Moafuleum

Sure. This is what a forum is for, discussion about opinions. I did not want to attack anyone either. Apparently i understood your statement differently, nevermind.

Why is it unfair to ask that? Honestly, i appreciate it when developers flesh out a module before moving on to the next. We have seen this with other development teams already and there was a lot of ranting going on. And he didn't particularly asked for something completely out-of-scope but for a skin. I personally think it is a good idea.

A quick and dirty solution is to hit Esc. Of course you can't click much and you have a nasty button field in the middle but at least you have time to read.

Damage is an issue for every aircraft as an aerobatic aircraft flies worse when damaged too. Although the thread is related to the damage model, other things are missing which may be more important. And having no (visible) damage model after such a long time doesn't increase faith that other issues are quickly addressed soon. That's why i will buy it when it is in an acceptable state for me.

It is true that the HUD refresh rate is lower that the FPS. I have no info on this but it is not necessarily a bug

Interesting. I will do further testing on this later this day as well Edit: Tried it with several methods of target designation, including WPDSGT, and via making HUD as SOI and designating the target via HUD. In both cases the bomb was not released. Please see attached track. It seems that it is indeed the case that it is not TPOD related but the issue affects all designation methods. PS: @BIGNEWY i did not take you file, saw it too late. AUTO_CCIP_bug.trk

Strange that Nineline could only reproduce it with TPOD points but bot with any other designation methods. As i have seen, you saw this thread already https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=253304

I am still not sure what you mean, I am sorry. However i believe it should be the following Station 3 is set to PP1, Station 7 is set to PP1 drop first two bombs Station 3 is still set to PP1, Station 7 is still set to PP1 (since the stations do not automatically change target) therefore, change both stations manually one after the other now, Station 3 is set to PP2, Station 7 is set to PP2 drop second two bombs Edit: do you mean during the second salvo, bombs of station 3 and 7 go to the target of station 3, PP2? It would be strange if it does. But as majapahit already said, one needs to be veeery careful to not press any wrong buttons as this can cause coordinates to get overwritten by something else in some cases. All the JDAM stuff can be a bit confusing i admit.

I am happy to hear that it works for you now! I'm not sure if i understood your question correctly, however: The station from which the next bomb will be dropped is chosen automatically by the computer. However what is not changed automatically is anything target related (coordinates, which PP target, etc...)

Exactly! This is what i expected after watching your second track. Why is that so? As i told you, each station can be programmed with 5 targets. Each station is completely independent from others. This means reprogramming one station or selecting different PP targets for one station does not affect other stations. This is why i told you to follow my suggestion literally. If you watch the track again you will notice that you change from PP1 to PP2 after the release of the first pair. Yes you changed the PP target, but only for one station. As they are independent from each other, the second station remains in PP1, therefore the PP1 target of that station was hit twice and PP2 of that station was never hit. That's why i said, change all the stations to PP2. Also note that this procedure applies also to the case when you have 8 JDAMs (4 * 2JDAMS) loaded. To summarize it: nothing changes automatically and each station is independent from another. Changing PP targets on one station does not change the target for other stations. I hope this clarifies the issue

You still didn't follow my suggestion closely enough. :music_whistling: Take it literally. Edit: As a hint, did you check where the bomb landed, that did not hit its intended target?

Seems like it is going to be the spring sale for me then :music_whistling:

You programmed everything correctly. Your mistake is that you don't change the PP point after you released the first two pair of bombs. You can program 5 targets per station but it does not mean that the first bomb is associated to PP1 and the second to PP2 and so on in the first place. You need to change that after every release manually. The next bomb that is released from that station is always falling onto the currently boxed target. As you didn't change them from PP1 to PP2, the second pair of targets is never going to be hit. It does not change automatically. My suggestion: release one bomb per each station. Change all the stations to PP2 and then release the rest. One hint: you do not need to wait with programming until everything is aligned.

That is strange. I tried it myself yesterday with exactly your loadout (2×GBU38 on station 3 and 7) and it worked in PP mode. I didn't watch your attachment since i'm on the phone right now but it is very likely that it is a user error.

Hi This happens in the OB version from 21.10.19, the Hotfix is already applied. The GBU-12 is not dropping in CCIP mode after switching to CCIP from AUTO mode. I tested it with the following procedure: releasing a GBU12 right after mission start in CCIP. All goes fine Marking a target point on the ground, using the TPOD. This causes the release mode switching to AUTO as expected. Undesignating target point manually switching back to CCIP on the SMS page Pressing pickle button: Bamb fall line flashes as intended, no bomb falls off the rack Recage the TPOD Trying again to release a bomb, same outcome. No bomb drops Please see the attached track file which follows the above described procedure. PS: i didn't try it with other bombs. Please also consider checking other bomb types as this might not be only a GBU12-specific issue. Thank you GBU12_CCIP_bug.trk

Do you land with <70 kts? How do you do at a crosswind landing?

To me the biggest issue is the NWS on touchdown because the speed is arpund 140kts roughly which is just too fast to use nws effecrively. I immediately turn it off on touchdown

Do you mean during rearming while you are on the ramp? If so, do you get a response from the ground crew? Do you see it on the pylon but not on the sms page? Can you provide a short track so that we can see what you are doing exactly?

Title says it, the radar is still active on the ground and is able to find and lock targets. Please see attached track. Thanks Hornet_Radar_with_WOW.trk

This is, in fact, indeed not an F-16 behaviour but it is due to the way DCS works and models the damage of ground units. There is some rumor around that this is going to change in the future.

For what purpose is then the camera mounted in front of the HUD glass? Edit: Nevermind, it is actually mounted behind the HUD

That is hard to say and most probably it is a bit different all the time. Some rules may apply due to national/local restrictions. For example exceeding mach 1 is not done because you want to avoid the bang. It is done at speeds which are safe for the audience and the aircraft because aerobatics is done at low altitudes. I don't know if there are videos of the viper around but you find a ton of videos of other 4th gen fighters doing displays where you can also see the speed sometimes. For the viper it will be similar i guess

Hi First of all, i strongly believe that your thread title will not gonna remain like that. Please use english titles, otherwise almost no one will understand. Do you mean if the viper is correctly modelled in terms of thrust, speed, acceleration? If that is your question then: it claims to be as every full fidelity model does and should. Keep in mind that things are very likely not fleshed out as it is early in development. For your other questions: i think (as far as i understood them) that this is not to answer in a general way as the viper can perform many maneuvers within a speed range and there is no hard rule.

They listened to the community in the early hornet times and found out that people care more about targeting pods and stuff than basic things like nav equipment or even EXTERIOR LIGHTS!! For me priorities are a bit off set but i guess everyone sees that differently.

Both of you are right. The model is probably correct and the view ingame looks probably not like it would in real life. This is due to the fact that you have to make a compromise when you try to project that view onto a 2D screen and have a certain FOV. Yes, some things start to get distorted. See the two attached extreme cases in which i experimented with the zoom (which is equivalent to FOV in DCS) and leaning forward/backward Sometimes it appears parallel, sometimes it appears V-shaped One can argue about realism but where is it to start? At the Viper's model? at DCS itself? What problems naturally appear when you mess around/change these parameters (keep in mind that these settings also affect the appearence of the world outside the cockpit)? Before these questions cannot be answered (and eventually the problems solved) it is meaningless to discuss about that "issue" in my opinion.