Zergburger

ran the same mission with minor edits this past monday. here is the server track, similar harm behavior exhibited. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KBvV5mbKeb8kevJLNKnt41PitKY_r9i0/view?usp=sharing

never heard of decoy radars, i know one of the lesser talked about benefits of AESA is the small sidelobes and backlobes when compared to mechanical or even PESA systems. when you talk about sidelobe reflectors, are you talking about a physical device used to bounce sidelobes? wouldn't that mess with the automatic gain functions?

guess i'll just put this in here.... add to the list:

yeah i wasn't implying they were submodes of POS. I was asking about these other settings/features since they play a much bigger role when using POS modes with long range and long time-of-flight on inertial guidance. Also, with the upcoming HTS pod these features will play an even bigger role. All AGM-88Cs started on block IV software, with block V being fielded 1999 time frame. If this is a 2005 viper it stands a good chance we are using AGM-88C with blockk V software. so... stands to reason we could get these.

bump, still hopin ED might chime in and tell me if these are on the roadmap.

radar elevation is borked in your screenshot.

I will try and ask my wingmen for their tracks, otherwise it will probably be a week before we run the mission again. If you view the ACMI file you will see the harms obviously misguiding. although i know you can't extrapolate causal factors, at least you will be able to verify that it's a true bug. EDIT: attached is server track server-20210419-185857.trk

(apologies if this should've been posted in weapons section instead of FA-18) Flew a mission tonight that had 3x SA-2 sites in a line 20-miles apart perpendicular to the vector of attack. Behind these sites were a pair of SA-6 sites 6-miles apart. ALL SAM SITES HAD WAYPOINTS DIRECTLY ON TOP OF THEIR RADAR SITES. Using HARM PB (A/C Pullup) we had 3 separate hornets prosecuting the Fan Songs at the same time, all hornets engages from ~30k MSL at around 30 miles. The HARM from the center aircraft made a hard turn (~50 degrees azimuth) off the rail and went for the righthand most SA-2 site, which he had not designated nor was he facing. The SA-6 prosecution did not fair any better. with 2 hornets designated on separate sites; the first HARM guided on the correct site, but the second HARM fired by the other hornet decided to guide on the wrong SA-6 radar, then switched to the correct site after the one it was targeting was destroyed. Cool to see flex-logic working, sad to see it working when there's a large bug in the mix. Attached is a zipped ACMI of the shots Trackfile too large to attach, google drive link included: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KBvV5mbKeb8kevJLNKnt41PitKY_r9i0/view?usp=sharing Bugged HARM PBclipped.zip

wtf are sam site countermeasures?

the glare is amazing, had to put my hud repeater on in the hornet for the first time today

btw, good job on the new kub models, loving the details

cat 3 lowers AoA limit, which will reduce G, but not a hard limiter.

The radars clip through each other when the model is in the non-combat state. (see attached pic, taken in encyclopedia)

-34

Mk60 motor was never made smokeless.....does not exist.

bump Are these features planned? is there a rough timeline? Is ED waiting on the HTS pod to finish development before putting more attention on HARM?

you should probably re read my post then.....

Was hoping with completion of POS submodes we would get an updated HARM. Still missing TI and GS settings, and Loss-of-track glide / Equations-of-motion glide features. I assume we will probably never get Datalink submode, but thats also missing. Any word ED?

use FPAS page, it tells you best speeds an d altitudes for range and endurance. set speed, press auto throttle, PROFIT

When looking at the MGW of the apache comparing it to the KA-50 we have, The KA-50 has 2x 2400 ShHP motors. D model apache is running 2x 1890 ShHP (uprated from the 1690 ShHP motors of the A). Comparison of power vs. max takeoff weight.... KA-50: 23,810 lbs max takeoff / 4800 shaft HP = ~4.96 lb/HP AH-64D: 23,000 lbs max takeoff / 3780 shaft HP = ~6.08 lb/HP Add to that the lack of an anti-torque rotor which will suck 10-15% power; the KA-50 is well ahead in power to weight. These calcs don't tell the whole story, however they may give you a rough idea of what kind of performance to expect compared to a KA-50 when taking a fully loaded chopper.

when the emitters fade he says something i can't understand at all, wtf is he saying?

why dont we just ask for F-16XL while we're at it, then you can carry like 20 GBU-12s

host it on google drive, or set up a mission that will exhibit the behavior quickly and then spend as small amount of time as you need to do it. (thus making the track smaller)

It is my understanding we are to get the AT-6(9K114) and AT-9(9M120) as our guided missile choices. My questions is which variants of these? 9K114M1 and M2 variants have increased range compared to baseline weapon. 9M220O proximity fused missile for a2a would be sweet, too.

when it was first announced, I was a bit bummed. However, when I considered how useless 7.62mm and 12.7mm weapons are in DCS, the 30mm fixed gun grew on me.