RogueSpecterGaming

I found deleting the FXO and Metashader2 folders worked. I had the issue of setting it higher and it turned them off for some reason. Also, be sure to check the Special tab in the settings as some aircraft, like the F16, have options for static reflections for both the canopy and MFDs.

T80SIDEArmor.trkT80FRONTArmor.trk I posted your tracks here for you. Looking at the side profile shots first from two M1A2s the armor on the side of the T80 seems correct. nullYou can see in the night screenshot that I was able to find the round being ricochet off the front armor of the T-80. I have also provided the track. In the daytime picture of the T-80 I have outlined the aim point that the Abrams is aiming at consistently. This is the area that the ricochets are coming from. This appears to be the expected behavior/expectation from the front armor of the T80. In both Abrams night screenshots, you can see the round hit under the angled portion of the tank. That first shot on both tanks immediately destroyed them. I don't think it is a problem with the front armor of the T-80 as it is performing like it should (since you can see the rounds ricochet) and ricochetting the rounds as proven. The problem would lie in the M1A2 armor as it is not deflecting any rounds despite the angle of the armor. In the track file "M1A2 destroys T72B one shot" you can see one Abrams gets destroyed while the other one takes out the T72 one shot. Same goes for the track with the T72B3. When it comes to the T90, the T90 does take a hit but I could not find the ricochet round. In the track you can see it hit just under turret or slightly on the turret but doesn't do much to it. The T90 was able to take out both Abrams with one shot. The side profile track is of course one shot as well. Both side and front profiles were tested with the M1A2C SEP v3 and same thing with the armor. I will do more tests later to ensure the Abrams are using penetrating rounds. But as it stands right now, the Abrams cannot take more than one hit from the front from close range. I will run more tests as well to test distance and see if that plays a factor. I will also test out to see what RPGs do to the armor as well. I would imagine and hope the Abrams could take a standard RGP shot from both front and side without taking too much damage. I am also not sure how thick the armor is on the front of the Abrams, but from what I can find it should be able to take a somewhat of a beating. This puts the Abrams in a very difficult position in DCS as from what I have tested here so far appears to make the Abrams rather weak from all angles no matter what. Whereas the Russian tanks appear to have stronger front armor as expected. T80 Front profile shots destroys two M1A2s - night time.trk M1A2 Front profile shots - nighttime.trk M1A2 destroys T72B one shot - nighttime.trk M1A2 destroys T72B3 one shot - nighttime.trk M1A2 vs T90 one shots - nighttime.trk M1A2 side profile - nighttime.trk M1A2C SEP v3 front profile - nighttime.trk M1A2C SEP v3 side profile - nighttime.trk

F16 Yaw 1.trk Yupp, providing another track for good luck. Definitely happens more when roll input is exaggerated and you try to over-correct it. Only happens this bad at low speeds with gear down and when making sudden rolls and pitch inputs as you can see when I do a go-around.

Yes, please post a track so we can see what exactly is happening.

Pretty much the point that was being made, the whole difference between EGI and the INS between the two despite the F16 being "newer" in terms of the year. Different branches different things. But better said. Thank you.

Negative. That was a different issue altogether.

Do you have a track by any chance? Also, 400kts seems a bit slow to be releasing those types of bombs.

Just set something up on Caucasus. INS Drift HUD & JHMCS sym.trk this was with unrestricted SATNAV and 2005. Setup was about the same distances as you mentioned give or take. During the flight I monitored my NAV page on the DED and at some point, during the flight the SYS ACCUR turned to MED. Did a FIX on the first STPT which was not over where I had put it, it changed back to HIGH after fix taking. On my way to STPT two my SYS ACCUR turned back to MED. Did another FIX on STPT 2. On the way to the target none of my points were where they should've been. Afterwards, I stuck around and looked at each point and each one was in a different place if I was looking through the JHMCS or the TGP. Seems like some type of an issue with symbology alignment maybe. So, if I took a fix using the JHMCS then the TGP wouldn't line up to the same spot. If I took it with the TGP then the diamond in the JHMCS wasn't in the same spot. I think this misalignment between the two is what is causing the issue. So, no matter if you actually need to take a fix or not the symbology is not going to match each other resulting in a weird sighting error. Pretty sure that wherever the diamond is looking should be the same spot that the TGP is looking. If they didn't match each other then you are going to get what we are discovering here. And since the TGP can control the SPI placing the TGP over a TGT and then looking through your JHMCS the TD BOX or diamond should be over the same spot. I feel like that is just fact. It definitely through me for a loop when looking out the cockpit and saw my TD BOX away from the tgt. Caused me to overshoot my pulldown height and because the TD BOX was closer to me than it should've been I came in shallower once I lined up for the target. Point of the matter seems to be: - The HUD/JHMCS indicates small to large drifts. - Unrestricted SATNAV at least in the year 2005 in the ME seems to make the SYS ACCUR go to MED randomly (seems not right? especially after a very short period of time) - Sensors don't line up with each other it seems like causing confusion on where you are supposed to be looking So really, I don't think it is so much the drift being the issue rather than the sensors (TGP and HUD/JHMCS) not matching each other. If I look through my HUD or JHMCS and notice my diamond for example isn't where it should be then when I go to take a FIX and I move the diamond over where it should, if I notice the delta exceeds the 300ft (~0.06NM) when I take that FIX ALL sensors should be looking at the same spot then. They shouldn't be looking in different areas like they are cross-eyed. "In order to perform a FIX/update certain factors must be met, and they can include: SYS ACCUR, GPS ACCUR, and GPS TRK/NOTRK. Now assuming normal GPS values of <50 feet and GPS in track, the Blended KF will have more confidence in GPS-aiding than a 300ft fix/update. But once the SHE exceeds 300ft for whatever reason, then a fix/update on a known stpt may be recommended. The position delta is estimated from the coords of the stpt. That delta is displayed to you on the FIX page."

Syria GBU31.trkIt worked for me. How long are you flying before you drop? And are you doing any hard maneuvering like pulling more than 6+Gs and if so, how many times? Yeah there are quite a few posts already about the JDAM and Ive been trying to tell people that it is still work in progress as told by Lord Vader multiple times. But they still want to argue about the JDAM stuff for some reason. Currently about to test the original stuff now.

Ok and that is fine, but don't come at me for not watching your tracks. And when has the ED team ever been the only ones able to help people?

Much appreciated. I will test this out. But in the meantime, read this and try adjusting and let me know your results please. Go into the mission briefing area before going into the mission and make sure the stpt is at the base of the target (so at whatever side of the building you will be coming from). Also verify the coordinates both in the mission brief and on your DED Nav page to ensure they match to include elevation. So the max range for the GBU-31 is 15NM under the right conditions (doing about 450-475 KCAS @25000ft, and hopefully no headwind). If you are doing 300-350 you are making that distance shrink down to about 5 to 8nm, so I would have to guess you're dropping inside that? Which is fine if you are trying to achieve a top-down attack on the target. I would still suggest bumping the speed up though and you can still drop at no less than 6NM. So it would look like this: -25000ft MSL -450-475KCAS (I know damage to weapons isn't implemented but try not to exceed .98 Mach if you can help it lol) -set your Impact Angle on the control page to 75-80 degrees. (This will ensure a more top-down attack. If you set this and try release at 10nm the bomb will not achieve these angles on impact) Try that and let me know the results please. I will test your scenario out in the meantime.

No problem. Glad you figured it out.

Can you give me the scenario? I don't have the campaign and have been hearing some weird things. Info that would help: - Mission Date & Time - Distance/Altitude/Speed to target when releasing JDAM. (Which JDAM 38 or 31?) - Weather - Any onboard sensors being used? (FCR, TGP, HUD, JHMCS) - GPS available? (I would assume so, but you never know)

This is so trippy to look at, but you can definitely see the difference. Thank you for doing that. I will be posting more if you would like to do it with the others lol Realistically, once we get the GPS inside the JDAM it should be 5M CEP. Currently as you can see majority fall within the 5M and 13M CEP with about three falling outside as of this new update and with using NO TGP. That was all done (big red circle pic) with only dropping on the STPT. Where did you read 49M? It shouldn't be any more than 30M under the worse conditions, most of the time. There are some factors that may affect that, but you should always see it land near the target or on the target as you see in the picture.

When and where did I tell you what to think? Why are you so upset? Didn't think I had to be a mod to help someone out. Is that not what this community is about, helping each other? You say you read what ED wrote but you seem to be not understanding what they are saying. Again, I have ran these tests multiple times and have shown everyone the results. Simple answer, the bomb is acting accordingly as it should without the GPS implemented on the bomb itself as of right now. I am not done testing. I asked that question to not be insulting. I am genuinely asking so I can understand where you are coming from and how it connects to this problem. Again, this problem is with the JDAM and not the INS/GPS in the jet. I only tell people to read and watch things as that is typically the best way to learn how to understand something. So how is it wrong to tell someone to do that? So, it is wrong to tell someone how they can better understand something? If there are lack of videos out there explaining things, why don't you make some videos? I have videos out there teaching and helping people understand things. I haven't gotten around to JDAMs yet as they are still being worked on in DCS. If you want, I can make a video explaining how things are currently if that is what you are wanting. I am totally down to do that. The links to other forum posts are not that old they are from this year. And we all know things with ED take time. It is what it is. But there is no reason to get all bent out of shape about it. I agree that the F16 manual is a bit dated and could really use an update. I have personally asked to help with that as I can do that with my down time. Sadly, I've been told that they have someone already working on updating it. And yeah, I agree that with every patch they fix one thing and then break another. That is just how the development goes. Show me another community though that gets to be privy to as much information as we get from the Dev. I can only think of one other, and it isn't a flight sim community. I understand the frustration of flying for an hour or more and having something go wrong. I think everyone in DCS has had that happen at some point. I only tell people to read/watch stuff, because on the small chance of it was just a miss click, or they missed a step then that is an easy fix. Before you claim something is bugged you need to make sure to look at what the person was doing or did. That's just basic stuff. I'm not trying to belittle anyone or their intelligence, but mistakes happen. I have helped a lot of people in DCS figure things out and almost every time it was just because they missed something as small as flipping the master arm switch. But we don't need people coming into forums like what you have been doing and blowing it up because you are angry at ED for breaking things. That isn't how things get fixed. And if you feel that I've insulted you or someone else in some way then I apologize as that wasn't my intent. Ever since they mentioned the work being done on the JDAM I have been waiting to see "GPS implemented" in the patch notes. But just like when they mentioned fuzes they only worked on the WWII aircraft weapon fuzes and then what like a year or almost two years later we finally got them on the modern jets. So, if something works one way on one jet and that same weapon doesn't work the same on another then I just assume they are only trying to test it on one jet before pushing it out to others. Which makes sense to me. Just like maverick boresighting I feel every jet should have to do so it is uniform across all aircraft. But I don't work on those other aircraft, so I try to avoid mentioning or talking about them. But you ask who I am and so I will tell you. I am a weapons team chief in the USAF. I run a load crew to load and maintain the weapon systems on the F-16. I have worked on the HH-60G and F-22 as well. I also run a YouTube channel dedicated to the F-16 where I make in-depth tutorials. I even put out a video for the history of the JDAM. I run The Viper Crew discord as well where we are over 600 members with a good amount of current and ex-military who have worked on the F-16 in real life. A few of us test things out all the time with some of us making forum posts about those things. I would like to think I am quite knowledgeable when it comes to my job, and I try to help where I can inside this community. I even got ED to change the Aspect Angle readout on the FCR page to change every 10 degrees instead of every 27.5 degrees. I provided them with publicly available documents and a track file showing what was wrong and it was fixed a few months later. Now I'm just waiting on the AA readout on the HUD to be same. So, I'm no one special, but I do have a lot of knowledge on these systems and how they should work. The only thing preventing me from being a SME for them is that I am still currently active in the USAF. And trust me I totally get it when they change something, and you have to relearn how to do something. It is annoying but DCS is ever changing, and I don't think that will ever stop. When something changes, I try to learn it as quickly as possible in order to help people. It's really all any of us could do. And what have I hit anyone on? All my posts have been trying to explain and help people to understand why it is working the way it is currently. Literally in my post to the guy in here I gave him a suggestion to try and see if it works. He didn't post a track or give much info as to what the situation was. Things like how many Gs were pulled and how often, how long was the flight, what year was the mission set for, are all things, me personally, would like to know in order to help out more. Now if he came back with more info then we could've taken things further, but you came in here not really adding anything. That tends to turn people away from the forums sadly. And I have taken the time to run tests. If there are any more tests that you would like me to run, please tell me the scenario and I will do it. But currently I am testing every aspect of the JDAM in every way possible. I am trying out distance when released, Altitude for release, speed when released, GPS and no GPS, sensors and no sensors, I am trying it all. I'm not going to talk about the TWS thing in here as this isn't what this forum is originally about. Not shying away from it but there is a forum for it already and if you would like you can PM me on here and we can talk about it as I have already tested it and found some things that may be interesting. If you would like to know what they are please PM me. I don't want this forum straying too far as it already has. Not once did I say you or anyone else was the problem. I have no clue where you are getting that from or why you feel like I am blaming you? I'm not going to comment on the rest of your reply as it seems to just to be a bunch of rambling and quite frankly insulting to say the least. But it is what it is. Again, if you would like to talk more about things and maybe get a better understanding of things, since as you have pointed out multiple times now the documentation is lacking, we can do that. I've said what I needed to say about the JDAM issue so there really isn't any need for the rest of the conversation you are trying to provoke here. Now if you have anything dealing with the JDAM you would like to discuss then fine, but other than that this is a good way to get this post either locked or deleted by the mods.

Ok, and like I said, how do you expect me or anyone else to watch a track if we don't have the map? Do whatever tests you want to do on Caucasus and then send me that track so I can see your claim. But I am taking the time to do these tests and as seen above and if you want the tracks to see for yourself, I can send them, and you can see for yourself. The only downside is the track is an hour long so not sure if it will work correctly but I think it will. I have more tests to run which will include doing the test without GPS enabled. So, if you want you can see what those results are.

This one was done prior to the update and the TGP was used and was only done for 30 minutes.

Just finished the first of many tests today. This was done with using the STPT only. No other sensors like TGP or FCR was used. A picture of the HUD is included to show the amount of drift that occurred over the hour of dropping. This was only the GBU-38. The black line circles are every 10ft starting at 20ft. My next test will be done with no GPS available in the mission and again only using the STPT.

just to make sure you aren't using ReShade are you?

@Lord Vader possible merge?

I would watch the track if I had the map. That is why ED suggests you to only do Caucasus IF possible. Not that you have to, but when someone doesn't have the map you are testing then you can't get mad when your track doesn't get watch. So before I watch that first track you mentioned what map is it on? I'm not going to waste my time downloading a track if it is on a map that I don't have. I have every map but Kola and Normandy. The second track you mentioned sounds like it is on Kola so I cannot watch that one. But as I mentioned in another forum about what seems to be a similar problem "In order to perform a FIX/update certain factors must be met, and they can include: SYS ACCUR, GPS ACCUR, and GPS TRK/NOTRK. Now assuming normal GPS values of <50 feet and GPS in track, the Blended KF will have more confidence in GPS-aiding than a 300ft fix/update. But once the SHE exceeds 300ft for whatever reason, then a fix/update on a known stpt may be recommended. The position delta is estimated from the coords of the stpt. That delta is displayed to you on the FIX page." And as well as,"The 38 we currently have on the F16 is not fully "equipped" with the full GPS package so no, it will not update as it should once it is released from the aircraft. So, without it you are going to see some weird behaviors which yes, is normal, but as you can see in the picture it is still accurate." Bottomline is the 38 or 31 currently is not going to be as accurate with a preplanned stpt currently. See this forum to see where I posted a picture of me dropping 47 GBU-38s over a 30-minute period. This was done without a FIX ever being done and with a good amount of drift occurring over that period. Granted I did use a TGP, but my next tests will be done with the TGP again because we just had an update, and I will also run them with a preplanned stpt. I will also increase the time from 30 minutes to an hour if possible. I will also do various distances as well. This first test was done at angels 18, 6NM from the Target at speed of 450kts, bomb impact angle was set to 75 degrees in order to ensure a straight down impact point. Out of 47 bombs 27 hit or came extremely close to the target. But you will see not a single bomb fell outside that 80x60 box. And right now, just with this one test alone the JDAM fell within the 30m CEP and quite a few more fell within the 5m CEP.

I'm not trying to be rude. Just letting you know that what they are going to say is exactly what I have said. I work on the jet and so I know what it should look like. And yeah, it hasn't changed over the years. But they will still ask for a source. If you have one, I highly suggest PMing BigNewy or NineLine. That is best answer you will ever get man. Just trying not to waste peoples' time that's all. A lot of people come to the forums expecting every little thing to get fixed without providing the proper documentation that the team asks you to provide whether that is tracks or public docs. And honestly it isn't as pressing of an issue as a lot of other things right now imo.

It's part of the "canopy reflections". Go to your settings and set the "canopy reflections" slider to like 0.3. That's what I did and it looks way more realistic/better.

Thunderbirds dont fly Block 50s. So that is irrelevant. And you know ED will not accept that. This is from the back of a D model F16 and judging by the electronic altimeter definitely not a blk 50 either Not from a blk 50 though? This guy is the closest. If only the picture wasn't so blurry. Also it would have to be from around 2007. Which reading the video description is from 2018 demo fight. You guys do know ED will shoot all of those down saying the same thing. So, try harder if you want things to change to be accurate/correct.

You still need to put the TGP into a tracking mode either point or area. Per my sources you can do TMS up short to go into point track or you can do TMS Up long to go into PT. This will remain true for the Sniper once we get that as well. Trust me I know the SPI is automatically updated with the TGP when in PRE modes for the F16. It is a bit old but will remain true like I said for the Sniper as well. https://youtu.be/MvQB6tVK-S4?t=562