RogueSpecterGaming
-
Posts
193 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by RogueSpecterGaming
-
-
57 minutes ago, Avio said:
Just cannot quite get the lateral left / right trim right (like in the A10C and F5E) when carrying asymmetrical loadout, is it too sensitive?
Also, the targeting pod seems to create a lot of drag to the right during takeoff and landing. Is that correct?
The TGP will give you slight drag pulling the jet in that direction yes.
If you have an axis to use for the roll trim I suggest using that as the trim hat on the stick is sensitive and you have to flick it to make smaller adjustments.
-
1 hour ago, Avio said:
Was trying to do CCRP bombing via the HUD but found adjusting the HUD cursor to be overly sensitive, jumping all over the place even with just slight cursor movement. Is this supposed to be like this? I am using Warthog HOTAS.
The HUD slew has a different slew rate than other sensors, but if you have the Warthog throttle I suggest using a curve since that axis is extremely small. The rdr cursor control on the F16 irl uses a pressure based setup so the more pressure you apply the faster the slew will move.
-
1 hour ago, Avio said:
I created a mark point for a target, came in using CCRP high drag bombs, only to find the mark point to be a little off from the actual target. This happened at Sinai map.
Anyone else noticed this before? Is it a map coordinate issue, or the F16 mark point issue?
Can you post a short track of what you are talking about?
Depending on the direction you came in from when you placed the markpoint initially it will appear slightly off if you come in from another direction.
-
4 hours ago, Furiz said:
I think you misunderstood what the issue is here.
no matter where the nose is pointed it will always scan the ground, when in some cases it is not physically possible to turn the antenna to the ground while the nose is pointed 85 degrees up. Like in this image:
Yeah, that's weird. Lmao maybe we will get better simulation in the future.
-
7 hours ago, lee1hy said:
https://www.scribd.com/document/678844678/APG-68
NOT "earlier version "
ITS APG-68 V5
If you want to check "correct as is", please bring a source material
ThanksFirst off, I am not the one who marked it as "correct-as-is", that is the ED team who does that.
Second, don't send links to try to prove something when the screenshots you just shared are from a document for the other F16 sim. Also, kinda weird how you took screenshots from another doc but linked to another one as if I wouldn't find where you actually grabbed those screenshots.
Third off, if you have actual publically available source material that contradicts what is in this sim send it directly to either Nineline or BigNewy.
Thank you and have a good day.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, lee1hy said:
You can see big big square moving target shown f-16gmt radar
big big square on the F16 GMT radar
. Is this realistic or is it incorrect?
game
F-16C Real
Your "F-16C real" photo is from a much earlier version of the F16C and most likely a much earlier version of the radar as well. And who knows if what we are looking at has moving targets on it. I think the squares a bit too big personally, but not too far off.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, skywalker22 said:
Oh, my bad, don't know how did I get this mixed up? I didn't use the harms in a long time 
All good lol I figured it was a confusion thing.
-
7 hours ago, Skrzatek said:
So if I understand correctly, the only true word in F-16's "Air to Ground Radar" is "ground"?
Are you thinking that the phrase "Air-to-Ground" means that it should have an "Air" capability to the radar while also being able to have the "Ground" capability?? Are you thinking it should show you air targets as well??
-
7 hours ago, skywalker22 said:
In HAD mode with HTS pod, it indeed does find it's target, but always precision factor PGM goes straight to max accuract (5) and it drops from 5 to 2, and stays at 2. The harm still finds the target with pin point precision. There must be something wrong with F-16 HARM system, and how it shows up the precision number. The bug has also been reported here in weapons section. Simple track file attached.
a2g_harm_accuracy_test_2.miz 9.49 kB · 4 downloads
Not sure which fault is it, but it seems thats on F-16 side and its HTS system. And it's the same with any radar that HTS is detecting.
PGM 1 is the most accurate, not PGM 5. PGM 5 is the least accurate. But also, the original bug that you linked to, had to deal with the accuracy of the HARM itself when a SAM's radar turned off. This was addressed in the latest update. Seems like a misunderstanding of how the system works. PGM 2 is still pretty accurate but it should not have been as accurate as it was when radar emissions stopped.
- Weapons. Fixed the AGM-88C being overly accurate, even when the target radar emissions cease. Fixed edge case where a target ID is passed to the missile, but the target stops radiating before seeker delay. Increased seeker range to match HAS implementation more closely.
-
8 hours ago, Linx said:
Interesting. Which systems can fail via the random failures in F-16?
I know about ME failures not being available on F-16, which is a shame.I've personally seen TGP, INS, and I've had the elec sys caution light come on because I ran the jet on battery power only for too long. But it is randomized so you might or might not get any failures. The battery one should be all the time if only battery is on but maybe one day.
-
1
-
-
On 8/18/2025 at 12:37 AM, Linx said:
Are there any system failures implemented in F-16 yet? Via combat damage for example.
There are random system failures implemented if you have the setting enabled. But the ME failures is something a bit different and probably will take a long time to be implemented as they will be more controllable. If you look at the A10C you can see how many different things you can setup to fail and the precentage of when or if they happen.
-
9 minutes ago, Rmac757 said:
Hello all. I believe this is my first post so thanks in advance. I am having an issue with GMT Mode getting the vehicle target boxes to appear. I place the a/c into A/G, CCRP in the SMS page. I place the FCR into GMT mode and I am not getting the white target boxes for the vehicles on the mapping. I’ve played around with gain, brightness etc. I’ve walked through the setup in MP with buddies and the targeting boxes just aren’t showing up. Any help would be appreciated
It is always helpful to post a track if you have one, and it is decently short to show the issue. If it was on a mp server can you replicate it in a sp setting and post the track and keep it short please.
Besides that I will ask, what server and do you know for sure if the targets were stationary or moving targets?
-
6 minutes ago, - Sonic - said:
interesting....with ATP in cold start also LGB bombs seem have a accuracy errors
Please do not turn this into another thing. If you notice something else wrong make a separate forum post about it. GBU-12 and AGM-65 are two separate weapons. And this is dealing with BSGT not accuracy of impacts.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, DJHKC said:
I haven't been able to find a clear answer to this, though I have tried: In the Mission Editor, with the F-16 set to Player, the System Failures tab at the bottom right is empty, as well as the dropdown within the 'Set Failure' trigger. Is this a bug or is it not implemented yet? If it's not implemented, is there a plan to do so?
Control over the failures for the F16 is not implemented yet in that tab. Not a bug, just a feature to yet be created.
-
10 hours ago, MeanJim said:
Would this apply to AAR as well? A few months ago I was on a PVE server doing a deep strike mission. It was late and there weren't as many players on, so decided to go with just a center tank so I could bring more ordnance. My plan was to top off at the tanker on the way in. I was just under 6000 lbs. of fuel when I got to the tanker. I connected, and didn't take on much fuel when it disconnected and told me to return to pre-cotnact. I returned to pre-contact, was cleared contact, moved in and the tanker would not connect to me. I was sitting there under the tanker staring at two green lights, but it the boom wouldn't connect to me.
I've had that happen before, but both times there was a TRP FUEL warning flashing in the HUD. Not this time though. DCS tankers seem to know you can't take fuel, but will still clear you and just won't connect.
In the air it should fill up every time. This is what makes me think they've confused a certain portion with the D model.
But I've refueled with a centerline tank before i never had that happen to me.
As far as anything special for AAR make sure to open the AR door 5 minutes prior to refueling to allow your external tanks to depressurize. From what I've tested that hasn't ever really mattered in DCS but worth a shot for the centerline tank.
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, Pribs86 said:
First off, forgive my frustration. I spent 8 years in the military so I understand the "this is how it's always been" or "this is just how we do things" and to both of those statements, and even more not even mentioned, I've always asked WHY?! They never liked it, but neither did I, so I never stopped asking. I always hated the "just shut up and do your job" because I felt it ends the conversation and cuts off all opportunity for further learning and expanding for all parties involved. But I do understand why that is absolutely necessary sometimes as well. Can't have someone asking a million questions when SHTF and you need to act fast.
Not to get too deep, but I think this bleeds into a bigger societal issue as well. We are often told to shut up and just go with the status quo. I don't like that anymore so I have to ask why. I should have been more clear before. I like learning and knowing all aspects of everything, especially everything related to flight and this sim has helped me learn a lot of things. When I see something in it that confuses me in DCS I have to ask someone - is it a bug, is it a real world issue, is it operator error (me - which a lot of times it is), or is it an oversight? I know most people just want to hop in the sim and fly and don't care one way or another, which is fine, but I need to know for some reason. Different strokes for different folks I suppose.
Thank you for taking your time and effort to explain this all. I greatly appreciate it. Much respect. Thank you for your service as well!
It's all good man. Thank you for your service as well. I definitely get where you are coming from. I didn't take any offense to what you said. I figured you were frustrated and realized that you wanted to know the finer details. Don't get that often on the forums often. Some like the simple answers and some like the longer answers. But I'm always willing to do some reading and asking people I know for clarity on what I've. Actually found some interesting info regarding this info and will give it to the right people and we might see a change. Nothing big but a small one.
Hopefully this info helps you out though and clarifies how and why it all works. If it does get change hopefully we will see it in the patch notes. They just need to bump the fuel from 4000 to 5000. I will send BigNewy or Nineline the info.
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, darkman222 said:
Thanks. I did not expect that.
But what youre saying is, as the TGP is not replaced, it would stay on then. Which confirms that the behavior of the current rearming process is correct.
Technically yes. But per the procedure the pilot is suppose to turn it off.
-
41 minutes ago, darkman222 said:
What do you mean? I guess in real life you would never rearm a jet with the engine running, would you?
Yeah I think that was the issue too. It was how the rearmarment process was programmed which lead to the behavior that is luckily fixed now for everybody who flies on servers with quick landing, refueling and take off turn around gameplay.
We rearm jets all the time with engines running. That is the definition of hot refuel/rearm. Hot, meaning the engine is on. In combat situations it is called ICT (Intergrated Combat Turn). During that we rearm and refuel the jet at the exact same time. But the TGP would never get replaced during that because it sits too close to the intake.
Just like if we wanted to reload the gun we would have to have the pilot shutdown because we would be too close to the intake.
-
1
-
-
On 7/26/2025 at 2:04 AM, darkman222 said:
In general it is questionable while you rearm with the engine running in a few minutes in DCS then need to wait for the old TGP to reboot is a realistic combination at all.
If the rearming procedure was realistic ( 45 minutes incl engine shutdown and restart ) a TGP boot would be required anyway because ground power does not power any of the TGP.
Considering DCS rearming being a game mechanic that way, the need to reboot the litening TGP is not a realistic logic or addition to realism anyway. So its good we dont need to with the ATP.
I guess for DCS purposes it doesnt really matter.
But for those who want to simulate real world stuff here you go.
If you hot refuel/rearm Avionics should be off. This includes ST STA, HUD, SNSR PWR switches, Avionics power switches, HMCS Sym INT, then Air refuel switch to open, RF silent, GND JETT ensure off, Master Arm Off. You will also turn the EPU off at which point the ground crew would install the EPU safety pin.
Technically the way they had before wasnt right in the sense that it was essentially replacing the pod automatically which turned it off. But real world you would turn it off anyways. If we are lucky we will get the scramble option for the Sniper which allows the BIT to run in the background essentially.
-
2
-
-
Just now, BIGNEWY said:
folks please dial it back or this thread will get closed down.
Of course BigNewy.
-
1
-
2
-
-
16 hours ago, Pribs86 said:
I read and understood what you said, so you don't have to patronize me. If this interaction is upsetting you then you don't have to respond. You can ignore this completely and go about your day doing other things. I have a issue that I would like to learn more about it all.
So my question to all of this is WHY. WHY can you only get FULL fuel if you are under 4,000lbs, WHY?
What if a pilot IRL takes a tank thinking he or she will need it but learns while flying that it isn't needed/required? What if he/she can't jettison the tank (civilian population or malfunction)? What if they don't (or aren't able to) burn ALL of the fuel? If a pilot lands in real life with 4,100lbs (h3ll, let's call it 4,001lbs even) and has to rearm and refuel quickly to get back on mission (they don't have time to ground jettison the center tank and add a new one), in real life again, does the crew tell them "f@ck you, you didn't land with under 4,000lbs so we aren't going to fill that center tank completely or at all, you get your ass back up there" even though the next flight might require 8,500lbs of fuel (make up number, whatever). Is there a limitation with the tanks mechanically so to speak. Is this an actual real life restriction/constraint/limitation with the external fuel tanks (seems funny to me if it is)?
I just want to know WHY this is happening. Was designed that way in the game intentionally or on accident? Is it was a bug? Is that how they do it IRL (maybe they do tell the pilot f@ck you, who knows)? I just want to know WHY.
By the way it does work when you are under 4,000lbs and you do get topped off.... but WHY?
Look, my bad if that came off rude. That wasn't the intention. I was genuinely asking if you had read what I wrote. I also didn't realize that you wanted to know the "why and how". If you wanted to the know the why all you had to do was just ask. Things don't read well through text.
This is the way I understand it after reading the GS (General Systems) for the fuel system, as well as talking to one of the crew chiefs I used to work with who is still on F-16s, and what I learned during my incentive ride.
Fuel pressure from the refuel manifold is routed through the deenergized refuel/transfer override control valve to the poppet of the refuel shuttle valve in each reservoir. The fuel pressure moves the poppet to provide an open passage from the refuel shutoff valve through the refuel shuttle valve and to the line outlet whose opening is blocked or unlocked by the
refuel/transfer float valve in each wing. The opening is unblocked when the wing is not full of fuel. Refuel manifold fuel pressure acting on the refuel shutoff valves and the fuel bled downstream of the valves cause the shutoff valves to open. Also, the poppet in the refuel shuttle valves is blocking the fuel passage which controls the external tank transfer shutoff valves and the valves remain closed, preventing fuel from the refuel manifold from entering the wing internal tanks. Fuel from the refuel manifold flows simultaneously into both the forward and aft reservoirs from the refuel shutoff valves. Fuel also flows simultaneously into the external fuel tanks through the fuel disconnect valves. The forward tank system and the aft tank system are refueled simultaneously.With that info, full internal fuel for our Viper is 7,163lbs. The internal wing tanks in our F-16 hold 550lbs +/- 100 each (The fuel in the wings will vary depending on the attitude during refueling. ). So that is a total of 1,100 +/- 200. So, if you subtract that from 7,163 you get 6,063 +/- 200 and the internal wing tanks should be empty. But to ensure the float valves are down in the wing, you want to be lower than that, but also if you tried to refuel at that level then the reservoirs would still be too full to allow external tank feeding. When crew chiefs do their Leak and T's, they aim to be at or under 5000lbs of fuel to ensure the reservoirs aren't full so they can fuel the external tanks (that is per the T.O.). From a pilot's standpoint they aim to be under 4000lbs for many reasons, shorter stopping distances when lighter, they ensure to use as much fuel as possible for training/combat (every leg of the flight is calculated specifically when tanker support is not available), account for attitude difference during the hot refueling process (less fuel means the nose sits higher meaning the fuel will go towards the aft and can bleed into the internal wing tanks), and the biggest reason is the arresting cables on the airfields. Too heavy and bad things will happen
Also, good to note that when you see crew chiefs refueling they will shake the jet for two reasons. 1. to ensure the jet settles (hydraulics on the gear will compress/ they typically do this after refueling and they kick the nose tire and done when the jet is off. Jet will adjust during taxi when hot refueling), and 2. to ensure the wing tanks are getting fueled completely and evenly (typically done during the refuel process whether the jet is on or off).
If they land with fuel above 7,000 then just the external tanks get filled via the receptacles on the tanks themselves (one reason why ED is talking about adding a fuel tank slider). Usually that will only happen if they taxiied but didnt take off and taxi back to the parking area. If they are in the air when an emergency happens, but it isnt an emergency that calls for jettison of tanks, they will typically burn circles in the sky over the airfield until low enough in fuel to land. Again, done for the arresting hook if thinking about taking it, and for shorter stopping distance.
With all that being said it should be able to refuel external tanks at or under 5000lbs of fuel internal. But in DCS 4000 is what you have to be under. But you do see the lower you go the more fuel you get. Which does indicate that the fuel system in the F16 is pretty dynamic. Also, for AAR you need to make sure the AR door is opened for a minimum of 5 minutes to allow the tanks to depressurize in the air in order for them to take on fuel. That is why i suggest the minute you land to open the AR door while you taxi off.
As for @Nedum, I don't know why you even try to make comments towards me when we both know you don't like me for some reason. But sure I will entertain you. Not everyone in the community cares about the how or why. That is why you see some unrealistic loadouts being used all the time on the F16 and exceeding G-limits with heavy loadouts as well. Also don't understand why you said "Army regulation" when we use Technical Orders, AFI's, and AFMAN's in the USAF. The Army has nothing to do with how we do maintenance on the F-16. And this may shock you, but a lot of times we don't get told the reasons why something is done a certain way or why we do things a certain way. Most of the time the only way you learn how something works is if you take the time to read the GS of what ever system you want to know more about. This is what makes a SME a SME. Just because someone does X amount of years in a job in the AF doesn't mean they know the ins and outs of everything. A lot of times people just get taught how to do something and leave at that. Each base also has their own set of "ISM's" when it comes to certain things, so there is that too. And that is the same no matter what branch or country you serve for, so to say that is how it is in the German Air Force is just false. Not everyone is going to know exactly why or how something works. They are just going to know how to operate it or fix it. This is why I have to ask pilots 1000 questions because a lot of times they just don't know the answers for certain things. The pilot may understand how to operate something, but you would be surprised to know how many actually know the why it works that way.
But since you questioned me actually being in the USAF and working on the F-16. Here you go.
Me with JTACs leaving 64B at the NTTR.Me on the Kunsan AB facebook page loading a GBU-31V3 and an CATM-9M while on a TDY
null
null
Me at Kunsan during an exercise responding to a mock "hung gun".
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=900765528751682&set=a.223059169855658&type=3
nullMe on another TDY out of Kunsan.
Me TDY with the Rescue SQ out of Nellis.
Me winning Airman of the Year at the Group level. I also one it at the Wing level as well. Our SQ, Tomahawks, won AMU of the year as you can see as well.
Me right before they announced the winners for Airmen of the year at the wing level.
Me with the pilot during my incentive ride.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Pribs86 said:
Just tried it again - landed with 4,500 lbs of fuel, opened the AR door immediately after landing, taxied to parking spot, rearm and refuel with center tank connected still, 8,600lbs of fuel total. Still not completely full for some reason. I'm on the Falklands, if that matters.
ahhh thank you so much, appreciate the help. If I remove them, will it remove them from the posts/comments I've already made on the threads? (im not sure what its called, forgive my ignorance)
Did you even read what I said man? UNDER 4000lbs. Not 6800 not 4500. UNDER 4000lbs. You really should be AIMING for 1200-1500lbs. If you are landing with that much fuel then you dont need tanks anyways. Try again please. And actually have a long flight that brings you under 4000lbs or just stay in burner. Again, 1200-1500 is preferred if you want to get full fuel.
But you did just prove that it does vary depending on how much fuel you have so there is that lol. But just read what i wrote.
-
2
-
-
39 minutes ago, Pribs86 said:
Idk, it's still kinda wonky. With an open fuel door and center tank only still, it sometimes it fills the tank entirely (9,000lbs-ish total), other times it only fills it a portion (7,800lbs-ish total). 7,200 is full fuel without external tanks. I have a trackfile, but it's too large and I can't upload anything over 1.64MB for some reason. Anyone know how I can attach this track file to actually be show what's happening? Thank you in advance!
For both of you.
Were you under 4000lbs? The goal fuel to be at to get topped off is around 1200-1500lbs. Even with wing tanks. Best practice is to open the refuel door the minute you land to depressurize the tanks so they can take fuel.
Isnt it bad code. If you arent low enough in fuel then the amount of fuel you receive will vary. Just like in real life. This area of the F16 is actually modelled pretty well.
-
This is already reported. @BIGNEWY can we get a merge please.
https://forum.dcs.world/topic/376010-ai-aar-looping/#comment-5667099
-
1
-
How does radar work during A-G mode
in DCS: F-16C Viper
Posted · Edited by RogueSpecterGaming
He was just explaining in more detail what the issue is. He isn't saying it should be able to present an image while pointing towards the sky. He is saying it shouldn't and provides examples of it doing what it should not be able to.
This issue has to deal with how ED modelled the A-G radar function of the jet. And I am sure they are tracking.
Edit: not sure why it posted the same thing twice.