CypherS

There is currently an issue with midcourse guidance. All ARH missiles are suffering from it. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=258817

I think all active missiles do this. I had an R-77 on my RWR after I evaded it and I was definitely not within 60 degrees off its nose

I'm not willing to downgrade my DCS version but LTWS did guide missiles before TWS was introduced. I tried it out after making this thread https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=255972 and I was incorrect when I said the missiles where going pitbull. I put my nose 50 degs of the target and fired and the missile went to the target. Anyways, hopefully someone from ED can comment on whether LTWS produces a good enough track file to support a weapon launch.

+1 The current modules and their systems are certainly pushing the edge in terms of simulation detail. Hopefully, it becomes a priority at some point when the system on the Hornet/Viper become mature

According to Wag's video on LTWS, it cannot guide a missile

Does the F-15's gun in DCS have 8 mil dispersion?

I wasn't using the paddle for that, I wasn't even pulling all the way on the stick. If I pulled any further I would start losing speed.

Are you sure of the hornet data? I can get it to stay at around 22.5 deg/s sustained at 400knots TAS

I'm not sure what the source of this data is but it is correct in DCS if you try it. The Tomcat doesn't need to get to the speed the Viper needs to get to in order for it get a high turn rate. This means the Tomcat will a turn smaller circle at almost the same rate. See this post too: At lower altitudes and no weapon loads the Tomcat is a better performer https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4145616&postcount=163

Does the Hornet have full scan range in TWS before bugging a target?

Thanks for the answers, everyone! - Hopefully, ED responds with news if the VS mode is going to be implemented at some point - But TWS seems to reduce scan volume, the appealing thing about SAM is that the entire scan range is available before bugging a target, and only after selecting a target does the scan area reduce - So SIL keeps radar settings and displays tracks from DL. What kind of passive stuff is there?

I was reading up about the hornet's radar and a couple of questions came up: - The hornet apparently has something called velocity search mode, for long-range search. Is this going to be added? - Does the hornet have something similar to the Viper's SAM mode(where it can soft lock and launch on a target without giving an STT warning)? I don't think LTWS can guide a missile currently. It just goes pitbull - Is there a difference between radar standby and silent modes?

What other flight characteristics are getting tweaked besides the ground effect?

While this is relevant, we need to consider which blocks he flew. Earlier block Hornets had underpowered engines while the lot 20 that we have has had an engine upgrade. On the other hand, the earlier Vipers had a higher thrust to weight ratio which decreased a bit due to the Viper adding on some pounds for equipment.

I really wish they would. The Hornet has been my favorite jet since I was a 5-year-old when my dad got me a copy of Top Gun: Hornet's Nest.:joystick:

If you look around you'll find a paper that mentions that the ALR-67 relays relative signal strength to the pilot. (It doesn't mention the rings, but you can find other sources that say the RWR uses these threat rings) Curiously enough according to Razbam's research (which I wish they could share), the ALR-67 in the harrier can actually show relative signal strength and that is how they modeled it.

Sorry for my wording. I meant to say that the RWR is "correct as is"; I'm not sure we will be getting all the features mentioned by AvroLanc since the EW stuff is classified. When it comes to the RWR threat detection and classification I think the RWR will not be modified as you can see in ED's reply to the subject of this thread https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=235510

According to ED, the Hornet's RWR is complete. So I think they know this is an issue but it is being kept there on purpose as one of those necessary limitations. (Again this is just conjecture on my part). I highly doubt anything in the RWR will get changed. Many members including me and most notably Beamscanner have shown ED proof and provided arguments that the RWR is in dire need of an overhaul for the DCS Hornet to be in line with its real-life counterpart. Hopefully, the F-16 gets those changes.

I think one of the largest testaments to how incorrectly the RWR is modeled is that it is showing lock status in two ways. The lower HAFU on the spike indicating a lock and the fact that the lethal zone in the Hornet's RWR only shows contacts that have a lock. Elaboration: A target in the lethal zone should be according to any article you read online on the Hornet's RWR (or the Tomcat or Harrier's, which are the same) is a target that the RWR identifies as capable of attaining a lock(or a TWS track) and firing. However, in DCS the lethal zone is just an indication that that target has locked you. So, if you have an F-14 10nm away (which is obviously capable of firing on you) and using TWS our RWR will just say that spike is from a non-lethal target and you will only know that you are in danger when the fired missile goes active...

I can PM you some sources, you could also ask the posters in that thread. But it against the forum rules to post anything declassified after 1980

Here you go: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=235510 Marked as correct

Probably not, there is a lot of evidence on the forums of the RWR's function being modeled incorrectly. They closed the most recent thread and posted the announcement for rule 1.16, pretty much implying that they cannot model the ALR-67 due to classified data (despite the fact that other jets with the ALR-67 have it correctly modeled and its functions have been described in many declassified documents..)

Here is the harrier which also uses the ALR-67 displaying correct logic for the lethal band: The Harrier seems to also be able to tell the distance of a target in the critical zone. (similar to the above picture) So far we have real-life videos, other aircraft in the sim, and an external simulation showing how the RWR works; ED can you kindly tell us if this will be implemented? It gives low SA in CAP and makes it hard to know which targets to prioritize when using the HARM.

We are not discussing where the bands should be placed... but what should be placed in the band. It does not seem right for the same RWR system to once display a threat 10nm as non-lethal while the other does. Currently, the hornet's RWR bands are not really non-lethal, lethal, and critical. They are just not locked, locked, firing. This is a massive downgrade in situational awareness from the Tomcat which is an older aircraft as you say.

It makes no sense for it to be called a lethal band in this case... I am considering creating a bug thread for this but I'm worried it will be dismissed