JTFF - Raph

I'm strungling with tracks, we did a full setup with 4 people and I think the new missile model desync. At least on tacview the R27's were completely desync compared to other amunition. Doing tracks with AI is possible but two things are problematic I think : - The fact that the AI defends missiles with the least "DCS engine" necessary maneuver (like a little barrel roll sometimes) - The fact that there might be a bug on AI difficulty settings and the MIG-29 radar (read on forums) Should the ECCM enhance the illumination ? Or this system should be only picture preservation/HUD sym ?

Same here, R27R are missing everything with solid locks and even without chaffs. The best results I had during past week of testing are near misses close to the target without detonation. I hope it can be adressed, the Fulcrum buyers are suffering a lot. Did a quick flight to capture some examples and had some funny things like 180° turns on my aircraft when the bandit is defending. Solid lock on this. nullnull

The trick might be to check the range relation between the intermediate target like this diagram? With less accuracy but less time we could divide the range in quarters (less or more) and apply it to the intermediate target seen in the scope ? This is on vertical plane. Idk if it is the fastest way without using trigonometry lol. Edit : dividing the range of the primary target by the number of DeltaH clics might be the trick

Based on ED response here is what I would do : If you have no GCI BRAA on this "pop up" target you would set down your delta H knob (+1 or even 0) since the TDC movement induces a "non-linear" antenna elevation. By doing that you will at least avoid that you antenna is to far up above the pop-up. Basically I would guesstimate the delta H of this popup. But at 10 miles you should search for a VID in your example. A medium ranges, if there is some time there might be a math trick to get the angle of a intermediate target in your scope

Okay makes sense so the expected range managed via throttle wheel would be accurate on a MIG-23 but not on MIG-29. Thanks a lot for the explanations. The good new is that we are learning a system that may not be changed in the future, but still really challenging in some situations (target switching).

Hi, So if I understand correctly, the range management on FC3 was wrong and this wheel is not used for delta H in the real jet ? If it is the case I think a lot of people will be disapointed since it is one of the worst Delta H management solutions... This implementation creates major changes on antenna elevation angle at each tiny cursor movement, while the FC3 system was only bound to the wheel so completely independent and "linear" on the elevation plan.

Hello I've checked if the man range wheel implementation was already mentionned by ED but didn't find it. Is it planned to implement the manual range wheel ? At this moment the TDC range management is a big problem for antenna elevation. Here is a video showing these particular cases. Have a good day

Yep here is what I try to on my tests : - Work on acquisition (mainly in HPRF, sometimes AUTO, but if AUTO works as intended it might use the wrong PRF cycle and fail initial lock) - Work on closure rate like a rocket - Dump one alamo or both if forcing the merge (is the jet guiding both with two sep DL chans ? Or one is in degraded inertial mode ?) - Then switch to MPRF at closer range (or when target is starting to maneuver) And most of time I loose lock here, still reviewing tacviews to see if it is bad radar management or speed gate. This trash almost 90% of my shots because lock is broken in final guidance. - Then trying RHS/FHS to try to get back a last minute track file. At this "transition" range it is to short for CC unfortunately, so there is a time gap before really getting in merge. Regarding COOP I only push the switch but migh be mistaking on usage

In fact, with friends we were really disoriented when we realized that the wheel was not working and we had no range. And yes your video answered the question ! I understand that the TDC is the actual range ref and can put your antenna onto orbit if you slide your TDC down. Also what CrazyGman pointed out on HUD scales changes between Head-on/Pursuit makes it even more challenging. Btw very good video, well explained and detailed. Learned cool tricks and then shared it to people discovering eastern radars. It will help a lot man.

@AeriaGloria I will check your video as well, I've just seen it after posting.

Hi, First of all, I want to thank ED team for this clean and well appreciated release. The Fulcrum is awesome. Now concerning this topic. I also noticed some inconsistency during radar usage but : at this moment we don't really know how ED team plans to design this radar model. So it is hard to say if something is a bug or not. In the first release of the manual there is no sufficient informations to juge wether or not everything is correct or bugged. Based on what I read in DCS forums or heard from well documented DCS members I made with hexcalidraw a "fulcrum radar workflow". It would be appreciated to have a feedback from ED team and from you guys to have a clear view on : - What we should expect from the radar (in terms of performance etc) - What is implemented or not at this moment - What will be implemented or not in the future - How to correctly operate this radar (it might change depending on DCS tactics or historical doctrines) - Correct this diagram and maybe give an accurate one for the future manual versions if it helps community With that, I think we could have more tools to understand what we are doing, what might be a bug or not and save a lot of time for everyone I guess. PS : I won't debate on open source data or anything else external from DCS forums since I had problems with moderation in the past, so I will rely only on your advice and hopefully on ED team' feedback. Have a good day !

Any news regarding the HOTAS implementation and bugs please ?

@Oldcrow Jr. 62 You are absolutely right, regarding noise jamming this relies on signal/noise. On a barrage jamming the BT is far away, in spot jamming the BT is closer to the victim (because you are either spreading your energy or concentrating it). Some previous posts are hidden but it seems BT range is hardcoded and active in DCS. Regarding deception you don't need that much power, you just catch the signal, process it, inject error and send it back. Kind regards

Hello I took a look back in DCS F-16's manual to check if we had an overview of the actual implementation of the ECM pod. I finally found it, they updated this section. Here is what they are trying to simulate at this moment : XMIT 1 : Deception jamming with degraded FCR (simulates the fact that the FWD antenna is not used to prevent jamming of front onboard transceivers) XMIT 2 : Deception jamming with FCR put in standby (simulates onboard transceiver jamming). FWD antenna inhibited if AIM-120 weapon profile is selected (like XMIT 1) XMIT 3 : Continuous noise jamming with BT range (barrage, spot or sweep spot) So if the two deceptions modes are working, we could be locked but we should be inducing error to the tracking radar. The SA-5 is not HOJ capable so we might be able to see missiles passing arround us. For an SA-10 it should be able to shoot at us weather we are jamming or not. Edit for deception : If we are locked we can disrupt it, but if we are not we can create multiple false targets to mask us, forcing the victim to handle multiple targets, find the true target or do some HOJ. ED own documentation My conclusions for now : - In modes 1 and 2 the tracking radars should have "false targets" and it might disrupt a lock or missile guidance (except for HOJ) - The actual ECM coverage is not accurate (omnidirectionnal instead of directional to the front and aft) - We do not know what type of deception jamming ED wants to or are already simulating, so it is hard to tell what behavior we can expect from tracking radars or FCR I will give it a try when I have more time. @RyanR Your problem must be caused by the FCR being turned to STBY. As you can see the documentation ED is 'turning off' the FCR to simulate it is completely jammed by your pod. You should have your FCR operating but degraded in mode 1, or in mode 2 with AIM-120 selected only. With ECM not transmitting you should have acccess to your FCR with its full power. EDIT : this is explained that all actual EW pods in DCS are identical, excepted for weight and drag values. EDITED and corrected wrong sentences

Hello @RyanR I dont know if WHOGX5 did some tests on the 131 version, personnally I didn't. In fact we see that the actual implementation of the 184 is not really acurate and we are trying to give them more data. My last post is under examination so we don't know exactly how ED wants to implement EW, at least what degree of fidelity they are targeting and what type of data they are looking for if needed. I don't think there is really a bug with the actual pod but maybe there is ? As you can see you may have to jam with XMIT 3 which seems to be more acurate at this moment. Let us know if you have better results with the 131 but I am pretty sure that 131, 184 short and 184 long have the same code Kind regards