Bunny Clark

Sorta. It's not really intended to be used that way, but it could be. The APU can drive either the right or left AMAD, and the AMAD can be decoupled from the engine if needed. The APU intake and exhaust isn't really designed for in-flight use so the manual recommends APU use should be attempted below 10,000 ft and 250 KCAS. See NATOPS I-2-27 through -28 (2.4.1 AMAD and 2.4.2 APU).

That doesn't make sense, as ED has already developed SAR ground mapping radar simulation for the F/A-18C, which does have it. The reason they're modeling the v5 version of the radar is because that's the one that was in use in the time frame they're modeling the Viper. Moving to the v9 would push the date of the aircraft back and necessitate modeling additional weapons and systems which they may not have complete or reliable information and documentation on.

When the USMC was trying to decide on a new pod, they determined that Lightening and ATFLIR were roughly equivalent in capabilities. They selected Lightening only because it was cheaper. ATFLIR has more optical zoom levels (3 instead of 2) while Lightening has more digital zoom. In real life, optical zoom is clearer, while the Lighting's digital zoom should get progressively more pixelated as you zoom in. Right now the Lightening at full digital zoom provides an unrealistically good image. Presumably this will get addressed when the new rendering system for targeting pods comes out, whenever that happens.

"Implementation does not match reality" is not a bug.

Your best bet is to crank the whole way in. Never drive right at a MiG-31, you're only increasing the range at which it can engage you. As soon as you commit, initiate an offset intercept all the way on your radar gimbal. Crank to reverse this offset every 10-15 seconds, and keep reversing the crank the whole way in until you're in AMRAAM range. Once you've launched, keep pressing, stay offensive, do not abort or disengage. The MiG-31 has advantage in BVR, but a Hornet has all the advantages in close, aggressively pushing in is your best tactic. Banzai, don't Skate. This gets considerably more difficult if there are multiple groups or the MiG-31 is operating above SAM cover. Pick your fights, try to bait them away from cover to engage you, or coordinate with other friendly groups. Taking on an enemy group outnumbered, especially from multiple angles, is always dangerous, and should be avoided unless you have exceptional SA and have a significant advantage over the bandits.

JDAM-ER was developed as a joint venture between Boeing and the RAAF, with Australian Hornets being the primary platform. I'm not aware that the USN or USMC have bought any or expressed interest in the program at all, they already have JSOW which is a similar system with better capability. So this is out of scope both in time frame and nationality.

There are two completely different altitude warning systems in the Hornet. There is the Warning Altitude, which can be set from the HSI DATA A/C subpage, and includes a separate barometric and radar warning altitude. That defaults to 5,000 feet baro and 0 feet (disabled) for radar. It will produce an "Altitude, Altitude" warning once when descending through it. The Radar Altimeter is set by the dial on the right knee panel, and it produces a "whoop whoop" for as long as you are below the bugged altitude. When the Radar Altimeter warning is active, the tone can be disabled from the UFC. It's hard to be sure, but it seems like the video may show a faster way to set the Warning Altitude. If so, this procedure is not documented in the version of NATOPS I have. It's also not clear if this only sets the baro warning, or if there may be some way to set either baro or radar.

The Hornet has full civilian ATC transponder capability, it's built into the IFF system. Military Mode 3C IFF is interoperable with civilian transponders and the 4-digit squawk code can be set with the IFF button on the UFC (which isn't modeled in DCS). TACAN is partially interoperable with VOR if you do the correct frequency to channel conversion. Quite a few major airports around the US have VORTAC systems which operate as co-located VOR and TACAN beacons. Overall this functionality wasn't considered to be critical for the Hornet because of its waypoint based-navigation system which does not need to rely on beacons to navigate to a fixed location.

In a general sense each block of an aircraft is a production run. Someone buys a bunch of F-16s, they're all manufactured, and those will have a common block number. In between blocks the manufacturer or purchaser may make small changes to the design to improve capabilities or make manufacturing and maintenance easier. The intent is that the block-to-block changes are not significant enough to warrant giving the aircraft a new variant designation, and are specific enough to be useful to mechanics and maintainers to know when parts or procedures are different from one airframe to another. All military aircraft have blocks, they're just don't usually differentiate capabilities because they're not really supposed to. That got kinda weird with the F-16. When the LANTIRN night attack variant of the F-16 was first designed, the USAF wanted to designate it the F-16G. Congress disagreed because they didn't want to be seen as funding a new aircraft type for political reasons and made the USAF continue to call it an F-16C. The USAF split the difference and internally call it the F-16CG instead. The same thing happened with the F-16CJ. The Common Configuration Improvement Program (CCIP) was intended to modernize the avionics of both the F-16CG and F-16CJ so that both could use the same software version. Aircraft that have completed this program are now labeled F-16CM. There are still some hardware differences between the F-16CM Block 40 and Block 50, but they're less significant than they used to be.

In my testing, it happens with both the Stennis and SC module ships.

As others have mentioned, the CNI is the DED's "home" page. You can always get there with DCS (dobber) left to RTN. Now, to get the radios to be in channel mode rather than frequency mode: open each radio with the COM1 or COM2 override button, type the channel number you want to select, then hit Enter.

Units in DCS have armor values and weapons have armor penetration values, so something like a small arm will not be able to do any damage to a tank. If a weapon impact is able to successfully penetrate the targets armor, then it does damage.

Unless there are features in Beta you absolutely need, I recommend working on Stable. Crap like this doesn't tend to make it to the Stable build nearly as often.

The preference is generally to dump fuel to get below max landing weight, rather than jettisoning weapons. Planners are pretty careful about sending up aircraft with a weapons load they will not be able to bring back to the boat if not used.

This should be fixed now, are you running the most up to date version of DCS World?

Everything looks fine on my end, confirm you're on 127.5?

Area track looks at the scene around the center of the image and uses a raster analyses to keep the pod pointing in as close to the same location as possible. In DCS this system functions perfectly, wherever you point the pod, it'll keep looking there so long as terrain does not obstruct the pod's view. Point track looks for a single object with a high local contrast and locks onto it, similar to how a Maverick seeker head works. It can be used to more precisely lock onto a vehicle or a hot spot and can also track moving targets. Because in DCS Area track works so well, moving targets are really the only reason to use Point track.

I've updated both versions to 2.9 which includes: -More reliable (hopefully) trigger for helicopters shot down and/or fleeing in Mission 2. -Cleaned up units hidden in Mission Planner. -Replaced the Courageous and Altair with the new Seawise Giant model, and updated the Mission 1 and 2 splash images. -(Hot Start campaign) Fixed several AI flights that were performing cold starts in Missions 10, 11, and 12.

Yah. I'd say we should have a sticky in this section that says "The DCS: F-16C module is a representation of a USAF F-16C and will not include any of the hundreds of possible options used by other nations that operate the F-16" ... but I suspect it wouldn't actually help.

Yup, CBUs need some serious love in DCS. They are consistently disappointing. I've shared this before, but this was two CBU-87s dropped as a pair on 5 fuel trucks. One was destroyed, two were damaged. Fuel Trucks.

In the F-16, the canopy is actually the component that sets the aircraft's maximum speed. If you go too fast, it's the first thing that will fail. They managed to improve on that speed a bit with the F-22, but not by much. The F-14 and F-15 are both theoretically faster. Interestingly, the F-35 is limited to a slower speed than either by its DSIs yet has a canopy bow. I'm not sure why that choice was necessary, without a HUD that would have been a hell of a view with an unobstructed canopy.

This isn't a Hornet issue, it effects all modules with moving map displays. The maps are part of the terrain module, and the maps are not finished at every scale for either the Marianas or Syria right now.

They're in the game for other modules, as well as the BDU-33, so I'd expect we'll get them eventually.

Yup, aircraft measure airspeed in a few different ways. Different ones have different uses. Indicated Airspeed is, as you describe, the direct measurement of ram air pressure from the pitot static system. This is the speed indicated on the analogue standby airspeed gauge. Calibrated Airspeed is derived from taking the Indicated Airspeed value and correcting it for various known errors imparted by the aircraft's hardware. This is the speed that is displayed in the HUD speed box. This speed is effected by density altitude, so it will be relatively lower at higher altitudes as you noted. This speed is extremely helpful for pilots because it reflects the speed and density of air going over the wings and control surfaces, so it will inform you of the way the aircraft will handle. An aircraft at 300 Knots CAS will handle the same regardless of altitude, air density, or wind. True Airspeed is the speed at which the aircraft is moving through the air around it, regardless of density and wind. You can come up with an approximation of this number by correcting for aircraft altitude, air density, and air temperature. Or you can measure it more exactly with a GPS system. This speed is displayed to the left of your aircraft symbol on the HSI and marked with a "T". Ground Speed is similar to True Airspeed, but corrected for wind, so it indicates the velocity of your track over the ground. This speed is most useful for navigation. It is displayed to the right of your aircraft symbol on the HSI and marked with a "G". There is also the Mach number, which represents your speed relative to the speed of sound. This is also a very important number as it has implications for the way your aircraft will handle and how efficiently it is moving through the air. It is displayed on the HUD and marked with an "M".

There are actually very few campaigns that really require AAR. And many that do these days provide some way around it. My Hornet campaign for example (link in sig) includes tankers in every mission but you'd only need them if you wasted a bunch of fuel flying the mission. It's also one of those things that gets easier with practice, just like landing. I actually find AAR relaxing now, no one is trying to kill me, I just have to fly the jet good.