amalahama

Well theoretically Auto + CPL = FD (flight director) delivery mode isn't it

Has this bug been fixed in latest OB?

So in the video it can be seen that FLIR and RWR contacts can be correlated. Does this mean that FLIR can be pointed to an RWR emitter?

Although I'm absolutely happy with BS3, I think you made a very valid point. Nowhere, neither in the shop page or in the official documentation, it's mentioned that BS3 new features are fictional and non-existing in real life. Since DCS mantra is "as real as it gets" I think it's fair to at least create awareness to the potential buyer that this product deviates even slightly from the regular addon full fidelity policy

Thanks! I was not aware that ATFLIR had this option; I'm just familiar with the Litening integration in the RL aircraft. In this case it will rock to have it some day in DCS

I don't think your statement is correct. The Litening cannot automatically look for targets, it's not that 'smart', it needs to be manually (or via radar) pointed to the boogie and then perform a contrast gate lock to track it.

I'm hopeful that eventually we will get updates on the TAD display, specially when the Mission Cartridge Utility is out.

Hi @BIGNEWY It's difficult to find direct proper evidence, but I actually got some info that might be useful. In the TAC-000 Harrier manual, which share many commonalities with the Hornet avionics, it explains in detail what happen when STEP is pressed. The Maverick circuitry is reset and the camera is boresighted, cancelling any lock that the missile may have at that point. This is the current behavior of our hornet, so I would lend to think that current implementation is right and the F-16 may have some additional circuitry in the store management system to keep two missiles locked at the same time. In fact, the manual also adds that the QTY value has no effect, and the missile can only be launched single Best regards

It's a fighter plane, not a 737 Best regards

Hi there, I just did a quick check and, opposite to the F-16C which does maintain the lock when stepping between missiles, in the F/A-18C the lock is instantaneously dropped when stepping into another missile. Since lock is done by the missile seeker and not by Hornet's MC, it's quite likely that the correct behavior is that lock are kept even if pilot select another missile for the attack. This would allow effective multi-target attacks in one pass with the Maverick, without using the cumbersome markpoint method (just aim each missile independently and then launch in ripple)

Oh I didn't know it was already implemented! Cool! How does JDAM behave under GPS denied (e.g. pre 90s missions) environments? Are they affected by the lack of available GPS too?

Are all INS fix modes modeled already?

Yeah I was aware of the markpoint technique, but I got inspired by this Tricker tutorial: Instead of using markpoints, he assigns one target to the maverick, gets the lock, then change the missile selection and locks another target with missile #2, finnaly launching the missiles in salvo. Interesingtly in the F-16 the target locks are kept in each missile, but in the F-18 are not, although I would have expected a similar behaviour since Maverick's lock is done at seeker level, not aircraft level. Bug or feature?

Hi, Is it possible in the Hornet to ripple Mavericks as in the F-16C, by locking each seeker individually to different targets and then launching them in rapid succession? It makes sense that when one missile is locked and you jump to other missile, the lock is kept and you can lauch both rapidly BR

This might have changed in recent tapes however, providing a more correlated display of AIFF and FCR

What's really annoying is that laser guided weapons guide towards an imaginary point floating in the air at exactly 8nm from target when illuminating out of range

Probably you jumped out of the plane already before making good use of it Degraded FBW modes however could be a good addition, single failures is something to be expected during the regular operation of the aircraft

At least Ka-50, A-10C and AV8B dont model drift at this stage. Best regards

Well, I guess that the INS of those aircraft "magically" have no drift at all

Well, or a gps-denied environment which its actually a very much possible scenario in future conflicts. Best regards

Hi! I was the other day perusing the Apache Early Access flight manual and I was surprised as it seems that there is no option to manually apply INS fixes to the EGI. It's true that in a regular situation GPS will automatically update the INS drift so there won't be any need to perform manual INS fixes but other EGI equipped aircraft such as the A-10C, Hornet or Viper can still manually perform the operation if the pilot wishes so (and it might make sense in a GPS-denied area). So, does the real AH-64D have this functionality or it was discarded for whatever reason?

+1, INS modelization is basic right now and INS fix implementation is incomplete. Also a proper manual would be welcome. Any chances to get a realistic 'bitching betty' sound based on the real aircraft?

We held a recent discussion on the very same topic in the DCS official discord channel, the super accurate Hornet's HARM implementation with instantaneous emitter updating starts to feel outdated compared with the more appropiate and realistic modelization in the Viper. Any update on the topic would be greatly appreciated.

It was mentioned some time ago a potential big FM upgrade, to polish the strange behaviour that the Viggen has, specially in corner cases (Max speed at altitude for example). Is this overhaul still planned? Thanks

That's not a J-10, but a J-11