Rayak

Just for info, most of the time when a manufacturer says "full AA load", it usually means a full loadout of AA missile, empty centerline tank and half fuel load as it is suppose to represent the performances of the aircraft in actual combat situation, so after take-off, climb and cruise toward the mission area.

I got this too this afternoon, but it was when I was landing at counter-QFU (shame on me for not contacting the ATC). I don't know if it's the cause for the reverse synthetic runway symbology but it's the only instance I encountered this bug.

There is also this bug on engine management when landing, so you have to be extra careful when you touchdown with engine not in flight idle.

It's because your INS is off I think. If you power it on, you should get the normal HUD but with wrong infos and once the INS is aligned you get an accurate HUD.

On a side note, the "TIR" mode seems a little weird : when the engine spools back up it exceeds the initial rpm by 2/3% during a split second. When you are initially at 100% rpm, it spools back up at 103%, triggering a RPM red alarm. Track attached demonstrating both phenomenons. m2000_rpm_alarm.trk

Description : when pressing the BRM with missile lock but with master arm in the safe position, the engine will engage TIR mode anyway. How I think it should be (SME input needed) : TIR mode should be engage only if a missile is actually shot. How to reproduce : with a S530 : select the missile, lock a target then press and hold BRM with a Magic : select the missile, get an IR lock then press and hold BRM

Isn't your HUD in test mode ? The HUD power button is a three pos switch OFF/ON/TEST and it looks like you are in the last mode

I'm just pointing out that HOJ can use proportional navigation and can lead the target so your claim that HOJ = Pure pursuit is false, no need to feel attacked.

You don't need the range to use proportional navigation...

New track, same mission m2000_landing_bug2.trk

Still present in last OB.

Bug description : at touchdown, the engine freezes at the N1 you had during final approach during 5sec then it drops to ground idle What it should be : at touchdown, the engine should throttle down to flight idle and after 5sec drops to ground idle Track attached : Instant action landing on nevada. Stabilized approach with airbrakes at around 80% N1. At touchdown it keeps 80% while my throttle is in the idle position and then drops to ground idle. m2000_landing_bug.trk

About the 530, i remember RB saying that now a circle around G or D means target lock-on by the seeker, I guess you should fire it to see what missile will go ;)

I would rather say that the radar deduces the velocity from the doppler shift rather than a mean value. I'm really not an expert of radar tech but inacurracy seems a logical drawback of PID scan

Isn't this behaviour an actual shortcoming of PID rather than a bug ? The delay between 2 sweeps inducing an error on velocity

I don't think it's that surprising given : a) relative mass of the ordnance you put on b) the tomcat has its stations better integrated into the structure (less interference drag) c) the stations are closer to the CoG in the tomcat (less increase in moment of inertia)

I don't fly the jf that much so i'm not saying there isn't any problem but the video you link shows huge desynch that explain the guidance problem

Same issue with mk82 SE

He meant JF radar

the triangle appears when the magic do find the target but if it fails, the box disappears, that's the bug

IIRC this function is not realistic for our mirage based on AdA feedback

IIRC it is BAP-100 which stands for Bombe Anti Piste (Anti Runway Bomb) :thumbup:

Even if I don't the only thing your test shows is that mirage generates more drag at low speed which is already known Another possible explanation is that engines have different idle thrust, might not make a big difference but has to be taken into account

Well the F16 FM being still WIP that could be an explanation... Can't look at the tracks right but I certainly will. Still you don't answer to everything

I perfectly understand the purpose of the test, yet the turn rate of the plane will matter if you are measuring the degrees of the turn. So in your test a 10° degree bank and a 50° degree bank will give vastly different measures. Plus in your track, you put the aircraft in a bank, let the nose go down and then suddendly pull the stick to maintain toughly the same altitude, doing so you bleed speed. And again I think your conclusion is wrong and your results are perfectly explained by the fact that mirage with it's delta wing will generate more induced drag (lower taper ratio) and more viscious drag (higher wing area) at a given lift coefficient