Tiger-II

I'm not sure why it drifts so quickly. Without GPS (or in fact, and position correction), ALL INS systems will drift. This is unavoidable. The drift rate seems quite high, but FAST ALIGN is intended to get you flying quickly (e.g. intercept approaching enemy aircraft). If you want the best alignment, use GC. It will perform a 4 minute alignment, and should have the highest system accuracy. Also, are you flying on a map OTHER than Caucus? I've found that PG map can cause all manner of INS and attitude problems, but these should be fixed in the latest update. A couple of updates ago I had major position error in PG despite precision alignment. Should be fixed now.

Correct.

Fast align requires the aircraft to be stationary for the ENTIRE alignment. Set the parking brake and ensure idle thrust. FAST ALIGN takes 30 seconds. During this time there is a prompt on the INS MFD page for TRUE HEADING. You MUST enter this heading during alignment. It will accept NO INPUT and still enter NAV after 30 seconds, meaning the system is now using an invalid heading reference. This will cause excessive INS drift, and extreme gyro precession due to incorrect drift correction application, which will manifest as a toppled attitude indicator after some time.

Deka have more than documents. They have access to the actual simulator, and it wouldn't surprise me if they have access to an actual aircraft, as well as "sikrit chinese documents". I trust Deka as much as anyone else regarding what they've modelled, and more so because they've demonstrated access to the actual simulator, which is no small feat. Going full conspiracy theorist, they have no reason to lie because think of the propaganda value of making it accurate, if it really is that good? It's not a Chinese front-line fighter, and not even in service with them, so they have no real reason not to publish accurate information, and it's a way of saying to the world "you think our smaller export fighter is impressive, imagine how good the other stuff is". Don't forget the Chinese sub that appeared in the middle of the US Pacific fleet and challenged the aircraft carrier... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chinese-sub-pops-middle-U-S-Navy-exercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html The biggest mistake would be to under-estimate their capability. What do you find "pretty questionable"? Let's discuss it.

I felt like total novice trying to shoot an E-3A the other night. The rounds missed every part of the aircraft. Rear aspect shoot isn't a good idea. Best to come from above or below where the aircraft presents a larger target, and shoot as the aircraft flies through the pipper.

Is there even supposed to be a filter for the HUD? Not every aircraft has this...just avoid flying into the Sun?

Is TTI counter on the real aircraft? I think laser time is a fixed time. I noticed firing BRM the laser showed long run times of 30+ seconds. I'm not sure the laser timer is bugged. I'm sure I've seen it jump/pause while lasing.

Really? What's missing?

Huh... Interesting! Thanks!

Yeah... so it's not my lack of recency here. The last few times I flew the Jeff I had to go around as I was too fast. She would previously maintain speed at idle in landing config with brakes out at -20 deg. FPA, but now that seems reduced to around -10 deg. FPA. Same with the F-16, too. Too hot initially (and I've several thousand hours in BMS, which I would hope is reasonably accurate, too). This is with the latest OB, so it changed 1-2 patches ago.

I was kidding when I said "insane"! :D It was a bold post, without knowing your background. I'm about accuracy with flight models, too. Nothing puts me off an aircraft faster than if it doesn't "fly right". I fly gliders IRL, so I find it jarring when I can't glide them at the correct speed/AoA. It says a lot about the drag/lift model, and if that's wrong, the rest of it is off, too.

Well, nothing wrong with that approach. It can get you 80-90% of the way, even if it's not exactly like reality. There will always be the classified element you can never know, anyway.

SME = Subject Matter Expert.

BF does shutdown on LD-10 launch - I've seen it and complained about the instant nature of it. Also unrealistic.

* Ground RADAR (new API on the way) * Some systems features (they just added DTOS data entry). * Bug fixes Jeff is 99% complete as it is now.

High altitude means: reduced maneuverability, lack of thrust, and minimum speed/Mach number is higher than at sea-level. If the best turn rate of the JF-17 is 340 kts at sea-level, then at high altitude it's around 450 kts. Missiles fly further at high altitude, but the aircraft must ideally be faster than Mach 1.0 when launched (this is quite hard in the Jeff - I find she's happiest around Mach 0.90). What's wrong with DCS?

I didn't say it was a cheap cup of coffee! :D

I couldn't disagree with you more... https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4389677&postcount=22

Most of what Jeff displays is datalinked from AWACS. Jeff can be totally RADAR silent and you'll still have quite the picture on RWR. As for display/knowledge of all ground assets in the "fog of war" - that's a DCS limitation, and works on the basis of if a friendly unit is nearby (within a certain range and within a certain time period) then all ground assets are revealed as if visually spotted and reported. There is nothing magical about the RWR though, and the RADAR will not magically see what isn't there, either. It must actually scan the ground/water to reveal whatever is there at that time. RADAR emitters are seen by AWACS and if datalink is up it will paint those, too, but only the emitters, not other ground units (that wouldn't make sense).

Now I'm looking at photos, I don't see the additional elements that I've seen on actual RADARs. In additional to the radiative elements, some RADAR sets have additional elements spaced in between for IFF, DL, etc. How am I wrong about AESA? In that case, the array is switched rapidly between RADAR operation and datalink mode, among many other things they are capable of.

Uhh LOL? Did you miss the SD-10 mega-thread version 2? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=278515

There's nothing special about them except the fact they require NVG to see. If the enemy has NVG, they will see them too (the lights are IR). What it does do is prevent most ground troops/hostile civilians/etc. from visually acquiring the aircraft.

+1

Interesting then as to why the C has less range than the B? Check my ACMI. I'm going to try this again.

I need to clarify: DL to the missile is by dedicated transmitter in the aircraft RADAR head to the missile. Obviously, this transmitter needs the range to update a missile in flight out to the maximum range of the missile, so the RWR "sees" this DL go active, and can alert MISSILE MISSILE. I think also on some systems, the output of the RADAR changes to a guidance mode, also betraying the fact a missile has been launched, regardless of datalink. This is a major difference with AESA - the datalink is part of the RADAR signal itself, making it indistinguishable from search (if it is detected at all).