Kula66

Many thanks for posting @Lt_Jaeger, I'll check this out ... I thought these got shut down as they were considered 'unrealistic'.

The seems to have been a lot of discussion regarding this since the 1606 patch, but no entry here. ED, should 54s be appearing on radar of 18s and 14s or is this considered a bug and will be fixed?

Sorry, perfect would have been (a) this switch change was introduced with a corresponding jester extension, or (b) a hot fix is out now. These issues just increase the perception that the 14 is full of issues/bugs

Good news IM. Is this likely to be out next week as a hotfix, or are we looking at a months time?

Thanks IM. I can see this being a particular issue, since many BVR comps end up low, and since the 54 drops quite a distance when you launch, I often pull up hard just before firing ... potentially, and unconsciously, triggering this issue - not that I've seen it my self.

Thanks IM, I'd always assumed the DDD was what the radar was seeing right now, and that the TID was your view of what the WCS HAS seen recently, ie. included things seen in the last seconds, but potentially, no longer visible at the current moment. I guess that's what comes from never having sat in the back!

This maybe a stupid question, given the level of knowledge and research you guys do, but I'll ask it anyway: is this definitely how it works in RL? I can understand it impacting the raw processing on the DDD, but if it also applies to the TID, it will effect all tracks shown on the TID as the RIO switches from NOSE to BEAM to TAIL aspect of only one of those targets?? So, if I have 6 targets, some hot, some beaming, some cold, some may disappear as the RIO switches through the different ASPECT modes - seems very odd.

Thanks again IM, much appreciated.

see

Thanks IM. But if I accelerate, I risk the target disappearing just as I shoot IF our closure goes above 1200kts ... considering a high fast 16 can be at M1.5 already. Ideally, I need to flip the switch to NOSE, accelerate, shoot, then ... switch to BEAM and crank? Would that drop the contact? And if I lose him for a few seconds, it is highly likely the missile is trashed when he reappears and a second separate track is identified and the first one X's out. In my limited experience, slow against multiple competent opponents is not really a good place to be in a heavily loaded cat. I guess we'll come up with something!

If I'm trying to give my shot a good start energy wise, I'll generally try and be high and fast, certainly around M1.0 ... and if he turns towards me, he'll disappear from my radar. Can you please make it a bindable command for the pilot like TWS or RWS?

See my post in the Bugs section

Awaiting a response from HB, but this may be related to a recent change 'Fixed RIO aspect switch affecting only DDD, it now affects target tracking, too.'

So, if I'm in a 14 with Jester at 650kts GS and a 16 is flying head on towards me at GS 650kts ... I won't see it! And how do I change that switch setting with Jester in a MP setting? ie. I can't hop in the back. So all I need to do to kill a 14 in a 16, is fly head on fast and he can't see me!! Awesome!

Were the targets closing you with a combined closure of 1200+kts (eg. head on) and do you fly with Jester or RIO?

Thanks. So, pardon my ignorance, but would that filter out targets with relative closing speed at greater than 1200kts?

Yes, @DroptheHammerposted some solid analysis in the discussion, but it seemed to be drowned out.

This has no basis in evidence, but could this entry in the change log have any impact 'Fixed RIO aspect switch affecting only DDD, it now affects target tracking, too.'

Interesting ... What's the default position? Could it filter out a front aspect target? PS> I never sit in the back seat

How recent is that change?

There was a lot of debate, and the decision was made to allow the 14, with a number of fairly major restrictions and penalties (ie. forfeit a round) for desync. I really sympathise with the tournament organisers, there is a perception among a fair few people that the 14/54 is broken, and they are trying to find a compromise to keep everyone happy, but there are some people convinced its got massive issues and has had for months. This latest 'feature' (54s appearing on radar) really hasn't helped!

Ok, happened again on a different server and different test mission. I was flying toward a 16 and 18 and firing 54s (I had to mad dog them, hence the switch is up) to see if he could track them. I could see my 54s on TID in RWS, but not either of the bandits. We were roughly co-alt at ranges from 80 miles. I appreciate that you won't be able to see anything from the TID view! RWS or TWS didn't make a difference. UPDATE: For info, it was happening to another 14 player before I joined.

The SPQR guys put together a great composite video of this: NOTE: I did not change the target size switch from default.

Thanks IM. Is this something you were aware of previously? I ask because its been mentioned for quite a while; should we bring things like this to this forum for your attention? I was very surprised that all these 'major' issue being banded about, have little or no posts either here or in the ED/Missile bug forums. I guess most of them aren't issues at all, but lack of understanding.

The examples I was shown, after being told it happened 'all the time', were: * a perceived 54 reacquiring issue after being spoofed off target by chaff. The 54 appearing to weave towards the target ... but to me this again seems 'reasonable' in a tacview that was shown to me as a good example of an issue. * a 54 suddenly 'reacquiring' after going stupid at launch; but this seems to me to be the 54 flying straight after launch and then starting to track the target after a few seconds ... its easy to see because of the massive bent smoke trail, but some people claimed this was an issue. Is this expected behaviour? Nobody could show me an example from the current TACT comp ... examples using recent DCS builds in a stable environment. I know you have an established trusted testing team, but I'm also happy to assist in any testing if you need numbers.