Hog_No32

Yes, I sometimes use it when two emitters are too closely spaced to allow for discrimination. For example my target is an SA-6 site which provides cover for a closeby Silkworm site. The Silkworm radar and the SA-6 radar are too close to see which one is boxed and selected. The OFFSET button works like a charm. You can find it below the AMPCD and behind the stick in the same row of buttons where the EW ON button is.

That makes sense, thank you! Indeed in my selfmade missions I get along fine using the HUD to select and engage emitters in SP mode. There are quite a couple SAMs and EWR in those missions but most exercise a tight EMCON so I don't "see" them all at the same time. But in a more dense environment I think I now understand why TOO could be advantageous over SP. Again, thank you!

Hi all, studying the various HARM modes I am wondering what the benefits and use cases of the TOO (Target of Opportunity) mode could be. As far as I understand the TOO mode (also called HAS "HARM as sensor") allows you to engage any emitter which the missile - while still on the rail - can see. Needless to say the HARM sensor has a very limited FOV. The SP mode in my understanding is exactly the same, just that you are not limited to the narrow missile seeker's FOV but you can select any emitter that your RWR can see (360° coverage). Flight profile wise both modes are the same, in either case the missile flies a shallow dive directly towards the target. Both are range-unknown modes and accordingly Lock-on-before-launch modes. The maximum engagement range is therefore purely a function of release altitude and speed. So what is the TOO mode really good for when you have the SP mode? Only case I could think of would be a failure of the RWR, but I doubt that was the sole idea behind the TOO mode.

Depends on what range you are talking about? The laser designation range of our Hornet will dramatically increase from zero to xy NM :music_whistling:

It does. That is my temporary (and very easy) fix for that problem.

I'm sure having read the project was cancelled altogether, despite the successful tests. Unfortunately I have no reference at hand.

...and microwave ovens!

So ED needs to implement the feature that enemy SAMs listen to allied radio frequencies and shut down their radars upon that call. :) Wait, we need tha call first. AI can call out Fox 1,2,3 but I‘ve never heard MAGNUM in the game yet. Just kidding. But indeed, by giving us the HARM, there is definitely improvements needed on the SAMs AI.

SA-15 for example entered service in 1986.

Before the last update I expended Mk20‘s on basically every flight and they always worked neatly. Settings were CCIP, MFUZ VT, EFUZ INST, HT 1500. My attack profiles were usually: - low-level ingress (<100 ft AGL), speed ~M0.9, pop up 4-3NM to the target to about 3000-4000ft and then a 20-30° dive onto the target. That is what I mainly used against an SA-6 site. Or about the same dive angle but from a bit higher altitude (5000-8000) when attacking an undefended convoy. To be honest I am not 100% sure I did use them after the update last wednesday...I was busy exploring the HARM too much ;)

Yes, there are many systems modelled already including damage models. Last night for example I was hit by a MANPAD. I got some cautions and felt the aircraft developing a tendency to roll left which was nearly impossible to trim out. Only after a safe landing I noticed that my left elevator was completely gone!

PB will be the only mode where s range can be displayed because PreBrief as I understand it means you know where the target is and feed that data into the hornets system before you takeoff. The HARM itself or any other onboard sensor on our Charlie are not capable of determining a range to an emitter.

Oh, that was entirely new to me!

Static aircraft can be added in the Mission editor. The relatively new top-down view of the carrier (deck) and all other objects in the ME is a tremendous help here. Make sure to link the static aircrafts to the carrier through the LINK UNIT option and the box „OFFSET FIXATION“ is ticked. The crew and gear are currently not available as objects in the default DCS. There is a mod out there where you can get them from with a nice workaround until we get these things from DCS at a later point. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3301580/ edit: Drippy you won ;-)

with winds <100 kts I highly doubt it is possible IRL when starting from the bow cats. A full deck run from the fantail to the bow with a light Hornet and deck wind ~50 kts, it might be possible. But I speculate here and have no takeoff performance data to prove it. Hey, have you read the book ‚Fight Fight‘ by Kevin Miller (ex Hornet driver)? In that book the carriers cats are all destroyed and they deck-run the entire air wing off of the carrier! So it might be possible... :smilewink:

In my understanding no as long as the friendly SAMs engagement radar is not hard-locking on you. If it is locking on another aircraft your RWR will not go off. Keep in mind the difference between being painted briefly by a search radar and being locked on by an engagement radar. There are different RWR indications and tones for each.

What is the range/scale of the SA page? I can’t see any indication of it (maybe because it is WIP still). Can it be changed? Or does it always correspond to the current scale of the HSI? Or the radar range? Sorry for hijacking...:music_whistling: Edit: It appears in the screenshot the scale of the SA page is 20 NM. The radar shows tracks about 10 NM away and on the SA page they are at about the half the distance from the ownship symbol (center) to the compass rose.

Our F/A-18C cannot determine range to emitters. That is why some modes of the HARM we will never be able to explore because these modes require to know the range to the emitter (i.e. its exact location). Dedicated SEAD assets like the F-16CJ used a pod called HTS that provided range and allowed for long-range shots with lock-on-after-launch.

Thanks Madbrood, that was completely new to me. And I‘m glad you mentioned the possibility to override that automatism because I was just thinking: There might be times when i don‘t want the displays to change...:)

:lol::megalol::lol:

What‘s that?

Yet it looks like HARM, JDAM and JSOW are just an update or two away. What a great mini-update today!!

Usually not a big fan of non-RL hornet skins but I have to admit this one looks nice! Well done, assaf!

Uh, does that answer imply it cannot be slaved as the OP asked? From the A-10C we know the Litening has an A/A mode so I think the question is very reasonable. Certainly it is not what the Litening is primarily used for but it might be an interesting option. I‘m thinking of a helo which I have locked with my radar at low level and I might want to have the TGP looking there what the helo is actually doing. IIRC IRL the TGP can be slaved to a ground target designated by the radar in A/G mode in the Hornet. That makes me believe slaving it to a target designated by the radar in A/A mode might be possible.

This is just awesome! Thank you P.Arnold, great work! Replicating Irans (strategic) IADS as realistic as possible is one of my goals when I build my own SP missions. I‘ve found the following websites plus some own Google Earth and Bing maps research most helpful: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Iran-SAM-Deployment.html This one is a very in-depth OSINT analysis with lots of interesting background information. The analysis is now 9 years old though so not that much up-to-date. At that time Iran did not (officially at least) possess the S300 for example. https://irangeomil.blogspot.com/2018/09/irans-sam-coverage-updates-and-future.html This is a more recent analysis from September 2018. It is based on the previously mentioned one and updated with the newer sites and systems. Again, just have a look at Google Earth. My main area of interest so far is the area around Bandar Abbas. For example you can easily see the SA-5 site with two launchers just north of the airport (you even can identify the missile by its shadow!).