Wizard_03

I wouldn't be surprised if we see an F-22A An early software version would definitely be less advanced then the hornet we have now. The Classified aspects are the stealth coating technique and how stealthy it actually is and the newer radars and its ECM suite, and the traditional how fast can it go and how high can it fly. But I'm sure ED can make some educated guesses on that front. They do so already with the hornet and viper already. Other then that there's quite a bit of data available on it. Its 2020 and the Raptor is basically using 1990s technology.

This is news to me. I use NATOPS all the time for it. In fact from a procedure point of view the only thing I can find in there that’s not implemented is; SHAAAS bit. Literally every other procedure is in and working per the manual. In fact as far as systems go on the harrier the only things missing are: FLIR hotspot detector SEAM Sidewinder DMT Slaving SMS tone Contrast and brightness settings for the ACMPDs Gain settings for FLIR TTT and TOT functions JDAM terminal functions ECM page Hardly as incomplete as you make it sound. The biggest issues the FLIR Im sure are waiting on ED since they are remodeling the entire system in the core game. Other then that is extremely useable, the remaining items are very Quality of Life, don’t really affect gameplay. Big things like the FM/visuals/weapons suite have been done for some time. Not sure if your just a troll but don’t get on here and lie.

Ok thanks!

I see that makes a lot of sense, I wanna say we have generation 2 but I’m not sure tbh. Very interesting. Yeah 4 seems the most logical place as far as masking goes too. I’ve always wondered if by having it there they run into problems with the gun installed as well, I would think the vibrations from it firing are bad for the gyros. Is that something they restrict? Having both at the same time?

He looks good, but what’s the F-16A cockpit doing behind him???

DCS: Goblin. Has to be

This has bugged me for a long time! Lol

I didn’t know that, I thought it can’t be powered from inside the cockpit. Only put in standby, The switch for the for ground crew is on the connector AFAIK. It’s ok for it too come on but before the INS is aligned?

That’s the assumption we came too as well. I posted in NineLines sticky to see if we’re gonna see that changed later in early access.

So any word from the team on this NineLine?

Ok fair enough but how come I can’t STEP between 2 JDAMs on a BRU-55. If they’re the same type and I have quantity boxed. Why is that not possible?

Yes and I completely agree, its impossible to get 100 percent fidelity. That's true, but they do a pretty solid job of getting us a good representation, and in cases like this I agree it's better to have some liberties then nothing. So to come full circle and based on some research I've done. I think I can simplify the problem, first off, the main issue is the way STEP is implemented, in the sense that it STEPs stations and not individual weapons. The reason AFAIK; its implemented that way, according to nineline's sticky post, is so that you can step between stations that carry DIFFERENT JDAM types, and that's the problem. I don't believe the aircraft SMS, at least from 2005ish can handle multiple types of JDAMs. Ex. you cannot carry two GBU-38s on a BRU-55 on station 2, AND a single GBU-31 on Station 8. The system is not capable of handling that. I've never seen an aircraft loaded that way, it doesn't really make sense and I don't see there being a need for it IRL, and If it can then their needs to be separate weapon selection, that is mutually exclusive to using the JDAM page. i.e. you would not be able to select both types at the same time or program them too the same mission using the JDAM page, in other words the JDAM page and its functions only apply to weapon selected, If it can carry multiple types of JDAMs, which based on what I've seen and heard it can't or it doesn't for possibly for this exact reason. So the Second, issue is simply a byproduct of the first one, being ATM I can't put JDAMs from the same BRU-55 on the same mission, Because I'm unable to STEP between them. Because STEP is being used to change stations that carry any JDAM type which is where I think the inaccuracy is. Quantity boxed and Release capabilities aside.

No worries, and I don't want them to change something just to make it easier on our part. I want us to have as close to the real implementation as possible. If I gave that impression I apologize. I realize that it's probably a WIP thing. But I don't want them to guess either, I myself certainly don't know how it's implemented in late software states for the C/D I just get the feeling that what we have now is something of a Frankenstein situation. I can tell you for sure based on the OFP we have BRU-55s either we're not available or at least we're not allowed on the USN squadrons. However if they do want to include them in the sim, I want them to have the correct implementation based on how the we're used in the fleet later on whenever they did become prolific. Regardless of our software level. Otherwise we may as well not use them at all. In other words I agree with your suspicion that we're looking an earlier SCS prior to BRU-55s and they're guessing as to how it worked on later software iterations. That said I think many of these "problems" Will get resolved with the advent of JDAM programing via the AMU whenever that becomes a thing in the sim. At that time we should be able to assign as many weapons to a mission as we want. Without having to cycle missions. Then how it works editing in cockpit will be somewhat moot, at least for me. The way you describe it, is exactly how I imagine and have seen in other aircraft. With a Quantity selected, Multiple overlapping LARs appear with the HSI providing centroid steering for all targets selected for that mission. with release consent given in AUTO mode, weapons come off in sequence or as the aircraft moves in LAR for each set of target coordinates. The selected mission program in the SMS dictating which bombs come off the jet based on their inclusion in the mission and boxed quantity.

Well they dropped a bunch of updates for the hornet before Christmas, broke a bunch of things. Left us with it for the holiday's, they made it seem like we we're gonna see them fixed in January, and back to a stable build. But they just came back slapped a band-aid on it on the 14th, and its still broken, and now were into Mid-February for a potential fix. I don't have a problem with big updates taking longer. But when an update brakes other things that we're fine before, I want prompt fixes. Like I want them to improve lighting, but I also want them to Finnish what they started. Who knows what issues this new update will bring, or how long it will take them to fix.

That's disappointing.

We already have two FW-190s. I don’t see why we can’t have 2 F-15s especially when one is half done. You might not want an AV-8B+ others may not want an AV-8B N/A if it’s easy to make both for them, how does that not increase sales opportunities for them, seems like a simple way to give people what they want. For ED and RAZBAM. Also the difference between the F-15s is almost akin to the difference between an FRS1 and AV-8B. It’s a lot more then the the difference between + and N/A

I don’t necessarily agree with that, RAZBAM has repeatedly stated they themselves are making several additional versions of the harrier, (FRS1, AV-8B+, AV-8A, Gr.3) same story with the mirage. So if they don’t mind competing with themselves for sales on several models that have commonality. I don’t see why ED would have a problem making the F-15C especially since the most difficult and time consuming aspect of the module, the flight model, is already complete and verified. It seems like pretty low hanging fruit for them.

I want to believe

Seems pretty easy to avoid..

I think we’ll probably see the FRS1 first in any case, but that’s a very USMC attitude. They treat aviation like flying artillery. Other operators see the harrier as much more of a multi role aircraft. It’s true strength is it’s VSTOL basing, and while its very well suited to those mission sets you mentioned, it’s no slouch as a dogfighter either. I’ve seen hornet drivers get spanked by it on several occasions. I think having a jack of all trades that can do VSTOL as well would be very welcome but that’s me.

In the harrier plus, you can use the radar antenna elevation wheel control on the throttle to zoom in and out with the TPOD in HTS mode just like the hornet.. Seriously would buy the plus from RAZBAM for that capability alone, never mind the radar, never mind AMRAAMs. :)

It would be nice to have the TPOD powered on or off via the ground crew menu. IRL this is how the pod works. Right now the pod is always on by default, I think it would add a tiny bit of immersion if we had to ask the ground crew to switch it on during cold starts. One of those 'DCS realistic' requests from a rivet counter. :)

No Clint Eastwood is a hoax created by the government. He couldn't have flown the firefox, the aliens would have got him way before he got to Iranian airspace. Don't be silly.

It's not specifically designed for low level CAS like the warthog or harrier. TBH I hardly ever search for targets with the HUD, 9/10 times I know where the target is, and I just use the pod for fine turning the designation and Lasing if required. And If I am "searching" for targets, its around a waypoint or markpoint, I've already created or received, So having the the TPOD slew to the designated point is really all I need.

It also has integrated NAVFLIR.