target's returns get lost in weather clutter). Weather shadows are similar to terrain shadows. The more the signal is scattered by rain/hail/snow the more it'll be attenuated, to the point the signal is too weak to be detected past a certain range at that line of sight. Possible solutions include using a lower frequency band or increasing the signal's power. On the other hand, a solution to clearly displaying moving targets that are detected inside weather clutter is using doppler filtering since clouds are relatively static compared to aircraft. The reason this is a problem particularly for A/G radar is that 1. A/G radar's uses low PRFs which make it impossible to calculate doppler, and even if it could, the intended target (terrain) is static so there is nothing to filter. 2. Low PRFs have a lower duty cycle so weather penetration will be worse than medium or high PRFs. A lower frequency band can't be used since that requires a larger antenna and available power is limited, so you're essentially stuck in a case where nothing can really be done about it. A/A radar has the benefits of higher PRFs and doppler filtering, but AFAIK very heavy weather can still cause weather shadows. At least so far in DCS weather interaction with radar isn't modeled but hopefully it could be at some point, especially for A/G radar.

Reported but pls include a short track next time

Already fixed internally

Yes it still uses the LAU-127 but the LAU-127 can't be mounted on the pylon directly. It has to be mounted on the sides of a LAU-115 which is then mounted on the pylon.

TXDSG has absolutely nothing to do with the targeting pod.

The outer pylons in that swiss Hornet are different and have that capability. Compare how that outer pylon looks to the US one that we have ingame: