AstonMartinDBS

100 % reproduceable in current OB. A short track attached FA-18C HSI AUTO.trk

Providing a short track supports ED to research that problem as quick as possible, no matter how nonsensical it may seem to you.

v2.2.1 released: new kneeboard design

v1.2.1 released: cosmetic fix of printable and kneeboard version, new kneeboard design

It would be helpful if you provide a link to the solution. You're probably not the only one with this problem...

This is another (known and already reported) issue, when you fly several maps within one DCS session...

@Minsky: The threat code for the Arleigh Burke (315) on your RWR kneeboard page is incorrect. The correct code is 412. Source: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p77yaLQJaUMbAIKJDKX5iMN5N5qm_Qqt_dJNyJjLQtw/edit#gid=0

v1.2.0 released: added code for Arleigh Burke, updated RWR symbols for Type 071, Type 052B, Type 052C and Type 054A

v2.2.0 released: added code for Arleigh Burke, updated RWR symbols for Type 071, Type 052B, Type 052C and Type 054A

Yes, CLAR PB and CLAR SL. I don't know if MAN works at the moment.

I'm not an expert but I think the codes are related to the HARM but not to the plane. That counts at least for all so far published codes for the Hornet and Viper by ED. I'll give it a try and do some testing tomorrow. Maybe 315 is a valid code for both, the Ticonderoga & Arleigh Burke class. Anyhow do both classes use the same main Radar system (AN/SPY-1). Edit: I've found the code, it's 412. Source: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p77yaLQJaUMbAIKJDKX5iMN5N5qm_Qqt_dJNyJjLQtw/edit#gid=0 The patch notes obviously referred exactly to this table. Thx anyway for your hints!

According to the Patch Notes for DCS 2.7 the Arleigh Burke has been added to the ALIC Table for the Viper. Does anybody know the threat code for the Arleigh Burke, so I can add it to my code table?

If that folder doesn't exist, just create it: Standalone Stable or Steam Version of DCS: %USERPROFILE%\Saved Games\DCS\Kneeboard\FA-18C_hornet Standalone Open Beta: %USERPROFILE%\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Kneeboard\FA-18C_hornet

Try the override function for the GBU-24. To activate the override just box [CLAR OVR] in the SMS page using PB12.

Same issue with the LITENING II since 2.7 btw (see attached Track). I can't believe that this is correct, because this would mean, that the TGPs are not useable for tracking moving targets at certain day times... FA-18C LITENING PTRK issue 01.trk

Even when I was right over the target (< 1 NM), I wasn't able to get a track. I already know this. @Harker confirmed it in the other thread.

Even if this problem has already been marked as "correct as is" in this thread, I don't think that this behaviour is correct. I just can't get a valid lock even though the distance to the targets is far below 8 NM and the contrast is very high - neither in WHOT nor in BHOT. Settings: Map: PG Date/Time: 21st June 2016, 05:15 Clouds: High Scattered 3 Testrun 1 level flight @15k ft, ATFLIR: FA-18C ATFLIR AUTO issue 01.trk Testrun 3 level flight @6k ft, ATFLIR: FA-18C ATFLIR AUTO issue 03.trk Testrun 4 level flight @6k ft, LITENING II: FA-18C LITENING PTRK issue 01.trk

Not yet AFAIK. Both, the official hornet early access guide and chucks hornet guide cover only the SP and TOO modes at this time. But here you can find a tutorial from Wags for the new HARM (sub)modes (PB and SP Push back).

We had to wait quite long for this update but the hard wait was really worth it. During download I saw a long thread about significant FPS drops. Due to my mid-range PC I was afraid that I'm affected as well. But to my surprise I cannot complain about a noteworthy performance loss so far. Big thanks @ED for this great update which brings besides the visual improvements a lot of new features as well as bug fixes!

The bug seems to be fixed! Thanks @ED! But I hope, embarking won't break again in one of the next updates.

Thanks for your feedback. But both, the F/A-18C and the F-16C version contains exactly the same amount of threats (currently 49). The two versions are simply structured differently because I've separated the three standard tables for the Viper. The rest is splitted into land based (AAA/SAM) and naval vessels.

As a workaround you can find a code table here:

What? How?

Excellent job @Minsky! Thx for sharing your great kneeboards!

Ah, alles klar. Den Menüpunkt habe ich zwar schon mal registriert, aber ausprobiert habe ich diese Funktion bislang noch nicht. Danke!