Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LastRifleRound

  1. Just a gentle reminder this is still an issue. Has there been any progress on this?
  2. Re-check that link, they updated it to "reported" and merged it with another thread, so the snap-back is going to be fixed.
  3. What about Designation updates for the INS? Currently only overfly is available.
  4. The problem is the sim doesn't recognize the bridge itself when it comes to sensors. Your laser will shoot right through that bridge and give a reading on the other side, so no matter what you think you're looking at, the system thinks it's the ground. High angles will be your friend here, which means altitude and/or proximity. Another way is to be sure to approach the bridge along the same axis it spans. This makes targeting them much, much easier.
  5. It's in the patch notes today that it's supposed to be fixed.
  6. I don't know if this is intended but in real life an LST actually will sometimes pickup the emitter. JTAC should vector you the opposite way so your LST isn't looking at the emitter on the run in. Does this happen no matter which direction you approach the target?
  7. I'm with you guys. All the ED modern aircraft get all the hype but they require work-arounds for virtually anything but PGM plinking. Mirage is out here delivering to specification and above and beyond original spec and not a word. RAZ is the No Man's Sky of DCS.
  8. It doesn't. This is a bug that has had exhaustive research done and dozens of tracks submitted and has been confirmed at least twice.
  9. The part I don't understand is you say NAV sets the range, but also where you're looking sets the range. These both can't be true.
  10. It's a bug. The only dumb bombs that will work consistently without work-arounds is AUTO with Mk82. Everything else has some issue you will need to know the bug and therefore workaround.
  11. Does the real gunsight stutter this much? It's extremely choppy. AA gunnery in the Mirage is next to impossible for me using the gunsight. I Kentucky windage it using the gun cross and tracers just like before the past two updates. Anyone having better luck with this? I'm: 1. Making sure I'm nose to tail 2. Making sure I fire slightly before the reticle crosses the target 3. Of course, I have radar lock Supposedly you're supposed to get a double box showing it's ok to shoot, but it never appears for me
  12. This happens with non-jamming contacts. It was acknowleged in the bug section then fixed for the most part, but AIM7 launches still trigger it sometimes. Remember in ACM you had to attempt lock 3 or 4 times as the radar would lock the "ghost"?
  13. It does happen to me, and there are usually two culprits: 1. Your radar briefly tracked your own Sparrow instead of your target, then lost track of the Sparrow and now it tracks nothing 2. There is a "Ghost" your radar will often lock at 99nm. No one knows why. It will briefly track this then dump lock Both bugs are months old now. The Viper doesn't share them. Then again, the Viper doesn't arbitrarily show missile tracks. Maybe that will change. Supposedly an SU27 pilot said they should.
  14. By that logic so is this post. There was an acknowledged bug cited in this thread. People are having a conversation about being upset about it as a reaction. We're not trying to extract meaning or monetary value out of the conversation, we're just reacting. I thought that was allowed in forums. Were this the bug forum (where I posted the actual bug cited here) I'd be inclined to agree with you and would expect the conversation limited to the scope of the bug itself, but this particular sub-forum is for general discussion, which is what you are seeing here.
  15. So many paper tigers. "For years" does not equal 3+. It means more than one. I said two things separated by a comma. "Every method of iron bombing has been bugged". This is a true statement. ", some for years". Also true. I provided evidence (mk83 bug is from 2 years ago, A10 bug is over 5 years. Radar designation bug is over 1 year almost 2 now, HUD TDC bug is from the beginning). What you did is in your mind was delete "..., some..." and then accused me of saying the resultant summation. I did not say what you said I said, and everyone can read that. Maybe English isn't your first language. That's cool, but don't put words in my mouth or in this case, selectively choose them and give them alternate meanings.
  16. You can set the increment to .1 degrees, but the ME will only give it in 1 degree, that's what I meant. I used your method of delta lat/long with great results before, and now RAZ has added that handy shortcut for the ME that lets you skip a step on the ramp. They're really killing it with the Mirage lately.
  17. Please re-read what I wrote, because you seem to think it was "all methods of bombing have always been bugged since the beginning", which is not what I said. Look into my history and you will see me actively engaging amd contributing on this topic for years. Also, I never claimed anything was "game breaking" as that's a nebulous throw-away term. Bottom line, these things are bugged, some of them for years, and I don't like it, and many others don't either. You're free to ignore it if you want, but that doesn't mean I'm not telling the truth.
  18. Yeah it's still bugged exactly the same way. FRZ mode has been fixed but now exhibits the same issues as EXP/DBS
  19. That's because using a pod with AUTO is the ONLY thing that works and ONLY with MK82 and ONLY below a certain speed. Every method of iron bombing has been bugged in the Hornet, some for years. HUD designations are misaligned and if you don't have a TDC axis too coarse. The radar designations are bugged from aircraft motion. Mk83's are bugged no matter what you do. Ccip is bugged as described here. If you don't have GPS, sone mysterious bug will make all bombing impossible. And no one seems to think it's a priority deserving a fix anytime within the span of years. Seeing as the A10 STILL has iron bomb bugs it had 5 years ago, there's a very real possibilty much of this is never fixed. It's wrong.
  20. Rho/Theta is a pretty inaccurate way to do this. Zoom in on the ME and just look at how much of a difference 1 degree makes. You cannot get more accurate angles than 1 degree increments in the ME. I recommend using delta lat/long if you have to do this in the jet. Even better, in the ME place a waypoint over the IP, and one over the target. In the Name field for the target one, type in "#CONVERT_TO_BAD". That will automatically become a precisely offset to the preceding (IP) waypoint. I'm seeing great results at 40 degrees, but ONLY if I keep that pipper dead still for a bit before designating, just as you say. However, I find that turning RS off might be necessary. It could be in my head, so I'm going to do many more runs to confirm it. It could also be in my head and I just hold the aircraft steadier with it off due to some subconscious confirmation bias. Hard to say, as I'm really pushing the limits of accuracy with the system to obtain an ideal to work backwards from. It's fun doing it. It's very challenging but entirely possible to nail a small house-sized target when using another house-sized target as an IP. Really tests your ability to hold her steady and wings level in the dive.
  21. The Viper bug appears to be less dramatic and different. If you are banked aggressively away from the target (say, 30 deg or more of bank) the cursor placement will be accurate. It's a lot harder to pin down, so I haven't made a bug report about it yet, but that's what I've seen so far. The Hornet bug is far more dramatic and is definitely tied to aircraft motion.
  22. CCIP is bugged, the aiming cross is mis-placed. Additionally, if you are using Mk83's, those are bugged for all but a very specific speed and altitude pairing. Confirmed Pipper bug below. Mk83 bug also confirmed but it's old (though never fixed) so I'd have to dig it up. If you want to use CCIP, you need to drop late, past the target. You can use the FLIR as well, which does accurately place the impact point.
  23. The above describes entering into FTT. This works fine currently because the radar map coordinates are not used for this. The problem is with INS designations. FTT is only feasible on isolated ground targets.
  24. I know this exists in azimuth when it comes to DBS calcs, but the inaccuracy of the calculation running in reverse doesn't change over time assuming the aircraft has done a good job keeping its own position. The only thing I could guess is the documentation assumes an unassisted INS.
  • Create New...