Harlikwin

Yup.

Yeah different radars do different stuff. And like that 30cm SAR res, was achievable in the early 90's by replacement F4 radars for example. So for something that reached IOC a decade later, well... And again I still very much doubt any real numbers will be used to model the actual dcs captor.

That is not detailed. That is pedestrian. It does show the actual resolution of the SAR which is sort of useful, but from what range? How long does it take to generate a patch map. whats the AA range vs RCS whatever target. Those are the numbers you actually need etc etc. Like gee whiz it has a SAR mode is not "detailed", or wow it has TWS, whats the scan rate, volume etc? Hey can you overlay GMTI on a SAR patch map? This is a very pedestrian description of captor. Similar ones exist for pirate, with no actual "data" presented.

You sir are an absolute genius.

Funny thing being "clutter" isn't random. They could develop and actual clutter model like Razbam has done, and then add how MTI filtering works to remove some of it (poorly). I posted the actual code they could use as an example of how to do this earlier. Also, there should be no clutter above the horizon like there is now (well clouds I guess, but clouds don't exist for any other system in DCS rn either). Unless you are at really low alt and eating sidelobe returns.

Sir, can you post the EM diagram for this? I don't find it realistic...

DCS huey is from like 91 and plausibly had NVG's since its cockpit lighting is actually nvg compatible.

The actual hind never had NVG's. Petro doesn't have them, and even if he did he couldn't really use the sight with them.

Gross.. Hind never had NVG's

That sounds strange. While tacview has its issues (i.e. affecting performance) I've never had it crash in years of using it that I recall.

Yes there is an AI F117 in game.

Yeah it was, simple fix. The jetseat can keep chugging along duct tape and all.

I think there may be some confusion on this point. As I understand it the mercury pod is basically using image intesifiers to amplify light like NVG's do, so it would depend on the photocathode chemistry used to determine what it can actually see. If the "marking laser" from the UAV are typically in the 800nm which are visible to most NVG types. I.e Gen1-3 tubes should be able to see an 850nm "marker" laser. If its a guidance laser used for LGB's those run are typically NdYag lasers running at 1064nm and those are typicall not visible through NVGs or LLTV systems for most of the time frame of DCS (there are modern SWIR systems that can see that as well).

After you mentioned hardware I opened up the control box and found one of the wire connectors askew and not making full contact, reseated it and now it works fine again. Thanks!

Yeah, lets hope they figure out and that its not in glacial 2weeks TM time.

Yeah I agree that point 1 is a big issue, I'm just not really sure how well notch susceptibility is modeled in DCS beyond some radial velocity number, and given the phoenix is a HPRF seeker, it should be notchable in some conditions, and on the A you basically don't have a whole lot of "tech" to mitigate notch problems. On the C, there are known techniques from that era to help deal with it, whether or not those were built in is another debate, but they existed at least. On the other points I totally agree, and those are some interesting suggestions to make it better. Then again it might break the AI entirely, hard to say.

Well written and on point. That being said I think people got waay too used to the phoenix being the "i win" button over the years and the current state is alot closer to reality IMO. A great many kills from the Iran Iraq war were against totally unsuspecting targets that did not defend. And if you set up a flight of mig23's to not react, well, they die just like that. So I think the main point is gonna be point #3 which I Don't think is going to be an easy fix for ED. Since first the AI has to know whether or not it knows the missile is coming, which is a radar/RWR interaction, and will need some sort of database. I.e. SPO-10 can't detect AWG-9 in certain modes etc. Which is gonna be hard to find info on.

I followed the procedure in the past, but its not working this time. The unit has the green power light on, and the USB tries to work, just with that USB device not recognized error each time the USB is connected.

When I have tried this I get a USB device not recognized error. Anytime its plugged in, any thoughts on that?

To be fair I didn't get the 4090 for DCS, rather "the other flight sim" where it literally more than doubled performance using DLSS 3.0. And went from like 45fps to 90 and got to increase settings. For DCS the 4090 vs a 3090 did significantly reduce my GPU frame time. But the normal bottleneck in DCS is the CPU frame time, so like offline in an empty mission I get rock solid 90fps 5-6ms CPU and ~7ms GPU. But the moment I'm online the CPU frametimes jump into the 14-20ms range and the overall FPS drops to the 45-50 range. My main hope is with the multicore improvement IF they can move that 5-6ms of graphics to its own thread, it will rougly halve the CPU times I'm seeing online, which means good frame rates even there.

Yeah I'd be interested to see how much of a drop you see with a G2 vs aero with the same settings.

Yeah, per the manual thats how I interpreted it too.

Yeah pretty sure Aerges plans to implement the S530F for all the variants they are doing. But thus far progress has been slow with fixing the missiles. And for the S530F they also need ED to model the actual missile behavior as I understand it. Which might be interesting given the snap up mode and how much (if at all) it differs from the normal mode. I.e. it may all be plane side stuff for snap in which case thats easier on ED.

Bummer

Smoke em if ya got em is all I can say. I'm personally hoping for those early F14 models for Xmass just like I was last year.