N8AHbl4

It is mentioned it the famous apg-65 doc. I would expect better explanation in the (C) marked docs. But since the APG-73 performance is completely made up from the EDs assumptions already, why not.

nullhttps://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/fulcrum/ Sooo maybe AN/APG-73 on the Hornet can get the passive ranging against jammers as well perhaps????

From what i remember, main issue is that it ignores PAN shift when creating a zone in multicrew. PAN -> move far from the ownship symbol -> BAM -> create zone -> created zone jums to the ownship just if it was created with no PAN. Even if you just select BAM and try to create zone, it will automatically go to freeze and mess up with the zone position if aircraft changed course while creating. Makes PFZ/NFZ totally unusable in multicrew.

With a Hellfire missile seeker.

+

Same with H FRG 46

Sounds like it would be actually more complicated to add a mechanism that prevents the radar from the missile support, if it is launched at non-radar track. Speaking of MSI stuff, i wonder if the offboard tracks IFF info should contribute to the EW page threat classification. Because right now, the threat becomes hostile only if correlated with onboard hostile track. Also altho i know that most of the MSI logic applies only to the A-A modes, would it be possible to designate the offboard A-G track by any chance?

surely we'll get the f-35 before those

surely ED would need to make the entire API for the single button, which would be still broken in 1 year after the initial implementation.

First Bug: Perry's missile launcher does not have a missile model on the rail before the launch. Second Bug: RGM-84D lacks the booster node and doesn't have the wings deployment animation. edit - this one seems to be reported and fixed Third Bug: SM-1 missile should have its fins deployed on the rail before the launch. Track: OliverPerryRGM84D.trk

Nah mate, its like this with basically every ED module. The proper name for such threads would be «Check if the feature that you want is "not planned" or "not accurate for the very specific variant of the aircraft"»

It seems like on the recovery one of the directors was in the wires, and Wags said it will depend on the ATC comms, which didn't sound good honestly. Hopefully, one day we will have all the deck configuration switches for the ME, triggers, and Boss like switches for each cat, launch recovery configuration and maybe to switch the availability of the parking/spawn points)

You do if you want to take some bombs back

В этом видео видно, как в рамках переднего квадранта появляются какие-то желтые символы, двигаются по окружности в соответствии с манёвром самолёта, и пропадают через несколько секунд после выпадания из квадранта. https://russian.rt.com/russia/video/380069-bombometanie-su-34-aviaciya