Jump to content

sirscorpion

Members
  • Posts

    291
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Tbh its range should be higher at least for very hot objects "aircraft for example", they do render in the NVFLIR so why are there no V displayed over a hard limit of 5nm. I really was hoping for more depth to this system. but it's a good start for now. the false returns at the moment should not happen at random, as @Fri13 stated it has specific situations and yes it will all depend on how ED does the FLIR system, but for now lower frequency of false return, longer range for Very hot objects like Aircraft or Aircraft in burners. would do nicely.
  2. All missiles in DCS behave that way, its an issue with DCS and not with the AIm54 only. Aim120,R77 and ET/T27 all need data link guidance to pit bull and none of them have that you can shoot from any range and turn cold and the missile will still chase the target "Aim120 and 54C should go to a track predicted point" but they also do not do that the chase the target either way. The missiles are not the issue, the Issue is as of now DCS does not have data link guidance or radar Track files. Also the AIm54 at the moment is pulling far less G than its real counter part due to DCS missile code model restrictions.
  3. https://alert5podcast.podbean.com/e/scramble-04-matt-wags-wagner/ @ around the 20-21min mark, wags talks about the how the F18 new frame work helps make the F16 faster and at a lower cost. There are a few of the top of my head but I wont search for them on the forums as thats a massive pain, in some of the hornet talk for example they mention the new FLIR. Razbam for example stated several times that they are waiting for EDs new Radar system and ground radar before work on the F15E and AV8B+. HB for example stated they could not wait for ED to make a new ground radar so they made their own. so a few of those tidbits are around here and there, but as I also stated ED never detailed on the progress or how those APIs will help the 3pd. Just that they will, and will reduce work and cost.
  4. Not much to be honest but enough information to state that the 54C seems to operate more like the 120 than the A basically. search for Forecast International Inc. Missile Forecast November, 1997
  5. sent you a PM with what i found due to rules 1.16 cant post it here.
  6. from what I understand the FA18c is basically a test bed for new DCS API, hence why its taking so long. so each system on the hornet is more or less getting a standardized API that in theory should make the development of other aircraft much easier. The ones I know off so far are the weapons and ballistic API "this will come with AGM84H/E,Agm-154, and already happened with JDAMs and some other A2A systems", a New Radar API that includes ground radar and SAR. and a new FLIR API which should be a more detailed system "ATFLIR and lighting pods for the hornet". The entire idea behind those APIs is that DCS will have a standardized system for most aircraft functions, and reduce the time needed for developers to make the aircraft so basically you can for example make the AV8B II + by simply taking the hornet radar API and plugging it in "its more complex than that but far less complex than trying to wright the code from the ground up which as i understand is required now days quite a bit. As in the progress ED never talks about that, but a good indicator is the hornet. if its on the hornet and the hornet gets an update, its safe to say that the API is ready. this is at least how I understand it.
  7. Of course that makes sense! I am sure I saw some source on the similarity of the 120 to 54C functions some time ago on some forum far away. ill set some time this weekend and try and look for it and even if its worth it as a data point source and not some forum speculation.
  8. Thank you for the answer, but why would the awg-9 have to look at the held track position if the data is sent from the "held track"? On the C I saw that statement mentioned on the forums, from what I gather the 120 was derived functionally from the 54c. documentation however AFIK will be tough to come by. but all and all worth considering to look into.
  9. Side question if possible, will the "track hold function" still give the 54 mid course corrections to active point, based on saved track data? or will it need an active TWS return to conduct that function? And does this apply to both the A and C? from what i heard the C operates the same way as the 120 missile "active at x range"
  10. My list with some predictions -Hot spot tracker "this is a tough one at the moment depends on new ED API" it can be done but the way to do it now is going to be hacking labels or something along those lines, the real thing is not perfect" -SEAM Aim9 "should be easy enough" -APKWS II " an easy weapon to make we have laser guided Rockets already and this will be a big big selling point for Mplayer crowed, while documentation is limited there are a few videos showing HUD symbols and process" -JDAM "should be easier now with the new weapon API from ED" -TPod/AIm9 to Hotspot tracked target/DMT. though the pod right now "all pods are kinda tricky with point tracking aircrafts" -Better FLIR or real FLIR system "this one is more on ED new API" Those are the major ones on my list.
  11. The F14 due to it having realistic vibration behavior overrides, typical visual cues reserved for simulating "seat of pants" cues. Arguing learn to play is invalid once more as it has nothing to do with the argument of using visual aids or realism as Seat of pants indicator are ironically and inherently realistic in them selves. So once more barney style, cockpit aircraft shake in some flight aspects is realistic, G Load cockpit shake is a simulation of "seat of pants" feel is also realistic. learning has nothing to do with it. And audio cues like pilot strain, or G-Loc effects are also part of simulation indicators. we are arguing 2 separate things, The process is the process it has nothing to do at with my argument, once more "Seat of pants" indicators are a real requirement irregardless of the learning process. and since no one can spend 10mil+ for a 6DOF rig. any simulator has a set of tools both audio and visual to simulate realistic effects with the limitations of costs. So really its just that, if however your argument is that realistic G-load effects and cues should not be simulated then we can just agree to disagree and leave it at that.
  12. Well that's not a valid argument haha, See the issue is that its a sort of Paradox of balance. The feel of G strain and limits of the Aircrafts "AKA seat of pants feel" Is very much a realistic effect, And well simulated "effects" can provide human-machine data points that are critical for practice. and there are many more tools to create such feedback loops. Stating the "Learn to Play b/c it is realistic" argument in a simulation is not a valid argument, feed back loops are important in practice or training and what differentiate good simulation from other. hence why the highest level of simulators like Level D need to have 6DOF axies to simulate seat of pants.
  13. Here is an explanation and a solution to what going on. Simulated aircrafts do not give you seat of pants indicator and important one to knowing what is going on around you. F-14 has cockpit shake all the time, while it is realistic according to SME. however while they are realistic they are inadvertently less so since they over ride the seat of pants feel. Cockpit shake Should be reserved as a "Seat of Pants Indicator" more than realistic aesthetics or less important simulated subjects like transonic flight , along with clear sounds of pilot strain in different stages, sounds of strain on aircraft, and with some sort of Pre G-loc effects "longer and smoother curve than the vanilla DCS effects". Simulating the "feel" of an aircraft, while reaming faithful to the realistic aesthetics is a tough balance act, but as stated above there are tools to get there with out a 6DOF chair.
  14. CTD as RIO in mplayer Pilot did not crash. had this several times before and after the patch. if any indicator it always happens when the pilot is in a Bank pulling G "low or high does not matter" Last log line: 2019-03-27 20:25:18.385 ERROR SOUND: invalid source_params(F14_PILOT_COCKPIT:aircrafts\f-14\windrushing): gain
  15. They did state that they were waiting for ED to work on it, and IF ED didnt make it they would. For me and many others it is a selling point.
×
×
  • Create New...