Ironwulf

@NineLine - I have played the track file back myself and it doesn't replicate the behaviour in game. I am not sure if that's because its essentially a SP replay of an MP game or not. You will see I look up a number of times, that's me looking up to where the 'land' is.

I would've thought a P12 Search radar would come up as S... as that is what it is. The Fan Song track radar now appears as "2"... and I have had that a number of times no problem. The next thing to look for if the HARM hits the launcher is, did the SAM turn off its radar for the incoming ARM? I am not sure if this is modelled in the AI logic, but it is a real-world tactic. The C model is supposed to remember where it was and use INS to stay on course but I guess its not very accurate. The E model has GPS, I believe. The other thing to check is that the launcher wasn't in the path of the missile getting to the radar.

No, I literally started there at Khasab, loaded up with weapons, and then fell through the surface of the earth :/ Somewhat related to my other posts on this thread... On a server that has a lot of AI activity - firing SM-2 sams seems to be the sure-fire way - the missiles seem to ghost around - see my aim120 in space... there will be SM-2s under water and under the ground. There's no actual missile there, but you can F6 view them. If you leave the server and come back, they are gone.

Here's the tacview ACMI file to back it up http://voyager.hi-powered.net/files/dcs/issues/Tacview-20190607-180208-DCS-Through_The_InfernoPG_v77a_LSO_sandstorm.zip.acmi

Well my understanding is the HSI shows your position (horizontal situation), and INS can be a source for that. So can other sources. You asked 'how would you get the map to start of alignment IRL', as I said the presumption in the navigation system, as I recall it, is that waypoint zero is your start point, thus it knows where you are, and where the map should be. INS isn't a system that can work out where you are, like GPS... it can only tell you how far you've gone and in which direction, from where you started.

Here's a track file that should work http://voyager.hi-powered.net/files/dcs/issues/FallthruMapIssue.trk

The coordinates of WP0 have to be in the system for it to align to, hence it should know where it is.... its job is to get the INS to agree.

I got numerous CTDs using the A-10 on the Persian gulf map. Anyone else get the same?

Wouldn't be the board number would it? The voice sounds a lot like the one in the carrier comms update demo'd by wags

Looks like carrier TACAN may also be effected... our carrier started flying away at thousands of miles per hour (according to TACAN) to end up 9000miles away... even though it hadn't actually movedo n the map. Note changing channels away, and then back again brought it 'back'. Note whilst this was happening ILS navigation was fine....

Yeah I noted several AAMs 'flying' around, underground... just check the F6 view on the multiplayer servers and you will probably see it from AI missiles flying about and so on

I have only seen it happening with 100% regularity since the latest patch.

Also might be related... AIM-120s going full ASAT...

I have fallen through the map 3 times in Caucasus, randomly, and twice in PG.

I just tried to land at Khasab and sunk through the runway... but just throttled up and flew out again.... so went straight for a mountain and went through it... I only died when I struck a world object on the other side

As the subject says, you can unfold your wings but to everyone else in the F2 view etc, they're still folded.

See this for a bit of a workaround https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=242554

Interestingly I tried this method, and twice now I have fallen through the map.

I didn't have an issue in hot start... in facti t works correct, for me, with the A/C position being the same as the W0 position. In cold start, the hornet seems to think its at N0deg 0.00' E0deg 0.00' and it will not align but I concur that in the 'A/C' area of the HSI 'data' menu, the position seems correct. Interestingly precise mode seems to be working on the waypoint data entry... not sure if its related or not. Man I cant believe this is borked before a weekend! :(

Kev2go, that's a great video of a Marine retired Lt Col agreeing with the majority of what Spey says, and wheels out the 'military professionals never lie, inflate, or exaggerate', which Spey correctly shoots down. From kill counts in Vietnam, to Oliver North, military members of all ranks have either bent the truth or outright lied when their ass was on the line. Do I think pilots criticise the F-35 up the chain... most probably do, as the Lt Colonel says. Do they do it publicly, even if it is in the tax-paying public's interest to do so? Not if they want to fly - let alone have a service career - ever again. Apparently you can talk up an F-35 that even the Lt Col says has issues - that takes 4-5 reboots to even fly as the best we are gonna get... and that's not 'hype'. You cant talk it down to the same degree without being an uninformed 'charlatan', despite being involved in some of the most iconic and capable aircraft that delivered.. and still do today. The Colonel talks about the Network, the sensor fusion, the information access as being absolutely necessary in future war. I'd agree its definitely a game changer and something you want to have. Spey talks about what if that is not there? What if its jammed, hacked, there's solar flares which render satellites inoperable... or as currently happens seemingly frequently... it just CTD's on you in a dogfight. Can the fighter operate as a fighter within itself with stick, rudder, and basic sensors? For example: A Hornet is certainly crippled without its radar if it is jammed or malfunctions, but you can uncage the IR seeker and use it that way. You can use the gun - its unjammable, un-decoyable, and the only thing that will stop a bullet is armour plating which enemy aircraft don't have. I see talk of things like 'wont have to dogfight' and like Spey I am equally concerned as a taxpayer in a country that IS buying and now flying the F-35 because that is the exact same thing they said in the 50s and 60s. Its why F-4s needed gunpods (I noted the visual reference). It had to be redesigned to fit something 'experts' told us we'd never need - despite I am sure many others - you'd call them charlatans - saying you do. You can decry Spey all you want, but his criticism has foundations in common sense, experience, and knowledge, and if you view it as the words of someone that wants the same thing - the best fighters we can have for the purposes we need them, rather than someone dropping a turd in your birthday cake - then you know, as I am sure he does, that proving him wrong achieves that, as much as him being right.... because without that criticism, it might not be tested.

I should note this is also a problem in the T-Pod of the harrier... Anyway, here's a video I am sure most of us have seen from an AC-130 showing real explosions in a FLIR, and the resultant smoke... neither of which 'blind' the sensor.

in the A-10C you can play with the gain to get a slightly better image but gain is not modelled in the Hornet, for example. Probably need to have an automatically adjusted gain.... In any case smoke from a smoke marker should not be 'hot' - perhaps its source canister might be, but the smoke it self isn't so hot it would cause such a huge issue with FLIR

My understanding is when you use the DCS embark/disembark troops, it does model weight... however weight changes are not possible through 3rd party scripts like CTLD.

Not only ship, but oil and gas rigs too