Shimmergloom667

TXDSG dashed or solid (for flight members) lines are supposed to be green, to the best of my knowledge.

Referencing FF as a speed indication was pretty standard for F-14s, e.g.

Mind you: there has been no official confirmation about the implementation of boresighting Mavs in the Hornet so far.

Tankers absolutely do turn in real life while refueling. The one thing they usually do is call out an upcoming turn on freq. That said: refueling in a bank is the same as refueling in a straight line, just with a canted horizon. You still make the same adjustments and look for the same cues. It's even easier at night, where you just look at the tanker anyways.

It is the tanker altitude in feet MSL barometric. I mean: in the end you will be in about the same altitude as well, of course.

That is correct and thusly not applicable

You want a +0 when you look staight ahead. That's not possible currently. The head position in the hornet is somewhat different than in other modules as well, but even in Wags' own HMD alignment video you will see that looking ahead at the HUD has him looking at a value of aroud -15° That's just how it is, atm.

Didn't fly the A-10 in ages, so I'm certainly just giving you the benefit of doubt here. Let me rephrase it: in the totality of the TGP modeling the ingame rendition is overperforming since a lot of factors are not modeled (deeply enough), a lot of which have been mentioned in this thread. Again I will say: I hope the weather and FLIR reworks will improve on all of that.

Absolutely! Given that the 2.7 weather engine is still being worked on as well I hope that the FLIR and weather improvements in tandem will lead to an awesome rendition of optical systems where you actually have to struggle sometimes. And I am not talking about lack of contrast on the CCD circuit below clouds or stuff

It does depend on a lot of factors. But our ingame rendition suffers no quality loss at all. Literally none, as of yet. While we may disagree on the details, I kinda can't believe that doesnt strike you as odd.

While true in that DDIs that in turned have been filmed with an old GoPro at 720i aren't 100% faithful to real life: there is such a PLETHORA of older TGP videos available (as in: mid 2000s) that all show our ingame ones to be of too high clarity, without focus issues, without sensor exposure, without digital zoom quality loss that I kindly disagree. You are very true in that in the end ED have to decide what to make of all possible sources, including SME opinions of course. I, too, have some experience with hi quality civilian stuff, made very recently no less - and that again leads me to say: our ingame renditions of optical systems are way too overperforming.

You certainly will, it should look like blurry green blobs more often than not, though, that suddenly go up in a bright green overexposure blob of fiery goodness.

No, it is based on dozens of videos of LITENINGs, ATFLIRs, various civilian camera systems etc. performing in regular old athmospheric conditions. Heatblur come close with their LANTIRN implementation that features quality loss in digital zoom (not present in either EDs LITENING or ATFLIR), sensor overexposure, DIS come close with thjeir implemenation of zoom and focus in the WMD7. All that is lacking in EDs TGPs right now.

Every FLIR we have in the game right now is overperforming. I hope they all get tuned down and get more realistic visuals with the upcoming FLIR rework.

It always was RAID/HARM/Flir as a keybind, so something must have been busted on your end earlier, if you could use NWS/Undesignate for that.

Flew SEAD today with the squad, no issues with HARM TOO handoff.

It looks like you have a display mod installed, since the font colour of your DDIs looks off, unless that screenshot just looks weird

Doesn't matter for DCS - no USN/USMC = no DCS Hornet

That one is not yet fully implemented

The thought is: it's just how track replays work. They record all inputs made to the birds in order to essentially replay whatever happens. Due to the intricacies of this, at some point (specially in longer tracks) desyncs WILL occur and stuff will go wrong. Essentially the track replay is not a "video replay" function, but a debug function to log stuff that happened and see how it affected the simulation - but you would use shorter, isolated tracks of the incident you want to debug / file a bug report on for that.

Redkite makes the best indepth videos, Wags' own videos are great as well, of course - I wouldn't go the video-way of learning, though (but that's me, it's just taking too long) but rather grab Chuck's Guide to the Hornet: https://www.mudspike.com/chucks-guides-dcs-f-a-18c-hornet/

Source for that? I mean, we DO have more than on/off in the A-10...

But you said it takes all of 5 minutes: put a target on a map, hop in a Hornet and verify that the Mav isn't slewing when it's been handed off from another sensor. Where's that 1+ hour coming from?

What are you talking about a GoPro? If you can reliably reproduce the issue, why don't you create the requested track yourself? Do what you said: take those 5 minutes to put a target on a map, hop in a Hornet and verify that the Mav isn't slewing when it's been handed off from another sensor. Finish mission -> save track -> upload track to your bug report -> done.

That said: is the discrepancy between age-out of the *bricks* and actual age.out of the trackfiles being worked upon? Because the latter shouldn't age out to begin with.