tom_19d

I don’t have time to do a detailed search to find a thread to back this up, but my understanding is that DCS doesn’t propagate the location of individual clouds across a server — so in any condition other than a solid 8/8 overcast or severe clear there is no expectation that the cloud you see in MP exists in that same location for any other client. Sniped by Kayos...

:thumbup: +1 to everything everyone else has said regarding SRS, it is really the way to go.

wait wait wait....I just have to ask....who is John Galt?

No worries at all Harlikwin, I figured that is what you meant (and like I said, I agree on the tactics of what you are saying). I also agree with the near miss damage within a 30 - 40 foot radius, hopefully someday DCS will be able to do some component damage modeling for armor instead of the hit point type system. And I would say your comment on Army Reconnaissance is spot on, well played sir:)

I’m guessing you meant to say “using a LGB in the first place,” (or maybe you meant to say I wouldn’t be using a JDAM) in which case I totally agree, but that wasn’t my question. My question was in regards to the current capabilities of the JDAM to hit a tank sized target under near ideal conditions.

I had asked a question very similar to the OP’s here just a couple weeks ago, because I too thought the the GBU-38 used to be a little more accurate. Regardless of whether or not anything has changed, I have done quite a bit of testing in the current OB using a steerpoint placed in the editor directly under a T72, starting up the mission, dropping on the STPT, restarting, and repeating. From what I have seen, while the tank is damaged to some extent nearly every time, catastrophic kills are somewhere in the neighborhood or 2/3 or 3/4. Putting aside DCS modeling of area effects, given that a T72 is approximately 7 meters by 4 meters, this seems to me to be a realistic representation of the 38’s CEP. To summarize, my current thinking is that even with near perfect target coordinates or a really well conducted designation with the pod converted into a steerpoint, the GBU 38 is still going to fail to K-Kill a tank somewhere between 25-33% of the time. Would the more seasoned A10 guys here see that as a fair assessment of the current state of the game, or is there something else I am missing?

Not seeing it. 2.5.5.32533, 6940 feet AGL, 300 KIAS, ISA, no wind; zero issues getting off 3 GBU 38s off against a tight cluster of T72s in a single pass, would have easily been able to do 4 but I only placed 3 tanks.

Thanks @Fangsout, missed this reply. What is the publication?

Dropping from the exact same parameters (altitude AGL, airspeed, atmospheric conditions, etc) rolling back changed the employment envelope? I am finding this very hard to believe without a track.

Xtacy has it — you are 6800 MSL in photo 2 but only 3900 feet AGL (3910R on the right side of the HUD) . Your height above the ground is all that is relavent here.

Keyboard mapping for all rotaries and encoders is on Razbam’s bug tracker as a low priority.

The term “armchair” anything is deragatory and is generally applied to someone expressing an opinion on an activity they don’t actually engage in, so when you use that terminology when talking about a game frequently played from an office chair, it sure looks like a criticism of more than “certain people.” But hey, my mistake if that was a misread on my part. The discussion in this thread has been about gameplay mechanics, which is always going to be a subjective topic. Some people want to see the sim function one way with regards to a fictional AI crewmember, some people want that crew member to perform its duties in a different way, but this is all personal opinion. Certainly a passionate debate at times, but just opinion. The contention that being a real life pilot in some capacity makes an opinion on this topic more valuable is condescending. Now, of course when the topic of proper recovery procedures in the Hornet or Tomcat comes up, or when the issue of how a certain hydraulic system on the Harrier functions is raised, or a debate on how to interpret a given USAF -1 is brought forth, I sit up and listen to the subject matter experts, and do so gratefully. But it has been my experience that the RL military pilots, aircrew, and support personnel on this forum don’t feel the need to denigrate anyone needlessly because they haven’t been there and done that. My only point is that there are places where RL experience is relavent and places where it is not. It would be a quiet forum indeed if RL cred was needed to communicate opinions on the gameplay function of a fictional system.

I was working on building a mission last night (deep strike at night/low weather) and thought it would be really fun to have the ability to make players fall back on INS nav — I’m not surprised others already thought of this. Big +1

Without rewatching the whole thing to try to see a bureau number, i believe it is an A, as it is single seat and has no radar display. Regarding a dedicated rocket trigger, if you are referencing the conversation at 4:15, I notice the stick in the video has the red pickle button next to the trim hat as we are familiar with in “our” F5, as well as a red pickle button on the right thumb rest where “our” F5 has the multi position dogfight switch. Early versions of the F5E had a simple button in this location that activated dogfight guns mode, but since the manuals are black and white I don’t know if it retained the red color. I suppose it is possible that this button could have been dedicated to rockets in the F5A, but I don’t have a manual for said aircraft. Edit: Western Museum of Flight where this video was shot has BuNo 66-9207, an F5-A

Ummm....I don’t have a dog in the F14 fight but I’m pretty sure this community is like 98% “armchair pilots.” Since it is a simulator for PCs.... Don’t get me wrong, there are clearly wonderful members of the community with RL experience that are great resources for TTPs and systems on particular airframes, or subjects like aerodynamics or even TERPS, and the community is better because they are willing to share. I for one am very grateful for their contributions. But I don’t think deriding the vast majority of DCS players by demeaning their lack of RL experience is constructive.

First time I have seen that one, good stuff.

Callsign Variable here, Just wanted to say well done to the pilots on either side today. Obviously the guys from ROSS had trained up for the specific task and performed beautifully, the gents from the 104th were clearly deadly, the JG1 fellows were a professional lot, and clearly everyone else involved was skilled and disciplined as I don’t think there was a single incident of friendly fire or collisions and RED team put up a long and serious fight. I know I could have done a few things differently as GCI, so my apologies to any F5’s (or MiG 21s) I put in a bad place. Hopefully next time I can do you guys more justice if I am behind the scope, I know I will do a lot differently if given the chance to do so again. As for a TacView, apparently if you never get into an aircraft the tape doesn’t start because I tried to share but my tacview recording had zero duration, otherwise I would have attached my track.

Hey guys, I never got the password, can someone PM me?

Variable MiG 28 GCI (Combined Arms)

Are you sure you have the TGP in AG mode? The symptoms you describe sound like the TGP in AA mode.

Thanks for checking Yurgon. I too had noticed mark points looked slightly off if I overfly the targets so that is why I wanted another set of eyes on my method. I just didn’t remember suffering so many misses with 38’s the last time I got serious in the A10... Totally agree, on a normal mission I would have configured all my profiles and used the rotary but I just wanted to get a track together as quick as I could that would only show the bare minimum needed for troubleshooting with as few variables as possible.

Piggybacking on an old post, I need some help here gents. After a long hiatus from the A10 I am having an issue with the GBU 38s using the techniques described in this thread. It seemed to me that in the past I never missed with JDAMs assuming that I didn't make an error in employment. Now, it seems like around 1/3 of my bombs miss. I have been trying to employ JDAMs in quick succession against 2 to 3 markpoints across numerous instant action and single missions with these results. Attached is a track of a setup I made in the ME to demonstrate. If someone can point out what I am doing wrong I would really appreciate it. Otherwise, is the CEP of GBU-38s such that it is unrealistic to expect nearly 100% success against tank sized targets? JDAM.trk

Could you spawn in a static interceptor at the airbase in question and have it despawn when the interceptor script goes active? Also write an event to disable the interceptor script if the static aircraft is damaged? Just getting started with MOOSE myself but I think the tools are there to make it work...

It’s been a long time since I played with the VNAV but if you are trying to command a 3 degree descent (for an ad hoc instrument procedure or the like) try entering -3.0.

Neat thread, I’ll play. Always good to see how other people are doing things that I haven’t thought of...