Hog_No32

159 posts regarding an INLET ICE caution in a combat simulation forum...do we need any more indications that we all are completely nuts? :lol: Seriously, I think this is actually an indication of the super high fidelity of the simulation we‘re all enjoying. A true study level simulation. Not saying it is perfect and bugfree. Also let‘s keep in mind the Hornet is still in EA state. But the attention to detail that we apply here and which so many users contribute to is simply amazing!

Frankly, I don‘t remember if the icing occured exactly and exclusively while in the clouds but I don‘t think that was the case. I certainly flew through them on most missions though.

I thought so too, Knives. I‘ve experienced pitot tube icing in the A-10C a couple times when I forgot to put the pitot heat to ON (yeah, who needs checklists..:music_whistling:). But I was thinking that might also be just a function of the switch being in the OFF position for a specific amount of time at or above a specific altitude regardless of the environmental conditions. Unfortunately, I mostly flew the default campaigns missions and in there, IIRC the weather conditions would permit icing (partly cloudy at around 11k feet with 15°C surface temperature), so I can‘t really tell if was actually simulated because the DCS engine itself has icing modelled or if was just coded as a simulated failure mode as described above in the A-10C model itself.

LOL, that video must be fake! He has the burner on for sooo long and no external fuel tanks - impossible with the hornet :lol: Seriously:Nice show at an even nicer daytime. I‘ve been at a couple airshows in Europe but always daytime and (nearly) always blue skies (sometimes the European summer is somewhat reliable...sometimes;) ). What a beautiful light and sky at that Airfest, perfect background for burners and the mach diamonds.

Half yes, half no. I agree with you that just reading the NATOPS and drawing completely wrong and ill-logical conclusions is not the way to go and those that do should be advised on hwo to interprete this or that. That is what has happened here - all good so far. BUT I have to say that at least your previous post and the way you wrote it came across a little bit arrogant. In my culture it is not a very polite way to talk ABOUT someone‘s shortcomings to others while te person you are talking about is present. Perhaps it wasn‘t your intention but at least that is how those posts came across for me. Please accept my apologies if you meant it in a different way. Also, I believe it should in general be appreciated when folks go over a 900+ pages document and try to find references there. Again, if someone draws false conclusions from that for whatever reason, he or she should kindly be advised by those who know better.

That is why we stupid rookies are so grateful to have real folks over here that knows it all and come down to our levels to enlighten us.

And by the way, whether realistic or not, the problem reported here is independent from the number of bags carried anyway. So let‘s get back to the issue itself pls.

I personally doubt you would carry LGBs on a ferry flight.

Sorry but this is not true at all. Google and you will find many pictures of real legacy hornets with 3 bags. Geez, even the first image in wikipedia shows one...

Well, I guess it is both things: What Flamin Squirrel said would certainly add to the problem: Even if the implementation of the Hornet’s system is or would be correct, you still would get the warning as soon as the temperature (and other factors like speed, AoA, bank, thrust setting...see NATOPS quote above and the parameters you shouldn‘t exceed when icing is detected) is in a range that WOULD permit ice to accrue IF there would be moisture in the air. If it‘s true that moisture isn‘t accounted for in the DCS engine atm, then we necessarily will get nuisance warnings regradless of the particular airframe and whether it has its part of the ice detection programming right or not.

Not several miles in FF, that is indeed a tad too much. Thanks for clarifying, I was under the impression you used them in retarded mode. Slick from 14k is a different story, sure.

aaah....Flamin Squirrel was just faster in writing :)

The slow trim behavior sounds strange to me. Frankly I‘ve never tried to trim it from the T/O 12° down to zero but of course I trim up from T/O 12° to the required trim for a catapult launch (usually 16° or 17° for me) and I don‘t recall that taking any longer than 2-3s. I even went too far into 18° once so I had to trim down by 1° and that was more or less happening instantly. Did you try to first set flaps to HALF, then trim down and then put the flaps back to AUTO?

Just to be sure there is no typo: Did you really drop them from 14000 feet (14k)? That would be a veeery high altitude for such a weapon and certainly not what it was build for. I wouldn‘t expect anything that deserves the label „accuracy“ when dropping from that altitude...except of you define accuracy by them impacting the ground...somewhere. If is 1400 ft, that is more closer to the envelope you would want to use a high drag bomb but likely still too high (definitely too high in a high threat environment).

I think that is no what the OP asked for. He seems to know the WPDSG button and its functionality but he asks for the diamond to show the WPT as TGT but still having the possibility to deliver in CCIP instead of AUTO mode. I actually believe this is not possible but I stand to be corrected.

I always appreciate when someone recognizes a misunderstanding. But how you come to this conclusion from what I wrote really puzzles me. I was not all complaining that not all units were killed. Also, doing ground pounding for 10+ years in the Hog, I absolutely understand the limitations of DCS when it comes to fragmentation damage. The OP reported issues with the delivery accuracy, not issues with the effect that the ammunition has or has not. By the way, you may have noticed I reported killing the SA-6 radar. So even though the Mk20 did not kill the launchers my attack rendered them useless without the radar. Mission accomplished.

What you observe is how it was for me before the update, they always fell short. After the update, I figure you release just like a Mk83 when the CCIP cross is over the target. For me they fall exactly where the CCIP cross was upon pickle (with a very light wind of only 1kt).

Works pretty accurate in CCIP for me now after the update, even though I only tried the Mk20s yesterday, not the CBU-99s. I attacked an SA-6 site (1 STR and 2 LNs) two times yesterday. In both runs I popped up about 4-5 NM from tree-top level to about 4500ish feet and then dived to the target. First run: 2x Mk20, burst height 500, INT 300ft. Got a good kill on the STR between the two launchers. The launchers were still intact though. Second run: 2x Mk20, burst height 800, no interval (both released at the same time): Again a good kill on the STR and one LN damaged. So for me they work really well now. I guess the fact that not all units inside the effect radius are killed is probably a realistic representation for (lightly) armoured vehicles and CBU effectiveness.

Strange. I created many missions in the latest 2.5 OB for the Hornet and PG with wingmen and I can adjust their loadout, save them and they show up with the revised loadout when starting the mission.

At the moment there are no approach plates or ground (airfield) charts included for the PG map iin the default kneeboard folder like we have for the caucasus map. I don‘t know if they will be made available at a later point.

also, keep in mind as per NATOPS 33‘000 lbs is only the MLW unrestricted. The absolute limit (emergencies excluded of course) is 34‘000 lbs and that is what NATOPS calls restricted MLW for CV landings. quote: Arrestments above 33,000 pounds are subject to the following restrictions: (1) Glideslope - 3.5° Maximum (2) Recovery head wind (RHW) - (a) 40 knots minimum - Half flaps allowed (b) Less than 40 knots - Full flaps only (3) Lateral weight asymmetry - 14,500 foot-pound maximum (external pylon stores, AIM-9 wing tips, and wing fuel) (4) No MOVLAS recovery Btw, max landing weight for (flared) field landings is 39‘000 lbs.

This „Undesignate/....“ button is so incredibly important I‘d never thought it would be. Trouble getting the radar back to BVR when in ACM mode? Hit „Undesignate“. Trouble getting the radar back to scanning after lock was lost? Hit „Undesignate“. Trouble getting from AUTO (CCRP) to CCIP delivery? Hit „Undesignate“...

Hi guys, quick question: What does „skating“ and „cranking“ mean? I‘m following this thread with great interest since - despite being with DCS for more than 10 years now (but entirely in the mud moving business) - I am a real newbie when it comes to air to air combat. In the past mainly flew the A-10C (couple hundred hours so I call this jet home) and more recently the lovely AJS-37 Viggen. Needless to say in either jet I always take great care to avoid any A2A engagements in my SP missions...even though I managed to kill a few Su-25s with the Hog...poor guys :lol: Now with the Hornet, I feel it is time for me to dive a bit deeper into the A2A arena but I am really just at the veeeery beginning.

You may want to re-read. Nobody said it was an international „body“. The poster correctly stated that there is an international treaty. Someone who wants to learn the difference between an unexploded Mk83 and a (partly) unexploded Mk20, just talk to a girl who lost her hands because she thought what a strange soda can is laying around there. She probably wouldn‘t have toyed around with that 1‘000 pound thingy...

Observed the same. STORES page showing CCIP after changing the mode but HUD still showing AUTO. I only got the HUD to change to CCIP as well after de-selecting the chosen bomb, de-selecting A/G mode (so switching to NAV mode), Master Arm to SAFE and then start all over again.