Jump to content

AlexCaboose

Members
  • Posts

    251
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AlexCaboose

  1. This would be incredibly useful for all sorts of training scenarios. I really hope you guys add this in the future.
  2. Can confirm that doing it with search works just fine. Unfortunately I didn't think to test with RWR off so my track wouldn't be too helpful.
  3. The way it was implemented wasn't even correct. There's a whole process to get to status 6 alignment that involves moving the jet.
  4. I think this is also a difference in service branch as well. I believe the USAF doesn't have switch changes at the range and the Navy will flip the switch before drop. I might have them reversed, but I believe Mover covered this in his CAS video.
  5. This graph doesn't make sense. How would a board upgrade allow greater physical displacement? Surely that must come from the actual base itself, which you're saying won't be out until later in 2023.
  6. No, the FSSB doesn't move. It also has software settings that allow you to adjust the left/right and forward/back force requirements separately.
  7. I did a quick repair + commented out the line in export lua and it worked fine.
  8. Yeah, busted for me now too. Vaicom seems to be dead.
  9. Whoops, posted on the wrong mod. Meant to be the rain fix.
  10. This mod was crashing DCS for me when slotting into a jet as of 9/29/2022.
  11. I've heard it's a thing IRL, but it doesn't generally happen in DCS except at extremely light weights (like after a sortie) or on an incline. An example of areas of where it does occur is the EOR by the 03L end of Nellis (low weight), or Incirlik EOR on the 23(?) end due to the incline.
  12. The DTC lets you customize however you want anyway. Why not make the default more user friendly?
  13. Adding on to this, the PW2 uses “bang-bang” guidance, which is basically a bunch of full deflections, which is probably why there is no DLZ. It’s inefficient and leads to a lot of overshooting on the way down. PW3 behaves more like a JDAM and should be continuously lased.
  14. What are these HOTAS improvements? Are these additional bindings or differing logic? There's no indication of what's changed in the patch notes.
  15. AIM-120s should be loaded on the wingtips in the Viper. AIM-9s go inboard to reduce wing flutter and stress. You shouldn’t be flying the Viper outside of mid 400kts if you can help it to maintain best rate speed unless you are pulling for the 1C HOBS shot with the 9X. You need to fly the Viper like a Viper, not a Hornet.
  16. I'm well aware of where the data for the HAD comes from. When in PB, you get a narrow cone, you do not get the ovoid. That's consistent with other simulators out there.
  17. They're not though. HAD is just the display. The launch mode, as I was mentioning earlier, is still going to be a submode of POS. When you go to the WPN Video page and select PB, you are changing the mode the HARM is shooting in. HAD is just displaying that change and will give you a much more narrow launch window, because it's meant to be used against a pre-briefed target. In PB, you are giving the HARM a terminal search profile of 20nm radius if I'm not mistaken, which is huge. EOM that terminal search range is 5nm radius. http://www.ausairpower.net/USN/HARM-Profiles-S.jpg That picture provides a good example of the flight profiles of the HARM. EOM is the most accurate flight profile.
  18. That wouldn’t actually make any sense at all. The mode is POS, and the submode is generally EOM. It’s called the HAD because it’s displaying the attack profile of the HARM and various targetable emitters, their general locations, the emitter status, and accuracy of the fix. You are still shooting in a POS submode, so the mode doesn’t change.
  19. It's definitely many. ATC rework was promised years ago, and I hope it's in the works.
×
×
  • Create New...