mcfleck

Hi guys, doing some longer missions recently I used the 3 droptank loadout for the hornet and came accross some oddities (at least in my oppinion). I thought if you use external tanks, you want to get rid of them as soon as possible due to the drag they produce. Normally I would assume you first want to clear your wings with the highest priority. So I would expect that the fuel pumps first use all the external wing tanks and only when they are empty switch to the center tank. What I observed is, that the fuel is drained equally from all external fuel tanks. That is not the most efficient method I think. I use to stop the fuel flow from the center tank manually untill the ext. wingtanks are empty but i get a warning doing this. So what is the supposed procedure? Is it really meant to be that way that in "auto" mode all external tanks will be used equally without any deeper logic?

My personal wish is that at least at the end of the early access phase the comms menu for the Hornet gets a little rework. As it is (or will become) a true multirole fighter, i would love to see all the ai commands from the A10 (engage tgt with ..., jtac interaction and so on) and additionally all A/A ai commands (declare, radar on/off, jammer on/off). Furthermore i would like to get a basic status report: What is is your fuelstate, Weapon state, Drop fueltanks (right now only doable via the "drop weapons" command) Ofcourse the ai shall be able to follow the commands and report if it is not able to do so. I often tend to let the ai rtb right after the take off because i know they only will be slaughtered in the AO or will eject in the landing procedure for no reason going with gear down and 500+ knots straight toward the ground. I am not sure, but I think the ai worked more reliable back in the 1.2X times in the shark as well as in the A10C.

Take a look at "Through the Inferno" Missions. They do pretty much what you want to do.

Having a hard time with the radar Your speed in the longitudinal direction from the enemie‘s radar has to be 0 (or atleast close to it) and not your closure velocity. So any flight path that will lead to a perpendicular flight vector in relation to the radar beam will „hide“ you from your enemy. The problem with diving/climbing is that you will not be able to sustain a pure dive/climb very long. You will not disappear from his radar if you match exactly his speed and therefore have a Vc of 0 relative to him (as far as i know). Ground clutter was indeed a problem with the first gen radars. Pulse Doppler radars should be „look down/shoot down“ capable. They filter anything out that does not move. To answer your question: Groundclutter should not be a problem for modern radars.

Absolutely amazing. Can‘t wait for the F18 version of it. Thank you for your effort and dedication.

Nope not really. Setting it to true will only affect the awacs menu. It will unlock the "request vector to tanker" call, which is working correctly in the hornet surprisingly. To be able to send your ai to the tanker you have to add the command in the "go to" section of the comm.lua. there is already an explenation somewhere in this forum how to get this done.

Sure. I am not complaining. I am trying to find a workaround...

Hi guys, i have managed to get the AA refueling comand for my AI wingman working and by doing this stumbled uppon some other very usefull commands that are lacking for the Hornet right now. Specifically i am talking about: Flight/Wingman: - Radar on/off - ECM on/off (not so important now, as we dont have jammers at the moment) - "Engage with..." commands from the A10C (will be much more important, when we will gain guided weapons and JTAC interaction) AWACS: - Vector to tanker (not so important as we have TACAN) But the most important command for me, which could make flying in MP much more enjoyable (due to the inconsistent IFF we have right now) is: - AWACS -> Declare I really want to have this for my hornet and not only for FC3 AC and so i started to find a way to get this working. For FC3 aircraft it is pretty simple: For every AC there are four given parameters in the corresponding file located in the folder ...\DCS World\Mods\aircraft\Flaming Cliffs\Comm\: (F15 example): fighter = true, radar = true, ECM = true, refueling = true With this parameters the Comms dialogue is created beased on the AC type and its abilities via the "LockOnAirplanes.lua" located in: ..\DCS World\Scripts\UI\RadioCommandDialogPanel\Config\ The AWACS dialogue seems to be the same for all AC, as it is in a seperate lua (Scripts/UI/RadioCommandDialogPanel/Config/Common/AWACS.lua) and is just created with two of the parameters: - Radar -> Activates "Declare" command - Refueling -> Activates "Vector to tanker" command For the hornet both parameters are set to "false" in its comm.lua. Setting them to "true" will make the commands appear in the corresponding menu. The problem is: The AWACS does not answer the declare call at all in the hornet. In FC3 AC you have to lock a target first for the AWACS to answer your declare call. Locking a radar contact with STT in the hornet seems not to be recognized as a "radar lock" by the AWACS. Am I missing something? Is there probably a way to get this to work as long as we do not have a proper IFF/Datalink?

I understand both oppinions, but i would not prefer an AA focus in the first place and i would like to explain why. Although I see the personal preferences, I am more interested in how this module can be most usefull and enjoyable not on its own, but in the DCS World eco system. First of all you have to decide whether you want an AA or an AG focus. Let us assume you take AA first: You will get an airframe for AA that (as a complete system) will be the best fighter in DCS. We have an outstanding AA fighter on blue side already and the community as a whole would not profit from an even better AA fighter on blue side. As many people bought the hornet and AA would be the primary focus nearly everyone flying it, would be doing CAP missions only. Now let us think the other direction: Develop the AA capability as far as the hornet can defend itself without all the neat extras in the first place (LTWS, Helmt Display...). If you would concentrate on a new task like SEAD for example, the whole community (even the ones that dont own a hornet) would profit from it. Opening a completely new variety of tasks and missions that can be flown, which need to be escorted, awacs that have to be protected and so on. Just try to fill the tactical gaps. By the time the AG component is finnished, another fearsome fighter (the F-14) is hopefully ready to play the red AA counterpart when hornets AA development focus begins. For all of this to work properly there are few things that HAVE to work as intended: - Reliable RWS (without losing lock while cranking, and all the other showstopper defects) - Datalink (providing enough SA to be absolutely deadly even without all the other stuff if an awacs is in the air. I usually get killed by the lack of my SA and not by missing TWS) - At least an initial capability to furfill SEAD tasks All other gadgets can come after that. Sorry for the long post, but I think it is important that all users profit from a new module and not only the ones that bought it (bought it in pre release phase). This is just my oppinion: 1. Datalink 2. HARM 3. Guided AG munitions 4. Targeting pod 5. Fancy AA stuff

Hi Mac, as I also experienced your problem and spent quite a time to analyze this issue i might know the reason, why you have this problems. I think your problem will more likely be connected to the IPv4 vs. IPv6/DS Lite problem. Depending on the country you live in and your ISP it might be that your ISP will only offer you a "DS Lite" (Dual Stack lite) connection. As IPv4 addresses are very limited, ISPs try to avoid giving real IPv4 addresses to new customers. In Germany for example some ISPs will only give you an IPv4 address in their business contracts, which cost immensly more ofcourse. Other ISPs (like Telekom, 1 & 1 e.t.c.) will give you a real IPv4 address if you request it. Just try t call your support. To clarify: I am not an network expert, but i will try to explain the problem with DS lite: Your ISP has a further network router between you and the "real" internet world. So your official router and external IP address is IPv6 and your "internal" is IPv4. It has nothing to do with the router you have at home as this happens somewhere else in the network. Due to this an external request first lands in this external ISP owned router and it would need to be forwarded to your connection. With this you will not be able to host any Server for any game. To work properly the protforwarding you set in your router should also be configured in this external one. But no ISP would do that i assume. You will also most probably experience problems with VPN like tungle or will not be able to work in home office, as you wont be able to establish a VPN connection. My tip: If you call your ISP tell them you need a real IPv4 address in order to work from home and it is absolutely mandatory for you. Best regards and good luck with that buddy, Fleck Edited: Made some minor corrections and addotions.

Well if you are doing case 3 you have to know atleast the orientation to fly your pattern. So what are your other preferred methods?

Hello guys, i do not know wether it has been mentioned already but it seems that th CV responds with the wrong runway information to an inbound request. Practising case 1 in sp all the time i didnt even bother contacting the ATC. Switching to case 3 however that suddenly became very much mandatory as you need atleast some information about the carrier. It seems that it adds 90 degree to its moving direction. Exmple: Carrier moving to 310. Its response to an inbound call: Fly heading ... For ..., qfe ..., runway 04, to pattern altitude. So if i am right in order to determine the actual landing direction i have to substract 105 degrees from the announced runway direction. Can anyone confirm this? Might be usefull if you are flying a mp mission and have no clue regarding the carrier orientation. As Wags said in one of his videos, the ATC is WIP right now but i thought it could be worth mentioning the current workaround for those who are interested. Best Regards, Fleck