Mandellorian

I`m definitely in the undercarriage is now made of tool picks crowd.I`ve snapped the LH U/C 5 times in a clean hornet with 3K fuel and a VSI as low as 300FPS..something isn`t right. I`ve also noticed you can massively exceed the G-Limit on the FCS without hitting the paddle switch. Routinely seeing over 8G without the paddle being pulled regardless of payload.

New patch, same issue only now its affecting SU-27s, J-11s and F-18 hornets. Targets that are affected vanish off JTIDS,RADAR ,RWR and F10 map making them significant threats in multiplayer as the only way to see them coming is visually.

At what signal strength you will get tone is a threshold setting that is usually set by the big brains sitting in an HQ somewhere. DCS doesn`t simulate this and just generates the tones regardless, even though the RWR screens themselves do correctly prioritise signals. From the systems i`ve worked on i wouldn`t expect tone anywhere near as often as DCS generates it, with them only notifying the pilot when the strength of signal reaches a threshold where the pilot has to be aware. Otherwise you would end up with what we have in DCS now, a stupid system that generates distractions instead of actual threat indications.

As stated F-18 with Litening pod in NAR FOV the MHDD flickers and displays visual tearing. Does not occur in ST version, wide FOV or ATFLIR.

F-18 Hornet. I hadn`t taken a hit, i lost my nose door when i was climbing out after takeoff and the MP stutter bug made an appearence resulting in an overspeed. I wouldn`t have bothered with a repair if it hadn`t disabled my weapons.

As title. When landing and repairing on an MP server i noticed that i was no longer displayed on the F10 map after taking off, the AI didn`t react to either my presence or my weapons, flying blindly into STT missile launches. A quick straw poll of players indicated i was no longer showing up on datalink either. Respawning at the base fixed the issue.

Current beta, no mods. Seems completely fine on the other refuels. Its only this mission he goes suicidal and comes straight at me. The only way i ended up doing the mission was wait for Kamikaze joe to do his suicide dive across the tanker and then plug myself.

Mission 9 mandatory tanking..irritating but that seems par for this campaign. Watch my wingman start taking fuel, slide on in beside and start tanking as well. Hear wingman state refuel complete and then watch in utter disbelief as he does a hard turn directly across the tail of the tanker directly into me. Ran the mission 3 times, sat just behind the tanker the last 2 times and every single time..finishes refuelling and cuts across the tail of the tanker directly into where i would be if i was refuelling.

45 Were fitted to USN/USMC Hornets at various points as you said it failed fleet trials, it was still fitted to a number of F-18Cs on the export market. where it was still a pain.

If its modelled accurately...be below the target so the radar on the tomcat is looking up and it shouldn`t be possible to notch it, the system should only apply the notch if it can see ground clutter. As for MWS...they are a lot shorter ranged than people seem to think. Slightly better than 3rd generation MANPAD range for most of them. The simple answer is DCS has always had inferior AI, they had to give them advantages to stop them being wiped out by even beginner humans. Its why the AI can do things like ignore physics, guide SARH missiles without having to point anywhere near you and know instantly where you are at all times. Unfortunately they have been playing with the missile code for the Human missiles and utterly messed it up which is why you will see a lot of missiles heading off into space again which makes it even worse and more noticeable.

Just remember the ASPJ on the hornet FAILED its operational tests, it was only fitted after an F-16 got taken out in Bosnia, and it was the only option available. It was notorious for being unreliable during fleet tests which was finally traced to them designing the system to the wrong G-limits. The Navy didn`t get a system with a tuneable filter to allow interoperation with the Radar until the F-18E/F was introduced. So a jammer that kind of works and does bad things to your radar is accurate for the period hornet we have.

I`m one of the strange ones that prefers being in the pit, but i will say if you know your way around the RIO systems, you will be extremely frustrated with jester when you go play in the front seat.

While a lot of people will give you the its highly classified line..its not. Exact capabilities are but the existance of such systems isn`t. Not really much point in pretending something doesn`t exist when you can just go buy a system from CRFS using commerical technology(RFeye Node) that can do it, the sales pitch specifically tells you it can track IFF/ADS-B and Link 16 transmitters. If you really want to know more..BAE have released limited data on the AN/ASQ-239 on their website, you can also read up on the Leonardo SEER/SAGE systems on their website.

I knew the Germans had originally gone their own way with DASS using their DASA system instead of the Leonardo system but i didn`t realize they had deleted it entirely from some.

Take any comments from the manufacturer about flare resistance with a large grain of salt. The AIM 9X was supposed to be almost immune to flares...until it encountered Russian quality control flares..that didn`t look like the ones the missile had been programmed to ignore. ( F-18E Vs SU-22 June 18 2017) What makes that even more interesting is its a repeat of what happened with earlier generation IR missiles, when we got some Russian flares from Afghanistan it was found due to the variation in flare performance the filters built into the missiles didn`t cover the actual flares in use.