Dawgboy

If you had them included, did you also notice sporadic drops in support aircraft (tanker, AWACS, etc.) on SA pages? TIA!

Yes, sir. Check this thread.

Probably loaded the HARM on the pylon that doesn't have the umbilical to talk to the missile?? I can't remember which, but I think the valid pylons are more inboard to the fuselage.

And the armed laser "L" flashes when firing, correct? @buceador

While I read these with great interest, until we get the new flight model, it's all kinda moot. I'm waiting for the dust to settle before getting too Viper serious, but that's just me.

Did these SFW bomblets have no warheads for this test?

AV8B NA until the Viper's more stable. <wink> Otherwise, LGBs and AIM120s.

Open Beta, v2.7.4, just before the 11 Aug 2021 update. We have mod'd the canned Viper sight-seeing mission. We put tankers and E3 on it; however, we see these sporadic issues: The AWACS system tracks are only sporadically available, as well as the Hornet's ability to pick up the tankers and friendly aircraft. When the AWACS doesn't show the tankers, when you call or look for tankers, E3 says unavailable. The tankers say they are unavailable for refueling. System tracks shared among the friendly fighters are only intermittently available, even tho you are flying next to them (Hornet, Harrier, Viper, AWACS, Tanker, etc.), so we don't think it's a line-of-sight problem. At other times during the mission, everything runs normally, and we see each other, with AWACS providing tanker vectors, etc., normally. AWACS and Tankers are set up the same as on our Syrian map missions, although I can't rule out my idiocy with the ME and adding these aircraft. MIZ file enclosed. Before I go into a bunch of research, would any potential linkages among the aircraft and map/terrain cause this? Anybody else see the same? Thanks in advance. db F-16C&18_MAR_IA_Hot Start.miz

Eh? Er...the Viper's in Early Access and the flight model is a work-in-progress. All Viper drivers are eagerly awaiting those mods.

I think the point is: ED has provided a target. Once the target baseline version is fully developed in accordance with the roadmap, then ED can pulse us as to what else to add, as well as which market/product strategy to use. I'm willing to pay for the some of it, but for now, what I want most of all is the Viper to be complete to the roadmap first. Until then, we can't get sidetracked or we'll never get anything completed.

Yeah, I need to wait for the ABS inclusion...

Here we go again...and again....and again....

And I'd be willing to pay for the F-16I/Sufa...

If your HOTAS trigger supports 1st detent and you have a proper keybind, the laser should at least fire, if armed. I can't confirm 30 seconds...I think I've seen it fire the entire time I hold it down.

Viper will be great w/HARM when ED adds the HTS and full JHMCS capabilities. Agree on all other fronts!

By having a specific development target, there is an advertised end-state, which should remain relatively stable. I know folks can argue changes occurred after ED "solidified" the advertised baseline. Any project manager and software development team would desire the same approach, regardless of being a sim or whatever. They should write the press release, agree that's the objective, then decompose the requirements for the roadmap. I've seen others saying the following, and I agree with it: Deliver to ED's promises. Once we get that done, and done right (working reliably and accurately), then build paid add-on modules in some prioritized fashion, hopefully after a survey of what users want, caveated by the best way to get there. [I.E., maybe it makes sense to build one capability first, because that's needed to get to the next.] For me, I love the Viper. I bought the module at a discount, before release. I understood it would be early access, thus full of holes, bugs/capabilities. I have my frustrations, but I didn't have the expectations I would if Viper was advertised as complete and at full price. I'd happily buy add-on modules, if/when available and I desired that for my realism scenarios. If folks want more Viper options, go to the other sim...and while they have a different go-to-market model, you will find happiness and frustrations there, also. That's life.

This thread is perfect! Thanks for the tutors who shared their insight so well.

A few questions about the current AK in OB v2.7.3, and thanks in advance: Does it have a realistic damage model? For example, what degrades the integral air defenses...it seems to have a never-ending supply of SAMs. Also, it only seems to show some damage (smoke/fire) from Harpoons, but nothing else if hit with gravity weapons, beyond the weapon's explosion. How do you put static aircraft on the deck?

Same here, but in MP. POS missed completely, overshot. For each, SA-11 was up and radiating.

+1

+1

It would also be good to have them flying as neutral in airspace to sort and deconflict, in scenarios that would call for it.

Polish Air Force demo team heading to Anderson, Marianas map. <wink>

Ditto. Used in Marianas.