amalahama

Yep I know it's WIP, what worrying me is that even the caption in the video is a bad understanding on how AUTO (aka CCRP) works. But if you don't like the videos of similar platforms doing CCRP (good luck finding one on the Harrier), just take the TAC Harrier manual and check. Since I'm a good person and again, my only aiming is that everybody gets the best Harrier possible, I took the trouble of looking up by myself, see attachment. Regards! P.S- In the second attachment (also taken from Harrier TAC manual), it can be seen how ASL is sticked to the TD, pilot only has to put the velocity vector on the ASL to reach the computed release point. If you include the wind into equation, and if ASL always crosses the TD, that means that the velocity vector needs to be wind corrected. Because all pictures show the VVI in the middle of the pitch ladder, I assume that also the pitch ladder is wind corrected, but I need to more carefully read the docs for assurance.

That makes sense - more than the current implementation Regards!

What sort of solutions are those? The only solution possible is to fix it. I don't care if they work with a Harrier pilot. The behavior of the ASL is just WRONG, and anyone with experience in Falcon and A-10C DCS will immediately realize of the mistake. The implementation can vary a tad between platforms, but the mechanics are always the same: Azimuth Steering Line (see the name?) provides the direction cue to fly towards the computed released point. Regards

Totally wrong CCRP. ASL randomly fixed in the middle of the pitch ladder, (instead of behaving as a kind of "flight director bar" guiding to the computed drop solution); pitch ladder which still is not wind-corrected. I don't understand you guys complaining about the 3D model, when there are so evident MISTAKES in the avionics fundations. Regards!

I agree, who dares to open it? It will get full quite fast... Regards

It's not a weapon. It's a decoy Regards

Yes, if we don't do it, then who will? Not the "OMG HARRIER, SO GREAT" army, for sure. And I just do it because I really, really want to have a proper modelled Harrier in-game. Same as the Mirage. I don't have anything against Razbam. But I'm a bit tired of third-parties leaving half-done modules for getting new sources of revenues. Regards!

Not especially refering to you, I think your appreciation is totally right ;) , but I hate the "BEST AIRCRAFT EVAA" statements around this post when clear mismatches with real AV-8B avionics can be seen in the shoots. RAZBAM is going to have a thought one with the Harrier, because lot of info is public and people will use, and compare, with the real documentation, something we couldn't do with the Mirage. Regards!

Yeah, looking to the wrong CCIP behaviour (In the screenshoots it's obvious that the pitch ladder is not wind-corrected, the Impact point should stay in the ladder's center), honestly the DMT is what worries me the less. But I'm pretty sure lot of people will keep pouring their $$ to them, whatever they do. It's a pity that just a few really care about realism... Regards!

Yeah, welcome to the I-Wish-Someday-RAZBAM-Pay-Some-Attention-To-The-Mirage club! Regards!

I hope one of the "secret big ones" is a finished manual. Regards!

I might be wrong, but are you sure you can actually lock an AA target with the radar? I think i've read somewhere that the radar is just not capable, it was not designed with that purpose, and the AA mode is just the regular AG mode "looking up". Regards

Wow thanks! Actually I'm quite surprised of the "fluidity" of the flight model. Are you sure you're still using SFM? :music_whistling: Regards!

Do the antenna elevation indicators work? I'm stuck at 2.1 at the moment, not enough space in my SSD for both, I hope they fix this because there is no other indication of antenna elevation. And does magnetic deviation knob work now? Regards

Wow neat!!! But is the standard data cartidge with the mission planner data still possible to select? Can the data cartidge be switched in the air? Regards

Yep, I hope they realize that the level of exigence of DCS pilots are WAY higher than in FSX... Regards

Why? What's wrong with the Fulcrum?

Please please tell me that finally the ASP will work properly :cry:

It seems an jf-17 is on the works. It's enough indigenous fighter for me. Regards

Well, this post is 24 pages long now and I see more and more unhappy customers complaining and asking for a clear roadmap for the Mirage, receiving a total lack of feedback from RAZBAM . But anyway, my post was referring to those who see as valid a business model based on leaving products unfinished in search for new cash incomes. Regards!

Poor customer satisfaction doesn't brings more revenues. This is learnt the first day on any business school. Regards!

I remember that in FC1, Kh-41 could be strapped in the Su-33, isn't it possible any more?

I used to be disappointed with Leatherneck due to the low quality Mig-21 and bugs still to be resolved, and hopeful with RAZBAM with the Mirage getting a good patch pace. After Viggen (almost feature complete since day 0, just polishing bugs) and the disappointment of RAZBAM being unable (or unwilling) to finish the Mirage, the tables have turned. So, totally aligned with TomCatMucDe and similar feelings around this post. Regards!

Is the Su-33 ground-attack capable? I've never flown it before because of the SFM physics, now it gets interesting with the new FM. It's a great match to the Hornet, really looking forward to it. Regards!

My bet goes to radar elevation too high Regards!