TheBigTatanka

Simple question..... Does the TOS function in the cruise page take into account the steer points in a route prior to the selected TOS steer point, or does it assume present position direct to steer point? For example, if i have a route to fly and the target is at steer point 5, and i select 5 and highlight the TOS In CRUS pages, will the speed carrot and timing info take into account that i want to fly steer points 1-4 first, or only give me info direct to SP5? Thanks. I've messed around with this, and can't make a determination. I also can't find the info in the pubs. Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

Did you get a laser range with the TGP before designating? Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

Correct -- most modern 4th gen radars don't have this look-down problem (although some do in DCS). Modern radars know your own jet's ground speed and can thus determine what is ground and what is not on the range and Doppler returns. This can be a problem if your own aircraft is low, as you are picking up more sidelobe returns. The Razbam aircraft are simulating this pretty well. The problem isn't that you can't see a return, but that you get some false returns. I think ED knows about this stuff now, and once they know about something, they're pretty good at fixing it. Looking forward to seeing what they come up with. It will be great to be able to sit at 35k and lock a bandit at 25k (someday). Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

Nicko's, The correct behavior is for the image to stay there until you deselect freeze. I talked to an F-16 driver about this recently. ED has modeled this incorrectly in both the F-16 and F-18. Of course, there are no public documents that say this -- but there are also no documents that say the screen should go black (which it currently does in DCS) Hope this gets some attention at some point. Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

Another thing to mention with cold contacts, which friends who fly 4th gen fighters have explained to me, is that the whole issue of "closure speed is near zero, so it falls into a Doppler gate" isn't a problem in real life, because in real life, 4th gen radars are also looking at their own jet's closure with the ground. If you are flying at 400 knots ground speed, and your radar is painting (and filtering out) ground returns that are closing at 400 knots, then that range hit (aircraft )with zero knots closure looks mighty suspicious to the Doppler side of the radar. Radar systems are highly dependent on knowing your own aircraft's ground speed to make the filtering work -- not sure if ED has considered that. Also explained to me was that the look down penalty isn't a thing; the altitude problem is when your own jet is down below a certain altitude (let's say 5K as a nice general number), then you get more false returns. The issue isn't that you can't detect down low, or that there's a look down penalty, but rather that you get more false returns because of the extra noise. Razbam radars do this now. Apparently, the look down penalty that ED has modeled is specific to an early version of the flanker/fulcrum slotback radar. I'm guessing ED has that documentation, and applied that to all 4th gen aircraft.

Excellent write up. Anytime someone is talking about height above ellipsoid, or TLE, we should probably listen. Thanks for the words! Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Are there any F-5 squadrons in DCS? Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Are there any groups / virtual squadrons that fly the F-5 as their primary mount? I'm looking for people who love the tiger and want to fly it together. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

There's a few ways to skin this cat, and different squadrons have different standards for it. It's a combination of tying either 1&3 together with TACAN while wingmen tie to their element leads with PDLT, or wingmen tied to leads with TACAN while element leads tie with PDLT. Some squadrons change it up if datalink is available or not, or if NVGs are used or not. Just do what makes sense tactically for your flight. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

If you've listened to some of the recent Russian BVR engagements.... The brevity is... Not there, lol. In USAF a missile not supported to at least husky is "trashed." Cheap shot and Husky are essentially the same thing, but one is internal comm, and one is external fight comm. Fox-3 with amplifying information is for training purposes, i.e. shot validation in the world of larping. It allows the range officer or the red air to evaluate the shot taken in real time and determine their own dead/alive status based on their own maneuvers or lack thereof. Not sure it would be helpful in a combat video game. That being said..... Internal AI comm of "pitbull" or "husky" or "trashed" would be helpful for the human player to build SA on how many bandits he can expect to have died on the last leaf. Better AI comm..... "Bandit Maneuver, north arm lead group, beam north" (not going to happen). Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Nice to see it's planned! Hope this also includes pre and post launch AMRAAM Apole and M-pole info. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

+1. Was just reading about this and also wishing we had this in game. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Probably the unrestricted satnav option. If I recall, the red side has a later date where it's available, or it needs to be checked for western coalition jets to have datalink when on red side. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

The radar shouldn't be notched as easily as it is in DCS. Perhaps at longer ranges, where the range return is weaker and it's relying more on velocity returns. If you read the description of the radar in the manual, it's building tracks with angular, range, and velocity information. If the contact falls into the filter for velocity, it's still tracked in range and angle. The radar goes into COAST mode and tries to resolve the velocity problem. You can still track and engage the contact in this mode (through the notch), you just don't get velocity data so you lose the active/pitbull cues. My reading of the manual, is that the radar shouldn't be affected by the notch unless the range returns are weak (small RCS or distant contact). There's also tools, like being able to adjust the radar gain in air to air mode so you can see smaller RCS contacts (or see them further) -- which we don't have in DCS. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

I never flew the viper (i was a heavy guy), but i recently flew the DCS viper with a friend from pilot training who did fly vipers -- we were both gitty with how cool it was to be flying together again, this time virtually. For an entertainment product (not a professional trainer), ED has gotten a lot correct. Like... I've been very critical when things are not right (or as right as they could be) -- but I think they are doing a great job with this product. It's finally at the stage where most things are implemented and the gameplay is really good (If you know how to use stuff). I think the jet has suffered from being bare-bones for the first year of its release -- but it's now close to fully functional. Like.... If you want to go do SEAD / DEAD with a four ship and protect an entity based on timing in the MEZ.... You can do that. If you want to do BFM or BSA, you can do that with a variety of weapons. If you want to do CAS, you can punch in a coordinate or make a mark point from a variety of sources, fine-tune the target location in a TGP, datalink the location to your flight, and set a time on target and get speed cues to delivery simultaneous JDAM attacks. If you want to fly DCA -- you can now (finally) get radar contact at an expected range, verify targeting and sorting on the datalink, and execute a variety of flows. If you want to strike.... You can do JDAM attack, GBU-12 attack from self or buddy lase (you can laser spot search), you can use a GBU-24 to point and shoot a bomb to glide in under the weather. The jet is just super capable. If you want to go cruise around and do a cross country with Steerpoint navigation, you can get performance data to optimize your profile. I'm sure I'm forgetting things, but it's capable of every mission set the Viper can do, and it's fun to fly (after recent patches). Is there stuff left to improve and add? Yes -- especially related to pre and post launch AMRAAM stuff, some radar symbology, radar gain levels in air to air, boresight launch mechanics, datalink network setup, and TDOA for the HTS pod -- but it's all achievable with what DCS has proven they can do. Again -- keep up the good work. Thanks for bringing this jet to life. It's cool. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

I know there's still some WIP stuff with the radar and the AMRAAM symbology -- but i just want to encourage and thank the development team working on the F-16. This is quickly becoming the F-16 of our flight sim dreams. I never would have imagined 15 years ago that we could have something like this in a game. Keep up the good work. It's close to being at as high a level of an entertainment sim as you can get. I'll probably start piling on with some missing features or weirdly implemented things -- but I'm really enjoying the F-16, and so are my buddies. Thanks. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Probably related to this bug, if you lock a contact co-altitude at a range of ~40nm, and continue to climb in your commit, the radar will lose lock when you get ~10k above the bandit, and they vanish from the FCR until you get much closer. It's awesome that the lock range vs detection range took a step towards realism, but the look-down modeling is either borked or WIP. I think as others have noted, it doesn't seem to actually model the interference of mainlobe and sidelobe clutter (or the tools to combat that interference); and instead applies a generic formula. As others have said, look-down penalty should, in most cases, only be a problem when the fighter is at low altitude. I've also been told that the look-down problem would manifest itself more like extra contacts appearing on the radar -- which is why you wait for two target histories before trying to lock (as a technique). Of course, ED isn't interested in second hand accounts. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

I have copies of several F-16 squadron standards documents, and it varies squadron to squadron. I've also had F-16 guys tell me how they've gotten yelled at in debrief for not having the lights set per the standards when in the arming area. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

What Fusropotato wrote matches with what I've been told by several fighter guys: that by narrowing the beam, you are getting many more returns back (because the radar is hitting the target that much more) and you can see and lock things much much further away than you would normally be able to. One example had to do with being able to lock a tanker at much further than normal detection range when commanding an STT lock at the bullseye location and elevation provided by AWACS. Another example had to do with being able to hold a lock on a contact at a further range than you would normally be able to detect it -- for example, let's say you can normally see a fighter at 50nm and lock it there -- you might be able to hold the lock on that fighter contact out to 70nm because the radar has concentrated its energy. The same applies for narrowing the scan. I need to do some testing and make some tracks, but i get the sense that it's not working like this when you spotlight aircraft with TMS up long. I can't seem to detect contacts where i have datalink tracks by using spotlight at any range beyond what i would normally get a hit at on a 30 azimuth and 4 bar scan. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

I can appreciate that at high angles like that it's going to seek that 1G and may need to pitch for it, until AOA logic takes over (at 15 deg AOA I believe); but it would be weird if the jet couldn't hold level flight hands off at one G, which is what we have in DCS now. I don't know, I've never flown a viper, it would just be maddening to pilot such a craft. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

We're not talking about the loft of the missile, we're talking about manually assisting that loft by pitching up pre-launch. The F-16 should have a cue on the DLZ to indicate that optimal manual loft-assist. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Why can't the jet maintain 1 G and stay pointed where you point the nose? The FBW aircraft that I fly is capable of that. A FBW system that can't maintain level flight doesn't pass the common sense test. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

There's a lot of variables.... But quick and dirty paveway III for DCS... If above 20k feet, release level. Set your release angle to zero. Have 350+ knots indicated, drop in the LAR. One technique is to drop on a spot a little beyond the target, and then shift laser onto the target to give the bomb more energy (steeper). Delayed lase of the last 15 seconds has been working well with PWIII. This is for a static target. Releasing from below 15K, and in greater than a 15 degree dive, the bomb is in "point and shoot" mode. Make sure your release angle is set to negative 30-45 degrees (affects the LAR). Roll-in like you are dive bombing, and point your HUD at the target area. In the LAR and with 350+ knots, release the bomb in the dive. Time of fall will be short, so be ready for the laser. You have given the bomb enough energy here that continuous lase works well. This works for static or moving targets, and self or buddy lasing. It's my preferred way to employ paveway III -- Point and Shoot. Lastly, releasing below 15K and level.... Bomb will pop up and fly level until it sees the target. When you lase, and how you lase, and when you release has too many variables and the jet won't give you good cues in the cockpit (since the bomb doesn't talk to the jet). A guy who used these IRL told me that for this scenario, they just get in the sim and try different things until they have an attack profile that works with the particular target. So.... For low level paveway III attacks from level, you just have to try different things until you have a system that works. I haven't found one particular attack i like yet. You seem to get too close to self lase at those speeds.... So I think it would require a wingman in wedge or arcing the target and buddy lasing. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

As pitchy / mushy as the jet got with the last two updates, it's not a bad idea. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

340 knots is really fast for AR if we're talking indicated. 310 or 315 is standard for boom receivers from the 135. I agree though, it is a lot more pitchy (even at correct speeds for AR), and the boom operator doesn't plug as well as he did before. The planes that receive via probe usually refuel at 270 or 275 indicated. A-10s are painfully slow and i don't want to relive those memories of dragging them across the ocean. You can calculate your TAS (for the mission editor) by taking 1/2 of your flight level and adding it to desired indicated speed. For example, if you want to refuel at 300 knots and 20k feet (Flight level 200), you take half of 200 (100) and add it to 300. Your TAS to enter into the mission editor is 400 knots. That's not perfect, but good enough to get you within a few knots. I'll try refueling at the unrealistic speed of 275 and see if that's more stable. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk