RED

Er meinte wahrscheinlich, wenn der Ball sichtbar ist, sollte man auch danach fliegen. Um das klar zu stellen: ICLS ("bullseye") und ACLS Mode II ("needles") sind nicht das gleiche. Hauptunterschied für den Piloten ist, dass ICLS nicht stabilisiert ist, ACLS Mode II schon. ICLS "schwankt" mit dem Schiff mit. Beides sind eigenständige Systeme, die Hornet kann beide verwenden. ICLS ist auch nicht so präzise wie das ebenfalls stabilisierte IFLOLS und weicht für die letzten Sekunden ab. Bspw. ist der Azimuth Transmitter nicht mittig angebracht, sodass die vertikale "needle" immer links rauswandert: https://imgur.com/qWIzouk Anflüge in einem Simulator zu machen, ohne sich mit den relevanten Systemen zu befassen, ist auch keine Mutprobe.

Da die Grenzen zwischen "Fighter" und "multirole" fließend sind und gerade die frühe F-16 mit "kleinen" Veränderungen auch Bomben tragen konnte, kann man da noch lange diskutieren. Mein Einwand ist nur, dass mal 3 Versionen der Hornet geplant waren und letztlich die Variante für die Marines, die gemischt Fighter und Attacker war, mit neuer Avionik genommen wurde. Allerdings ist mir schon wieder etwas aufgefallen, das mir neu ist: Hornet als Nachfolger der Tomcat?

Ok, so hast du das gesehen. Ich habe in anderen Dimensionen gedacht. Ja, die Prototypen für das LWF Program waren natürlich in erster Linie "Fighter". Im Gegensatz zur F-16 war die F/A-18, als sie in die Produktion kam, von Anfang an "Fighter/Attacker" nach den Anforderungen der USN.

Das wäre mir im Bezug auf die Hornet neu. Kann man das irgendwo nachlesen?

Ordered a Viggen Shirt a while ago that did not arrive. Got more Tomcat shirts than expected last week. Thanks Ironmike! Looking forward to more cool stuff from Heatblur.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3981645&postcount=44

It seems like ED currently does not plan to enable full client based mission planning that can be saved e.g. with a MDC (what OP was likely asking for). The MDC in DCS will be great to setup your aircraft but will have limited use for the "standard" multiplayer use where a mission designer creates a (dynamic) scenario and not a specific "mission". The pilot has the responsibility to do his or her own planning for his or her own "mission" and configure the jet in MP. Hopefully we will be able to reduce the unnecessary, "unrealistic" and annoying time hitting buttons on the ramp with a combination of new tools by ED and great 3rd parties. Being able to share your MDC settings with others would also be very helpful (especially for new players).

Thanks for the video @IceFire ! Also interesting for people not flying the F-14. :thumbup:

It doesn't. Too decide if a contact is hostile or not you either need enough 3rd party information (e.g. AWACS or other surveillance tracking the contact getting airborne from a hostile airbase) or a VID. Since DCS is not a surveillance simulator you could simplify this process in some ways.

He mentions a trigger for rockets. We don't have that in DCS. What version is he sitting in? Ty for posting.

To get a general idea: @8:10 The firing range targets

Nah man, you are doing fine. I liked your last turn on the second engagement. You waited to turn to get behind the bandit and didn't just met him head on. Both engagements are 2 Circle (2C/ Rate/Nose-Tail) engagements that you win with a higher turn rate. You will get your highest turn rate at corner speed (I don't have the numbers for the A10). E.g. in the first flight you should have accepted lag and misaligned turn circle to fly corner. Then you will hopefully gain angles faster on the bandit and can pull for the shot at some point. For your turn circle entry you pulled too earlier and got into lag straight away. I hope this answered some of your questions and created new ones.

Indeed, track shows that, too. ACM modes are not all implemented. Current ones are probably just WIP.

from page 177, discrepancies marked red between jet and manual for gun modes: Track attached shows selection of different radar modes and discrepancies. You have to select a different weapon and guns again to get into GACQ mode. Note 2 also doesn't make much sense. "Above lift vector" would be somewhere vertical to the lift vector. "Along the lift vector" or "above the nose" would be better. The term lift vector is not described in the manual. AA_GUNS.trk

Psst. Try to hide from Viggen drivers and Saab, they want to have a word with you. :megalol:

I think there are different misconceptions by different people. JDAMs are INS guided. However through GPS updates the INS unit's drift will be compensated. JDAMs work much like the INS+GPS systems in the F/A-18 while the technical solutions and their performance are different (big airplane/small kit on the bomb). Like you probably learned in school, you can describe 3d space by 3 independent vectors. If you get a value for each vector you will have a defined position in relation to your vector system. Like drPhibes wrote, the modelused for the weapon system is made to be easily used on earth. It is a mathematical abstraction and not a map. But you will still be able to describe a position in reference to your model by 3 values (Lat/Long/elev). The bomb only knows at what angle it should arrive at what position in reference to that model. By entering a position and elevation into the system we are inputting an already translated position. The step from real word to model of the system was already done and doesn't need to be made by the system. I am not an expert on this. There are probably many people with better info on weapon systems.

Will there be any point of having PLID in DCS in the future because of changed RoE etc? As I understand it, currently you can ID the side of any aircraft as long as you have a second source (fighter, AWACS, ...) and get the hostile/friendly symbology. Will that change? Will we be able to set different RoE requirements for missions? Will a CA controller have the ability to do ID?

Somewhat the same problem with the refueling lines of tanker.

Can confirm this workaround and freezes without it.

Do you mean which requirements must be met to expect a certain probability of kill or do you mean that environmental conditions like air pressure affect your result in different mission with changing conditions?

Man kann zum Beispiel wunderbar alle taktischen Wegpunkte, Navigationspunkte und Ziele in der NTTR sowie alle Punkte für die verschiedenen An/Abflugverfahren von Nellis in einer Mission abspeichern, sodass man nur noch einen Flugplan nach den Namen eingeben muss...

Ah, ok. Die Version der MiG-21 in DCS wurde nach Vietnam zwischen 1975 und ca 1985 ausgeliefert. 1975 war auch die F-4E (in De F-4F) sowie die F-14A im Einsatz und die F-5E kam bei ihren Käufern an. Die Franzosen hatten da auch gerade ihre Mirage III durch die F1C abgelöst. Nach dem Zerfall des Ostblocks haben manche Staaten nie ihre 21 ersetzt, allerdings hast du Recht, dass die MiG ab dann sehr unterlegen ist. In DCS werden wir also "demnächst" die passende F-4, F-5, F-14(HB) und F1 (Aviodev) fliegen können. Vier Gegner reichen mir erstmal, mehr geht natürlich immer... :thumbup:

Was meinst du denn mit passend? Historisch oder rein technisch auf ähnlichem Niveau? F-4E und F-5E passen doch optimal, auch wenn sie teilweise ein bisschen älter sind. Auf einer der nächsten Karten ist auch ein Land, dass bis zuletzt so einige Fishbed-N im Einsatz hatte.