VC

Scan range is under scan distance. Bars you can't control directly but he optimises it fairly well, more when in RWS, fewer in TWS as you would expect. Never had issues with this. TWS-A also optimises scan volume both vertically and horizontally to keep the tracked targes inside. To avoid issues with not finding targets due to altitidue difference, under the Radar Elevation section, the "scan at distance and altitude" fucntion is super helpful. It's a bit clunky manually, I recently bought Voice Attack and am using Bailey's profile for it and it transformed the experience with Jester.

Yes, hopefully, but there are already schemes that should work. Someone said it uses AGM-65E, that can be buddy-lased fine. So either it's not using that or it's broken/incomplete. There are also Russian missiles (S-25L I think?), not sure if that can be buddy-lased. Maybe that's the scheme it's using, since it's a Su-25T only missile (FC3 level) it might be why it feels "simplified" in the JF-17 too?

Is BRM guidance still placeholder? Something very weird is going on there. What scheme is it using at the moment? I can't find the patch notes where it says it is no longer beam riding.

Tested again in Single Player with JTAC. Laser Spot Search (LSS) works GBU-12 buddy lasing works BRM buddy lasing does not work. BRM will not show IN RNG icon, or allow any launch at all, unless the TPOD is pointing inside the aiming circle. And, further to my point above, the BRM guidance is hard coded: It doesn't matter what laser code the TPOD is on, or even if the laser is not firing (set to MAN and left off), the BRMs will track where the TPOD is pointing no matter what. It will ignore other lasers, even lasing on same code directly in front of it.

No, it's done in the Ground Crew radio menu.

Just tried it, can confirm it doesn't work regardless of using default 1688 laser code or something else. Another weird thing: self-lasing, the BRMs track regardless of whether the TPOD code matches theirs or not. Seems the guidance is still placeholder or hard-coded in some way. Actually, buddy lasing does not work at all with JF-17 as the "receiver". My GBUs did not track an F-18 lasing, but his GBUs tracked my laser. Laser Search works fine and tracks, so I don't think we were doing anything wrong in testing.

Would also be cool, in a similar vein, if you could have the video feed of both C-701s up at the same time, or at least flick between them like the 802 MITL, so you can lock and fire both at once instead of one by one. But basically the POD page can only ever be on one MFD, which I guess is a realistic limitation.

Th JF-17 cannot set weapon laser codes from the cockpit. So it is not faked. Weapon code is set on the ground per pylon (so all rockets in one launcher will have same code). In cockpit you just set the code the laser transmits, to match your weapon setting or for someone else if you need to.

I tried it and it doesn't work, mounted 3 TPODs but when selecting on MFDs there's not way to switch between them and only one is active. But wouldn't this be so cool? Circling above the battlefield, one TPOD on each MFD, lasing 3 things on different codes as other people come in and ripple LGBs that hit different targets. Is this capability possible ILR? Sorry, it's not a serious suggestion just thought it might be fun. :music_whistling:

Did you work out what the issue was? I haven't had a chance to try it myself yet but I'm curious if it works.

The F-14s roll rate is already one of the best, especially at higher speeds, what more do you want? The spoilers do the aileron job to increase roll rate when the wings are fully extended. Having spoilers and ailerons would be unnecessary and wasteful of weight and space for flaps. The F-14 control system is incredibly efficient and cleverly designed. On top of that, you can use the rudders to increase your roll rate or pull off some crazy snap rolls that FBW planes can't. It's much more hands on than FBW planes that just give you max roll rate safely and without you having to put extra thought into it, but that's just the way it is.

I will test it when I have time. But my general experience in online play, considering jamming, different altitudes, dynamic things going on (not perfect clinical trial, which means nothing really) is that these radars are nearly useless beyond 50km in "real" conditions. The point I am trying to make, to be on topic, is that the general capabilities of the FC3 modules are not really good enough to support SD-10 even if this missile is modded on. It might be fun and a little bit more fair but you're still effectively fighting with one hand tied behind your back.

Improvement in plexiglass design and manufacturing techniques for distortion-free curvature.

Hmm OK, F-14 and F-15 introduction is closer together than I thought. But some F-14 systems were developed first for F-111B, the whole design is somehwere between 3rd and 4th gen fighters even if it has a lot of raw capability. I guess the windscreen design is a bit of a relic in this case, but clearly it was not such a big issue IRL to make them consider replacing it on already in-service aircraft.

The windscreen design is not a bad choice by Grumman, it is basically identical in almost all fighters from the 1950s and '60s designed in all nations. It's a limitation of glass manufacture, they needed to have a completely flat part in the middle to not distort for aiming, but without the extra frame you can't join that to a curved piece for aerodynamics. The F-15 is not really an F-14 contemporary, it's a generation newer. I don't think that style of windscreen is crippling for dogfighting. Obviusly clear is better, but Tomcat is fine in my opinion. Having said that, I fly in VR and can lean around it naturally, I don't even notice I'm doing it. If you say you have no tracking at all and are stuck with the default view on a screen... then yeah I can see it could be quite bad.

I find this hard to believe, maybe A-10A just has a huge radar cross-section. Against fighters even at high altitude lock much beyond 50km is difficult in my experience. And this is ignoring jamming. With the ranges of a typical high altitude AIM-120C vs SD-10 fight, you're almost at MAR before you can burn through and your opponent doesn't suffer the same in return. And you are giving people lock warnings because you can't fire in TWS.

Oh, I'm behind the times then. Thanks for setting that straight and apologies for spreading misinformation. Doesn't explain why the OP can't buddylase though.

They are currently using a beam-riding guidance like the Vikhr (as a placeholder), and that means they can't be buddy-lased. Unless maybe the guy lasing is flying right next to you as you fire, haven't tried.

I agree with having fun with DIY mock-ups, to see for example what Flanker aerodynamics can achieve combined with a competitive Fox 3. But for me the experience of flying low fidelity modules is becoming more frustrating. Adding very powerful weapons just highlights the other issues even more: useless radar detection ranges, made even worse by jamming, clunky controls, no usable TWS or even SAM style mode, lack of fine controls and low immersion due to fidelity. It's a real shame but the mod is not really a solution for me.

If the TrackIR movement limits are wrong and allow this that should be fixed. Can you reproduce these head positions with no tracking just using view commands? But as was said, in VR you can physically move wherever you like. If your room is big enough you can fly the plane sitting on the wingtip. I would like to point out though that IL2 solves this problem very elegantly by having a collision model between the VR head position and the canopy. Inside the head movement is unaffected, but as soon as you "bump" the glass it starts moving the whole cockpit with your head so you can't stick it outside. No idea how much of a "core cange" this would be for DCS.

Why is your DTC already inserted before you INS align? Doesn't make sense to me, DTC update and insert is last thing I do before taxi. Sometimes I load it while taxing if I'm in a rush. How close are you when you can't see targets below you? 3-bar scan is pretty good in my opinion. Are you making the azimuth wider? That's not really necessary, I don't think I ever changed the radar from default settings. Up to you, but for me DL is a game changer for every aircraft that has it. Night and day difference to situational awareness, seeing all AWACS contacts on the screen.

Ground crew INS position update is instant and completely separate from DTC. Just ask for INS, start alignment, put heading, done. DL SLAVE mode only works if someone else in your mission is already MASTER. Also I never had an issue with finding aircraft below me on radar or look-down shooting. Just use the wheel on the throttle to move scan zone, check target altitude from datalink if you have it. Set cursor at approximate target range, the numbers next to the bracket are upper and lower edges of the scan zone (in angels) at that range. If the target altitude is between those numbers you will find it. SD-10 is a bit weaker to notching and chaff than AIM-120, but has better range down low. Make sure you dive to point at the steering dot when you're ready to fire. Sorry, don't know any advanced IFF use :(

I wouldn't consider myself a veteran and I don't know if this is the kind of thing you're after, but here are some things I found out that Chuck's won't tell you. Best turn rate is at ~400 knots, clean at low altitude you can sustain an 8G level turn at that speed, which makes for excellent turn rate. After you get a PL-5 seeker lock, lead the target as much as the missile seeker gimbal will allow before you fire, it tracks and intercepts way better that way. If you're at high speed for BVR but still have tanks on, zoom climb or turn to engage with a high yo-yo, to be slow enough at the top to drop them before diving to accelerate again. Angels 35 Mach 1.3 to 1.4 is do-able without tanks and is a very good energy state for BVR. Unfortunately, the engine seems a bit anemic at altitude so you don't gain much by going bigher, but has plenty of power to be competitive at medium and low altitudes. Don't have much on A/G, but I'd also love to see what other "advanced tips" people have for this aircraft.

Definitely want realism and in-depth simulation over "alternative solutions". The radar is very usable with Jester if you understand the limitations. As QuiGon said, this makes it more immersive to use. Things which are actually bugs have been acknowledged and I am happy to wait for that fix work to be done properly, not rushed. I don't know if this is already on your radar IronMike (pun intended), but cranking in TWS-A seems to directly cause track loss, more likely the further you turn. Would you count this under expected/realistic unreliability of the set, or is this an actual bug?

MSAA seems to affect the readability of the MFD font in the JF-17, the letters become fat and blurred which does not usually happen to text in other plane MFDs, DDIs, instruments or labels. Even without MSAA the letters by default are quite "chunky" and harder to read than same size (or even smaller) text in other aircraft cockpits. Does anyone share this issue? Any chance for rendering improvement with MSAA? Which file controls these fonts if I want to mod it?