Beamscanner

The documents I have on the ALR-67(v2) for the Hornet concur with yours.

Bro, "2" is the SA-2 not the E-2. SA-2 is a threat, hence the dashed line indicating a lethal threat. Also, the ALR-67 doesn't use IFF. Friendly emitters are just those emitter identified to friendly platforms.. (ie an emitter ID'd "18" correlates to the F/A-18 radar. IRL only friendlies use that radar and so its left in the non-lethal area.) However, I'd argue that if the U.S. pilots knew that enemies were flying the F-18, they'd allow "18" indications move into lethal and critical (the ALR-67 is re-programmable). That being said in DCS the enemy can have 18s. Thus they should be allowed into the lethal and critical bands IMO.

There's alot that can be done without going into classified materials.

I'd love to see UMFCD built into DCS. Same with Simple Radio and voice attack.

Alot of people keep putting datalink at the top. Keep in mind that radar bricks are not sent over link-16, only trackfiles are. Meaning you wont have any fighter to fighter datalink without LTWS or TWS. You'd only get AWACS/AEGIS surveillance tracks.

I will say this again.. Rolling past the 'roll gimbal' should NOT stop the radar from working. The radar antenna only rolls to keep the guard antenna pointed toward the earth for sidelobe suppression. The radar antenna doesnt roll at all in ACM modes and works just fine (as it should). Rolling a flash light doesnt stop it from illuminating an object, nor does it prevent your eyes from seeing the reflection. You should be able to fully roll 100 times over without losing track. Only letting the target exceed the azimuth and elevation limits would allow for a break lock (because the antenna can nor longer point in the targets direction).

It would seem weird to implement AIM-7/9/120, and not finish the AA radar.. Even weirder to switch to AG radar when AA is missing so much.

people dont even know what their missing out on with LTWS, L&S, DT2,TWS, Raid, and Az/El.. Theres so much more capability missing. Right now the radar gives very little SA.. A completed AA radar would give more SA than any other radar in game.

Are you in ACM?

Yup, but the yellow is more amber. The DDIs use two phosphors in their screens. A red and a green. Mixing the two will produce the amber/yellow color

I dont know. I haven't read much on that specifically

So at first I thought you could only make a trackfile hostile manualy in the SA page (all trackfiles that do not respond to mode 4 being labeled as unknown). But after further reading, you can actually setup your own HAFU logic. So if you wanted be very liberal (and risky) you could make trackfiles lacking a mode 4 response automatically hostile by setting up the "Rules of Engagement Programming Format" (A whole DDI Page called "ROE PROG") You could make no mode 4 but yes mode 2, unknown. etc.. there's alot of flexibility. hence why ED needs to work on their IFF logic. Unfortunately as per rule 1.16 I cannot show you the basic graphs with datalink symbols. Just know that there are symbols for pretty much everything. In general though, friendlies on the same link 16 Net can be "members" or "donors". A member recieves data and only transmits their own aircraft info (alt, mach, head, position, fuel, weapons, etc). Donors (indicated by the large dot on their track) do everything a member does, but also transmits sensor data (like radar contacts). EDIT: my datalink picture isnt 100% correct. Its missing altitude info for both the friendly and the unknown DL tracks.

1. thats the Block 2 AIM-9X, not the block 1 (which is in DCS) 2. "The Navy achieved Initial Operational Capability of AIM-9X Block II on March 31, 2015, with Carrier Air Wing FIVE." (ie they fixed the BIT issue)

Will we be able to maintain 9X seeker lock on a target after switching weapons? AFAIK the 9X seeker wont stop tracking unless its caged again or loses sight of the target. Thus we should be able to -select 9X #1 -uncage and track target A -switch to 9X #2 -uncage and track target B then when within range, quickly cycle between the 9X missiles and immediately launch as both seekers were already tracking their targets.

Is there any chance you can setup a pre-order? I'd really like to be able to purchase your product.

I think LOS is modeled. But not diffraction, refraction, or atmospheric attenuation. Meaning there is no extra range from the VHF signal. Technically both UHF and VHF can propigate beyond LOS IRL. Just more so for VHF.

the dashed lines do not start at the same position as the short solid lines. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3347781&postcount=11 As far as the placement goes, I agree its alittle off. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=197024

Where can I find the LUA for radar TDC slew control? I wish to edit it to remove the TDC acceleration found in the DCS Hornet.

Data link'd tracks can go into SA page, HUD, A/A radar, JHMCS and also the Az/El page. Be it friend or foe. And yes that means you can look around in 3D space for friends, foes, tankers, AWACS, etc.

Dont know about keys, but if mapped to an axis you can limit the saturation. I too hate this.

1. Small communities write their own NATOPS and send them up to NAVAIR to be approved. The F-5N community is very small. 2. The NATOPS is not a good source for detailed descriptions of tactical systems like the RWR. Especially when the squadron doesn't even have an RWR. 3. You're suggesting I'm an idiot because I came forth with documentation on a system that showed it work contrary to the DCS simulation? 4. I work with digital and analog EW systems so I understand the differences.. 5. Instructor Pilots who write the NATOPS don't have the luxury of being EW experts. 6. Documentation on the ALR-87 istelf (besides the NATOPS) cannot be found ATM. However, I've provided much documentation on the ALR-46 which the ALR-87 is derived from. Note how the ALR-46 document is many pages long, while the NATOPS has but half a page worth of text covering the ALR-87. Also, nothing beats video evidence :) At the end of the day, if you think that the NATOPS description of the ALR-87 isn't missing anything, then you'd have to believe that the ALR-87 has no lock tone (PRF based or synthetic)... Truth is, older RWRs didn't need synthetic lock tones because older fire control radars used lower PRFs (audible frequencies, usually between 600-3000Hz) and a mechanical antenna that stared at the target when locked on.. audible tone (low PRF) + steady tone (staring antenna) = natural lock tone (unique to each radars PRF) I'm willing to bet that the synthetic tones were added to things that system couldn't produce naturally. 1. Missile Launch - Most old school Fire Control Radars used CW illumination for guidance. CW signals produce no tone, and thus cannot be heard. 2. New Guy audio - A pilot may not recognize a new PRF tone as being much different from the others. Especially if its a duplicate emitter (ie two MIG-21s). Thus a synthetic tone informs the pilot of a new contact.

Please keep this discussion to the issue at hand (TDC slew is slow when assigned to buttons)

Some photos of the F-15E I came across in a book. NAVFLIR in HUD Targeting pod SA Page Radar TFR Photos via Steve Davies / FJPhotography.com

When using the TDC mapped to buttons, the TDC will not slew diagonally, nor does it slew as smoothly and quickly as it does in other modules (say the F-15C). Background: The TDC will slew at different speeds depending on how far an analog axis is pushed. When the TDC is assigned to an axis, this works very well. However, digital on/off buttons do not have different magnitudes of input. Poor diagonal slew: Unlike the DCS F-15C cursor slew, the DCS F/A-18C slew struggles to move diagonally. This could be related to the issue below. Cursor speed and smoothness: When the TDC is assigned to buttons, and the TDC is pressed, the slew starts moving slowly and then speeds up. Additionally, quickly switching between directions on the TDC restarts the speed-up processes making the cursor slow again. This variation is undesirable with on/off buttons as it does not make the TDC control smooth (due cursor speed variation) and slow (due to the initial slow slew movement, and remaining slow if you change directions) Below is video of the DCS F-15C and F/A-18C slew rates using the same input device. Note the smoothness and constant speed of the F-15's TDC. Also, note how much easier it is to make the F-15's TDC move diagonally. DCS F/A-18C: Video link: https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/SilkyGrossAllosaurus DCS F-15C: Video link: https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/HairyLimpHogget The forum will not let me upload files that I've already uploaded. Thus, the log and track can be found here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3594751&postcount=1 Its from the same flight