RAZBAM_ELMO

This is in the single player missions? Please attach a .trk of the incident

Im not going to say that this will be solved by the next patch but please keep an eye on it after the next patch. If it still occurs, please attach a new trk with the issue and well look back over it again.

Because it provides detail for the devs of what exactly is causing this issue. Whether thats pilot error or code error or possibly a mod creating the issue.

Thanks Raptor

After review. As intended behaviour to assist pilot in acquiring target for release. Was left over logic from the days where the TPOD was non existent. Solution? Dont drop GBUs in CCIP and dont use the TPOD and DMT at the same time. Moving to resolved -AS INTENDED

Moving to resolved -AS INTENDED

After review. As intended behaviour to assist pilot in acquiring target for release. Was left over logic from the days where the TPOD was non existent. Solution? Dont drop GBUs in CCIP and dont use the TPOD and DMT at the same time.

OK so you should not be using PGMs in CCIP at all, im gonna give this a shot with dumb munitions ad see if I can replicate it.

Im going to keep this up here in case someone who knows more about exporting can help and possibly solve your issue.

Hard to say, if you are getting a CTD then we need a .log file from you attached here in the forum. If you arent getting a crash bug are getting weird behaviour then we need a .trk file. We do know there was/ still is an issue with the GBU-54 at this time which has already been reported.

Thanks Ramsay. YEs as we know there is some work that has been done in regards to the AGM-65F coming from ED and SHOUlD be present in the next big patch. Cannot confirm that it WILL be there but we have been told and CB testers have informed me issues have been resolves internally so we will have to wait for the next patch to come out to confirm this. Moving to RESOLVED as a DUPLICTAE isssue

Yes, as with the previous thread it has indeed been logged. Not confirmed if there is a patch fix coming or not as it is not our knwledge what ED has coming or not with them internally. Marking as DUPLICATE and moving to RESOLVED.

The fixes come out in OB and eventually work their way down to stable. Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

This is an issue with exporting. Not n issue directly with the harrier. My advice would be to check with those who have better knowledge exporting mfds in your case. Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Thanks @LastRifleRound. When you do so could you please make sure to keep each issue as a separate .trk file if possible?

So is this happening only when using GBUs in CCip mode?

Yes....I know. Thats why the prior post is still labeled as reported and actively being looked at. Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

I have already stated what is and what will be. If at some point it changes, then that will be so. I'm not going to continue beating this dead horse after I have already talked to the team, the SME and done my own tests to come to the conclusion pouring alot of my own personal time into trying to figure out the is and outs of the perception this is inaccurate behavior. I have no issues accurately hitting a target by using the top of the hexagonal pipper, not to mention I never use this unless its a column or a large area target. The behavior persists throughout every airframe that carries MK82SEs. We actually found the MK82AIRs tend to be more accurate and fall less short when using the center of the pipper but every single one had to use an earlier point of aim in order to hit the target accurately. But again using a method ill suited to this type of weapon. I am not a coder, im simply volunteering my spare time right now to help Ron and the RAZBAM team streamline their bug reporting, moderating the forums as well as assisting in acquiring talent for projects. Im also not sure where you assume our SME belongs to 2/5. Sure, the squadron does actively use our module in its simulators that is true but the identity of our SME is not public knowledge due to security concerns for them. So I would suggest avoiding assumptions as we all know that rumors can spread and in accurate information can be bad for everyone. What I ask is that there be a certain level of trust garnered here. I am doing the most that I can, with the free time I do have, to best represent the communities concerns. I'm coming from the community to help a dev team. I'm not paid, im not endorsed, nor am I receiving special benefits like CB access or free modules. I simply care about you all and the dev teams having great relationships free from harrassment and toxicity. Looking at other bugs and other resolutions I think its fair to say that what I say isn't a lie and I'm not deceiving or lieing to anyone for any reason. I do my best to bring the issues to the attention of the devs and have them look at it as well as working closely with community members and CB testers to find the root of the issues so they can be solved. When I do get a result, answer or resolution to the issue, that means I have done everything in my position to fix it for you guys. I've probably sat down and flown with several dozen folks who have had problems and simply needed coaching or a person to talk to who doesn't hide behind a forum label and just puts the blanket over everything. Im open and honest as much as my NDA contract allows. I hope this explains everything for you and we don't need to discuss things further regarding the matter. If the individuals who are considered "experts" want to reach out to me then it will go through the proper channels with regards to classified information and security measures to authenticate their identity and then perhaps using them as an SME if contracts and legalities allow. If you still have further concerns then I encourage you to PM me here or on the discord and we can set up a time to talk voice to voice to better ease concerns you may have and not babble on about it here. Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

They are on it. Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

I explore you to review the F5 bombing tables for the Snakeyes. It does not have a CCIP "mode" because its all dropped by referencing bombing tables. You can do your tests to confirm for yourself but I spent the better part of the night before, the day yesterday and last night trying this out with modules I own and having testers use those which I dont. Its the same results between all aircraft and bringing this evidence to the dev team. The SME's input from the Harrier and the Mirage on use of snakeeyes at level low altitudes is why use a single or pair of bombs to hit a single target. That is not what the attack method is designed for. Its for large area targets and columns of vehicles or a strip of road. So this will remain a USER ERROR. Adjusting the pipper would make other forms of bombing inaccurate. Decreasing the time from button press to weapon release would be inaccurate. Therefore it will remain as is. Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

All good Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Just m,arking this as I forgot to before hand.

Hi snappy, I did m,ake the report and i know some fixes accidentally made their way into recent mini patches, could you check on this again and see if it still present and provide an updated trk if so?

Appreciate the effort to help correct this guys but the logic the SDK follows may not always translate well from IRL to game. Like I mentioned before the team is exploring variations and options to better increase the realism between the IRL system and the system in game.

While alot of HUD footage is difficult to read from, it is also difficult to tell what model of M2000C is used as some may be the D/N version. I would suggest keeping this post in mind and after the next update come back and edit your post as there alot of big changes coming.