Hobel

okay i tested it again and i have to agree it seems like the radar is coming exactly from the tads

maybe and that's exactly why you need 3 skeets to destroy a tank in DCS. a hit on the engine or turret would be enough. I think that's a good compromise and many misses in DCS too. DCS could add the same missrate, but we would have a worse result than in irl because the weapons do no damage, not to mention mission kills with the current DM model. apart from that, we can hardly judge the exact miss rate on the basis of the videos, in DCS there are also a lot of misses. the best thing would be a paper documenting this exactly bg9uoI8RQKc.webm

why don't you post a track/video of it so that we can see your view. in my test the beam is coming from the Dome.

Normal thing for the F15 to track a RCS 5 target at 70nm

In DCS you need 3 skeets/BLU108 to kill a tank, I think that's a good compromise because the damage model can't simulate a lot of things CBU-97/106 there are 40 skeets, and not every one of which hits every time. and a T72 tank has a top hull armor of ~30mm, top turret ~45mm here are 2 more videos that also show how the sensor works in parts, unfortunately, as in your video, you can't see what a possible direct hit looks like

From the doc above

thx. looking

This has nothing to do with the topic and is also misleading. The Radar Simulator from RB has already proven how authentic it is, just because it didn't work some time doesn't mean it was or is bad

Look here https://forum.dcs.world/topic/349673-agm-45-shrike-quick-guide-by-klarsnow-updated-june-5th-2024/?do=findComment&comment=5467470

Help me out with an aspect, there is also talk of the PK and a Miss Distance(m), up to 24 meters. among others: 9m 1PK 14m 0.5PK and so on so 100% lethal at 9m and 50% lethal at 14m. so the Proxy Fuze should be much bigger or more dynamic. Are they probably referring to this as well? APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA379702 https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA509688

Have you noticed the new notes? I think it was partly 30kg less

Serious question in what way, the fact that not all contacts have an alt display, the SA goes away...and every time I select a contact I have to press the mfd button for AUTO or when searching, back to MAN...horrible

I started with the F18 and then with the F16 and realised that the F16 is much lighter. Just the fact that F16 saves the pages and doesn't reset them every time... It's also much clearer and simpler a/a a/g. With their F18, sometimes double or triple the amount of input is necessary to trigger an action compared to the F16

Well you see, that's enough for now if you keep looking you'll find more. To be on the safe side. There are enough public documents to model modern sensors well and plausibly. See F15/m2000. If it were up to me I wish we had razbam's radar modulation for all weapons and aircraft.

There are enough public sources to confirm this. If you really want to know, try Google, the answer will come to you quickly.

Watch the video and you'll see everything you need to know. I read the approximate range with the RWR, from the last "junp" that the symbol makes I can deduce to be about 30nm away from the emitter source, the max range for the wrcs, then I point the nose to the emitter using the FD, at the same time the wrcs also shows me the distance, bottom left next to the ADI, then press pickle and hold, now I pull the nose up for a loft, the wrcs then automatically shoots the Shrike-45 with the correct parameters. https://youtu.be/mZ3-ZO6xspw

If the option works, it could be interesting in conjunction with the harm, as the POS modes are still not implemented, this could cause crazy scenarios.

yeah and?

I don't remember exactly, but wasn't it the case that pre flare didn't work? Flares that are dropped before the launch of the missle do not exist for the rocket at launch? That's not quite right - there are already games in the aviation sector that simulate chaff very well and, depending on the amount and aspect, can deceive the radar very authentically. The Razbam modules can also react quite plausibly to chaff.

Hopefully the later versions will get more life time, the aim120c in dcs could theoretically fly 80-100nm but is limited by the 100 seconds.

Maybe yes, but look at the scenarios posted here, the missle usually only misses the target by a few metres 10-20m. Which is still good. However, the real missle would explode at the closest possible calculated point before it simply flies past. In a newsletter a new PF logic was mentioned, maybe such an implementation will come to dcs in the future. And fixes the problem we see here.

No, the track radar was not destroyed or damaged by the shrikes, only when I directly shot at it later with the maverick. You can also see in the Youtube video that the destroyed search radar is very far from the track radar (the column of smoke) And as I said, if the search radar is destroyed, the sa2 is basically blind, but first you have to break the lock once.

Okay? What do you expect the actual function to look like? It's basically the same as irl, tgp is soi, you point the tgp at a target and press TMS UP, then a handoff is given to wpn and the maverick tries to lock the target. And that's how it is in dcs. What is not implemented correctly, the general process is exactly as described in the irl documents for the f16. TMS up handoff and TMS up on the wpn have the same precision in the end if done correctly, I have also linked a video how it works. and especially with units that are close to each other at a great distance, problems can arise, why has already been explained. Oh hum, okay nice.

I agree with you about the bugs, but when WPN SOI and the Maverick is fired, I have to do the SOI back to TGP which is another work step I still save and I demonstrated that in the video. with Auto Handoff I DON'T HAVE to do a DMS down for another shot and can immediately search for new targets and lock them. if you don't see the advantage in this, everyone should play the way they like it.

what do you mean? I posted a video that shows exactly the opposite... here the same again only with manual handoff , the procedure takes much longer and I have to switch back to the TGP SOI for each new destination< MAN: 2x TMS UP + 1 DMS down vs AUTO: 1 TMS UP