falcon_120

Agreed on all those points. Hopefully we'll get a m 2000-5 at some points as a new module, it would be awesome as it is the current M2000C

I should not have used the 27et as an example, again, the thing is IR seekers seeing through clouds are not a thing and should be corrected, it's a bug as far as I see affecting all IR missiles, 9x,9m, 27et,ir Sams... Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Basically this, since the introduction on the new clouds; amazing by the way, people forget that currently weapon system like IR missile totally ignore clouds. IRL those clouds are blocking your target almost completely, meaning you R27ET would be restricted to clear LOS. Forget about those 12-15nm through clouds that silently kill a lot of blue planes that didn't even have a chance to spot that missile smoke through a dense layer of clouds. Never heard again of this from ED since months ago, but they should introduce at some point the blocking of visual targetting systems (also EOS) by clouds.

I'm really hoping Deka could make a full fidelity J11/J12 some day, that would be a good modern high fidelity fighter. They could even try to make a su30 mki/mkm, that would be awesome. We just need a 3rd party not based in Russia. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Although I'm totally in favour of such an initiative, even impressed, I do see a lot of problems of taking this approach unillaterally. I think this is something ED needs to provide via API; so all modules benefit from it. Having said that, thanks Deka for this work! really looking forward to seing this changes applied and see how they turn out for a more tactically realistic simulation.

I'm using vaicom pro addon for voice Attack and it works great, you can access to all existing Jester commands and do a lot of other things, you should take a look.

Basically yes, but SU27 is a big airplane, I'm sure it can be detected up to 50nm based on some anecdotical evidence (Spanish f18 with the APG65 detecting other f18s at 45ish nm during interceptions drills). We are talking about subtle corrections though, they new changes by ED are far better than previous situations.

Hopefully one day this become a full fidelity module Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Its not like in DCS if you hit the antenna, that antenna will be taken out, since as you already mention there is little to no modular systems damage in ships. And i'm sure that the damage is not very well coupled with the 3d Models, rather just with the life percentage (eg. under 70% damage radar stop working...), so hitting the antenna does not translate to the antenna system being taken out of action.

All this stories of real pilots on how easy was to beat X plane, also needs to be taken in context... How many engagement did he participate in? against how experienced pilots? In which configuration.... so many variables

In this case I don't even want a complete module, just a decently good Early Access Heatblur style, like for the F14 Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

IRL? Either you engaging a big target (mig 31, tu160...) or you are flying an F15c. The eagle is the true bvr machine for those scenarios . Previous ranges of the Apg68 were too optimistic to say the least. They were like the ranges you would get from an Aesa equipped f16v nowadays. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Could this fall in the 450€ range? Not willing to pay much more for a throttle... Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

As a previous poster explains, the numbers you see tdc (top and lower coverage) are only true at the distance your tdc is at. So determining a bandit is within coverage of the radar is a 2 step process: 1-Place the tdc over the target DL or suspected target range 2-Review top and lower coverage limits and adjust as necessary. Its like that in all western fighters, f18 and f15 included. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Yes, it's about kinematics. What I mean is, that now virtual pilots do not stay out of the NEZ because they feel they do not need to as there are easy exploits to avoid being shot down (notch and chaff). It should not be the case, and at least you would have to think very thoroughly if entering the NEZ is a good option for each engagement. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Bottom line teknetinium is that for modern missiles, either us or rus, notching and chaffing is very very low % of success evasion inside their NEZ. Actual defense for these weapons is staying outside the Mar. Currently in DCS is quite easy and reliable tactic. BTW the same could be said of SAMs... Its quite easy to notch a SA10 or SA11 at close range, not so sure IRL. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I'm really looking forward to some good wallpapers from HB with the typhoon. It's going to be amazing when it finally comes out. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Where are your tracks guys? You don't get things fixed just complaining! Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Totally ignorant about this Rocket warhead type. How does it work? I mean, what is the principle behind a flechette rocket? Kind of a shotgun effect against infantry/light armour?

I think it is a WIP issue. The new seeker logic + INS just got out and massive testing is needed. I have seen some situation whether the missile have missed unexplicably. FOr example on the F18 AIM 120 AMRAAM training mission 2 days ago, where you have several MIG25 turning at 2-3Gs without dropping chaffs, I've seen 2 cases where the AIM120 has missed in a target at a 45-60ish angle (not even close to the beam), with enough energy left, the strange things is that the AIM120 went past him in the front of the target; which again was not deploying CHaff. It was really strange, unfortunately i did not got a track of that, I will next time it happens. I think we just need to help a lot providing tracks of such situations to find the problem. Apart from that, the Amraam works great now in posturing cheap shots. You can expect now that a 40/30ish nm shot will find its target even if you turn cold, provided that your target keeps hot aspect on you ofc. Which is a great tactical addition. BTW, is it confirmed that all other active missiles (SD10, R77) have the same improvements applied to them? Haven't seen any specific mention to that.

He means "fictionary" weapon, as not really used for those variants or countries that operated those versions, but maybe employed on similar variants of other countries... Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Mission: F18 AIM 120 Amraam (Base game mission) Behavior: Target locked on stt, Amraam on pitbull goes for totally different target (original target is turning to my right, while the target the AIM120 decides to engage is flying straight and slightly to the left. This happens on the second launch approx 1.30 min after track starts. Expected behaviour (could be totally wrong): Since the Aim120 is being supportef in STT all the way (and maintained prior and after TTA), and given differences in target aspects, the AIM120 should have an easy time discerning between those targets based on velocity gates and target aspect. This is considering this has been implemented in the last patch as advertised. Please review to see if its normal behavior or maybe any of the parameters used to discern targets is not working as expected. EDIT: Attached second track, this time happens on the first launch. Amraam bug.trk Amraam bug 2.trk

For certain missiong I see a very prominent lines and artifacts on clouds, specially on borders or when the layer is very thin. Attached Picture. Mission: F18 AIM120 AMRAAM Mission (base mission included) Attached track. Other relevant info: -1080ti, NVIDIA driver 496.13, clean installation, and recently repared and cleaned additional files. Clouds bug.trk

Not a bug. Its a product design decision. The short history background is that FC3 modules date from 2005ish IIRC when full fidelity modules were not a regular thing. I say regular because at that time there was a full fidelity module; the KA50, and shortly next it came the A10C. But that was it. Nowadays is almost impossible to think of a non clickable module other than a mod. Lets see what happens with MAC, announced many times but totally silent for some months/1 year.... But MAC is like a stadnalone FC4 geared towards a different audience.

Yeah, for me its a breaker, as i only play DCS in VR now and i'm not thinking of ever going back to 2D, so this means i cannot play CA in VR. I hope they will fix it one day on CA 2 or whatever they call it. It would be really great.