Krippz

I disagree. Everyone is aware of what the issues are no need to constantly voice them. People complain about lack of progress, these guys are working with little information on these features that are waiting to be added. Do you have a ATFLIR doc that has a description of the symbology and how the pod integrates with the aircraft? Do you think a lot of SME's are willing to go there with a foreign based company. Not saying this is a reason but it could be... Look at the end of the day there's a lot of content in DCS if you're not satisfied find something in the sim to do that you suck at and improve on it e.g. BFM, formation flying, Case 1's, etc. But there's plenty to do and learn at the moment. No need to continue to gripe over things out of your control.

No disrespect but a lot of you guys ask for the "wrong" things. The radar still needs to be fleshed out. We're missing: VS. AZ/EL, Bump ACQ, existing radar bugs cleaned up (e.g. Radar antenna elevation getting stuck). Jamming is not available in the F-18: You cannot jam and your radar automatically burns through jammers. From a survivability stand-point that's an issue and from a balance perspective Flankers/Mirage's are at a disadvantage not being able to JAM and engage closer at high altitude or mask their azumith. Instead of pestering ED for inconsequential things like A2G radar (which is rarely used in real life) and additional stand-off weapons instead shine a light and ask for missing radar/avionic features. I'm happy with the Hornet and I think ED is doing a good job. But having those features would go a long way.

100% this

01 and 02 are for Gen-X countermeasures which we don't have yet in the sim.

<64>Krippz | F-5

Apparently you know better than the developers and have documents and proof stating otherwise. Hornet pilots here and in other mediums have been saying for months that the TGP Box is not displayed on the HUD. It’s time to move on and stop perpetuating a fantasy.

We have a different tape mate.

Su-27. Guys we have enough western aircraft in the sim. It's time for full-fidelity Red-for aircraft.

I think Chizh says that this is going to be addressed but it's a really silly bug that's been present for far too long. It's kind of unfair for Fox 1 carriers.

Thanks for the informative write-up. So while the FM improvements added to the Sparrow made a big difference; ED still has a long way to go.

Welcome back!

Well there it is.

The E-3 can only see 210 miles away. The GCI was probably getting tracks from the EWR not the E3 Daniel.

This behavior is still present: https://streamable.com/t9251

Name: <64>Krippz "Pilot" | <64>Fox "RIO" Squadron (if any): 64th Aggressor Squadron Country: USA

Event: 1v1 Squadron Name: 64th Aggressors Teamspeak/Discord: 195.201.110.22 Contact person Discord ID: Krippz#6204 Aircraft Selection. F/A-18C Pilots: USA - <64>Krippz Event: 2v2 Squadron Name: 64th Aggressors Teamspeak/Discord: 195.201.110.22 Contact person Discord ID: Krippz#6204 Aircraft Selection. 2x F/A-18C Hornet Pilots: USA - <64>Krippz Slovenia - <64C>Vati

Good to see this getting addressed.

Name: <64>Krippz Squadron (if any): 64th Aggressors Country: USA Role: Aircrew

Good bug report.

The FPS issue is related to the HSD-Datalink. Cold jet great frames, after startup and the HSD-Datalink page is up, frames take a dive.

Agreed.

Yeah

Exactly. The TPOD is the preferred method of acquisition even IRL. After a week of the JF-17 people haven’t realized how overrated the Ground Radar is? We need to get the A2A radar done before moving to the A2G Radar, people complain about incomplete modules but they want incomplete systems :doh:

You guys realize that if the current AIM-120 is using the old guidance logic and lacks a proper CFD it will undoubtedly underperform to a contemporary missile that has a proper guidance model and CFD study right? Maybe the onus should be on ED to iterate the 120’s....

You can't be serious.