Jowen G. Bruère-Dawson

catt42 : yes, I understand what you mean, but as I said in the first post : the drift between the true position of the waypoint (in the mission editor) and the waypoint position displayed on the HUD are pretty much the same (maybe 0.1 to 0.2km of drift) while the CK-37 estimates a 2km dirft. I can understand that it's just an estimation, but this estimation is really not reliable. If I post a bug report now it's because I havn't noticed such a drift in the CK-37 last digit in previous versions (I may be wrong about this though) Qui Gon : yes you get it. Please keep me informed if you have the possibility to test this. Sorry for my english, I don't use translator. Thanks all.

Ramsay Yeah, just noticed that, on the inner station, you can load M151 but only with triple mounts, on the middle stations you can't load M151 even on Lau-68. I think it's a bug.

Hi some1, We have both the Hydra 70 and FFAR rockets for the Harrier. Hydras can only be carried with LAU-68 pods (7 rockets) while the FFAR can be carried with either LAU-3 (19 rockets per pod) or LAU-68 (7 rockets per pod). Cheers.

Hi catt42 and LevelPulse, Thanks for your answer. I don't understand the manual this way. Page 188 Output AKT/POS : (...) ''The sixth (last) digit indicates the navigation systems estimation of its position error (the distance between the own position and the “true” position) in kilometres.'' So, when the sixth digit shows the value ''1'', the CK-37 estimates that the delta between the true waypoint position and the displayed waypoint position is off by 1 km... This is how I understand this, hence this bug report. Thanks again.

Hello all ! During a little training session, I noticed that there was a little inconsistency between the data provided by the CK-37 in AKT/POS-Output and the real position of my attack waypoint. The CK-37 estimate a 2Km error while the waypoint displayed on the HUD is right where it is supposed to be. See the screenshot attached... The 6th digit indicate ''2'', you may not see it properly on the screenshot, but the circle on the HUD is pretty much at the same position in mission editor (on the targets). So the estimated error of the CK-37 is wrong. Is it a bug or a normal behaviour ? I estimate the distance between the circle on the HUD and the true waypoint position on the ME at around 0,1 to 0,2km, not 2km. Thanks.

Thanks for the answer about the ''out of game'' ELINT-data... The F-10 map would allow us to use way more efficiently the ELINT capabilities of the Viggen. Is there a possibility to implement such a functionality ? Thanks

It works for me, but i'm in 2.5.0 release

I've tried, in release version, I don't have this bug. But I've tried only PLAN mode, and the waypoint was M4. It works fine.

I would like to have completly black mirrors rather than what we have now by the way. Thanks for the answer Quip.

Nice initiative. About the SA-10 minimum engagement range : I think you can put something like 3 to 6 km. Because I do some DEAD/SEAD with the Viggen and when there is a S-300 site without other anti-air systems to protect it (like SA-9, SA-8 or SA-19, which I consider as very dangerous because of the combination gun/missiles by the way), I like to use the RB-05 or the rockets at close range. I realized that once I'm less than 5 km from them, they never launch any missile at me, except if I go a little too far.

In release, I don't have this bug, but I'll try again to see if I'm not wrong

I already had this problem some time ago. Thought I missed something and forgot to report it

Great news for weapons inaccuracies and kneeboard ! Thanks ! Omnirock : I would rather like to see the devs working mainly on systems for my part. But they will do as they want, it's their project. If I can suggest you a little thing : lack of dynamic campaign is a pain in the a** for DCS, but there are already quit a lot of missions for different aircrafts. I have the A-10A/C and the Frogfoots in mind. Maybe you can open the first mission of one of their campaigns on the ME and modify it slightly to fly them with the Viggen on different objectives...

Same here. However I'll take the F-14 to support Heatblur for both the Viggen and the Tomcat. Didn't even bought the F/A-18 and I will not buy it until fully capable (so in 1 year or more). Tired of this constantly bugged sim. Paid more than 500€ in total, and I can't enjoy what I paid for. It's getting too much. And the prices are higher and higher by the way. Anyway, It's not the topic ; I hope for a way better accuracy and reliability with rockets and bombs for the release version very soon.

I'm getting tired to wait for a stable Viggen with really efficient weapons and ELINT/recce systems. Hope good updates will come very soon. Currently, only the Viggen make me want to start DCS, but weapons are not reliable (specialy rockets and bombs in some mode, and I'm on the release version).

Agree. I have all the modules and the Viggen is my favorite.... I'm still waiting for a much better weapons accuracy for rockets, A/G gun pod and some bombs modes... And the final version of the manual. Also, I don't know how it is implemented right now, but last time I tried ELINT was a failure, coordinates of the SAM site were not even on the map. Hope one day we will be able to do really efficient ELINT missions. Great Aircraft overall. Nice job, but do not let it die in beta stage.

Very interesting. Thank you very much guys ! I really enjoy learning those kind of informations ! Thanks again cheers from France

Wow, thank you very much ! Apreciate this kind of information. There are the left and right selector, right selector is pretty self explanatory but what does the 0/1/2/3-4 mean for the left selector ? According to google, Vapenantal mean ''Weapons'' and Vapenväljare mean... ''Coat selector''... If you can explain a little ? Thanks again for your answers

I never managed to properly use the Viggen's radar on A/A mode xD. I must try again About A/G I must learn more functions of the radar like Lin/Log differences, Pulses etc etc to know how to get the most of it because I find it difficult (specialy on the Caucasus and Normandy) to distinguish ground targets from trees/buildings, and this even before this update (I'm still in release..) By the way, Bombs in DYK and Rockets are accurate for you ?

Hi, thanks for your answer. So if I understand correctly, it's not only due to the weapons selector in the cockpit but to an other selector swtich somewhere on the aircraft and configured by the mechanics ? Just like the TAM on the Mirage 2000 (Tableau d'Armement Mécanicien, mechanic weapons table) ?

I don't understand why you're talking about the trim... ? There are mixed payload options available like with dispenser/jammer pods or guns, so I don't think it's a trim issue... Sorry I don't get it x)

Hi everyone. I've read some weeks ago that ED have changed their atmospheric model, hence making the Viggen a little bit useless for some weapons. This problem has been fixed ? Because I have poor accuracy with rockets, AKAN and some bomb delivery mods. EDIT : Mentioned in the Viggen dev update thread, my bad... It's been fixed for the Open Beta and rockets will soon be fixed too. Good News. My other question is about the weapons mixing on the Viggen. According to the manual (Page 277), the Viggen have a very limited mixed weapons payload capability, due to the fact that the weapons selection switch can use the same position for 2 or even 3 different weapons... Thus the computer don't know which one to select. But there are cases when you must be able to mix weapons. My particular case is BK-90 with M-71 bombs. The BK-90 uses the ATTAK mode, while the bombes uses either PLAN, DYK or RR modes. So, since there will be no conflict, I must be able to take BK-90 and Bombs... But each time I try to launch the Bk-90 with this payload, DCS crashes. I would like to know if you have the same problem, and if somebody know if there are other limitations other than the weapon selection switch for mixing payload, I'll listen. Thanks, cheers !

Dr Arrow : Thank you very much for the link. Read a bunch of answers, very interesting ! Thanks again. Cheers from France

Yes, the Force Correlate seems very very accurate even at 10-11nm. This missile locks at about 3-5 Nm in normal lock... So the Force Correlate seems too precise in my opinion. But once again, I think ED can't base their simulation on something else than real life pilots experience or very very accurate and 100% reliable informations. By the way, I have an other little question : it seems that we can lock buildings with AGM-65D/G. I don't think that it's possible since they have0 a heatseeking sensor, and building don't emit IR signature (?) Am I missing something ?

Ok thanks for all those answers, it seems that the toogle switch is the cause of their locking failure. Thanks everybody ! Deezle : Can you explain a little bit more please ? Having real life pilots opinions about Force Correlate/ AGM-65 would be great. By the way, I have an other little question : it seems that we can lock buildings with AGM-65D/G. I don't think that it's possible since they have0 a heatseeking sensor, and building don't emit IR signature (?) Am I missing something ? Thanks again guys