nomdeplume

The error 30 metre error margin (should be ±15m) is for the precision of the coordinates entry into the system. The actual "waypoint position rendered in the HUD" margin of error will be impacted by the INS drift, which is said to be up to 1 nautical mile per hour of flight. So in normal use, the waypoint will be in the right neighbourhood, but not such that you can just attack the waypoint and expect to hit your target. Azrayen touched on this, but I thought it might be helpful to explicitly explain: the GBU-12 is a laser-guided bomb. Without a laser reflection to home in on, it's no more accurate than a Mk-82 iron bomb. The M-2000C lacks a laser designator so is unable to provide that guidance. This is why you need a third-party to lase the target. Even if the M-2000C's Inertial Navigation System (INS) was accurate enough to provide a very accurate fix of the aircraft's position (which it isn't), it still wouldn't be able to put a freefall bomb close enough to a target to be useful from mid- or high altitude, due to the things that can't reasonably be calculated by the ballistics computer: varying winds, pylon misalignment, imperfect pilots not achieving the precisely required release attitude, etc.

This is normally due to loadouts using the 'old' missiles (the ones that have been part of DCS World for ages), rather than the 'new' ones. Re-arming manually should work; the new configuration only allows the new ones, which have 'Matra' at the start of their names. You might want to edit/recreate your saved loadouts.

If you hit Ctrl+ScrollLock a couple of times you'll get a frame counter with a breakdown of where the system is spending its time. Comparing the breakdown between in-cockpit and external views might give a clue as to where the problem lies.

99.999% sure that was a joke. Although now I kind of want a tailwheel on my Mirage. Anyway, earlier in the thread: So it's known and it's being worked on, and will be fixed when it's fixed. But the forums being what they are, people will continue to 'report' this until it's actually fixed (and then for a week or so after that). It seems that pulling back lightens the load on the gear and reduces the effect of these 'issues'. Also, anticipating the behaviour helps a lot. If you correct the drift and centre your pedals once you're going straight again, you'll keep turning and wind up oscillating back and forth until you lose control.

I stand corrected, but I really meant more in terms of its avionics and weapons capabilities. Even though the DCS M-2000C and DCS F-15C (for example) are arguably only a few years apart, the ability to use ARH and track and launch on multiple targets simultaneously creates a huge capability gap. Though on reflection, perhaps most of the Mirage's deficiencies are down to its role/design purpose: it's a light interceptor, and will naturally struggle against air superiority fighters. Though I think the DCS F-15C would be 'better' at all air-to-air missions than the M-2000C RDI, probably same for Su-27.

It's a generation behind those fighters, so of course it's not going to be able to face them 1v1 on even footing. If the newer jets are restricted to SARH missiles it'll have more of a chance of closing, but new jets are designed to outperform old jets in all categories. That said, both the F-15 and Su-27 are flown by people, and people make mistakes. So if you make fewer mistakes, you can still win. Like other DCS modules, Razbam are not trying to make something that is nicely balanced with other fighters in the game. They are trying to recreate an 1980s era light interceptor with all the limitations the real aircraft had. If it could match the performance of newer fighters, nobody would have made newer fighters since they weren't better than what already existed. When it's ready . :D At the moment, the forums are the best way. The sticky "M-2000C Pending Update Fix List" thread is the best single thread to follow for news, although there's also discussion there. No, not yet. Razbam have indicated they plan to implement it later as its lack of use in real M-2000C aircraft is probably due to just not being required for their role, not a technical inability to utilise the detector pylons. I don't know the details, and probably nobody who really knows the details will tell. But basically, yes. Although in most sims people usually use semi-automatic mode at most, because fully automatic dispensing of countermeasures tends to waste a lot of them. LL is the decoy launcher. When powered, you can launch flares/chaffs. That part is already implemented, the automatic dispension of countermeasures when a threat is detected isn't, and neither are different countermeasure programs/sequences. Not sure I'd agree with it being the 'heart', people have been flying and navigating for a long time before these fancy schmancy navigation systems were developed. From a user functionality point of view, the main addition will be the ability to add/edit waypoints from the cockpit. This will primarily be useful for CAS missions. Also, INS drift should be modelled in some way. This means the aircraft's notion of its position will lose accuracy as you fly, up to about 1 nautical mile per hour. The effect will be the instruments that point you to your waypoint will only be pointing you roughly to the right position. No, this is not functionality the Mirage 2000C has. And I'm not sure how you figure asking another player to lase the target is not useful. Why play MP if you're not going to play with other people? The nature of public servers makes it difficult to set up anything that requires coordination, and they tend to run missions for a long time so providing AI-lased targets for everyone is a bit of a hassle. On the plus side, dropping LGBs from the M-2000C is probably the least interesting thing you can do with it. So you could potentially do a few deliveries in single-player, go "hmm, I guess that was kind of neat", and then not worry about it anymore? :)

The same way they guide on a air-based laser? :) In a nutshell: The bomb has a seeker/laser receiver on its nose which is able to detect the laser energy reflected from a target*. It has some electronics which actuate control surfaces to alter the bomb's trajectory in order to put the reflected signal in the centre of its 'vision' and keep it there. Which results in the bomb hitting whatever the laser is being reflected from. The pilot is responsible for releasing the bomb such that its trajectory will allow the seeker to pick up the reflected laser energy, and therefore begin guiding. Until it does so, it's simply a normal dumb bomb that flies a normal dumb bomb ballistic trajectory. If the launch platform can detect laser emissions itself, then it can provide some kind of assistance to the pilot. e.g. the A-10A's Pave Penny pod could provide an indicator on the HUD as to where it was detecting laser energy, so the pilot could bomb that spot. More sophisticated targeting pods can enter a laser scan/search mode, stopping when they pick up a signal and pointing themselves (and the pilot) right at it. This also helps to ensure whoever is responsible for lasing the target actually is doing so. If the launch platform has no laser receiver capacity (like the M-2000C), the pilot just performs a regular delivery to place the bomb on (or close to) the target, and hopes whoever is responsible for providing the terminal laser guidance is doing so. The target position is communicated by normal means, e.g. over the radio, pre-briefed, etc. * - it can also detect laser energy which isn't reflected, so RL procedure is to make sure the attacking aircraft is behind the thing doing the lasing, so it only sees the reflected energy, not the actual emitter itself.

From my understanding, it's just an alternative means of getting the target altitude, like RS (radar altimeter - assume target is at the same altitude as the terrain directly under the jet) or TAS (actually measure the slant range between the jet and the target and derive altitude from that). PI just uses the altitude of your current waypoint as the 'terrain elevation' for its ballistic calculations, rather than actually measuring anything. Since in many cases you'll have a waypoint at or near your target position, this is information already entered into the system, and PI just provides a means of accessing it. This should be pretty accurate, assuming that both the elevation in the waypoint and your altimeter are correct. Speculating here, but I don't think the Mirage 2000C's targeting computer utilises its position (as in lat/long, actual place in the world) in any way, nor that of the target. The INS notion of the aircraft's position is likely to be too innacurate for that to be reliable so it's just not used at all. Target designation in CCRP mode sets a position relative to the aircraft, so the absolute positioning error is irrelevant - the only errors that affect the solution are those that accumulate between designation and weapon release, which should be measured in tens of seconds, if that. For CCIP, the ballistics computer is continously tracing the weapon trajectory to whatever its notion of "ground level" is. For PI mode, it's just a flat plane at the waypoint elevation. For RS/TAS it would be a constantly changing plane; but I wouldn't be surprised if the pipper position was 'smoothed' to make it more usable. I thought jojo made it pretty clear that ±30m was the expected error resulting purely from data entry, as an indication that the system was not designed with precise positioning in mind. The number of people repeating now repeating "30 metres" as if it's the expected error margin in a dumb bomb release from 30,000 feet is amazing (even if it's only 2 or 3... it's still amazing). And yes, Paveways are dumb bombs until (and unless) they detect the laser spot.

This thread is several years old. The mission editor has changed a lot so even if you could find this mod it wouldn't work properly (or possibly at all :D).

There is an option in the .. options menu .. which is something along the lines of "use these settings for all missions", which might override at least some of the settings in the mission itself. Can't look at the mission at the moment and I'm not sure what the screenshot is supposed to be showing. How did you remove the extra aircraft? My best guess is that you're set up as the lead in a flight of four aircraft, and you deleted the entire flight - so when you start the mission you just have an external camera somewhere? If you want to go solo, then you'd have to select the flight which includes the player aircraft, and reduce the number of aircraft in it to 1. That will get rid of the AI aircraft. The player aircraft is the one with the skill level set to "player" (you can also use "client", but "player" works smoother for single-player).

The built-in scoring mechanisms only apply to the player (OFFLINE) or to coalitions (BLUE/RED, for multiplayer). I don't think there's any way to access individual player scores from the triggers or scripting interfaces. You could probably use SLmod or similar, if you're comfortable requiring server-side support. If it's a group exercise (i.e. the group of players needs to destroy a certain number of targets, not each individual player) then it'd be fairly easy to do within the trigger system. Since you described it as a race, it sounds like you need individual player scores, so that means you'll probably be looking at writing an event handler that tracks kills for individual players. It'll get a bit fiddly but should be doable if you're familiar with the Lua scripting system, or willing to spend some time learning it.

I also noticed that landing waypoints now have a parking option as well, so you can set AI aircraft to taxi and park in particular spots. When I tried this a few versions ago (on the Black Sea map) it didn't appear to work. Haven't really checked lately, but I did notice yesterday aircraft taxiing to where I wanted them. Not sure if just coincidence or if they were actually following orders. I'm not sure when this functionality was added but it was new to me, so just thought I'd mention it.

The checkbox on the left side says whether or not this setting is enforced for this particular mission. The checkbox on the right hand side says what to enforce. So if you tick "Unlimited weapons" on the left side, but leave the right side off, then that means Unlimited weapons is not allowed (forced off) for the mission. If you tick both boxes, then it will be enabled. This allows you to e.g. force labels off, etc.

I've noticed the rocket pods suggest AA mode. They are quite small compared to other A-G stores and are fitted on the same stations that carry the A-A missiles, so perhaps this is correct and the pods can handle 9G?

Well, it sounds like the S-3B can work okay because it simply can't go any faster, so is unable to speed up. Don't know if that really can be considered 'working' though. :)

Just did a mission where I used most of my fuel (about 700 kg left when I reached the tanker). Still had the (empty) centreline tank attached. As soon as I made contact and started taking fuel, the conf warning light enabled (I was in A-A mode). Thought that sounded like a good idea to change it to Stores mode anyway, so I flipped it. I only refueled to about 2,500 kg, which should not be enough to start filling the external tank. Center "RL" indicator light on the fuel panel remains on, indicating the centre tank is empty, as expected. However the CONF warning light logic still thinks I should be in stores mode, not A-A. Just in case it's relevant, I had no other stores remaining at all. Mission loadout was standard 2x S-530 and 2x R-550 plus centreline fuel, but all four missiles (and all cannon ammunition) had been expended.

Most? What other modules does it speed up for?

The DCS World User Manual provides documentation about the mission editor. There's a shortcut in your start menu, or you can find it in the "Docs" folder under the game installation directory. Since you're editing an existing mission, you'll just want to find the groups you're interested in and change the aircraft type. Setting the skill level to 'Player' will make it the default aircraft for single player, and 'Client' will make it available for multiplayer, or the role selection menu in single player. But, I don't think the forums will be able to help much with such basic usage of the editor. You could alternatively create a new mission in it, and place down a new airplane group (with the Airplane icon in the toolbar on the left), and play around to familiarise yourself with the editor a bit. That might make it a bit easier to understand an existing mission.

...and the logs are located under DCS in your "Saved Games" folder. If you're using the open beta it'll be DCS.openbeta. Under Saved Games\DCS you'll find a folder called Logs, you can just zip that up and attach here. Or if there's lots in there, the specific files of entries are the DCS.log, the .crash file and the .dmp file (if they exist) from your session. A new DCS.log is created each time you start the game. The previous one is kept as dcs.log.old, but if you've restarted more than once the log will be gone. Alternatively, since you can reproduce it fairly easily, you could (while the game isn't running) delete all the files in your Log folder, then start the game, join a server, fly until it crashes, and then zip up the Logs folder and attach it here.

The wiki says aircraft have their own AI, but that doesn't apply to ground units. You can use disable unit AI to shut down a specific unit, which might do what you want. I'm not sure how that'd effect group movement, they might still want to wait for that unit to be close enough before continuing.

You read right, but it's believed the C has all the internal bits necessary for it, they just don't normally install the external sensors since it's much less useful for the intercept role they actually use the C's for. Or something like that. So Razbam plan to implement it, anyway, since the aircraft supports it and DCS users won't be using only it for intercept/air-to-air.

It will check for updates once every 24 hours when launched via the normal shortcut. You can also force an update check at any time by running the 'Update DCS World' shortcut. (Assuming the standalone version, of course - Steam version will be updated like other Steam products.) Yep, turbine damage was added a few (open beta) updates ago, they got pushed to the release version yesterday. You need to increase the fuel flow slower, to keep the rotor RPM and turbine RPM needles in sync. So basically, you increase the fuel flow to get the turbine RPM to just beyond where the rotor engages (~ 30k), wait for the rotor to catch up, then gradually increase the flow rate til it's at full. If you just jam the fuel flow to full, the turbine will overspeed and rip itself apart. Or see here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=166770

Also I think this is fixed pretty thoroughly in the latest open beta releases, although your saved loadout configurations might still have the old settings that don't work properly. Just re-assign the payloads in the mission editor so the new configs are saved and you'll be fine. They made a change that forces symmetrical loadouts but the old loadouts don't work properly with it.

Magic currently only lock at the boresight cross at the top of the HUD, slaving the IR seeker to the radar lock is not currently implemented. So your missile was launched without a lock. You'll hear the seeker tone change when the Magic is locked, and there's also a HUD indication. Not sure, I never use the RDO; I think it used to automatically lock in PIC but that changed recently. I was watching a stream and the guy mentioned it, and I think also said that just pressing lock again doesn't work. So, seems like you might need the cursor over the contact to go into PIC. But, I'm pretty sure a lot of this is WIP still, and very subject to change.

Matra rocket pods were added for the outer pylons in the last update to the open beta, i.e. the one before this weekend's update. And, thanks Zeus. :)