Harlikwin

Yeah I think it got temporarily deleted. I'm sure it will be back soon.

IDK, I flew a bit after the latest patch and I Think the worst spots for me around Ushiao were generally at least better FPS wise.

In general gas ingestion issues are pretty well known and documented for different airframes, the F1 has "protection" for this modeled, or did before the last patch, it seems to be missing currently.

IDK I think turning stuff like the HMD or Link16 on/off server side would be far more impactful for MP servers.

ZOMG how did I not know this was a thing, it looks amazing!

So ED is gonna make us some good F16A Blk10 or 15, and F15A's right?

Yeah I'm not worried. It's like 1 month into EA.

I haven't noticed that. Though I wonder about it overall when compared to other wingtip modules like the F5.

Yeah, so at high alt the light comes on and the plane blows up, but something weird is happening if you get it to low alt fast enough. Yeah IDK at what speed it actually blows up at, but its probably a bit low at sea level.

Yeah 1100 was in a dive per F2 bar, I also hit M2.0 or near it per the internal speedo once, you gotta be careful cuz at some point you do blow up and the speedo doesn't go past 900 or whatever it is but the mach indicator does. I honestly can't remember if the LIM light ever came on. Its pretty easy to replicate, I was doing it on the SA map, start at 30k be supersonic at start, dive like 20/30 deg. you gotta be careful cuz at some point like over m1.4/1.6 you start loosing control authority esp in roll. But if you are careful you can pull it out near the deck if you don't dive too steep. Just starting at sea level subsonic (SA map default settings) (clean full fuel load) you can just put it in burner and get it to 1.4 maybe even higher (I had to back off due to an uncommanded roll to the left). Given that that speed record for sea level is like m1.3 with that race modified F104 IDK, 1.4 seems a bit optimistic (and it was still climbing slowly when I throttled back). No idea on your survitesse bump thing. IDK I figure either something is off with overall drag for the model at high speeds or maybe the engine.

Honestly the aside from the overspeed stuff I quite like the FM, the shakes around m1.2 are interesting, the nose hunting around some near the transonic is intersting, and idk how real or not the lack of stability or "coupling" is but it certainly gives the F1 a very different "feel" vs some other modules that seem far more on rails.

Do you think like 1100 at sea level is too fast cuz it can be done in a dive. I've managed near m2 coming in from a dive and holding at sea level. I've gotten to m1.4 at se level with a clean jet accelerating from subsonic which seems off as well. It does make some scary noises at m1.2 but it will push thru.

Yeah this is basically correct. Its actually a function of contrast at range and the wavelengths you are using and then accounting for atmospheric transmission/absorption in those windows as well as overall target size/emissivity and reflectivity. So for example you are gonna have more absorption in the LWIR band than the MWIR band but you will be able to see "cooler" objects better in LWIR. Typically these days most military TGP's/IRST's are using sensors that see in LWIR or MWIR, or increasingly dual/multiband band sensors (I.e. PIRATE is a dual band IRST) and the tomcat AN/AAS-42 IRST was either MWIR though later LWIR. And of course aircraft signature is going to depend on aspect rather heavily as well as speed which gives rise to airframe heating and at supersonic speeds you also get signal from the bow shock (I've got a neat picture of that somewhere). At any rate anything fast at high altitude is basically the perfect detection case, i.e. you have a perfect contrast background vs "space" which is cold, you have much less atmosphere and humidity to work through, and your target if its fast is giving off a strong signature in the MWIR/LWIR bands. So for example you can see the SR-71 from crazy long distances, but that basically tells you almost nothing of that sensors performance in other use cases. I.e. you get major SNR reductions and false positives when the background is either clouds or looking down at the earth. Or detecting stuff at lower altitudes due to humidity and atmospheric absorption etc. Most early (pre-90's) IRST's had significant issues in look down scenarios or dealing with stuff like clouds because the signal processing tech of the day was basically either non existent or very primitive.

Something on the plane needs to blow up well before 1000kts....

My guess is upscaling. Which at the end of the day tends to look like crap. Even with a 4090 I doubt you'd be able to natively render that high. and given my experience with the DCS engine the issue tends to be CPU than the actual GPU so I'm pretty skeptical.

Yeah there is already a lively thread in the bugs section. But like the world speed record at sea level is several hundred knots short of that, thats like Mach 1.6-7.

Honestly I'd unmark that as solution and maybe change it to under investigation... Mirage F1 seems to have serious overspeed issues. Mind you this is in a dive with AB on but you can hit this pretty easily. Literally the world speed record at sea level is 896kts... So The F1 is like 200 over that... And actually I think it goes to 1200 before blowing up in DCS... That is unless you know something we don't. So unless Aerges position is that the F1 can do mach 1.8 at sea level this isn't a solution. World speed record: "The speed was set by a civilian F-104 with a borrowed military engine. The world low-altitude speed record was set by Darryl Greenamyer in a rebuilt F-104 on 24 October 1977 at 988.26 mph (869.67 kts; 1,590.45 km/hr). Since no one else has bested that record, the official answer is the F-104."

Yeah seems like the manual Cage/uncage behavior for the aim9J/P/Juli does too, they shouldn't autolock, aside from possibly Juli (that was handled plane side for 9L/M seekers). And the 9B shouldn't be able to uncage until fired.

Good work on most of the fixes, It seems like the FM got changed too, seems more jittery right around transsonic. Also, IDK if you guys caught it in testing but the F1 can now get stupid fast diving from high alt. Like 1100kt at near sea level... Pretty sure the plane should break doing that, or the engine. null

Yeah, it is a major limitation for BVR aircraft, though even with IFF gear for example the USAF in general had similar ROEs in VN, which was one of the reasons the US forces generally didn't do great, because they didn't really train for BFM much. Navy Crusaders basically were WVR machines and their training/usage reflected that so as a whole they did much better than other USAF/USN units as an example. Currently given the poor range of the R530's (realistically WVR) its generally not a huge problem currently for the mirage. Once the Super 530 makes it in the game I think it will be far more of one. And online servers will have to adapt IMO. On ECW (I assume this is the MP server you mean), the meta that evolved was that since blue F5's had 9P5's for armament which are basically BVR missiles when fired head on, they learned to work closely with human GCI's to find and localize targets. The mig21 with IFF on red those guys had little need for that so it never developed prior to the F1 being on the sever, and currently its "evolving". So I'd assume that whichever team ends up with the F1 will end up using human GCI's more for that reason. Which is totally realistic. One thing that DCS does badly overall is really modeling the level of SA that most fighter pilots realistically have for the non-DL planes (also why those planes are popular). For example if you looked at what hierarchical soviet era IADS/GCI nets looked like basically there is a radar on ever street corner covering everything, and each group of fighters has a lot of hand holding going on GCI wise. In DCS MP, on most servers you are lucky to have some random EWR's setup or a single awacs and tons of blind spots which is laughably unrealistic and seldom anyone doing GCI. A big part of the issue are clueless mission designers, but also the antiquated DCS radio setups. I had high hopes for something better from the IADS dev, but I guess thats been shelved for now so we are stuck with the ancient radio comms.

Yeah thanks for that. Also good thread for the other issues as well.

The K-13 which is based on the Gar8/aim-9B is bugged with regard to its uncage-lock/pre-firing behavior. Currently, you put the gun piper on the target until you get “tone” (~4 deg IFOV). Which automatically “locks” the target, and “uncages” the seeker head, and you can freely maneuver within the seeker gimbal limits (~25 deg). While this behavior or variations thereof may be found on later models of the aim-9 its not correct for the 9B since its seeker only uncages (locks) the target after being fired. Correct behavior would look like maneuver till you get tone on target. Then fire, and the firing process takes ~1 sec from depressing trigger to missile leaving the rail. The seeker gyro is uncaged with the firing command, never before. If the target maneuvers out of the 4 degree seeker FOV during this time you loose lock. Early versions of the sidewinder used a mechanical cage mechanism as described below. Later 9B versions used a magnetic cage mechanism which still mostly operated in similar fashion. While the K-13 did have "upgrades" namely a better motor, and upgraded gas generator, the seeker head/guidance unit worked the same as the 9B with regards to the seeker uncage behavior. The K-13M and K-13M1 likely could be uncaged. Pg 71 Pg 115 sidewinder Magnetic caging and firing sequence, and 9B firing sequence from OP 2309 (3rd) page 2-2AIM-9B (https://archive.org/details/OP23093rdAIM9B) Declassed pre-1980. As stated above, only AFTER firing does the gyro uncage. And finally the first sidewinder to have uncage capability was the aim9E as mentioned in the Project CHECO report from Vietnam (pg10-11). https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA486826

The Aim-9B is bugged with regard to its uncage-lock/pre-firing behavior. Currently, you put the gun piper on the target until you get “tone” (~4 deg IFOV). And if you hit the uncage switch you can “lock” the target, and “uncages” the seeker head, and you can freely maneuver within the seeker gimbal limits (~25 deg). While this behavior or variations thereof may be found on later models of the aim-9 (9P, 95 are uncagable) its not correct for the 9B since its seeker only uncages (locks) the target after being fired. Correct behavior would look like maneuver till you get tone on target. Then fire, and the firing process takes ~1 sec from depressing trigger to missile leaving the rail. The seeker gyro is uncaged with the firing command, never before. If the target maneuvers out of the 4 degree seeker FOV during this time you loose lock. Early versions of the sidewinder used a mechanical cage mechanism as described below. Later 9B versions used a magnetic cage mechanism which still mostly operated in similar fashion. And yes I know what the F5 -34 says and it is wrong in this regard (its correct for everything other than the 9B). The 9B could never be uncaged. Pg 71 Pg 115 sidewinder Magnetic caging and firing sequence, and 9B firing sequence from OP 2309 (3rd) page 2-2AIM-9B (https://archive.org/details/OP23093rdAIM9B) Declassed pre-1980. As stated above, only AFTER firing does the gyro uncage. And finally the first sidewinder to have uncage capability was the aim9E as mentioned in the Project CHECO report from Vietnam (pg10-11). https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA486826

The Gar8/aim-9B is bugged with regard to its uncage-lock/pre-firing behavior. Currently, you put the gun piper on the target until you get “tone” (~4 deg IFOV). Which automatically “locks” the target, and “uncages” the seeker head, and you can freely maneuver within the seeker gimbal limits (~25 deg). While this behavior or variations thereof may be found on later models of the aim-9 its not correct for the 9B since its seeker only uncages (locks) the target after being fired. Correct behavior would look like maneuver till you get tone on target. Then fire, and the firing process takes ~1 sec from depressing trigger to missile leaving the rail. The seeker gyro is uncaged with the firing command, never before. If the target maneuvers out of the 4 degree seeker FOV during this time you loose lock. Early versions of the sidewinder used a mechanical cage mechanism as described below. Later 9B versions used a magnetic cage mechanism which still mostly operated in similar fashion. Pg 71 Pg 115 sidewinder Magnetic caging and firing sequence, and 9B firing sequence from OP 2309 (3rd) page 2-2AIM-9B (https://archive.org/details/OP23093rdAIM9B) Declassed pre-1980. As stated above, only AFTER firing does the gyro uncage. And finally the first sidewinder to have uncage capability was the aim9E as mentioned in the Project CHECO report from Vietnam (pg10-11). https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA486826

There is a cutout on the bottom of it allowing access to the controls, easy to see in VR, impossible to use in VR...