twistking

i also hope, it can be optimized further. i want to like the map, as it is really beautiful and a nice change of scenery, but the performance impact really takes away from the experience. i only fly around the northern islands, because they are less taxing, but even there i get less frames than on every other map i have...

Doesn'T the JFS also needs it's own exhaust pipe? Couldn't you just put a generator on the JFS and call it an APU?

Thanks for the replies to both of you. I agree that it has probably to do with the time it takes to spool up an APU compared to that speedy, little hydrazine EPU thingy... (The hornet f.e. has an APU, but it also has multiple levels of reversion modes for the FCS, so is still flyable without any power at all...) The Viper's EPU does also deliver the hydraulic power, right?

The argument with the fuel running out doesn't make sense to me. You could just bring more JP-8 for the size and weight of the EPU. *edit* Did not see your latest post before posting this.

I don't udnerstand how it can be more efficient to have both a JFS and an EPU instead of having one part that does both... so an APU that can start the engine and run a generator. I understand that an EPU that's only there to run a small emergency gen for a short time can be very small and leightweight compared to a proper APU, but i do not really understand why you could not put a small gen on the JFS and use that for emergency power. Can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks!

i agree. i think it may also have to do with the tracking not being implemented correctly. i'd assume that the SON-9 tracking would be reckognized by RWR, which right now it does not. hopefully it will come with the next update...

i think if you count station 6 as a weapon station, you are left with only 8 other stations, giving you less weapon stations than before, since i don't think that you'd use 5,6 and 7 at the same time... just guessing... in the end it's just semantics...

thanks for the answers. now that you say it, i remember that the radar did indeed quicken the response time, however i found it to not make any difference, since the unit would be ready quick enough even without the radar. back then i tested with the a-10c. maybe it has a bigger effect with the faster jets, which can be outside of the engagement range much quicker...

I strongly disagree with the "good balance". The selection of liveries for the F-16c is very meagre compared to other modules, especially the F-18. It does not help, that the USAF liveries avaialble for the 16 all look more or less the same. Some also looking quite bad actually... I don't think that it is a coincidence that all the pictures of the F-16c on your social media show the 16 with liveries that are not available in dcs. If those are still WIP or user-made i don't know, but they do look notably better than what comes with the module. F.e. https://imginn.com/p/CfHSUOeO-6f/ there are lot of other examples... in the video trailer too. I hope those are WIP and will find their way into the sim... I understand that liveries can add quite a lot of disc space required, but if you compare the 16 to the 18, you'll have to agree that the F-16c is really lacking.

my hope would be that having them as the same unit with only the nameplate/hull number being a different texture, would make it more efficient memory-wise, but of course that would not work if the mdoels are different...

Basically what the title says.

The KS-19 should be able to engage targets with it's own gunsights, but right now KS-19 won't engage at all when without their supporting radar.

well at least the lights are visible for more than a mile and therefore actually work for their intended usecase: make the aircraft be seen at night. hornet's lights are visible (and well visible) for 10nm which is still not enough, but at least usable (i think 20nm -25nm would be great!). other aircraft's lights are visible for only about 1nm and get extremely dim after only some hundred feet... making them unusable for anything but close formation flying. i do agree however that the hornet's lights don't look particularly good aesthetically. i have the hope that the hornet is kind of a testbed for better aircraft lights, because it obviously uses a different technique for the lights at distance. far from perfect, but hopefully just a first step. as a workaround you can tell your wingman to only use formation lights and beacon light and/or put nav lights on very dim only.

Accuracy of KS-19 with SON-9 seems not affected by jamming in AAA mode (A-10c II).

cool indeed!

ok. tested again and the problem seems to be the Z program. it seems to be used for the quick access programs as i suspected. using program Y for custom programming works flawlessly.

What functionality does the Dog Ear EWR/CC have in the sim? In reality it acts as EWR/CC for all kinds of AA, but most interestingly it can act as RWR/CC for a battery of ZU-23-2. Some years ago i did some testing in DCS and could not see any notable difference from adding it to to any group of AA. Since this kind of testing is quite tedious i wanted to ask, if anything has changed in recent time or if you've found some functionality from using it I'd imagine that it would be helpful at nicht f.e. ... Anyone? Thanks!

Have been returning to the A-10c II after a long time and have trouble with the Countermeasures. I run manual mode, but my selected program gets overruled constantly and also my custom program gets reset. My workflow: I put the system to manual mode, select program Z (since A - M are reserved for semi and auto modes), modify program Z for what i need. If i now use the quick-access modes (cms switch in any direction), the system jumps back to program A for some reason and the modification i did to program Z are also reset. What am i doing wrong here? I suspect that program Z may be reserved for the quick-access programs, but this does not explain why it jumps to program A. How to use manual CMS on the current version of the sim?

Interesting. I'll tag @George2772 so that those good information reaches the devs.

Great!

I cannot really believe that. 3500 feet would be less than the effective reach of the bofors guns. I found a source that says 3km which sounds more reasonable: https://en.missilery.info/missile/seacat

*sigh* ... more night lighting ... issues ... At a certain distance the lights of the Arleigh Burke are not visible at all. It's probably a certain LOD that's missing lights. Also lights are not visible enough on everything but LOD zero. But that's a problem with most (if not all) ships.

Hot Take: Since in DCS the smoke cannot change depending on state of the vessel (anchoring, accelerating, cruising, full speed), it may be best to make it more like the other ships in DCS (can't remember if the diesel and gas turbine powered ships don't smoke at all or only smoke very faintly) and leave the dark smoke for the Kuznetzov... Holy Cow!