Spurts

no not LMC, IAT. from the manual, Image Auto Track/Offset. Initiates and controls image auto tracking and offset tracking. • IAT (forward), short. Enables image-auto track and establishes the object under the cursor as the primary track. • IAT (forward), long. Activates manual sizing of the tracking gates. • OFS (aft). When offset tracking, returns TADS LOS to the primary track.

and Wing tanks and targeting pods unless 2xGBU-28s are being carried you can include my above additions.

Is the auto image stabilization not working? I try flicking the switch to "lock" the TADS on a target to help compensate for pilot input wiggle but it seems to have no effect.

Come to think of it, I can't even tell what the commands are to use voice coms.

He would be an excellent resource, but we kind of need an interested developer first.

That's why we all want the BN AI to be named Tiger, so we can go DOWNTOWN!

AESA vs MSA in general

Thanks @draconusand @Naquaii! That clears up so much for me! I trusted there was something that allowed our version to be accurate and I appreciate you verifying that for me.

No worries @fat creason. Thanks for the heads up though. I am all too familiar with real life getting in the way of DCS.

And yet that is what we have. Makes me wonder

https://youtu.be/w_81hEGuVwM Recording problems, sorry

All this talk of amazing PTID clarity, and we have a TID. They really make it sound like TID was never used with LANTIRN. Truly a remarkable story about getting the capability so fast that the Hornet Mafia couldn't react in time to stop it.

F-4s didn't maneuver until missiles were 9nm out

I'm just waiting for the TF30 tuning. IIRC that is still to come.

One day you pull a 350lb deadlift and it feels great, the next week 325 feels impossible. This is very much a thing. I thought this too until this week. Having recently had this discussed by someone who did this study, the gain is about the vertical distance between the eyes and heart. The first 10deg of recline actually makes it worse, the next 10 get you back to normal, and going to 30 only gets you a net 10deg gain. This also means if you "look up" to follow a bandit you are increasing that distance and are more likely to black out.

Similar to fighting the Phoenix now, lots of pre-emptive notching and dynamic flying to try and bleed the speed. Oh, and fly low. The Meteor has to chose between "high" flight speed or high flight range when in thicker air. It is a throttleable ram-rocket but the radome is not protected against high temperatures (i.e. Mach numbers). What I've read says the max mach of the Radome is ~3.5M so it has to modulate throttle to not exceed that due to thermal heating. Lower altitude causes heating to happen at lower speeds so it has to reduce speed even more.

Yeah, it's been done to death that the F-14D IRST was too sensitive to have docs released under ITAR, since it is the basis of the LEGION/IRST-21. And unless something changed since I last looked, the Tiffy being made does NOT have an IRST.

in short, no, not AFAIK. ED models each store with a given drag property. IRL different stores have different properties depending on their mounting locations and aircraft. I'd be happy to be wrong on this though

Don't worry, they'll just ban the Meteor and IRIS-T like they banned the Phoenix.

That would be the APG-68(v)9 mentioned

None of the SAMs in DCS are really dangerous if they're deployed unrealistically. That SA-11 would be surrounded by SHORAD, such as SA-15s and SA-19s (and a bunch of AAA), which can and will take out at least some HARMs, even if they approach in a top-down trajectory. Which is why I had to start adding SA-19 to my SA-10 sites. By itself it was too easy to do a low level ingress and even dumb bomb the snot out of the SA-10 (as I have done with the F-14 and AV-8B in the past)

clickpit does not mean ASM, but we can dream. ASM F-15C would be unreal.

The above is largely how I pop SA-10s too, but once I throw an SA-19 is as a defender of the SA-10 that doesn't work anymore.

https://youtu.be/ZJYTFffgYvg I wont say latest and greatest, but latest.

Exactly. The SW functions of the F-35 radar are classified enough that they make the F-16V impossible at study-sim level. The F-35 is just MORE impossible. Now, a FC3 style SSM could be possible where the radar is buffed (mostly in scan volume and update time and the ability to do A-A, GMT, etc at the same time.) to just say "this is close enough to what an AESA would function like compared to MSA".