Jump to content

S. Low

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    948

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by S. Low

    F-18 ECM Jammer Questions

    in DCS: F/A-18C

    Posted

    I had no idea the ecm was affecting my own radar lol. What does it do on receive mode? And maybe this is why people are having issues with the hornet radar because they don’t realize the ecm is putting their radar in standby?

    Campaign? So... finally yes! Thx!

    in DCS: Mi-24P Hind

    Posted

    Well I'm not saying I WANT them or others to stop putting effort into scripted indepth campaigns, I'm just saying it's likely after they put all this effort into a dynamic campaign they will likely weigh resource expenditures and say "well, we don't NEED a campaign for this new module because we already have a dynamic campaign module" 🙂

    Cold war restricted F/A-18C

    in DCS: F/A-18C

    Posted · Edited by Relic

    Here are some restricted loadouts I came up with, if I can remember correctly since I’m not at home. Modify them based on how much fuel you need. Might need more tanks and less bombs etc:

     

    JHMCS OFF - SELF RESTRICTED (not sure if you can turn this off in editor)

     

    CAP: AIM-9L*2, AIM-7M*2, FUEL*3

    ALERT: same, fuel*1

    INTERCEPT: 9L*2, 7M*4, fuel*2

    CAS 1: 9L*2, 7M*2, Rockets*8, fuel*1

    CAS 2: 9L*2, 7M*2, 82*8, fuel*1

    CAS 3: 9L*2, 7M*2, 83*4, fuel*2

    CAS 4: 9L*2, 7M*2, 84*2, fuel*2

    CAS 5: 9L*2, 7M*2, Rockeyes*4, fuel*2

    CAS 6: .... you get the idea. Swap for GBU 12, or 16, or AGM-65E, or AGM-88

     

    Hope it helps. Or someone comes along and corrects my bad loadouts. Either way! 😄

     

    Edit: corrected aim-9L typos

    • Like 1

    Cold war restricted F/A-18C

    in DCS: F/A-18C

    Posted · Edited by Relic

    9 hours ago, Tholozor said:

    AGM-65F was IOC c.1991, you could do Laser Maverick though (IOC c. 1985).

     

    Huh I had it backwards. I swore I read that the f model came first. Thanks though 

     

    edit: oh my goodness, why would f come before e. My brain lol.

    2 hours ago, Foka said:

    I didn't see anyone mentioned - you can't use any GPS/INS guided weapons, co na JDAMS, JSOW etc.

    Laser guided bombs:

    yes: -12, -10. -16

    GBU-24 was introduced in 1984, so it's ok for "Late Cold War".

     

    But since you can use TGP, you'll need a JTAC or FAC(A).

     

    CBU-99/Mk-20 is also ok.

     

     

    Yeah I had figured already that the jsow/ jdams were out.

     

    How did they use the E mav if they had no TGP? JTAC only?

    Cold war restricted F/A-18C

    in DCS: F/A-18C

    Posted · Edited by Relic

    1 hour ago, Machalot said:

    You could also try the F-5 or the Viggen.

    I don't see a reason to get the Viggen, personally. My brain-space is limited lmao. And when the apache releases all of my modern aircraft memory will be spent on it. I have the F-5 on my wish list. Maybe eventually. 

    1 hour ago, Tholozor said:

    LITENING no. Baseline pods reached IOC in '99, and the AT version we have is circa '03. Hornets around that time were using AAS-38 Nitehawk pods (for the squadrons that even had them; better off letting strikers like the the A-6 take care of it).

     

    Same for JHMCS, that's an early-to-mid 2000s system.

     

    You could possibly get away with 7MH for a late Cold War setup; that entered service around '87.

     

    9M would be a no, you'd be stuck with 9L. The 9M-1 didn't enter service until '82, but that was USAF only. The Navy didn't get 9M until the Gulf War, and even then they mostly used 9L.

     

    For a mid-to-late Cold War setup for the Hornet, expect a lot of dumb bombs, Rockeyes, and maybe a HARM here or there (may be a stretch since the 88C entered service in the early 90s, but HARM in general were in service since '85).

     

     

    Thanks this is the extra detail I was looking for. 

     

    Edit: But what about the F model maverick? It was released by then, but was it not used with navy hornets?

    Cold war restricted F/A-18C

    in DCS: F/A-18C

    Posted

    Hey everyone,

     

    I think I want to restrict myself to cold war era and nothing beyond, and I put the cut off point at 1990. It seems doable in the F-18 but I'm just asking for some extra eyes to help me out. I know I need to remove the AMRAAMS and 9Xs from my loadouts. I think the 7MH is ok though, obviously the 7M is fine if the MH isn't. Based on dates pulled from wikipedia I think most of the A/G weaponry is ok aside from the AGM-154s. 

     

    Is there anything else I'm missing other than removing AIM-120s, AIM-9Xs, and AGM-154s? Is the litening pod ok? The JHMCS? I'm most comfortable jet-wise with the F-18. I could go back to the Mirage if I needed to though. I love the F-14 but don't prefer it over the F-18 and Mirage. 

     

    It's just that the active radar stuff and more modern post cold war tools are becoming less interesting to me. 

     

    Thanks 

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1

    Mi-24 Facing the reality.

    in DCS: Mi-24P Hind

    Posted

    4 hours ago, CoBlue said:

    With antitank-missiles, it may be effective, but still challenging coz of the periscope-sight, time & high-speed to aim, according to the lead developer PilotMi8.

     

    With the current splash-fragmentation damage the rockets won't bring much in terms of semi-realistic combat scenarios.

     

    Right now DCS is only semi-realistic with precision weapons:

    In terms of combat effectiveness even against light-armored enemies I'm setting my expectations very low.

     

    I apologize, I don't understand your point here. The entire reason for precision armor penetration weapons is because "splash damage" doesn't do anything to armor. Or did I miss something in historical weapons development? If I'm wrong about splash damage in real life then I welcome some education, but my understanding is you need penetrating warheads specifically because a shockwave with small frag isn't going to do anything to armor.

    • Like 2

    VIRPIL lead times

    in VIRPIL Controls

    Posted

    As requested by Virpil on their store page, I waited a week (8 days actually) before sending an email to virpil support asking for a lead time on my order. It's been about 3 days now with no reply on that email. 

     

    Is there a lead time on requests for lead time? lol 😄

    Pre-ordered!

    in DCS: Mi-24P Hind

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:


    who forces you to use Steam? I started on DCS on 2013, on  Steam sale with 75% off .. good times where those.
     

    But after only 6 months I realized that I was going to be with DCS for the long haul, so I switched to stand-alone on 2014, mostly to better support the developers and avoid the 30% cut of Steam. Never regretted this switch.

    And I've stuck with Steam since its inception and haven't regretted it once. I'll stay with Steam, but thanks for the input! If ED gets a pre-order discount for Steam users, great. If not then I oh well. I enjoy discounts on the other products.

    Tell me I am not Dreaming

    in DCS: AH-64D

    Posted

    52 minutes ago, veenee said:

    I am not going to buy it just because it is an Apache, which I like, but not to that degree that I want it regardless.

     

    Other people are much bigger fans of that platform, and will buy it anyway, which is absolutely fine.

     

    However, "I want to say I understand this position, but I really don't" 🙂 - it is those fans of AH-64D who should demand the highest level of realism and features, not just something which is 'almost a Longbow'.

     

    I’m sorry I think you misunderstood me or I wasn’t very clear. If they are marketing it as a longbow then I expect a top notch FCR to be developed for it because they have a reputation for high quality products.

     

    I sort of understand the position as a consumer of wanting the module fully completed before paying for it. But I personally don’t agree with this sentiment with regard to eagle dynamics and their products.

     

    ED has produced fantastic work with continual improvement over the years and I can therefore be confident in a track record. That’s why I don’t mind paying for an ED AH64D that launches in EA without FCR or L’s.

     

    As a point of reference, I’m not certain I will buy PC’s Kiowa at release because I don’t have the same trust for their track record. I’ll wait for reviews and then consider purchasing it.

     

    So yes I absolutely agree that the module being marketed as ah64d full fidelity should have a properly designed FCR, but given ED’s track record I’m fine with using the m230/rockets/K model while I wait for the FCR later in the life of the module.

    • Like 2

    Tell me I am not Dreaming

    in DCS: AH-64D

    Posted

    17 hours ago, Rick50 said:

    agreed, but that radar system it's modes, and the missiles, are all "new" to DCS, are quite complex, and so it's probable that it'll take many working hours of researching, planning to implement, programming and testing to get it right. Thus, it'll have to wait for after the Apache is ready for early access... that way we get a bird to fly, they get some revenue to help pay for development of the radar system, and get time to actually do it. While we get to fire regular laser Hellfires and do stupid things like fly Apaches under bridges for the Lulz!!

    Honestly I care more about properimplementation of the m230 lol

    13 hours ago, veenee said:

    Let's hope this is not the plan and FCR is confirmed sooner rather than later.

    I am sure many people will think twice before buying as long as it is not.

    I want to say I understand this position, but I really don’t. I’ve been messing around with Apache sims for years and we’ve never had a truly accurate FCR. Getting a full fidelity ah64 even without the FCR is still amazing and I’m fine waiting for it as long as I get 30mm, rockets, and K models to play with 

    Tell me I am not Dreaming

    in DCS: AH-64D

    Posted

    2 hours ago, veenee said:

    I find it quite strange that FCR has not been mentioned at all in the recent dev report, where many of the features of upcoming module were listed.

    https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/2021-02-26/

     

    Why not to list it, along with AGM-114L's with a mention they might come a little later?

    Are they still not sure if it's going to be included at all?

    It was stated that the Apache will release without the FCR, and that the FCR will come later. I’m sorry but I don’t remember where this was posted.

    How will a 2 man cockpit be run in single player?

    in DCS: AH-64D

    Posted

    5 hours ago, jasonbirder said:

    Well, A2G (The only thing an Apache will be doing...) NOT SO MUCH...

    I'm sure that promised Jester LANTIRN functionality will be coming...in maybe Two Weeks or so!

    I'm not sure your point here. Are you worried there will be zero AI air-to-ground functionality in ED's Apache? Seems unlikely. 

    Tell me I am not Dreaming

    in DCS: AH-64D

    Posted

    On 3/19/2021 at 4:41 PM, Fri13 said:

    I believe that ED has solved problems to make Apache. A dual cockpit, a A-G radar and many others that was not challenge to Black Shark.


    Seems like a good explanation. Plus they are a business so I wouldn’t put it past them to fib a little. But ultimately the Apache is coming and the sim is in a great state IMO to accept it as a new arrival. I can’t wait

    • Like 1

    How will a 2 man cockpit be run in single player?

    in DCS: AH-64D

    Posted

    It’s been awhile since I’ve fiddled around with apaches so I’ve forgotten the differences in these systems, but it’s my understanding that the pilot can fire rockets; can slew, zoom, and fire the m230; can fire the hellfire L radar lock variant( I think it’s the radar lock one?); can fire the hellfire K laser designate variant.

     

    The pilot cannot use the targeting system to precisely self laze for the K. 
     

    There’s another sim out there with an Apache and you can put an AI in the front seat. It has what seems to me a very simplistic AI targeting system where you bring up a menu of available targets that shows everything within the sensor limits of the aircraft along with ranges to help you differentiate similar threats. You select a target and the AI lazes it. Then you can fire or command the ai to fire. Like I said it’s simple but it worked fairly well.

     

    CasmoTV was an Apache pilot and he’s mentioned in one of his videos you can’t really run the Apache from one seat and be combat effective. I 100% believe that in a real life situation, but from a sim standpoint I don’t see a problem with having an intuitive and simple AI in the front seat. Then if you absolutely need to look through the sensors yourself laze a building or PID a target, just come to a hover and swap to the gunners seat.

     

    The jester ai is a really great tool that lets you get a lot of out of the f14 that I guarantee most people would say would be impossible without a human rio. Jester ai isn’t perfect and will frustrate you with seemingly simple tasks like getting an STT lock on a bandit you both see on the repeater right in front of you: “Sorry, can’t do that! No can do!” Jester he’s right there!! Lol.
     

    Regardless, jester gets a lot done with a very intuitive command wheel on what I assume is a far more complicated set of tasks: radar scanning, interpretation, and manipulation; visual out of cockpit identification; RWR readings; navigation and radio manipulation; bomb settings.

     

    My 2 cents and the TL;DR version is, based on my experience with another Apache sim and the f14 module, I don’t see any reason to worry about either pilot controls of weapons or gunner seat ai.

×
×
  • Create New...