Frederf

One test I've been meaning to try is simply to TWS bug a target and use a script command to delete the target airplane. The bug should remain extrapolated for up to 13 seconds after the airplane has been erased from existence.

He's using "grid north" to mean XYZ coordinate or ruler north. Grid north is a generic term to describe the reference direction of any grid system. MGRS or UTM grid north is a specific example. And I haven't checked but UTM grid north, XYZ grid north, and latitude-longitude grid north should be three separate directions. In real life UTM grid north is not exactly aligned with true north.

Note: altering/confirming system altitude is optional in both normal and stored alignments and is not mandatory (both real and DCS). In the real airplane entering/confirming position after the 2 minutes simply results in the alignment starting over again. Altering/confirming position during a stored alignment reverts to a BATH type alignment (typically avoided). From what I've read failing to enter/confirm position during normal alignment should only "flag" that alignment. After every mission there are some calculated errors which are taken into account for monitoring the long term health of the INU and trimming out errors. A flagged alignment doesn't produce these results (RER and one other) which won't be counted toward the upkeep. The consequence of an alignment being flagged in the real airplane is (I think) only the absence of these performance metrics and the airplane performs normally on that mission (except for any navigation degradation due to any poor position info if any). DCS obviously doesn't have (seems intentionally so) normal mission performance when this alignment flagging occurs.

There are two competing effects. Being close to the ground can be bad for radars due to the strong self-interference from the ground. Uplook is good as the main beam doesn't have a ground backdrop and the secondary beam is hitting the ground at a lower grazing angle. A head on, low altitude, look up scenario isn't obvious (to me) any particular reason to have difficulty except maybe overall gain (if that's something the radar even does).

My understanding is that LASTE measures atmosphere on the way up (and an air start may assume that you climbed to get there) and it also will interpolate downward. E.g. if it's X knots at Y altitude then linear decrease to 0 knots at some negative altitude (like -4000' or so). If one was truly determined one could take off without any computers switched on and then only turn them on at altitude. Then with some drastic wind shift below it may be able to be tested if LASTE magically knows this. I somehow doubt that it's quite that detailed. I have input false LASTE atmo info and gotten the corresponding error in aiming but the rest deserves test. The concept of "north" is a bit wiggly in DCS. Ruler direction is used as true heading for all purposes even though it doesn't not run parallel to the lines of longitude. Almost certain that LASTE pilot info would be in magnetic.

That could have an effect in theory but it's rarely the case in DCS unless it's very hilly terrain or an unfortunate obstacle. It's more likely that the bomb seeker never saw the laser due to an overshoot. A track or simply viewing the bomb's fall in F6 view can show a lot about the geometry.

Always use area track. This would be normal practice when SPI is continuously updated and doubly so with bug that it's not. Point has only a few uses: hands off keeping tabs on moving vehicles and missile handoff. Pick a likely point of aim about one TOF ahead of the moving target. Refine the laser onto the target or slightly ahead at the last few seconds before impact. Preserve bomb energy with delayed lasing (~12s is my fav). A slight dive delivery ensures bomb seeker can actually see laser spot. I find sideways (say +-45°) the least troublesome as the kinematics aren't changed much by the target motion. When dropping from high altitude it usually doesn't matter much. The most worrisome situation is where target is moving toward you as the bomb seeker may never see the laser spot. That's when picking a nearer SPI, slight dive, and other techniques are the most helpful.

I know it's not native to DCS World but there is a utility called Windowed Borderless Gaming that quite easily allows you to override the position and size of windowed games quite easily.

It looks like DCS explodes any bomb which collides with another bomb even when it is not armed.

Yes, cycling includes every combination of weapon profile and weapon config. E.g. if you have weapon profiles A and B with weapon configurations 1 2 3 you'll cycle through: A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3. Being on TERs vs straight on the MAU rack counts as a different config, same as different fuzes or subvariants of bomb.

Polarized glasses are polarized such as to permit vertically polarized light. I don't know if they're named for what they block or what they transmit. A lot of diagrams will show this as vertical stripes like it's a wiggling rope which has a "slot" to wiggle through. If you put the glass under a microscope you'll actually see the opposite. Polarization is done by printing very thin lines of conductor on glass parallel to the polarization that should be blocked. When the electric field of the light meets the glass it want to motivate the electrons to move parallel to the polarization. These moving electrons act as an antenna which gives off the canceling phase of electric field. By allowing the electrons to move left-right but not up-down the light which is polarized left-right is cancelled but the up-down polarization isn't. LCDs work by polarization. It has a static polarizing filter and the active element is another polarization filter at right angles. The combination allows the light to be blocked when both are applied. But the light that isn't totally blocked is already polarized by the first built-in always-on filter. So you never get unpolarized (i.e. randomly or uniformly polarized) light out of it. And this will interact with glasses adversely. Airliner/private jet windows can also have non-uniform polarization effects which look clear with the naked eye but splotchy when viewed through polarized glasses. I don't know about jet fighter canopies. Presumably they are coated because radar reflections off the cabin are bad news but that's a different wavelength. But they don't have any special displays that are non-polarized that I know of.

If during a normal align the position isn't confirmed then the alignment is 'flagged as degraded'. In real aircraft documentation that phrase is used but it's not clear what the practical effects would be. DCS's interpretation seems very clear and deliberate. My feeling is that 'flagged as degraded' doesn't have the effect we see in DCS (just some error calcs are skipped) but in no way can I prove it.

Like most helicopters it has artificial feel springs. From a set position the user feels spring resistance pulling back to center like a common computer joystick. But when the trim is engaged the spring anchors are unlocked and the cyclic has no resistance (is floppy). When trim is disengaged the spring anchors relock and the spring resistance is felt pulling toward this new set position. Ideally you would have a force feedback stick which would have this behavior: spring around a center, floppy when trim held, and a new spring center when trim released. As far as I can tell the VKB stick's clutch friction is not dynamically controlled by software so it's effectively a traditional spring joystick. Personally I would use such a joystick like a traditional spring joystick with DCS unless I could somehow emulate the new-spring-center behavior.

Any time the video isn't showing it's automatic. Also you should be able to toggle video with uncage button. I don't think Maverick ever have bad effects on too long in F-16.

Multi-Maverick requires the LAU-88. The big Mavericks (E, F, L, G, K) can't go on an LAU-88. Only the small missiles (A, B, D, H) can. Navy really only likes the F for naval attack and E/L for laser land-based attack. Even USAF doesn't use LAU-88 much. F-16 stopped flying it a whole ago and A-10 is rare. I don't think the F/A-18 has ever had a LAU-88 possible or AV-8B. Has any USN aircraft been compatible with the LAU-88? I've only seen it on A-10 and F-16.

Regulation limits are not physical limits. Physical behavior at certain weights is difficult to verify as accurate as documentation of behavior beyond regulation limits are esoteric.

The differences between fuels is an interesting aspect of aviation. My first reaction beyond "neat" is how genuinely complicated it would be. An aircraft that holds x kg of fuel A won't hold x kg of fuel B because the volume is more than the tank size. If there are any performance differences that would have to be modeled. It would be good to have different smoke trail effects. Russian cold weather fuel should probably be needed for super cold missions, etc. Most machines can run on practically any of the JP numbers so typically it wouldn't be a mission ender to get your second favorite fuel on top.

I understand how to set up tasks, enroute tasks, priorities, stop conditions etc. but for the life of me I can't get this Reaper to see the PT-76 at all. I've looked and it's simpler than what you've tried so far. Reapers with tasks to FAC automatically orbit so there's no need for a separate orbit task. As soon as the group FAC assigned was deactived the task auto finishes so you don't even have to set up another trigger. The only, only, only part I can't get is for the thing to see the thing.

HARM does have a wide seeker FOR but the issue I have seen is that all HARM no matter what mode will go off track 1-2sec after launch if it spots a valid target. My understanding is that this behavior should be delayed until in the target area and not so immediately off the rail.

I think someone read a document wrong. By entering PPI FTT with "frozen ground map picture" someone took it to mean that it enters freeze mode. Right now we don't have FTT functionality.

Look in the bottom-left corner of the HUD. If it says "JETT" then you're in S-J or E-J.

There is an accepted bug report about this wrong behavior.

"STT" only refers to the radar and only against air targets. No such thing as STT/FTT/MTT for TGP, those are radar-only terms. When the TGP is tracking and SOI (AG preplanned context) it must be the master sensor and the HUD TD box and FCR radar cursors must follow continuously. If the radar is tracking (slewed search or FTT/MTT) and SOI then it must be the master sensor and TGP must break track and slave to radar LOS. The TGP/HUD TD box/FCR are always, always, always sharing the same line of sight. This is a core and fundamental design concept of the F-16. If the simulation is doing anything else then it's wrong.

Mavericks do have a standby mode which is the state it's in when powered but not operational. Obviously this is not a mode you want or can keep the missile in indefinitely. Mavericks however generate different amounts of heat depending on if video is supplied to the cockpit. By keeping the video feed off this limits the heat production and you get more continuous operating time. Whenever you're not seeing video from the missile it's automatically conserving heat production by disabling the video. Depending on the model you can also toggle the video with the UNCAGE button. There is not a limited supply of coolant in the missile a la AIM-9M. Maverick is electrically cooled but the heat extracting equipment gets saturated and eventually overwhelms the sensor. There is a limit of 30 minutes with video or 60 minutes without continuously suggesting the video supply accounts for about half of the total heat. After 60 minutes off time the missile cools enough that the cycle can be repeated. It's perfectly normal for the missiles to be turned on, calibrated, and then turned off and you should do this normally whenever you don't expect the launch the missile shortly. Limited missile run time is exactly why the avionics has an automatic EO power on option. You can set it to turn on automatically when passing north of steerpoint 3 for example and due to your known flight plan it will be ready by the time you get to steerpoint 5.

If TWS performs adequately in the sim then use it I guess. I was surprised that it's not thought highly of in reality (and this is only one source). RWS with a bug was always going to have better quality on the bug than TWS simply by how it works. The "tank track" level wasn't always a feature of the radar historically. Originally it was just the 10 tracks. I would agree TWS is pretty sophisticated but by getting information on a lot of targets the average quality is reduced. The little blue azimuth lines in SAM should grow and shrink based on the geometry of the situation. The radar is doing two things in SAM, a quick series of updates on the bugged target and then a scan of the space around the cursor. By separating the scan space from the bug or the bugged target gets closer or there are two tracks all of these cause the radar to have less time to devote to the second-priority search task and the search area shrinks. With one well-behaved SAM bug far away the radar can scan the full +-60 azimuth. At closer range the azimuth limits start to shrink. With say the target to the right and the scan zone to the left the radar has to shrink even more because the radar spends time moving the antenna. At close ranges the search portion has to be abandoned entirely and SAM looks similar to STT. Contact is a one-time position return. It will be a small filled-in box. On top of this box is a "hot line" which is the radial velocity information due to the Doppler color of that return. When a wave bounces off an approaching target the frequency is increased and receding decrease. If the frequency is blue or red shifted (and by how much) tells the radar the velocity of the target but only in the radial direction which is why the hot line is only vertical in the scope. It's like taking a photograph of a school bus and knowing if it was coming at you or backing up because it was a little redder or bluer than its normal color in the picture. You can't tell how left-to-right it was going. It's not a trend over a history of several pictures but an actual measurement taken from a single snapshot. Tracks require at least two detections. The radar detects the target once and then again, decides they are the same object, and draws a line from the first detection to the second. This is why the vector line on a track can be in any direction.