MysteriousHonza

No its not, its still present. Heatblur managed to push player flown 21 into unknown, you wont hear difference between search and stt in handoff mode though. There is issue in migs radar programming. After F4E released, nelson tried to fix it on F4E and found out that mig21 flown by player doesn't communicate properly with other modules. Its magnitude problem. AI 21 is perfectly fine on rwr and works as it should. With prf tone change, everything.

What track or comparison, its a known fact that you can launch R3R literally above ground on coalt or slightly above target... Its pulse missile. Manual for that radar pretty much says min alt is about 1000 meters for enemy target above ground and you have to be significantly below it. In DCS??? 50 meters is enough on the deck, often coalt is enough even if you skim tree tops. Using mode for tilting radar dish 1,5-2° above horizon? Why, no need, you can see everything anyway. Its outright ignoring description in manual where upper portion of radar screen should be absolutely cluttered. Not in game brother.... And they are talking about 800-1000 meterts alt targets, so mig flying at altitude of 300 meters minimum, not licking tree tops. R3R on top of that is pulse missile only, no filtering whatsoever, you literally have to shoot it into cluterlless environment for it to properly guide, same issue with R530EM in DCS. 530EM had literature stated 3000 meters minimal altitude for headon shots and no lookdown capability. These missiles dont have any filtering, they will just hunt strongest return. Go, take F-4E, set aspect knob to wide and try these shots with boresight flood 7E on wide, as under this setting, its going after the brightest target, aka ground clutter. It wont guide until you are pretty damn high and in STEEEEEEEEP uplook. Ignore first one, purpose of the video was more dedicated to that stupid locked beam function which shouldnt work like this whatsoever. And as we can see on F4E, 3rd party dev can actually affect if fox1 guides offrail or not. Both in stt or flood. Sooo.... you literally get BLIND zones in upper areas and then clutter blips in lower zone of radar screen where you have to distinguish what is what. Not like in DCS where plane is literally screaming here iam with totally different intensity of return compared to clutter even though it shouldnt.

what F1M.... We still dont have proper radar... Its still placeholder barely passable GIF with perfect detection

Yeah... now its time for ED to simply kick magnitudes ass till its fixed... so it doesnt climb, turn, dance around while stalling instead of slowly going down..... That lift is so excessive, its amazing its not fixed yet. but iam not surprised, F4U is no different.... that BS is literally doing flips.

Ai had some nerfs today. How good are they, god knows. But they should be substantial.

Currently, RWR is behaving incorrectly with player flown MiG-21Bis. Its not being shown as fighter symbol but its under unknown. Additionally, according to manual and PRF tone site, it should change tone in handoff mode if it switches from search to STT which it doesn not. https://officialdsplayer.github.io/F-4E-RWR-PRF-Library/

Dev can already decide if missile guides off rail, HB does that with phantom. They can do it even with flood without STT. Aerges should be able to simply launch dead missile off rail if enemy is simply too low.

I know the priority track and what it does. Its up to 6 targets. Mainly used to guide amraam. What i cant find anywhere. Especially publicly available (not leaked manuals but couldn't find it in there either) is scan speed of radar dish.

Hello everyone, I would like to ask if there is any public information/source (as official as possible but not classified or from manual) about ECR-90 or Captor-M scan speed/rate. Not dish movement itself (even though useful too) but also how long it either takes to complete full scan. Or just number of how fast it moves under RWS/TWS. Any info about priority track would be welcomed too. I cant really find any numbers about it. Just antenna scan limits, modes but no numbers about speed. I read that it can perform AG/AA modes at the same time few times but i cant find any official source for that, neither how fast it is (should be given you need quick scan for proper TWS and priority target track)

Is there any ETA on model?

nullEvery single reason you posted why not to include extremely important variant and stepping stone between 9B and 9J, when its in fact ALREADY IN FKIN GAME... is insane. Sometimes i wonder how **** people on forums can get yet always someone delivers on spectacular level. from 9E is just wider FOV 9B to actually being totally wrong, to just use SIGNIFICANTLY MORE ADVANCED 9J when it was barely used in SEA and early CW air warfare, to but hey, it was PARTIALLY used during one operation with few dozen launches from specific squardon using specific sidewinders. THE FACT STANDS.... 9J CANNOT replace 9E. Performance wise and date wise.

no its not... its 3-4 years ahead of 9E.... its literally few last months of combat, used in few sorties and had only few launches.

And uncage and better acquisition angles and better aerodynamics. Its different enough to warrant its addition to F-4E. Epsecially when it already exists in game itself. 9B cant uncage, its uncooled seeker had worse acquisition envelope and worse low altitude performance due to worse aerodynamics. It upgraded 9B in every aspect other than max G load. The seekers iFov was smaller too so less prone for flares to enter it and decoy it.

As of now, we are missing Aim-9E on F-4E. It was already added to DCS though, with wrong model but added. I asked and its finished code-wise and missing proper model. Yet 3rd parties can already use said missile. It would be nice to get it sooner than later when from performance view, its finished. It just looks like aim 9J. When model is added, we wont have to wait for next update cycle but we will get it corrected right away. Not like model matters that much. As of now, 7E2 is using 7E model, 9Ps are wrong dimension-wise and they are still present without anyone caring that much. It would be neat if HB added it as soon as they could and not wait for model which could even take months as it was already months in game files without proper model.

Thank you for clarification. I suppose that also means 3rd parties cant implement it yet and have to wait for full model?

@Маэстро Sorry for ping but may i ask if 9E in game is finished product or waiting to be finished? LUA is in, its in encyclopedia just with wrong (9J) model and can be launched if LUAad on plane. Can this missile be already used by 3rd parties or do they have to wait for full implementation?

This is dcs. No ground unit has good enough DM... One bomblet from heat cluster should be enough to mission kill almost any vehicle it hits center mass. In DCS, it does %dmg. Shrike in dcs upon direct hit should destroy any radar unit as we cant really disable radar antennas on them

Chaff can be dealt with by filters, some logic and range gating in lock. Clutter on the other hand, mainly strong sidelobes, are issue for MTI. And esp for cyrano and its design. Nerf? No... Just proper stimulation of pulse radar with barely working MTI and only pulse guided missiles.

PL-11 is aspide. Both engine and seeker, its copy of aspide. Aspide is slightly upgraded 7E - new seeker and slightly better engine. Its far from 7F/M. It got somewhat upgraded engine that burns for 3-3,5 seconds.

You still have 530F... its on level of 7F at altitude and beats R-27R. Be happy for what it is now. It should get only worse. Properly simulated radar will hamper its AA performance, especially in lookdown scenarios or at low altitude. If aerges manages to fit missile limits in module itself, you can forget about radar missiles at deck level or in shood down. The missiles are incapable of that.

They do... they asked BN to close ONLY viable and extremely good bug report for its FM so they dont have to deal with it. We are at point where ED should just step in and give ultimatum - overhaul this clickable sub FC3 quality trash or we will remove it from shop/take over it. Its in unacceptable state and is absolutely out of quality standards of even modules years old. Mig-19 or M2000 were in terrible state too, similar quality to 21. Both were given outstanding reworks. Mirage 2000C went from one of the worst simulated fighters to BEST simulated fighter in DCS. It is NOT acceptable that ED sells this slop, let alone for the price its set at. I have no idea how they can even sell something like that. This product is so dated, it should have been removed long time ago without proper rework of FM, DM and avionics. We need whole new mig at this point. Best would be if someone went and did F-13 and MF.

Hello, may i ask how it looks like with 9E? I noticed its in files already with its own numbers, its also in encyclopedia but it still uses 9J model. Then i would like to ask if there is 9D or G planned, both are really important Aim-9 version historically and for certain planes and could be carried on F-4E and F-14. Two very popular modules. There is a lot of documentation for both, especially D so docs shouldnt be an issue.

Well, this means one thing. DO NOT BUY ANYTHING IN EA ON ED SHOP OR STEAM... Always wait for full release thats protected by buyer rights atleast in EU. What they did with the map is borderline illegal to do and they should offer MONEY refunds on both ED site and steam. They literally stole money from us by removing portion of product. The moment you buy even EA product, you buy its current form. You are not entitled to get more but they CANT remove parts without monetary compensation.

By playing more, antenna elevation in like +-2,5° and +-5° would be really good aswell, if you fly low above terrain, its hard to get it pointed up and if we could just tell him to bump elevation by 2,5° up 3 times or once by 5°, that would be super useful. (noticed radar on/stby is in from the start)

Anyone used GBU-8s, walleyes or AGM-45 and do they work for you? They were added on ECW but for some reason, they dont work.