Swift.

Indeed, by 'impossible' I meant that you cant enter an autorotative state, not that you cant descend in a controlled manner whilst attempting it. The act of doing so will 'pull' the engine RPM up as the rotor RPM increases. Indicating the clutches arent working.

Its almost like they haven't modelled the clutches that would allow the rotor to autorotate faster than the engine. Notice how a power on autorotation is also impossible, with the rotor dragging the engines up to 105% or so. It also exhibits with how immediately on power down the rotor will spin down regardless of collective setting, affecting both autorotation and also making the shutdown a lot quicker. Perhaps its some odd bug where the clutch doesn't disengage until the engine is at idle, so any RPM above idle will drag the rotor down with it.

A user editable time delay to the instant mode would probably go a long way to solving peoples headaches. Just have a slider or freetext field in the special options where the user can enter a time eg, 0.8 seconds. Problem solved

If you've got the TPOD on the target, why do you want CCIP? Just drop it in AUTO. Same mechanics as you describe, designate with the pod, roll in, fly the thing on the thing, boom

Yeah its WIP, the only successful autorotations I've seen have either been suuuper fast or from really high altitude.

I'm currently using a Dualshock 4 controller to connect to my PC via bluetooth, and it works a dream. No problem binding what I need bound in DCS, but whenever I turn off the controller and reconnect it, the controller will initialise without the bindings I set up previously. Has anyone managed to stop DCS from doing this or do I just need to get good at setting up bindings quickly!

This was my understanding too, MRT is required, MAX isn't prohibited. For legacies that is. iirc on Rhino, MAX is prohibited, but not so sure.

Evidence included in discord PM as per the rules

Hi 9L, For this report, I was basing it off the definition of 'Cruise AOA' and 'Dash AOA' which are above and below about 2.5 degrees AOA respectively (as per page 30-2 of NFM-210). On the specific range charts there is a marker that separates two regimes, with cruise AOA being to the Slower side and Dash AOA to the faster side. Inferring that the approx 2.5 AOA point is where these areas divide.

My apologies then, I guess that shows my inexperience with coding Flight Models. Perhaps I should have said there are widespread issues with the FM, the level of work required to fix them is unknown to me. In any case, thank you for processing those other bugs.

If I pretend to be sherlock holmes for a second. I see the mission time is 0602, which combined with the X'd out JDAM might imply the mission has only been running for 2 mins, therefore not leaving enough time for the JDAMs to full align and remove the X. If this is from a longer mission, then we'd need a track.

Good afternoon Bignewy, Please find attached a selection of outstanding FM bugs, as verified on 04MAY2022.

To augment this existing thread: I will provide some additional data points to improve the modelling of hornets AOA performance. It can be observed that for the majority of hornets flight regime, the AOA shown is too low, however there exist situations where the AOA shown is too high. So the conclusion may be that the problem is more complicated than a simple absolute shift in AOA reading.

The current modelling of hornet has a fuel burn in excess of the computed numbers pulled from the specific range charts from NFM-210 This problem is spread across the entire flight envelope and at all configurations, so instead of providing 1000s of tracks for each data point, I have supplied a short sampling from either end of the spectrum. It can be observed that the discrepancy is proportionally larger at lower altitudes and airspeeds, precisely when you might want correct fuel burn for fuel ladder calculations.

Yeah when I say performance charts I refer to the NFM-200 and NFM-210 supplements, both of which don't have EM charts. They do have basic turn rate conversions but those dont really do the job.

Err, last time I checked the perf charts natops doesn't have EM diagrams. As for the AOA you might have seen a number close to 4 when very heavy and draggy, but it should apply more universally than that. I'll be devising a series of demonstrations for the errors in the FM as this AOA discrepancy is present in other regimes. For example M0.6 4000ft 30k, expected AOA is 2.5ish, DCS shows 1.7. Combine that with the fuel burn issues very clearly highlighted in the specific range charts. There is a still a *lot* of work left on the FM.

So a different bug for a different thread then

Does the TGT diamond move with 'undepressed' movements of the TPOD? Because fundamentally what we are saying is that if the TGT diamond updates, then the JDAM should also update.

Perfect thanks for the gouge. What we need to check now I guess is whether the TPOD will update the TOO mission when it slews. I havent had a chance to look yet.

Thats possible. Some numbers are hard verifiable facts, for example the cruise AOA (4.2/5.6) is a number from natops. And the performance charts have fuel burn on the specific range charts, I just hadn't made reports yet because I figured ED would have those sources for their FM rework. Perhaps I shouldn't assume though. The bleed during turns is a harder one to pin down, all you have is vague anecdotes, which is a challenging metric.

Yeah another long standing bug, the ATFLIR gets 'stuck' on the designation and then switching to SCENE will make it drift like crazy

Just wanted to touch back onto this bug, now that ATFLIR has come out and now that even Apache has the correct roll behaviour. Perhaps we can get this long standing bug fixed in hornet?

So for a while now I've been thinking about all the FM artefacts we are seeing in DCS Range Cruise AOA is too low (3.2 vs 4.2 IRL) Low speed fuel burn is too high Bleed during turns is too low Sustained turn rate is too high (suspected) It's occurred to me that all of the above can be explained by hornet having too much lift, or more specifically a Lift/Drag ratio that's too high. If the airframe produces too much lift, then it wont need to meet the same AOA to fly level at a given speed, so we will see lower AOA values for cruise flight. If the fuel burn was calibrated for range cruise, it would have to be increased to account for this lower L/D. This would make the burn match the specific range charts for maximum range flight, but when you fly slower, the fuel burn becomes artificially increased above where it should, which is why the fuel burn is much higher than the specific range charts indicate at low speed. Too much L/D means less AOA required to make the G specified, so less AOA during turns, less AOA means less bleed. Same as point 3, less bleed means more thrust overhead. Hopefully ED will fix hornets FM at some point in the immediate, perhaps all thats needed is a simple L/D adjustment, perhaps more is needed, idk

I had a similar thing the other day, took about 20 mins to get a green position confidence. I just chalked it up to a nicely modelled ambiguous INU

JDAMs in hornet will not target a pre existing waypoint designation if it was created before the weapon was placed into TOO. JDAMTGT.trk