Eddie
-
Posts
5038 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Eddie
-
-
Don't set QFE in the A-10C, doing so is not realistic (setting QNH is required in reality to calibrate the IFFCC on takeoff). As pointed out above, it's also not physically possible to set QFE at high airfield elevations. Setting QFE can also cause issues with weapon delivery in areas with terrain elevations significantly above MSL, especially where there are major elevation changes such as mountains.
QFE can work well when flying VFR in very localised areas and with terrain elevations close to MSL (such as much of north/western Europe) it doesn't work well in other situations.
-
3
-
-
As has been stated already, with LAU-88s loaded no. For some more detail regarding why this is the case, see this post/thread.
-
CBUs only use 3/9, 5 mil is not available.
-
1
-
-
No it’s not necessary at all. The IFFCC wind model does a very good job of correcting for the wind.
-
So how does the pilot know when can he release the weapon? I guess, flying at 20K will let you shoot further than 5NM?
CCIP/CCRP...
-
What would the double ones mean ?
What's useless, if you can get the more of the same effectiveness.... If you know something more than us, the common folk, share it...
Modern flares tend to be spectral and/or propelled, they're a lot more than just a burning blob of hot stuff. This is why you'll see far fewer flares on jets of all types these days.
Of course flare (or chaff) types are not simulated in DCS at present so until/unless they are, there's no in game benefit. We can just hope that one day the modelling of expendable countermeasures will be improved.
-
1
-
-
as shown in wags' video, the apkws has a unique profile in the DSMS separate from regular hydras. all the necessary info is present for the optimal launch zone to be calculated, yet it isn't for some reason
Because, as I said above, the jet doesn't know if any given rocket will be guided after launch or not. Therefore it uses the exact same symbology and ballistic calculations as for other rockets.
Remember, you can still use a rocket with an APKWS kit as a dumb rocket. Additionally, you don't need an optimal launch zone, you already know from either the CCIP or CCRP symbology if the rocket cam reach the target area, what more do you need?
-
You said it, if there is In range indication for one there should be one for the other or viceversa. Right?
How does the jet know if the rocket is going to be guided or not? It doesn’t, and so the CCIP range ring is the same as always for any standard rocket.
There are already plenty of circumstances where the range rings don’t indicate “in range” when firing existing “dumb” rockets (LATR/HATR/Loft Rocket). There also never an “in range” cue when using CCRP for rockets either. APKWS isn’t unique here at all, in fact its exactly the same as any other rocket type on the A-10C.
-
Quigon, keep a close eye on the slip indicator when making large roll inputs, you’ll see a fair amount of slip (you’ll see the same reflected by the TVV) which should be dealt with by roll SAS. You have to manually counter with rudder to keep things coordinated, this has always been the way since release. As the comment you quoted points out, this shouldn’t be the case.
It’s got nothing to do with needing and/or using rudder to line up on a target.
The SAS in DCS can handle small roll inputs and smooth turns, but nothing more than that. Because you don’t feel slip in a sim, its easy to ignore/not notice it
-
There are many NVG models and versions out there.
I dont think any pilot would use a so limited version today.
The monocular aspect can happen even when use a binocular NVG, but binocular NVG have a wider FOV anyway.
Even if some airforces still uses F-16C anyone could easily adopt a more updated NVG.
I think the only model that could create a visual like DCS would be a fully monocular like this:
https://opticsmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/3879817571_e479ac6b47_b.jpg
A binocular model but with only one lens wouldn't allow to see outside of circle view:
https://www.optics4birding.com/media/images/products/151717-1.jpg
A binocular like the following would allow to see outside of the circle but would have a bigger FOV:
https://media.defense.gov/2012/Jan/30/2000182798/-1/-1/0/120125-F-ZE476-252.JPG
If you don’t have access to a set of binocular NVGs, which I’m guessing your don’t, go and get a normal pair of binoculars and look through them. Now, let us know what “shape” your field of view is...
-
A third (neutral) coalition isn’t what we should be looking for, we should be having the ability to create coalitions on the fly (coalition 0, 1, 2, 3 etc...), add countries to them, and then set the alliances as we see fit. Not only that but it should be possible to change alliances with triggers etc during a mission.
-
1
-
2
-
-
Yes, this type data needs to be kicked out of the options screen, and become part of the mission planning and .miz file.
It doesn't belong there IMO.
Mission planning yes, but none of this should have anything to do with the mission and/or mission builder. It should be up to pilots to plan their mission and configure their own aircraft as they deem appropriate for the task(s) at hand.
We already have aircraft configuration linked to the mission, and it’s a huge limitation for large/persistent missions; and not particularly realistic either.
-
As Spectre has said, these marketing pages are largely incorrect and hugely outdated. Take at look at the info Spectre posted in his thread, that is the most accurate info you'll find from any public source at the moment.
-
Wow, all that stuff and not even a summary page to go in the kneeboard.
That's what your memory is for... :smilewink:
-
It appears he's misunderstood/misexplained the purpose of of setting 34 mil depression on the pipper.
It has nothing to do with the specific delivery profile you're flying, or any element of it. Setting the pipper to -34 mils gives you a reference for where the TVV will sit if you stop the pull and roll out at any given moment. It's just an assist for getting your nose position right.
It's a good initial tutorial for those unfamiliar with realistic weapon deliveries, but does contain a few errors/omissions. Most significant is that Mk-82 profiles don't work for BDU-33s, you need a BDU-33 profile for that, so many of the numbers are off due to that.
-
If detailed weather information is not available, adjust the aim point up wind slightly and set the HoF to the lowest practical value. With a 500ft HoF there is minimal drift. HoF does not chance the submunitions footprint for the BLU-108, they always function at the same altitude, it only impacts how long they spend drifting on the parachute. Higher HoF is only required in terrain with large elevation variations.
-
This is correct behaviour, submunitions drift is not accounted for. You need to account for any submunitions drift by adjusting the desired impact point, attack profile, and weapon settings accordingly.
-
A few from my RAF Typhoon days.
-
That’s more or less what i wrote above.
Yep, we posted at the same time... ;)
-
Restricted is the first level of classification above "unclassified" (which is also a classification) in the NATO convention, it's equivalent to "For Official Use Only" in the US system and "Official" in the UK system. It's also separate from any export control restrictions such as ITAR/EAR, as security classification always is. The entire Typhoon dataset is "Restricted", and a fair amount of it is subject to US, UK and European export control.
Anything the team are using will have to be obtained through licence, which can be provided even if it is "restricted" or otherwise protected. So given their relationship with EF, will be perfectly possible.
-
Simulating.
The real ones have a big maintenance time, because of their engines.
If you god AB / to long it need to be replaced.
Technical is it a plane in beta stage. So this I dont wanna have simulated :P
Well that’s simply not true.
-
What about the RAF jets that operate out of Al Minhad?
There aren't any, and to my knowledge never have been (although the caveat that I haven't worked in the UK Typhoon world since 2017 applies). Not sure where you've got this one from? RAF Typhoons are currently operating out of Akrotiri, Cyprus.
-
While it will be a German Typhoon first, Oman operates them as well as Qatar and Saudi Arabia, so we do actually have a Eurofighter base(Oman) in the PG map
We don’t have a Typhoon base in the PG map, it’s well outside the modelled area.
Besides, the Oman jets are PSC 12.85N.40, which isn’t what we’ll be getting.
-
We flex Typhoon/Tornado mixed pairs over Libya, and the French flew Rafale/Mirage mixed pairs in Afghanistan while I was there. It does happen, and there are situations where’s it’s operationally/tactically beneficial, but as other have said it’s not the norm.
Add Reverse Clearing for the GAU-8 and possibly other Gatling Guns!
in Wishlist
Posted
This was actually implemented in DCS A-10C but seems to have gotten broken some time ago (along with the gun unsafe warning caption). Seems it hasn’t been restored in a-10C II.