randomTOTEN

Yeah, my bad. I thought you were talking about wanting the SPO-15 there. My experience of the SPO-10 is also from the MiG-21. Not even the SPO-15 can do that from the experience of the Su25T/FC3. You're gonna need situational awareness to understand if the emitter is likely friendly/foe. Friends shouldn't be locking you up. Yes it can. As others have said, the RL unit likely converts the received signal to audio... allowing identification. We probably aren't going to get that. It'll be interesting to see how useful it actually is. I suspect we aren't going to be using it much for long range SAMs or AI in the Hind (route planning and CAP is probably a better defense), but it will probably be mostly used for detecting radar AAA and SHORAD. In which case, 4 lights might be enough to tell us which way to look as we take evasive action. Or it might not.

...sigh...

Hopefully we will have it one day, so you can judge for yourself the value. I personally look forward to this unique crew position in the Hip. I would be very disappointed if it was not enabled.

I have the same experience. It's new tech I expect it'll get sorted out.

...no way EDIT: THANK YOU DEVS THATS AWESOME

Yeah it does. I just got assigned it (3L) by ATC for takeoff.

this isn't true, I have had experience of completely smooth air entering the types of clouds which can be seen in DCS. Thinking that cloud=turbulent is a misconception which you shouldn't fall for (even though it's sometimes true). Welcome to the forums BTW!

not really enough for you to worry about, considering what you're spending on the hardware

About 1 month depending on what you're getting.

For the USA, order VIRPIL directly from their webstore. They will ship it to you. They're actually based in Belarus. Shipping tracking starts in Lithuania.

Make sure the winds are correctly activating the system you intend to check. Many of your test show only one side of a bidirectional runway being activated, which is realistic.

it can be as much as 180 degrees where are you getting RL tacan approaches for the Caucasus? Many of those TACAN stations don't exist in real life, many stations (like the VOR in Sochi) are in different locations in RL vs DCS. My personal policy is to reject RL charts in the caucasus map. Yes, it does work better in Nevada. But we probably ignore or don't notice the minor errors there. You didn't notice the 1 degree error. If you can accept a merely 6 degree error and misplaced navaids you can be pretty happy with the Caucasus too. In DCS the variation is directly applied to the Grid course. Which results in a strange situation of GC+/-MV="MC" It's a nonsensical solution for anything outside DCS. The equivalent of rotating grid north by a value equal to the variation. let me try and show you: when I measure the direction of the local meridian to Kutaisi (E042°30.0) I get a "DCS Grid Course" of 353° This line defines a True course of 000°T so we know that at this location the "fork" value is 7 degrees East. The runway measures 073°G, so 73+7=80. The true course for the runway as depicted in DCS is 080° compare 080 to your statement: now we calculate the DCS "Magnetic heading" we subtract 6E from 073G gives us the "DCS MH" of 067 which you see on the HUD and properly working wet compasses in DCS. The TACAN is oriented this same way, so when you set the inbound course of 074-067=about a 7 degree alignment error. but for the same pavement in DCS if we subtract 6E from 080T we get 074 which is correct. But the TACAN's reference radial isn't pointing at local magnetic north, but instead pointing at GN+/-MV because that's the direction every compass and flux gate valve in DCS Caucasus is pointing on a flat earth. Yes, the best solution I have is to either accept the 5-6 degrees of course error, or reject using real charts

There are several problems when I try to study this bug report. 1st: The F-16's magnetic compass is oriented to map north. I.E. it does not correctly account for variation at all. I tested this by switching the same unit to the A-10C and seeing a different compass reading at the same takeoff point (Kutaisi Rwy25). This is not correct. True heading doesn't exist in DCS (the simulation) as a concept. The 074 direction value in both of these screenshots is not correct in reference to True North. DCS Caucasus is a flat earth, not a globe. This is why your direction calculations are off. No. They are grid headings. (interesting aside, this is properly labeled in A-10C INS). When you correct for local true north from grid (using i believe what is called the "fork" value)... this appears to be correct. This doesn't sound right. If this is the case then the other airfields are oriented incorrectly. And that's another point of clarification, so far you are only talking about airfield orientations. This doesn't make any conclusions about the orientation of the entire map. "True" has a difference of 1 degree. Magnetic difference possibly 1.5 degrees. Possibly a fork value of 1. I would need to check a mission on it. A-10C is a better judgment of this, considering the compass error in the viper.

probably because of a lack of evidence

My experience in the DCS: Mi-8 is the same. VRS really isn't a factor in forward flight. I think what would be productive would be for you to fly the Mi-8 into the conditions which you believe results in unrealistic VRS, and save that simulator session as a replay ".trk" file. And then upload it here for all of us to directly view. Please be mindful of the forum attachment limits, the shorter you can make the track file, the better. It's a lot better than this beating around the bush that it feels like. You can directly show us what you're talking about. I also think it speaks extremely highly of the simulation that we are considering VRS in this much detail.

I'm sorry you had to see it go. They goofed by making it available in the first place, and it was reported previous to this patch. It was reported within this thread, and marked [FIXED INTERNALLY] Had the initial implementation been correct, this thread probably wouldn't be here. You would be either asking for the export pylons which allow this carriage, or you would maybe have adjusted to never seeing this option in the first place. But they implemented an error which some people found they liked, and now there's resistance to the change. In consolation, hopefully you still keep the reduced drag and weight from only a single munition on the launchers, instead of 2. But it was really out of place. The community seems to accept that liveries and coalitions can be fantasy, but the actual simulation of the subject aircraft is more stringently considered.

I think this is a beautiful solution to a long standing problem, and I congratulate ED on this implementation. I was personally of the opinion that the option should have been removed entirely. But of course that would have broken numerous missions which included it in the mission payload. They managed to find a way to keep it as an option, while fixing the only thing that was really wrong with it. The launchers. Nice job ED!

you don't

have you even flown it at all since you bought it?

Yeah I'd actually forgotten that the system used Gyros until this thread. Now I need to run those preflight tests I just discovered.

I'm mostly concerned about the AGL+MSL readout. I'm fine with the current FC3 magic pipper, and just a readout of ground elevation below the aircraft. Don't really have an opinion on the use of meters. Thanks for looking into it!

As another topic of understanding, In this situation, the helicopters groundspeed (relative to the horizon) is 0kmh. If the gyro stabilization was perfect, the doppler signals would still be oriented by the gyros in relation to the horizon. Instead of detecting motion along the vertical surface, they would detect no doppler shift from the surface which has no speed relative to the unit, and the resulting groundspeed would be 0kmh. Which would be correct. Even though the helicopter is in a vertical climb, and pointed straight up.

Yeah, it does. the only thing influencing the distance on the map is the signal. the signals are stabilized to the horizon with the AGB-3K attitude gyro, and oriented with respect to direction using the GMK-1A. The ground distance doesn't matter. the ground shape doesn't matter. The gyro systems orient the horizontal plane, the doppler measurements move the navigation solution. It doesn't make sense when you claim that a sloping terrain doesn't affect the signal, but changes the map. It can't simultaneously do some thing and yet not do that thing at the same time. it's not part of the radar, but it is part of the DISS. It's mentioned in the first paragraph of the system in the manual. I just tried it. Shutting off the left pilot's attitude indicator results in an immediate failure of the DISS. Maybe the actual radar unit is still operative. Who cares. It can't provide valid information.