Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Rework the manual can be a heavy work. If the new manual will be released only after the ajs37 ends her ea situation, at least an official announce can be posted to point out where the RC2 manual is inaccurate, so new player can stop wondering between"Am I doing wrong" or "is this a bug?"
  2. Actually it is INDEED the problem of the outdated RC2 manual. Although the question about the release pattern is solved, but the manual DO reads that the glide altitude can be set through the VALB switch and the 91xxxxx code, both on manual p343 and the weapon chart. While in the game it is impossible. I don't know how hb treats this, is this considered as a "bug" or a "feature" if it is a bug, it should be fixed if it's a feature, the manual should be changed
  3. Finally find it in the old trash can. Actually I think it is a relatively new discussion. I recall there were some even before this.
  4. I kind of remember the approach height was discussed long time before, and the height is fixed to a certain number, no inputs can change that.
  5. no any specific issue. I'm translating the manual to chinese with another guy. So I just want to check if the final version is far away. If the final version changes a lot compare to the RC2 version. We may have to rework a lot of things. Anyway, we just finished the canopy section on p216. Just half away the work. Actually, doing translation is a good way to really READ the manual, I found I missed a lot of thing before.
  6. All player launched antiship missile has the same problem, rb04 rb15, or harpoon, jeff's missile. It's a dcs main game problem since the new stone age.
  7. @MYSE1234 It's quite a long list. Btw, is your marvelous RWR mod integrated into the module itself?
  8. The aim54a mk60 always pulls a high g maneuver even I am shooting a non maneuvering target at high altitude. See img below. The missile pull a max 12g in the middle of flight, and it cost more than 1 mach energy to do it. Is it deliberately designed to act like that?
  9. I actually sent him a private message:) But yeah, it's a good advice. @renhanxue Hi, can I translate this article to Chinese and post it on website? There are plenty of Chinese dcs players, but aren't many nice articles due to the language obstacles. I will certainly mention your credit! Hope you can notice the message : )
  10. Hi, can I translate this article to Chinese and post it on website? There are plenty Chinese dcs players, but aren't many nice articles due to the language obstacles. I will certainly mention your credit!
  11. Ground radar is like a grey corner in the dcs system, guys are more interested in 120s or mavericksl. So I've tested the ground radar between hornet and jeff, the only two planes that have a complete and modern ground radar system. The result is interesting but somehow weird. The test altitude is around 45000ft, looking at a airfield 30nm away, 50 degrees on the right side. First is the unzoomed radar image f18: jeff: Both images are similar, jeff's image is a little bit sharper. Then is the first level zoom, for f18 is exp1, for jeff is exp: f18: jeff: null At first zoom level, jeff has a much better performance than f18, the image is much sharper. However, the airfield is unrecognizable for both side, the actual airfield location is in the red circle. Then is the second level zoom, for f18 is exp2, for jeff is dbs1: f18: jeff: On the second zoom level, the f18 has a larger zoom magnitude, and the airfield is clearly visible. For jeff, I wouldnt say that's a recognizable airfield image(red circle) Last is the third zoom level, for f18 is exp3, for jeff is dbs2: f18: jeff: The weird thing is here, although the f18 has a much larger zoom magnitude, jeff's image is clearly sharper. On f18 image, bunkers are really blurred and intersect with each other, while the jeff image is sharper and the bunkers are separated. The pros and cons of both side seems balanced, but f18 has a larger radar antenna and radar power! It is pretty weird that jeff has a sharper image. I know that exp3 mode for f18 is a SAR, so I deliberately put the target on 50 degrees to the right. Conclusion: It seems that f18 has a larger zoom magnitude, while the jeff image is sharper. And if you are trying to locate an airfield using only ground radar: if you are on f18, exp2 mode is enough, if you are on jeff, you have to zoom to dbs2 mode to be able to recognize an airfield. Btw, I also put on some target on the airfield, those targets are visible on both side: f18: jeff: the actual target:
  12. I found this on manual page 283: Radar ranging. For some weapon modes, when in master mode ANF, the radar will range the distance to the target if the triangulated range is about ≤ 7000 m. In modes DIVEBOMB, ARAK (rocket pods), AKAN A/G (gun pods in air-to-ground) and RB75 (AGM-65) the radar range may be used before trigger unsafe, assuming the bank angle is less than 45°. In LEVEL BOMB the trigger must first be unsafe. If the bank angle is more than 45°, radar ranging is enabled after the aircraft has a bank angle less than 45°. I think even you turn the radar at a0 mode, in the rocket attack the ajs37 is still using radar ranging. So the strange behavior is caused by inaccurate radar ranging at low dive angle
  13. I'm still thinking about buying this module, this new long range radio system and navigation can be a really new and interesting feature! the previous ww2 module is really similar, you have some guns, and a gunsight, engine, some bombs, and nomatter it's 190 109 or p51, it is pretty similar. But this radio system add some new things, so how are the simulated?
  • Create New...