deadpool
-
Posts
604 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by deadpool
-
-
Hey Developers we see roadmap on f 16 on 2020 year? Like we saw on f 18? ------------------------------------------------------>https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4364412#post4364412
Roadmap:
- AGM65 by end of April
do you need any more roadmap?
-
Question for you, how do I get the B000.0 to show on the HUD? Thanks!
I'd say by placing the waypoint at your altitude level. That way you're directly flying through it.
-
Hornet got 5 updates today.
Will Viper get 1? The one first scheduled for April?
No idea, whispers say "no".
But I am giving this new guy a chance, let's see what he comes up with in 2 months of full time work on the mavericks .. maybe they will be close to complete.
That's kind what I expect after all this time.
And from what you get after these 2 months of full-time-equivalent work you can guess how long the rest of the Viper is going to take :-D
-
It might get a bit more complete this week if we get AGM-65D that was originally planned for April.
Maybe.
Let's see how the Mavericks are implemented first. Depending on whether we get the TER with 2x (or god forbid 3x) Mavericks, there is usually some boresight adjusting involved before TGP/MAV handhoffs are precise etc.
All of this will not be in.
So put MAVs rudimentary in (I would be happy to have them nontheless) and I raise my 20-25% to 22-27%.
I kind of predict that for example, that doing this won't work when we get the MAVs:
- Have Mavericks on two pylons
- Select station 1. Lock MAV on target
- Use NWS button to switch to a second station with MAVs.
- Lock that MAV on a different target
- Fire the two MAVs in quick succession.
-
One thing people really need to understand is, that by design, the TCP/IP protocol was invented to prevent loss of data, not necessarily fast data transfers... It largely depends on your overall connection to the nearest CDN site, having the download available. That alone usually involves more than one network provider, at minimum yours and the CDN provider's... It's like asking Amazon to buy faster cars for parcel delivery to fix the delays by commute traffic jams or trying to use a detour.
Your point is valid, but did apolloace really use Steam (which would then be not EDs "fault" at all) or did he use non-torrent?
Because if he - like I suspect the majority here - uses normal updater without switching to http-mode, then I'd say torrent uses preferedly UDP.
But TCP got some nice additions to make it very suitable for high speed data transfers over the years.
All the best,
Deadpool
-
Yeah, dropped a GBU on a moving tank yesterday while the target was tracked by my tpod.
Due to laserpoint not being synced on the target, but always slightly lagging behind, the bomb fell a few cm behind said tank and it didn't go boom. Quite anticlimactic.
This issue + laserpoint lagging both combined made this possible.
-
I´ve been making some tests.
In order to fire an ASM, for example a salvo of 6 P-500 from the Moskva cruiser OTH, we need a OTH radar.
First I tried with the most logical plane; TU-142 as a recon.
No joy. The enemy ships are displayed in the F10 map and the ASM can only be launched IF the player shoot manually, using the assign target.
BUT, using an AWACS (A-50), ships are located AND the Moskva launches the P-500.
Tweaking the TU-142 LUA and adding the value AWACS, and doing the same test, the 142 detect and transmit the data and the ships engage OTH.
Maybe ED could tweak the RECON tag to achieve the same results as the AWACS tag. Mainly because the radar of the 142 is coded as SurfaceSearch in the dbsensors.
With this adjust to the tag "RECON", we wiil be able to use SH60 or KA-27 as radar picket helos.... well the KA-27 mujst be redone, because it lacks any radar.
And yes, the P-500 engage at 400km, the KH-41 at 200km and P-700 at 400km.
If the target is "donated" on launch by the AWACS, I would be really interested in knowing what the RWR will output. (And what it should output).
-
Weird observation i was able to replicate many times when experimenting with fast sync and vsync. I was using a mission in "over the hump" Mig29S campaign (the 2nd I think) where there is a flight of Su-25T that will conduct SEAD against SA-11s to test for smoothness of the settings. For some strange reason the Su-25s move and taxi ahead of my flight (causing collisions with my wingmen too) when Im on normal vsync and without triple buffering (triple buffering off). when in fast sync or vsync+triple buffer, they behave as supposed to, taxiing only after my flight. I've replicated it again and again for half a day, and they keep doing it only in normal vsync w/ triple buffer off. I honestly don't understand how this happens
(I'm not from ED or associated, just a curious person)
Would be interesting if you could generate a trackfile in the triple buffer off mode and then replay it in triple buffer on mode and see if that changes the playback already.
That would narrow it down to a "runtime" or "decisiontime" incident.
-
The OP is the one complaining for bugs and should search the forums and also post in the bug section for said bugs that he found.
This is THE ONLY WAY that bugs can be resolved. Not by complaining.
It's definitely the only way.
Community contributed bug reports is definitely a huge thing, yes.
But the majority of bugs should be found inside the development pipeline by ED's and third party's own testers. But of course - especially with games - and open beta, using the users as beta testers is an economical measure that makes sense.
-
Look on the product page. Short answer is - it's not very far along, 80% of stuff is missing and development is going to be slow due to the focus on the Hornet. If you only want to do air to air in a PvP environment the Viper is fairly decent and complete for that role, anything else I'd say you stay away from it.
BVR, yes.
BFM, definitely no.
-
It was reported in Dec 2019 already.
The ACM modes in the F-16 take way longer / aren't working in comparison to F-14, F-18, etc.
Threads:
Most likely thread this should be merged with https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=257840 and/or https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=262460
Other information about Boresight mode in particular not slewing the radar continously:
-
If you want to employ MRM with FCR ACM (quickly) then you would typically select DGFT in order to get FCR ACM and then using MSL STEP to change to the AIM-120. That's a two button press to desired configuration.
I second that MRM does not mean ACM modes.
DGFT means ACM modes.
Beware: there is a current defect, that when having a locked target, switching to DGFT and subsequently to ACM will drop that target. That is not correct and was reported already.
-
This is a human thing, which means that every pilot will be different, and any pilot's G tolerance won't even be the same day to day. It does seem that DCS is a bit punishing when it comes to GLOC, but that is very difficult to say with any certainty. Don't expect that your digital pilot should be able to always hit some specific metric of performance to be "realistic."
Yes, yes.
But in DCS we have a model pilot who behaves statistically the same.
Beneficial effects are however:
- G-Warmup (modelled)
- Seat inclination (F-16, not modelled)
- Overpressure mask (F-16, not modelled)
- G-Suit (no idea if the model pilot behaves differently in airplanes with G-suit than in airplanes without one)
-
If you had to assume how complete viper is in percentages what would you say?
But I can't say it's unplayable either. I am having a blast doing ag missions with viper. Going really fast over enemy and dropping mk 82 airs and taking some screenshot when zsu 23's are firing at you. Or doing old school sam hunting with sa-3's. I know it's far from complete but I am having so much good fun with viper at this stage. Just my few cents here.
I'd say about 20-25% if you take TPOD and HTS and stuff into account.
-
Hint: only switch on NWS below 60 kts to prevent spilling tea.
True: the Viper is one of the easiest to manage fighters in the air but groundwise it can be a bitch.
Main gear position is pretty much too narrow for highspeed cornering.
Well, I had crosswind conditions (well within operational limits for the airport and viper) that had me do a full rudder deflection at 100kts on the runway and I still would yaw sideways towards the green. so I tend to activate NWS as early as possible, as the plane's behaviour on the ground is just unrealistic anyhow.
And I didn't even land crabbed in the crosswind. Try doing that and you're done for immediatly.
-
The hornet isn't 95% done, far from it. And they (the customers that bought it) deserve it to be finished before the Viper. Sad truth.
-
First of all, F-35 and F-22 also have more reclined seats, although not to the extreme point of the Viper.
And now for the helpful bits:
In DCS it seems you can exceed limits for a brief moment of time (~3 seconds) before your pilot seems to lapse into dreamland.
F-14 and other jets can use those 3 seconds to get to whatever amounts of g instantly.
The Viper - contrary to literature - is really taking a damn long time building up the gs .. so you can't use that "spike" effectively either.
There are a couple of other bits in the viper that help in high-g conditions.
A good G-suit
The reclined seat (although if what I heard is correct that's mainly as blood doesn't collect that much in the legs due to the specific leg angles? no source on that though)
And the overpressure mask that helps to get air into your lungs when pulling gs.
Should they give the viper-driver a slight edge? yeah ..
Right now this whole G issue (combined with some engine performance and onset stuff) is what makes the F-16 quite teethless in dogfights. The regime you're supposed to be good in .. is not accessible. Thanks a bunch.
And because you brought up other planes, Zergburger,
This is a game and aspects like the crew chief yelling at you, or the airframe being worth scrap after you bring it home aren't modelled.
This means the G-Override button in the FA18 is almost constantly pressed.
This means the F-14 pilots don't give a cent about their INS, their Flaps, their wing sweep mechanism, or stress fractures.
And that's something they get away with. And by that they are put in a place where they are able to pull more G than the viper driver.
Yet another laugh and spit in the face in terms of realism. But hey, there are other games where this is modelled correctly. This is something that needs serious rework before the F-16 is usable in dogfights against anyone but beginners.
-
I need to write things down, but I have a couple of ideas how to build an Environment-SNR-based radar logic that takes chaff / statistically modelled birds / ground, whatnot into account.
Although as said before, radars go for chaff too. Ones like F-14B/MiG-29A probably easier than our mid-2000s F-18s/JF-17.That matches with what I heard from IRL pilots as well. You basically try to keep the radar guessing and make it hard to aquire / reaquire. Basically don't wait until you're fired upon.
-
If after detection, you go into the beam at BVR range, the AI won't engage you, but will keep pointing the nose constantly tracking on you.
The AI knows better than to waste a missile on someone who's so close to notching :-)
-
Also just to add:
When firing a FOX1 on something and retaining a solid lock all the way through ..
The missile has no chance in hell to go for chaff! ... Just saying.
It has in DCS.
-
Frankenstein was the creator, not the monster. :doh:
Sorry just while we are needling people about being accurate......:smilewink:
-S
+1 :-D
-
Having to push AA again could be because you end up in NAV mode? Unsure about this.
But if so, it might be related to this: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=268399
-
I still have never heard of an F-16 or other modern fighter that isn’t F-14 that can track in the notch with radar. Just becuase the F-14 is older, I don’t think that necessarily means something later has all the same features.
The doppler component is used in a heavy zero speed clutter environment (ground or chaff) to be able to have some criteria to make out the target.
Imagine you are running after a guy who stole something from you. Now even if it's very crowded it's a safe bet that he will keep on running and thus you can easily make him out even in a crowd.
But if he stops running in a crowd, you'll lose him .. if he stops running on an open space, you would be pretty dumb to lose him.
Are you telling me that in order to get a look down / shoot down capability the entire set of modern radars has sacrificed the little MLC AUTO switch from the F-14 and made itself completely blind for beaming targets? I think not.
A modern radar might be even more awesome. Think of a line going straight from your radar to the target.
You ---------------------------------------> Target Ground
Then your radar would be awesome enough to know the target range when locked and apply range gates to it .. so that returns outside of that gate won't even be taken into account for drawing conclusions on its position.
You ---------------------------------------> Target Ground | Range gate | -
How is there a non Doppler component of RWS? The AWG-9 requires to be in pulse and main lobe cutter removed, so it only works in an uplook situation and has to be deliberate
I think you are mistaken.
Take an AWG-9 set it to RWS or even TWS (any PD mode) and have MLC to AUTO.
If your radar is now looking up more than 3° it will disable the MLC.
Now your radar sweeps across the sky and you get returns for the different planes.
MLC means that those returns with a doppler shift of less than 133 kts +/- will be analog filtered out. They won't reach the weapon computer and won't be shown. not even on your DDD.
Now given a target above 3° will generate a nice fat return, albeit without a large doppler shift as he is notching. You will still get the blip and all the other bonus features that come with it (making the target go boom for example).
And that "return" is what I mean by the other component to a radar return other than the doppler one.
Now why am I saying this? Because that's what happens automatic in the F-14's radar system.
In the F-16 radar system the MLC so to speak won't disengage and you will lose the fricking contact from your scope .. even when you're looking up.
The F-16 should have even more automatisms in it's radar. (Same goes for the FA18)
They work fairly well against poor or average defense techniques. Albeit even often arguably poor against bad defense techniques if you happen to have a good timing.A very simple example is a target having a stable G turn in a certain direction, if it happens to go through the notch at the perfect moment, even if for a split second the missile returns to 1 G and will miss even if reacquired because after the neutral 1 G moment the intercept geometry is impossible. This actually occurs a lot, resulting a lot of situations where a bandit should absolutely be dead but gets to live another fight.
If it only had a simple extrapolation method, a sustained G in plane turn should not be able to spoof it if the notch is only occuring momentarily.
Typically if you go against an AI he will notch you every time with a 2 G U-turn casually, notching for maybe not even 100 ms. I haven't checked in the recent months but ~ half a year ago this was the case.
Yeah, it's still the case and it's absolutely arcade. Right now you can notch when the missile is looking almost level. You can notch when you're 6000ft away from the ground and the missile is just a few hundred feet away from you. It's just a huge big counter that reminds me more of dark souls than flight simulations.
Please dedicate more people to fixing the core game before adding new features...
in DCS Core Wish List
Posted
I don't know these numbers, nor did I claim or hint at that I do.