fjacobsen

So apart from... *Fixed Helmet decal showing on the visor and oxygen mask of the pilot ...nothing has been fixed or added to the AV-8B !!

Well depends on which sources You read- but You are right that the F-16 became more expensive as initially planned, but that also made it favorable among countries that had to nenew their fighter fleet.

..and to follow up on that history.... The F-15 became so expensive that the US couldn´t buy it in sufficient numbers, thereby came the idea of the "Lightweight Fighter" that eventually would lead to the F-16, as well as (via the YF-17) the F/A-18. Initially the F-16 was only meant to have a simple search radar, where the thought was that F-15's should go in with radar guided missiles, while the F-16's should go in with heatseekers and guns. But a combination of developement of cheaper, but at the same time more complex and efficient solid state radars, and demand from the European customers (Norway, Denmar, Netherlands and Belgium) to add something better than a simple search radar, meant that the base for the very efficient F-16 multirole fighter was laid. It can be seen that the prototype YF-16 had a much slimmer nose than the production F-16's. Both the F-15, F-16 and YF-17 (later F/A-18 ) was also a result of the "Fighter Mafias" influence on fighter designs, but thats a different story.

Also be aware that using Your radar altimeter (TERNAV) only works properly over ground and does not work over sea. With strong winds over sea, INS position drift can be huge.

Finally got it to work... I made a mission with a 2 ship formation of AJS37 (Player & AI Wingman). Player is equipped with 2 x "normal" RB15F, while the AI is equipped with 2 x AI RB15F. Flightplan consist of 6 waypoints, where WPT3 is the attack waypoint (After mission start set Waypoint B3 to M3). At mission start also set the RB15F is configured to 800002. Target point M3 is some 70-80 km from the group of ships (Cargo and tankers). For this waypoint set additional waypoint options to Anti ship, attack group (the ship group) and weapon to "ASM". When some 20 km from M3 order Your AI wingman to go trail. At 5 km from M3 order Your wingman to "Engage..., Mission and rejoin" DO NOT USE "Engage...., Ships" !! Setup Your own attack and fire the RB15F's. Your wingman should now move in at launch too.

I have tested it now, and there is some spacing. With som math I get this: At 250 kts => 465 km/h => 128,6 m/s x 0,2 (200 ms) = 25,7 m spacing. This is also appr. what I see. So it seems that ripple bombing with the BDU-33 works.

Thank You, but I did exactly that with 4xBDU-33 on each rack for each inner pylon - so 8 BDU-33 in all. The bombs all seems to be released simultaneously. RIP set, Interval: 200 ms, both inner pylons selected.

And how do You set this up ?

+1 Exactly !!

Roger... But it has not been implementet yet as it seems. Great module despite that :)

So it only works for practice bombs - or also for "real" boms´bs, like the MK-82 ? If so - how to setup the weapons panel ? As I told - right now only the two inner bombs are released, but in pairs. I need to deselect the empty inner pylons to drop the outer ones.

I have tried to ripple bomb, but it does not seem to work - maybe my procedure is wrong ! I got 4xMK-82 bombs. Bomb pylons are selected and interval set to 150 Arm mode set to RIP But when I press the weapons release trigger, only the two inner bombs are dropped and that simultaneously.

How much is missing, to call this module finished ? I got the Yak-52, which seems be stuck in developement for quite some time. Additionally I got the Razbam M2000C and AV-8B, as well as the F/A-18C. Only the F/A-18C shows steady progress. I would like to by the Christen Eagle, but will not risc spending money on another DCS module that won't get out of open beta within a reasonable time - burned my fingers too many times.

All released EA modules has been / are called Open BETA !! And as told many times, the problem is not that they are beta versions and takes time to finish !! The problem really is that it seems they don´t have the resources to run parallel projects and therfore leaves not only one, but two projects behind, just to get the next EA module ready - that is by no means fair for us who paid for the modules that seems to run endless with no real progress, clearly because focus has shifted away from the two modules. I´, happy to hear that something is now goinf to happen to the M2000C, and the Harrier will follow, but with my experience so far, I want to see this really happening before I believe it. Bottom line - no MIG-19 for me before both the M2000C and AV-8B have got their promised features and will be bugfree (as far as possible offcause).

Good list :thumbup:

The problem also is with ED'2 and 3rd party addon developers use of the terms alpha, beta, Early acces and release version. I find with Early acces they most often refer to a version called "Open Beta", but most often what we get are Open Alpha's. Here are the terms as I know them from software developement: Alpha: Software dveleopment version, where many features are missing or incomplete (what we most often see in DCS EA). Beta: Software developement version, where it is feature complete, but bugs has to be ound and fixed. Only very minor additions of new features. Release candidate: Software developement version, where only very minor bugs exist, feature complete and feature locked. Mostly used to test that the final installer put's files anto the right places and with th right versions. Release version: Final product, which has beome feature complete and bugfree so far as possible. Mostly called V1.0. Bugs will mostly be found as it starts to be used by a much larger community. After that subsequent version will be released and new full versions or updates to squeeze out new bugs found by customers. new features might be added. In DCS these terms are used very loose. Most often EA are alpha versions, and what are called release versions are still in beta state, like the M2000C. Alpha state can take quite some time and should normally not be released. Beta state should be as short as possible. This is the state in which it could be released as open beta i.e. EA.

+1 If they aren´t able to shedule enough resourcs to to finish what they started, then they bette should stick to one module at a time. It´s not fair for paying customers do leave ne project (and here actually two) inordr to start a new one. Progress on both the M2000C and AV-8B has been very slow. The rebate for EA modules are not so high, that it can be used as an excuse. Better leave the MIG-19 on hold until the two other modules are properly finished. At least I won´t buy more Razbam modules before the M2000C and Harrier shows much faster progress, cause I´m not going to make the same mistake three times.

From a distance I find 1.5 looked beter than 2.5. It is only close on that the opposit is true. Textures are better and so are scenery mesh, but 1.5 looked more photo real from higher altitudes Personally I find the performance impact 2.5 has made, compared to 1.5, was not worth it. Looking on these comparisation screenshots tells alot.

For me it doesn´t matter when it will be released, cause I won´t buy it before the AV-8B has been finished. I have been burned twice now by Razbam (M2000C and AV-8B), I´m not doing it a third time. If they don´t have the resources to run two projects in parallel, then they better spend the resources to finish what they started. Even the M2000C cannot be regarded as finished.

I just wonder... In the latest changelog this is on the list: + Updated RB-15 for AI definition. AI will now use the missiles properly. It would be nice to either have a mission where it works, or a description on how to setup a mission in the mission editor. FinnJ

So... No one other than me having issues with this ?

It would be nice if some of the devs would com into this part of the forum and explain why performance is getting worse. Seems that game optimations are of low priority - strange considering the amount of users struggling to get smooth game play.

I have set all Bx waypoints in the ME, sa well as set an advanced waypoint for ship attack pointing to the ship group as well as set to use ASM (Anti ship missile). The AI wingman has the AI version of the RB15F. If anyone has managed to make a mission where the AI Wingman uses the RB15F, could You then post the mission file here ?

Any news on this ?

I don´t agree - it must be the code... Why else does every other game / application I have run butter smooth ? I got both First person Shooters, Racing sims and most flightsims worth owing and all runs smooth, even with "just" 8GB RAM.