Rex854Warrior

The Farmer will be released feature complete as Prowler said.

Thank you very much for the answers :)

Very good video ! Thank you for bringing it to us :) How is VR in the Tomcat (frame rate, readability,...) ? I don't think you talked about it in your video. Also does the LANTIRN work atm and can Jester use it ? Regards, Rex.

You can use the current in game missile performance to get a correct Rne though. I'd also like to see the devs or ED comment on what the current Rne calculation takes into account.

Ok so Rtr takes into account the turn radius of the target and Rne doesn't if I understood correctly ? Does Rne work in a different way then what was described ?

What does Rtr mean and what's the logic behind it ? I don't think that indication is present on the Hornet's HUD or ATTACK RDR page.

The R.550 Magic II is the only Magic variant modelled in game, both by ED and Razbam. Although the ED developped missile is really underperforming, barely hitting anything further then 2 miles head on. I'd have to do more tests to give you some accurate numbers but compared to the Razbam missile that can hit targets 8-9nm away when the closure speed is high and at high altitude, there is definitely a massive gap. I couldn't find data on what Magic variant the C-101 carries, but like the sidewinder I suspect the MkII is backwards compatible with MkI launchers and hardware.

Makes a lot more sense then trying to identify the target to estimate it's turn radius using NCTR and data on that particular airframe, then using it to calculate Rne. Thank you for the information.

Yes absolutely, missleading was not a very wise choice of words ^^. But how would you identify the target type ? NCTR could be used but at relatively close range with the target being hot, but that's exactly what we want anyways so maybe it's used for that purpose. You'd also need some data on these airframes to estimate their turn rate and then calculate the Rne. That or some general numbers are used for turn radius as a function of g load and speed along with the set size of the target set in the stores page to estimate max g of the target at that particular altitude. At this point though It's only speculations, only someone with proper documentation (I hope ED does because this needs some work) could answer this question, though there is definitely something wrong with the NEZ in game because the behavior described in this thread is not what is observable in game.

I don't see why it would be much more complicated actually. If the launcher and the target are closing, Rmax will increase as closure speed increases, and Rmax decreases as closure speed decreases, which makes perfect sense. The point of the Rne is to inform the pilot that if the target goes from hot to cold without changing speed or altitude (very drastic change in closure speed), the missile will have enough energy to reach the target. This value shouldn't change if target or launcher speed do not change as it's predicting the range at which the missile will still hit based on the lowest closure speed possible with current target and launcher parameters. It's predicting the "worse case" scenario. I also don't see why it would take into account energy losses from a target going defensive as that is not predictable, a % of the Rne might be substracted as a margin if the target does any maneuvers. Lets take a launcher at a constant speed. Rmax, if it's not limited by the maximum range at which the selected missile can lock onto a painted target, is the maximum range at which the missile will be able to hit if the target does not change speed, it's altitude or change aspect. This increases or decreases with changes in closure speed (which is directly affected by target aspect), so if a target is hot Rmax is greater then Rne and even more so if the target is closing fast as the Rne decreases and Rmax increases if the target accelerates. Now when a target is cold, the closure speed is low, Rmax decreases as the target accelerates and so does Rne because this "worse case scenario" is acheived. Both should be equal in the case where the target's relative heading is 180° since the maximum range at which the missile can hit is also the Rne if no margin is subtracted. In that scenario if the target accelerates, Rmax decreases and Rne decreases as the closure speed decreases and vice versa if the target deccelerates. In short, Rmax increases if the target speed or launcher speed increases, Rne decreases if target speed increases. Rmax decreases if the target speed or launcher speed decreases, Rne increases if target speed decreases. If Launcher speed increases, Rne and Rmax increases. The higher altitude the better for Rne and Rmax. This I find makes alot of sense, it's not a max PK indicator, which would be alot less confusing and would vary alot with target aspect as it is observed in game. Although it's a little counter intuitive. EDIT : While indeed you could add some range to the Rne when the target is hot to anticipate the time it will take that aircraft to turn at 180° relative heading, you can't be sure how long it will take him to break, so this added distance could vary alot and potentially be missleading in some cases.

Same thing with the Magic II, also I see the Magic being used is the ED version of that missile which is horrible compared to the more realistic Magic II being used on the M-2000C, could AvioDev get in touch with Razbam ?

Hello, Since the release of the F/A-18, the NEZ has been a mystery to me. So I've done some testing and I'm really struggling to see what use it has at the moment. If I understood well the concept of a NEZ, it is to inform the pilot that the target, if it keeps the same parameters (speed and altitude) will not be able to outrun the missile by turning at exactly 180° away from the launcher, if it goes defensive, missile is trashed, if it speeds up, missile is trashed. So in theory, Rne should be equal to Rmax when the target has turned 180° cold, and this distance (Rne) should not change with target aspect. Though this is not the behavior observed in game and I don't know what the Rne currently indicates. Please feel free to correct me if i'm wrong about how this logic should work but currently, the way I understand it, the Rne cue is bugged on the F/A-18C. Track attached, first missile fired is to test how the Rne changes if the target turns cold, and second missile launch is to see if the Rne indicator was correct when the target was already cold. In both cases the Rne provided incorrect information to the pilot as in the first case, it was very far away from catching the target and second case the missile was still burning by the time it hit. Regards, Rex. server-20181228-220807.trk

Thanks, I noticed when the update passed that DCLTR 2 was on by default but completely forgot in the three days away from the sim. I would if it didn't have an effect on the outcome, here in this specific scenario it did not (I tested it in air start after making the report) but in other cases air start or ramp start makes a difference in how the aircraft behaves in certain scenarios which is why from now on every time I notice an issue I keep every single variable the same, including ramp start or air start. Since I was on the ground you could have also sped up the track, but I'll test both next time before reporting.

Hello, When locking a target, the scale on the right of the Attack radar page should display a carret indicating antenna elevation and next to it a number indicating delta altitude. On the right scale there should be a carret indicating closure rate with the closure speed indiated next to that carret. Neither the delta altitude indication or the closure speed are displayed in 2.5.4. Track attached. Regards, Rex.

ED has to put this in the game. ^^ Thanks alot, your mod is amazing !

Did some more testing, for medium to high altitudes the equation you provided is spot on with the performance of the DCS AIM-120C (tested at 40k feet and 15k feet, MiG-31 at mach 1.3, launcher same altitude at mach 1, closing speed mach 2.3), at lower altitudes though it's a little off compared to the performance in game, about 30% ish less calculated range. Though I didn't do enough testing to call that number relevant it's just what I noticed generaly. So good job ED I guess ? When are the other missiles getting tuned ? The MIM-104, the MIM-23, the 48H6E2 and the 5V55,... EDIT : While this data is very nice and probably accurate, it doesn't really fit public data, which makes me wonder why. Now of course the easy explanation is that the public numbers are wrong or fake but it's the "easy" explanation. Maybe the engine parameters are off, if anyone has some inputs on that it would be great :).

Some Wintip baskets will be added in the mean time on the KC-135BDA, I don't think ED figured an easy solution to this problem.

Not sure what was changed but it's worse then before, now the host sometimes still sees the trees after they have been removed in MP and in SP the scenery looks like this after the action was triggered :

Hello, Picked up the C-101 today, loving it so far, a massive thank you to the AvioDev team for all their work and dedication :). I did encounter a pretty serious bug though, when starting up with winds coming from behind my aircraft, the stall warning sometime triggers and this causes the oil pressure to drop to 0, which will destroy the engine. Both seem to be tied, did not test it in flight but this unfortunatly prevented me from starting up the engine without it being destroyed a couple of minutes after it was started. Track attached. Regards, Rex. OT Hormuz 0.184.0.0-20181222-191544.trk

Fixed in 2.5.4 thanks :)

Hello, I just noticed that for the past few months, ED has been working on adding VR controller support in DCS. So tonight I tested it and i'm sure it's WIP but I have a few bugs to report about it and a few suggestions. First, the controller action is left click only it appears, so sometimes if you click on a switch you'll never be able to put it back in it's original place because you don't have a right click. EDIT : Figured it out, palm up if left click (green laser), palm down (blue laser) is right click. It's a bit clunky though and doesn't always correspond to how the switches move. Second, when I reach for a button, if my controller goes forward, the switch moves back and when my controller is moving backwards the switch moves to the front position, looks like this should be the other way around. Also regarding physical interaction with the cockpit, there should be some delay or something along those line after you hit a switch because very oftenly I just bump on the hitbox again after pressing a switch, making it sometimes really hard to make it stay where you want to. Third is more of a suggestion but it would be nice to have options to switch left and right hand controls (left hand is for escape and reseting the view, right is for zoom and something else). Could also be nice to have an option to set which hand you are primarely using as with both controllers powered on the one that has physical interaction without pressing the trigger is the right hand by default. And lastly I think an option to make the controllers disappear when they are not being used would be really nice as I put them on my desk and they are very much in the way of the cockpit. Anyways, ED I hope you can fix at least the issues, i'm fine with the rest, it's really a great feature, thank you very much :). Regards, Rex. EDIT : Using a Rift

Thank you very much and my bad, PCN is in the list, derp.

That's great to hear ! One question, it's not in the list but will you implement the CP/PD function of the INS ? Regards, Rex.

Well an overhaul is coming so it can only get better, it's already a solid aircraft. And yes as clickable aircrafts go it is pretty easy to learn compared to others (of course not including WW2 birds ^^).

I'll have to do more tests with heavier payloads but it seems that with a fairly light aircraft the problem is no more or at least alot less noticable, but that's probably just me, after cycling the flaps, thank you. But this is not indicated in the DCS manual, I don't think it is in the landing lesson, this is something that has to be added. Attached is the NATOPS checklist, it's not complete but putting the flaps in auto is one of the first items. I should have dug this up ages ago. Regards, Rex.