Leviathan667

Thanks for the quick reply. Let me sum up your reply as I understand it: HUD fin = time-error computation relative to the next waypoint TID output = time-error computation relative to the waypoint for which a ToT has been set. Is that what you meant? My finding is that: HUD fin = time-error computation relative to the ToT for Bx8), using the speed of the missile as a reference (as if the missile were to be released immediately, with no consideration for the missile's limited range) TID output = time-error computation relative to the target waypoint (e.g. M3), i.e. when the aircraft should be at M3 for the missile to be released and reach Bx8 at the defined ToT. I just flew WoT mission 8 again. In the mission planner, I adjusted the aircraft speed to mach 0.55 for all waypoints, including M3. I noticed the same behaviour where the HUD fin would not agree with the TID output (HUD fin shows I'm too early as compared to the TID output). But, in following closely the cues on the TID output, i.e. keeping it at 0, I could make the HUD fin cue to eventually agree with it at M3, when it was time to release the missiles. Following this method, the missiles did reach the russian ships at 0713. What do you think? Is this interpretation right? This is how I modified the mission cartridge in the mission planner: LS at 0640 WP1 at mach 0.55, no ToT set in the cartridge but in the mission order, have to hold there until 0701 (I did not follow this procedure and only focused on the output TID screen). WP2 at mach 0.55, no ToT WP3 at mach 0.55 no ToT Release of RB-15F Bx8 at 0713 ToT L1 at mach 0.55, no ToT Also, I noticed after release of the missiles and on my way to L1, the HUD fin continues to behave as if I was still going back to M3 to release the missiles again, Even after I switched to LAND NAV. Actually, even after lowering the undercarriage, no landing cues did appear. They were superseded by the ToT on Bx8 cues. Not sure it is a bug or if I should cancel the TID input (but if so, how?). Thanks

Did any of you try to complete the Viggen campaigns as if they were flying an AJ 37? I did with the Wrath of Thunder (WOT) and Mjolnir response (save, so far, for the mission where you need to use RB 15F in WOT #8) while only using the following loadouts: AJ 37 Loadouts IMO, when it comes to rockets, guns and bombs, the AJ is about as good as an AJS. HE Bk-90s can be substituted by SB71s in long and wide area mode using toss bomb mode and varying the angle at which the aircraft arrives on the target. But I cannot think of anything to replace the effect of that weapon in compact mode? AP Bk-90 does not seem to have a substitute? RB-15Fs cannot be easily replaced with RB-04Es since modern ships have long range SAMs. I don't know if it is possible to coordinate the launch of many RB-04Es from several planes) to hit an enemy task force at the same time (like input TID Bx8 for the RB-15)? The absence of TERNAV can be compensated for using terrain features to regulary do INS fixes. The closest to the target one can update the INS, the better, especially when tossing bombs. Do you know of any workaround besides those?

In Wrath of Thunder, mission 8, we are supposed to make the RB-15s reach the russian ships at 0713. For the Ck37 to compute the ETA, I did the following Select Input TID (Datapanel) Press 071300 (Datapanel) Press Bx (Navigation panel) Press 8 (Datapanel) While in flight, the HUD cues do not agree with the Output TID on the datapanel screen. See screenshots. The HUD shows I am ahead or right on time. TID shows I am very late for the RB-15 to reach the russian ships at 0713. Is this a bug or is it I who have missed something?

There's another one. In Wrath of Thunder, mission 7, F-5Es drop illumination bombs over the target for you. But it all seems like a UFO is hovering above your head. See img.

Mission #7 issue: 3 out of 5 trials cannot take control of the plane. In the mission planner, it will show the aircraft is AI controlled.

Same here with bitdefender

Same issue here. The CPU utilization is maxed out but not the GPU

To add to what TLTeo said:see the RC2 manual, p. 264 to 266

The 2.5.6 build looks awesome. Unfortunately, it comes at the expense of not only performance but decent performance. Where I used to be in the 40-60 fps range, not I'm in the high 20s. In crowded places or during sunset, I'll be in the high tens. I also did the fxo/metashaders2 deletion thing. It did not help. I also noticed the 2.5.6 build fully uses one core of my CPU but only partially uses my GPU (70%). With versions 2.5.5 and before, both would be maximized to almost 100%. My build: Ryzen 7 1800X, 16 GB DDR4, GTX 1080, SSD NVME, Track IR + 1920*1080 Also, the mouse cursor sometimes has a nasty habit of jumping to the middle of the screen. PS: I did lower the video settings (like removing bokeh, lens effect dirt + flare, heatlblur to low, lowering the anisotropic filtering and antialiasing) but shockingly to strictly no effect on performance.

pdmarsh, on your video, you don't see the aiming cue because you're flying too slowly. You should at least be on afterburner zone 2 and diving at mach 0.85+

Thanks for the very comprehensive replies, renhanxue & Skyracer :)

So there was no cartridge to download flight plans from on the AJ37? The cartridge tech is so 1960/1970 I thought that the AJS inherited this "primitive" way feeding it's computer?

Hi, I'd like to make sure I got all the steps (short of the real thing) to turn the AJS into an AJ: Turn off TERNAV (Input TAKT 581) Do not use RB-15F and Bk-90 weapons Anything else? Thanks Edited list following the comments received up to 20200216 at 2140z Turn TERNAV off (Input TAKT 581) Cannot not use Rb-15F, Bk-90 and Rb-74 weapons Can only use Rb-24, Rb-24J and Rb-75 on stores S7V and S7H Cannot concurrently use Rb-24 and Rb-75 Cannot use more than 8 Lysbombs or SB-71 if loading the plane with Rb-24 missiles Cannot use the data cartridge. Have to setup the flight plan manually with the data panel Cannot use SPA mode

Thanks Jediteo

Hi, In the Wrath of Thunder campaign, during mission 5, there's a R&R area on the roadbase near Senaki. It is basically impossible to taxi there ,refuel and rearm and then taxi back to the runway to take care of those pesky artillety pieces. The issue: the plane gets stuck at the crossroads just before the R&R area, even though all wheels are on the road. See video: https://youtu.be/9KeU4SHfeco I suspect the roads are too narrow to allow for the plane to adequately make a right angle turn given the fact DCS is so unforgiving when even a single wheel wanders off road for a split sec (but this is not the case here). Furthermore, I did some research and it appears the roads around Senaki (about 12m in width) are too narrow to be compliant with BAS-90 specs: My understanding is, the map being as it is, there's no easy fix to this issue (?)

I agree with Tonk'er the Tornado ticks the most boxes and should logically be HB's next module. But I also think HB haven't yet made their mind as one of them has said, last December and in the context of a heated debate between Tonkers and A-6ers: "As for the rest: I'd leave it to general speculation for now, as that matches our own "state of mind" at the moment: not sure and we'll see. :)" Link

I am a member of the Buccaneer fan club. But without much hope for an adaptation to DCS anytime soon.

I understand the case for the A-6 is strong. But, if it were to be the next flyable module to be developed, all the other cryptic comments made by HB about an unnamed playable module to be developed next would be meaningless. So I tend to think a fully playable A-6 module is on the way but may not be the one that comes right after the F-14A/B.

Since I forgot to add the A-6 to this poll, I made a new one: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=261838

This a repeat of another poll (https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=261776) where the A-6 had been forgotten in the list of contenders. So far HB has made public their next module will be a (1) complex (2) twin engine jet. Aircraft that fits this bill I can think of are: Blackburn Buccaneer English Electric Lightning Gloser Javelin (not sure it is a complex aircraft) Panavia Tornado SEPECAT Jaguar (not sure it is a complex aircraft) Grumman A-6 General Dynamics F-111 Lockheed F-117 (nobody ever mentions this one) Sukhoi Su-24 (not sure it is a complex aircraft) Mikoyan Gurevich MiG-27 (not sure it is a complex aircraft) This list excludes (1) planes that are too new to be adapted to DCS or that have been announced by other developers as part of their development plans, (2) medium and heavy bombers, (3) reconnaissance aircraft, (4) trainers and (5) planes that never made it to mass production.

I forgot a serious contender, the A6 Intruder, and I don't know how to edit the poll. Sorry about that. Can an admin add Grumman A-6 in the list of poll options, please?

Does anyone think HB can surprise us with a popular, yet never modeled in a flight sim, like the Buccaneer? But then they would have to model the HMS Ark Royal (R09) too.

Just added poll options. You can vote now!

So far HB has made public their next module will be a (1) complex (2) twin engine jet. Aircraft that fits this bill I can think of are: English Electric Lightning Blackburn Buccaneer Gloser Javelin (not sure it is a complex aircraft) Panavia Tornado SEPECAT Jaguar (not sure it is a complex aircraft) General Dynamics F-111 Sukhoi Su-24 (not sure it is a complex aircraft) Mikoyan Gurevich MiG-27 (not sure it is a complex aircraft) Lockheed F-117 (nobody ever mentions this one) EDIT: I forgot a serious contender, the A6 Intruder, and I don't know how to edit the poll. Sorry about that. This list excludes (1) planes that are too new to be adapted to DCS or that have been announced by other developers as part of their development plans, (2) medium and heavy bombers, (3) reconnaissance aircraft, (4) trainers and (5) planes that never made it to mass production.

Will the Forrestal mod have all the supercarrier features? ATC, deck crew, etc.?