al531246

These 'updated' models from ED are a PR disaster. I don't understand who they think they're kidding?

Thank you for the acknowledgement. The problem in this case is not geometry, however that could be an additional issue worth looking into. The problem is the excessive glare. The TEDAC does not glare IRL like it does in DCS. It has an anti-glare coating. The fix here is to massively reduce the glare amount on the display else this module is not a useable product. Additional info; I found a study on the human factors of the AH-64 from 2002 (Unclassified) and it touches on this issue. Display readability issues from sun glare were reported as extremely rare. However many pilots noted the CPG's displays to be so bright that it reflected off the sides of the canopy glass creating a visual distraction for the Pilot when flying at night. It necessitates the deliberate dimming of the display or the use of the CPG window curtains. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA401032.pdf

You should be wearing a helmet if you think this needs a trackfile...

4 months later ED, the glare is still here. Can this please take an urgent priority. This should have been fixed months ago.

Shame I missed the 1 year anniversary of this bug report. Hopefully I'll make it for the 2 year anniversary. See y'all on April 4th next year! But seriously come on ED. Whoever marked this as 'Correct as is' needs to be made redundant.

You're kidding? Anti-glare is standard in a lot of displays these days. In addition one can buy anti-glare sheets from anywhere for $10! However even without such additions the screens do not glare like DCS. It's ridiculous. Real display in direct sunlight for comparison... Trackfiles won't be getting uploaded because it's not my job to diagnose and fix problems in ED's game. My hourly rate for tech is $100 p/hour. Happy to dig into the code once ED transfers some money...

Honestly this is one (of many) issues which puts me off the AH-64. I end up trying to CPG with my head on the floor or in some other quirky position. Please fix the glare. Anti glare 'technology' is not UFO tech, it's existed for a long time and AH-64's have it. Please remove this god awful glare. Track file not included.

>blindly pre-orders without knowing the release date >gets mad when because release date isn't soon enough lmao it's entirely your own problem! If you were myopic enough to place a pre-order without knowing a release date, don't complain when a release date is announced.

Almost every unique object or building on the Syria map suffers this issue. It's one of the reasons why a DCS cannot have a Dynamic Campaign, critical targets are invincible map objects. I reported one in 2021, not even so much as an acknowledgement...

This should contain the answers you're looking for AIM120C5-Performance-Assessment-rev2.pdf

I concur. Frequent rubber banding even with low ping. It's as if the network update frequency has been reduced?

I'm having files in Saved Games failing IC now. It's time for IC to be retired - less and less servers are running it and the devs can't figure it out.

Still having this issue with the Apache. Had my engine 1 shot out, flew back to FARP. Once I landed and shutdown it said in F2 view the engine was still running! Screenshots below.

As the thread title suggests - using Jester to tune TAC for the radio causes a CTD. I've had this happen quite frequently. Only occurs when I tune TAC the radio frequency. Others have reported this a long time ago too. See linked threads at the bottom. When this crash occurs DCS maxes the memory usage. I have 32GB of RAM with a 110GB pagefile. DCS had maxed both of them before taking Windows down with it! I had to take a picture with my phone because there wasn't enough memory to take a print screen! Log file attached. dcs.log

Just want to add my 2 cents to this. Since today's update (2.8.4.38947) the Apache FM is acting up. Very twitchy. Extreme roll tendencies - the helicopter is entering barrel rolls from relatively tame maneuvers. When I turn the SAS off most of these issues cease. I do believe the values for the SAS are incorrectly tuned. If it's anything like a PID it's quite apparent your 'P', or more likely 'I' values are too high. Those were my impressions of the SAS prior to this update, it's worse now.

ED, hello? This is a big issue with the DCS Apache product that needs addressing.

I mean the audio should be nearly identical. If you have video evidence to the contrary I'm happy to be proven wrong. Don't get caught in the trap of thinking Hornets / Harriers of all nations use the ALR-67. More and more these days countries are using their own proprietary EW systems. Heck Finland even uses it's own FCS code for the F/A-18C!

It’s the RWR model more than the library. An ALR-67 in an F/A-18C will function and sound largely the same as an ALR-67 in an AV-8B and so on. Right now with PRF audio coming to the ALR-56M we’re on the right track. This will add an IRL feature to the RWR. Customisable sound and symbology is a slightly more complex matter. Lua editing of symbols is fine like in the Mirage. Any deeper simulation of the threat library is a waste of resources. As for Russian RWR’s; they’re a lost cause! They’re kinda <profanity> IRL anyway and they’re not as big a part of your SA as in a Western jet.

I also recommend porting the sounds from the F-14's RWR. The AV-8BNA's RWR sounds are awful! I made a mod some time ago which replaces them with the Hornet RWR sounds which you can download here, just cut out the betty sound files: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3216792/

Reported since April of 2022. According to ED's EW expert this is how the weapon functions IRL. Comical...

Complain to BAE / Raytheon. That's how it is IRL.

It is correct.

Please disregard Bignewy's comment, he's talking nonsense. The issue is caused by the F-16C's damage model. The pilot's hitbox is defined by the entire canopy. It is the same in the F/A-18C too. Any hits to the glass cause the death of the pilot.

It's in my post with the graph image, it's an attached file. Whether the ECM came on 1 second or 15 secs after launch is inconsequential; the missile was not launched in HOJ nor was it flying a HOJ pursuit course. It's performing a guided intercept without guidance. It's that simple.

My buddy in the Su-27 also reverses his crank at the same time. You can see this in the tacview. I think it's more likely the missile is reacting to his defensive maneuvers.