Hog_No32

Thanks, Ziptie. I get what you are saying. But unfortunately I still don’t see how a point on the ground at which my HMD crosshair is displayed over cannot accurately be designated as SPI „because it is outside of the HMD FOV“?? How on earth can something be under the crosshair but outside of the HMDs FOV at the same time? If it would be outside, how comes I have a crosshair displayed over it?? I must be getting something completely wrong here, hope someone is able to lend me a hand. Thanks.

I struggle to understand what the HMCS „screen“ (video lingo) or FOV actually represents. I mean it isn‘t a sensor itself that looks outside like a TGP but rather a system that just senses the position and orientation of the Helmet relative to the cockpit. I understand that when something is outside of my HUD FOV it is simply not within the area that I can visually identify as my HUD FoV (simply speaking, it is outside of „where I can see symbols“ on the HUD or „where the HUD is unable to display something“). But given that the HMCS symbolgy can be fully seen wherever you look, how do I know I am looking „outside of its FOV“ and so I know when I can make a SPI or not? Thanks.

As Tholozor said, a GBU-31 is not a glide bomb as it has no surfaces that generate lift unlike a JSOW for example. The strakes mounted on its body barely generate lift but help the overall stability. So the updated range is probably more accurate.

just click the link...you will end up on a Google-download site :) I don‘t have a Facebook account but it worked fine.

Hornet. Simply because she has been my favorite jet since I saw her first about 30 years ago. First love - true love forever. (I sometimes feel really sorry for the Hog in my hangar which served me so faithfully before the Hornet came out...but I pay homage to her through my forum name :smilewink: )

Legacy Hornet? Classic Hornet? Yet, a considerable fleet of USMC Cs and Ds will see some upgrades...and rather substantial ones (AESA radar)! I‘m so happy my favorite fighter for the last 30 years will get even more love :thumbup: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/36435/the-plan-for-making-aging-marine-corps-hornets-deadlier-than-ever-for-a-final-decade-of-service

I tend to activate NWS as late as possible, just when the rudders become ineffective due to too slow airspeed over them. Somewhere around 80 kts or less. That helps me a lot to keep it straight. I also have bound both left and right wheelbrake to the same pedal to avoid inadvertent differential braking. In fact I don‘t know when you need differential braking in that jet, so Imdon‘t miss it :smilewink:

I couldn‘t agree more with what you just said! Well put, Adam, we are in the same boat here. I believe everybody who has used the mission editor for a while and played some of BD’s other campaigns knows that BD is a master of it, probably second to none. Yet, with 15 missions and all the tricks BD had to come up with to have a somewhat predictable and consistent AI behavior, there is simply NO WAY a human being could do this COMPLETELY bug free in the first run. Add to that the constant updates ED is doing to the AI logic and ME (often unbeknownst to mission designers...) plus the updates to the aircraft itself like the INS alignment changes that came out at the same time as the campaign. With all thtat in mind, BD and the team did an outstanding job. I realize this was probably more for the review thread than this one...Sorry:smilewink: I will write a more complete review there once I‘ve completed the campaign (my 2.5 year old doesn‘t allow me lots of flying time recently...:) )

Hi BD, finally made it to M8. I used the updated version you kindly provided recently. All went fine, but when I got told to RTB and opted to get a drink on my way home I had an issue at the tanker. Knowing early in the mission that there would be a tanker around I wasn't as conservative with my fuel as I usually am (should say: have to be in the Hornet). So by the time I RTB'ed I am somewhere around 3.0. Once I turned towards the tanker and lock him on my radar, I noticed that we are on the same heading so I have a very low closure rate. Becoming afraid I would by dry before getting to the tanker I called them from about 30 miles out on Yellow 1. Tanker responded normally. (Normally I don't contact the tanker until I am on its left wing but I have noticed over the years that sometimes if you call the tanker early they will immediately change their course and begin to orbit or turn around on their racetrack pattern. Anyway, all normal up to here.) Once I got closer to it there was the pop-up message telling me to refuel first and then to tell Olive to take her turn. The message ended by saying "Press SPACE to remove this message". This is what I did, I hit SPACE and it removed the message. However, and I think here is the bug, it seems that hitting SPACE did do a bit more than just removing the message: Shortly after hitting SPACE I am in pre-contact position behind the basket and I tell the tanker so via the default radio command. But now Texaco tells me: "Chicks in trail, 1 mile". I wonder who else just came around the corner and began searching the airspace. I then noticed Olive was no longer on my left wing but had detached to get into position behind the basket! Yeah, truly a chick in trail!:doh: I checked the F10 menu which still contained the option to tell Olive that my refueling was complete, despite her acting as if I had told her that it was. I acknowledge that this would all not have been an issue would I have just saved a bit more gas earlier. I could have just waited until Olive completed her turn and then try it again. However, just by the time Olive connected my engines starved and I became a pretty heavy glider heading for the warm gulf waters...:( Anyway, maybe you can have a look at these triggers there. I am aware it may just be another DCS tanker issue which I know there are few of out there. Thanks!

Now that is quite interesting! Thanks for the detailed info, G B.

Concur. The list already exists in the campaign user guide, LADDER just needs to be added in there. I‘m sure BD will do it when time and priorities will allow it.

Awesome, thanks!

Thanks BD. So in the linked user file there are only updates to M8 but none of the other changes that were mentioned in the DCS OB changelog, correct? The reason I am asking is that I am currently on M3 and with the limited time I currently can spare for flying, it will probably take me a month or longer until I reach mission 8...:cry: So it seems I can perfectly wait for the next Ob update to get these fixes (and all the other ones), right?

Same in mission 3 (post todays update).

Supercarrier is available in the stable version already. Early access has nothing to do with Open Beta or Stable apart from the fact that new modules are usually available first in the OB (as early access). But they are normally released in the stable version soon after - and still as early access. Otherwise there would be no Hornet or Viper or Supercarrier in the stable version.

Sorry, I could have been more clear. Thought 404 is pretty common knowledge since the early 2000s :smilewink:

Error 404...:music_whistling:

When Kevin insisted „Ladder“ is used in naval aviation, I‘d appreciate we use it too. From your response, BD, can I deduce that „Joker“ is a pure Air Force term and not used by naval aviators at all?

The main limitation currently is basically the range. In MAP you can see ships quite well (the returns are pretty sharp , not unlike what you see in the Viggen‘s sea mode (admittedly a much older radar)), but only within 20-30ish miles. Way too close for an effective Harpoon strike on a warship. For an effective Harpoom attack I think we need at least 60 miles, better 80. And that is what I think the SEA mode will give us as it is specifically tailored for this kind of search unlike MAP mode.

You have to destroy the entire SA-11 group that attacks you once you arrive at the stricken ships. Destroying the radar only with your HARM is not enough, you need to kill every single vehicle of that group. After that, you will know that the mission progresses since there will be more action ahead:smilewink:

observed the same while actually flying the mission.

It‘s a difficult topic. You can see it from many sides: Reading the entire book before playing the camapign certainly builds the characters much better. You know Flip, Olive, Weed and all the others just so much better and it makes you understand the storyline and dialogues, both in the briefings as as well as in the missions much better. On the other hand, sure, there will be some spoilers and you might have an expectation here and there on what will happen. Yet, there are 15 missions in this but only like 3-4 missions described in detail in the book. So there should sufficient surprises left :thumbup: It‘s been 1.5 years (and a few other books) since I read Raven One for the first time. I actually now read it again just to have all the characters back up before starting the campaign:) Everybody has his or her preferences. Jell-O, Kevin and BD discussed exactly this in the Air Combat Simulation Podcast episode about this camapign as well:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=283532 The INS has seen some major changes in the last OB update. The link above has all the details. In a nutshell: If you still want a fast alignment(~90sec) you now have to select „STD HDG“ (stored heading) on the HSI page after you put the INS switch to CV or GND.

Now that we have separate sub forum for the campaign, wouldn‘t it make sense to close or move this thread?

I was asking myself the same question after landing: Did I suceed? Will the campaign progress? I guess the fact that some other designers include a „Mission success“ message when the right criteria are met leads to this expectation. Not saying such a message is required, it‘s just good to know what to expect. May be worth a line in your campaign guide? Just an idea, of course:smilewink: