Rubberduck85

Thank you @BIGNEWY, I understand this is not game-breaking but I hope ED finds the time/resources to rework the current implementation. Regards

Any feedback for this? Regards

Less accuracy? Yes definitely. Better yet coupled with less awareness. I find it hardly believable that a tank column (just tanks/APC/trucks, nothing with radar anywhere on the map) can see me approaching from behind/front at 500 kts / 300 ft AGL and react in any coherent manner... This is just how the all-seeing AI works.

@BIGNEWY hi, did you have a chance to review the documents pm'd last week? Any update on this? Regards

This was done last week, let's see ED's reply.

Guys/girls can we stay on topic? This was started to understand the difference, avionics-wise, between master arm/off/sim and understand if DCS: F-16 simulates correctly. It is not a post for sharing individual/squadron/real/realistic/anecdotal SOPs on master arm, even if they are truly interesting! Thanks

@BIGNEWY sent you a PM as requested. Regards

@BIGNEWY @NineLine the logic of the Master Arm / off / SIM in the current implementation is apparently incomplete, is this a W.I.P.? Are the devs going to revisit it? Thanks!

So the current functionality of SAFE is not correct due to that fact that shows the simbology?

Hello, To me it's clear the goal of SIM mode, which is to enable weapons related avionics use/interaction but ultimately preventing ordinance delivery. But what does the current simulation of SIM offer vs leaving the switch in "off/neutral" position? Example: Currently if i engage A-G master mode while in ARM, i get all the delivery hud simbology (ccip/ccrp/dtos) with bombs and access to WPN camera feed from mavericks or HAS for Harms. The same if i engage SIM. But the same also in leaving the switch to "off". Shouldn't leaving the switch to "off" inhibit all weapons employment symbology/MFD pages, while engaging ARM/SIM enable it? Regards

Or...remove cmds_ale47.lua from the integrity checklist until DTC is developed and deployed. It would take less than a minute to add the exception. As @Falconeer said, no possible cheat/exploit is possible in this regard. And the initiative of pure client is laudable, but this looks extreme. I see your point but we already have BYPASS for how "95% of us" supposedly use CMs. 1 press= 1 chaff + 1 flare. Long story short: imho the cascaded effects of pure client enforcement on this specific file, while not having a DTC, is a QOL decrease if you wanna use custom programs. Unless someone has a fetish for data entry... Regards

+1 no time to enter custom cms programs via DED every time...

Hello Devs, I kindly ask you to re-open this bug report (opened by me). It was marked as fixed and indeed there was an improvement: when in Crus->Home interacting with the rocker to change the HMPT now does not change "active" STPT (thanks!). However i've found this: airstart, flight plan of 3 STPTs (#3 being the landing airbase) if I go to Crus->Home and change the HMPT to #3 it does not change the active STPT (correct behaviour). But when I exit Crus->Home, reach STPT #1 and switch to STPT#2, when i go back to Crus->Home the HMPT is now #4. Again if i exit and change active STPT (#2->#3) when i go back to Crus->Home it will now be #5. Apparently if I change the HMPT and exit the Crus->Home page, every increase (or decrease) I make to active STPT will be reflected to the HMPT, but this should not happen, HMPT should remain what i set it to be indipendently from what i select as active STPT in navigation. This bug does not occur if i leave HMPT unchanged, only if I interact with the sub-page and change it to something different from #1 Track attached. Same behaviour with cold and dark start but track was too large. Regards F-16_CRUS_HMPT_BUG.trk

Thank you ED for implementing this! null

Hi, I have no track to offer, but during a closed multiplayer session 2 months ago i singlehandedly shot down 11 F-16 all at the same time, just by sharing a markpoint. Sadly they were on my side, so no "double ace in a day" badge There might be some issues on the receiving end of data link transmission. Regards

Haven't had the chance to try and apply the tables yet: is speed (dive speed) a factor to be considered? Regards

I suppose in a "guns team deathmatch" you employ guns, to employ guns you need to see your target so... give it a good look to visually IFF before shooting. It would help to have different skins for different teams to help in visual ID. Regards

I agree but this should be applied all across the board to DCS modules, updating the rearming interaction. Older gbus remain older gbus and should be set by the ground crew for all modules. Regards Rubberduck Sent from my MI 10 Lite 5G using Tapatalk

Thank you! Yes, that was what i meant and is also specified in the documents i mentioned. One has to enable through M-SEL the CRUS HOME to see cues on the HUD and "activate" the Steerpoint. But if CRUS HOME is not enabled through M-SEL we should be able to change and monitor the home steerpoint indipendently of the currently active one. As of now there is no way to select HMPT on the DED it with the "dobber" switch and change it with the ICP rocker switch. Regards Rubberduck

Hi, one of the document I was thinking of has already been mentioned by user itn. Yes, it refers to mid-life upgrade of older variants and i think it makes sense also for block 50. I can also refer to block 50: unsure if these are classified so i will not post excerpts. I do not intend to be cheeky here, this consideration is based on logic: it is at the very least impractical and potentially dangerous IRL to have the plane change course just to check remaining fuel estimates. Also, the HOME subfunction should trigger a FUEL advisory on the HUD (bottom left) if the estimated remaining fuel over HOME Point is less than 800 lbs, telling the pilot that it's really time to go home. Edit: this is pretty much similar to the FPAS page on the F/A-18C. Kind regards Rubberduck

Hi, this maybe be a bug or a WIP. With the last open beta (v 2.7.15.25026) ED modeled the cruise page, accessible on DED by pressing ICP button 5 (thank you!!!). The submode "HOME" should give me the optimal cruise speed & altitude to a specifically designated HMPT wich I believe stands for Homeplate, or my designated location for landing and ending my flight. However i noticed that the steerpoint (STP) selection for this submode is the same for the currently selected (active) STP. Example: if i have a 10 STP flight plan, with 10 being my homeplate, if i'm flying the leg between 4 and 5 (with 5 selected as active STP), HOME shows optimal data for STP 5. I cannot select a different STP in the submode without changing my active STP. Shouldn't the selected HMPT be indipendent from my currently active STP? While flying with autopilot (alt hold + strg sel), in order to see the optimal profile i force the plane to make deviation from the flight plan. Regards Rubberduck

Have fun! Sent from my MI 10 Lite 5G using Tapatalk

Hi, i got my orion2 with F-16 grip last week and i set it up like this regarding throttle motion range: 1) i never touched the DCS settings of the specific axis (RX i believe), except maybe inverting it. 2) in the SimApPro tool i calibrated that axis from idle to max by moving it forward and back as required. Note: from idle to max, whereas max is Full afterburner and not MIL. 3) i set the DCS control of Idle and cut off to match the position of the throttle ( in the SimApPro tool you see that those positions are actually BUTTONS and can be mapped! Result: i do now have the throttle physical range of motion matching the the sim range of motion (verified by enabling the Ctrl+enter combination). I can start the engine by freeing the throttle from cutoff to idle when rpm reaches 20% and it works 1:1 in the sim. It's pretty cool, i love this piece of hardware! Regards Sent from my MI 10 Lite 5G using Tapatalk

Ok thanks! I also see it has been tagged as " coming soon" Regards Sent from my MI 10 Lite 5G using Tapatalk

Hi, is the AG radar supposed to assist in ranging in CCIP mode? Should it "ping" the terrain to offer a more precise distance calculation to the CCIP aimpoint? Regards