Hobel

In my opinion with Lantrin, which is older and less capable pod, you don't lose any aspect of a 2007 Viper, since they were using Lantrin after all. We will get Sniper later, and remember Viper is still in EA, and in the future if ED gets access to more info a Litening pod as well. Nevertheless, the f16 equipped with litening is the one with more possibilities and these possibilities are not necessarily unrealistic and that is my point.

What is realistic representation? Is the litening missing a few functions and symbols, yes for sure! But the real task, and that's what it's all about, is to display an image, and as far as I know, important functions like -white/hot -TV -zoom levels -digital zoom -LSS Mostly correctly displayed, so in most cases you can work with it as it is intended for a modern f16c. Is that unrealistic now? On the other hand we have the lantirn which will come with a few limitations and we can no longer fully use some aspects of a 2007 f16. Just my personal opinion

The barometric altimeter actually had an influence on this a few patches ago. This means that if you set the altitude of the target and then enter the coordinates into the pvi-800, the shkval will give you quite close to the target. But this possibility was removed whether it was intentional or happened by mistake I can't say.

Then name at least one thing

If the contrast is big enough the missile recognizes the contrast of the helicopter, sure it could happen from time to time that the missile gets confused, but just helicopters are very big targets that stand out well from the background, is there otherwise sources reading that supports your claim? @Default774

Agree I would also have fun with it.

hm, I did not mean that, I am actually very satisfied with the LMC as it is currently. what should be improved from your point of view?

That's why we announce on the radio every friendly missle that is fired, the same in apache, so you can assign the warning. If you are on an MP server, just ask nicely via srs if people could please announce their missiles.

Can you upload a track of the situation, please?

I think this is also taken as a reason for the possible "prealignment" that could occur in the future. But as I said, no one knows when

tac-views davon wären auch gold wert hier ist sonst auch ein Spannendes Thema was das verhalten der AIM-7 in DCS beeineflussen kann.

In the Russian forum pictures from the manual were posted and these times seem to be correct. also you can see from other post that the fast alignment is not intended for combat operations so 10-20min is the minimum for combat missions. But in the Russian area Dev mentioned that sometime in the future there might be something similar to a prealignment so that you don't have to wait 15-20 minutes for an exact alignment, when that will come nobody knows. GLOSSNASS is not connected to the PVI-800 in our KA-50III so it does not affect the alignment. The alignment is also so long because it is probably (correct me if you like) a part of the system must come to operating temperature.

yes his test are not very good, but even if you fly fast the cooling needle goes red after 3min MW50 and the engine is dead after 10min, but according to the manual it should be possible to fly longer with these settings on the other hand, nothing happens without MW50. btw for which D9 engine should these values be, surely not ours

yes and that's okay too?

Certain things are still WIP, note the news in which were announced revisions to the F16 as well as F18 radar

I have tested the scenario and RGP gunners try to shoot at a helicopter, but normally they never or very rarely hit. So, if this is not the norm, I would say you are just unlucky and the RGP gunner is very lucky.

As far as I know, any kind of weather only affects the line of sight. It also depends somewhat on the experience of the unit.

You might be right. But KA-50III is an ED prototype, a what-if production. Therefore, entering the height would be a useful and very important realistic extension. Apart from that, the ME sets the waypoints and target points to the correct altitude, so how should this be evaluated now? As a bug? In dynamic missions in somewhat higher terrain, you already get into trouble with the ka-50III.

How was the height then transferred to the PVI-800? Was there no other possibility? Working with target points seems not to have been possible in reality, especially from ASL over 300 metres, which is not unusual. the same for the waypoints. Are there plans to create a possibility for this in the future? thx

You press "DL to ALL" and then SEND/MEM. I don't know exactly whether it should be saved there for you, leave out "DL to ALL" and try again.

I haven't been home yet, I'll check it and ping you then.

This is the same? https://forum.dcs.world/topic/321471-datalink-problem/#comment-5175653

Hmm, at first glance you didn't do anything wrong so far. I'll look at the mission again later when I'm at home.

At the moment I don't know anything more than what it says. Which one exactly? single player or MP mission? Track of it?

I am aware of this and I would also think that the helicopter/PVI-800 knows the altitude when you create target points with the Shkval, because these have the correct altitude, as you know. Maybe there is a way to transmit the altitude to the helicopter with the help of your KA-50 tool, just like the ME does. But I have no idea how to do this, so maybe you can find a solution.