falcon_120

I'll add my 2 cents. For me its its needs to be tweaked, but not massively. I would work on 2 main areas, first reducing a bit (maybe 20-30ish per cent whatever that translate to) the size and blackness of the dots, to avoid very easy acquistion and second, polishing the transition from the dot to the LOD, which now is not working really well (easier to spot further out thant closer when the LOD transition occurss). As a possitive for ED, i'm really glad they are working this problem trying to find solutions that satisfy most people. Also i really think that MP should be handled a bit different, so it can always be enforced by the server.

An orthogonal roll is a defense technique involving 2 out of plane maneouver against an incoming missile. it consist on putting the missile in the 3-9 line in a shallow dive, and as it comes closer (if you are seeing the missile cause it close), you pull up hard at the sametime you roll and turm towards the missile while still pulling up. Seen from the front you are painting a sort of octagon in the sky. This technique, is not too effective against modern highly agile missiles, but it work amazingly way, or it should, against older SAM types (2/5/3/6...) as long as you manage to have enough distance to avoid a fuze detonation. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Not so much, last time i checked S200 in DCS is seriously overmodelled. Its using a proportional navigation and withstanding 9g orthogonal roll defense easily. Its basicly as deadly as a SA11/SA10. Ive learned that the hard way in DCS. In the other sim that shall not be named, you can evade the missile with a higher than 6 g orthogonal roll towards the missile and dropping chaff+ecm, thanks to its pure pursuit guide and medium resistance to chaff. Ive hardly seen any effect of chaff against the SA2 in DCS. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Thanks for the answer, Ive seen the video, but thats the point, we are not seeing Friendly contacts on the SA page. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

After the recents L16 changes I'm not seeing friendly contacts anymore in my commoun MP servers. Is it just that the mission has not been adjusted to new changes or is the process different? I normally click twice on The D/L button in the UFC and then click on "On/off" once. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

They should be on User/Saved games/OpenBeta you can click on the input column and load them from that location IIRC Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Strange, for me i have not had any poblem taking the quest 3 on and off several times in busy MP servers. As soon as i put them back in i can see the game and all is fine. i guess it depends on HW or something. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I think you need to keep trying different settings. Just received my quest 3, 2 days ago. After some testing and tweaking and going back to my G2 I've decided i cannot stand my G2 anymore, everything is blurry outside the sweetspot and much worse vertical FOV. For me using DLAA abd increasing the resolution with oxtoolkit, along with increasing colours and saturation on OXTK has increase a lot the image quality. Ive taken out the FSR at 0.8 that i used through OXTK as that made the image a bit washed out. IDK I just felt in love with the edge to edge clarity abd how well ASW works, almost no ghosting in the wingtips or helicopter blades compared to MR. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

what has happened to the viper ? Out of curiosity o_o Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Hey guys, since many month i've notice what to me seems a weird behavior of how the aim9x seeker behaves with JHMCS, just want to confirm if this is "correct as is": -With JHMCS on, aim9x selected, radar silent or in search mode(no radar lock) and A/A master mode on, if i look to a target i get a tone with the same circle representing the aim9 fov, when i uncage the tone changes and the circle reduces its size around the target, now the target its locked by the aim9x. -Now, if i take my sight from the target, lets say i check my six or look at the ground scanning for SAMs the lock is lost, i need to look at him again and hit cage/uncage again. Shouldnt stay locked if i have uncaged the seeker until i hit cage/uncage again? in other words, is it correct that i need to be looking roughly around the target for the lock to stay on. Additionally to that, i see that now, when i have a radar lock I still need to hit cage/uncage for the seeker to actually lock the target, I think previously it was doing this step automatically with an STT lock. Regards, Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Anyone has had time to test the new radar changes at all? Curious to know preliminary results. Unfortunately I will have very limited time this weekend to test anything. EDIT: So just tested it for a couple of hours and its amazing, you could be having a clear picture ahead and all of a sudden narrowing down the scan bar and azimuth you could picking a fighter real far away. Also far away target tracks in HI PRF start to fade when they enter a simple notch while in the same situation a MED PRF seems to provide a generally more stable track. So far i have not seen any false returns in any situation, neither very low at HI or MED PRF, so that might be coming later. I want to test yet if close far away contacts are resolved as one hit and if RAID mode makes any difference. So far so good, lots of testing yet to be done but it "feels" less canned and realistic than before, no more i cannot detect you at 45nm but at 44.9nm i will detect you perfectly fine, it feels so much more dynamic now.

So if you are sitting in an F15 against a F18/F16 you are basically always starting on top in BVR: -Fighting in an eagle at angels 40, where the eagle really shines, you need the earlier detection ranges, otherwise you can be dead in the blink of an eye. At those altitudes, you are able to shot very dangerous Amraam shot at 40ish nm, at that ranges the F16 is not able to shot back with your ecm on, you always have the upper hand. -You can somehow bypass that through datalink if Awacs is avalaible, but if thats not the case, the F16/F18 does not allow you to complete a proper bvr timeline at high altitude, you begin to detect an eagle when you are almost in need of going defensive already. -Previous two points are specially relevant with a coordinated 2/4 ships when you set a grinder or similar, and you can put F18/F16 defensive while staying out of their missiles range. -IRL in a ecm degraded environment smaller radars can see things even at shorter ranges, in that cases having a powerful radar is even more relevant to keep BVR actually Beyon visual range. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I'm thinking you are reading too much into that. The biggest items so far "Probabilistic detection" and different RCS simulation based on aspect, where introduced by Razbam some months ago on their implementation of the M2000C radar. False target detection is also their on their radars (F15E and M2000C). So apart from the range cell resolution which is interesting but also done by Heatblur if IIRC, ED is mostly playing catch up here (its not a critic at all, im super excited but just being honest to the 3rd parties)

So thrilled by the upcoming changes to A/A radars. Amazing steps towards a more realistic simulation. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Hey all, I'm looking for some recommendations in order to improve the vibility of the JHMCS during day time. I would appreciate any mod or trick compatible with MP play (IC compliant) Maybe is the lack of contrast of my reverb G2 LCD pannels but as soon as I have any normal sunny day or even some cloudy days, it get really difficult to see the JHMCS symbology against white or green background (JHMCS turned all the way up) Regards, Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

For me the main reason is the lack of a FF F15C and SU27. If i had those i would not touch FC3 i think, maybe some weird day when i want to fly a SU25 or Mig29 but that about it. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

It should arrive on October 12th, stay tuned! Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I've ordered it. I will report back whether it improves the dcs experience of the reverb g2 i currently own. If not i will return it. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Care to expand a bit more? As far as i understood most people testing the Meta Quest pro on DCS are reporting a net improvement over the reverb G2 (I'm a reverb G2 owner) specially due to the pancake lenses. I was under the impression that the Quest 3 slightly improve the quet Pro in resolution while keeping the pancakes lenses. So, my question is, shouldn't I consider as an improvement over my reverb G2? Regards,

Can any of you confirm if there would be any reason to pick the 512gb version over the basic one if DCS is the only use that the visor will have?

After more than 4 years of EA we still don't have that special options for the hornet. Maybe Razbam will listen more that ED do in this specific topic. +1 Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

Maybe a tacview&track test showing the turn rate achieved would be a good point to identify odd behaviors. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I really think DCS is taking too long to add a FC3 level of some of the latest flankers (su27sm, su30 at least), in fact they are more than 20 years old already and operatives around the globe. A su30mki would be wonderful For other existing planes like the J11, ED is taking too long to give them Modern chinese fox 3 like the PL12. Thanks god several servers;including DDCS as a not gamey example, are already bypassing this limitation and adding the PL12 to them. I like simulating modern scenarios and currently this is hard Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

I'm with you guys. I always tend to enjoy early access releases, and the joy of having systems added incrementally. I like a lot getting sneak peeks or videos of coming features, it kind of lets you learn the systems in a more digestive way. Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

since one or two patches I'm seeing a lot how not supporting the amraam till pitbull results in missiles not magically picking target with a 40g turn and actually missing the "basket". It feels so much more realistic, might be placebo though, nothing scientific in my testing methodology (1 or 2 setups everynow and then) Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk