ShalashakaDS

The thing is, it wasn't always like this, there was a time we had a "other sims" subforum, but eventually it became grounds for stupid flame wars and shameless advertising from other sims fanboys who would come here only to trash the then fairly new DCS, só eventually not discussing other sims became a rule and the forums became a little more friendly as a result

The f-18 and f-16 got their wing flex way after initial release, seems the same will happen to the apache, nothing to worry yet.

thats a stupid ideia to say the least, and comparing with iracing model (with leagues, championships, etc) is dumber yet.

Its hard to be positive all the time. I dont care for Hornet vs Falcon discussion, i bought both, admittedly against my better judgement. I thought, well, it cant be more barebones than the hornet at release, at least that was my impression from all the videos, and to my surprise, even with the lowest of expectations, i was still disapointed, not even a basic damage model. Its very hard to be optmistic, specially when we are still waiting for fixes bugs that were reported on the first week of development, when we are still waiting for the new damage model, the IR revamp,any hint of development on the AG radar, loadouts for WW2 planes, units for the asset pack, the P-47, the Me-262 (wich many like myself already paid for years ago). Its not that the comunity cant handle Early Acess, it seems that ED cant handle early acess or has bitten off mare than it can chew, now with the Falcon out we have 5 modules labeled as Early Acess only on ED ( not counting third parties), they are the FW-190, Yak-52, F/A-18, WWII assets pack and of course, the F-16. I wish only sucess for ED, after all they seem to be a passionate bunch and i fly and find enjoyment on its modules on a daily basis, but i certainly can understand and share some of the frustration and disapointment of part of this comunity, and to be honest, after all that was said about development on one module not afecting the others, this last move simple doesnt look good.

If you take in account that Wags said they only had 4 devs working on hornet systems, some is a lot.

It was not, this behavior is present from day one of the beta.

Thats funny, i may be wrong here, but IIRC, they actualy released the beta a-10c without mavs :D, also, i dont see how anyone would be surprised since the last ED module released was the F-18, and that was by far the most barebones of the releases so far, at least the F-16 is on the same level of the F-18 right now, very enjoyable to fly around.

As was already sugested, a simple threshold mark in the axis setting page would go a long way. Bonus points if we get the option to custumize the threshold, getting that custom curve just right can get a bit annoying.

Thank you for taking the time to reply, if im not abusing your good will, could you do one more test with the 84 with a level or very shallow dive release? I think we also stabilished that a steep dive helps mitigate the problem. Here are some more screens and tracks. Same mission i posted before, two releases of the mk-84, one in a very steep dive and the other in a shallow dive. mk-84 steep dive mk-84test1SteepDive.trk mk-84 shallow dive mk-84test1ShallowDive.trk In the fisrt test, with a steep dive and a release at 12000ft it lands much closer to the center of the target, still a little short. In the second run, all the same settings, the same mission and a 5 degrees dive with the release at 8000 ft it falls way shorter. If that is the intended behavior im fine with that, HOWEVER, in the very same mission i can repeatedly score hits in the center of the X with the mk-83 from steep dives AND perfectly level releases, from anywhere from 5000ft to 20000ft, i cant imagine why it should be diferent from bomb to bomb.

Could you do some testing with the other models? We kinda stabilished that the 83 is the most accurate one, I can score hits with it all day long, but it's a different story with the 84 with the same procedures.

Thank you very much for taking a look into it. I dont discard the reason being user error, but i tried to be consistent with my delivery. Same procedure, same throttle setting, same set up for the bombs, only difference every time is the bomb loaded, yet i cant hit with the 84 even firing 4 with 100ft spacing.

Since no one gave a about the tracks i posted here are some screenshots. Same mission as the tracks, same delivery profile every time. mk-82 mk-83 mk-84 My target point is exactly on the center vehicle. All bombs where released at about 8000/7500ft starting from 10000ft with a 5 degrees dive. These are only a few screenshots but ive made a lot of runs and it seems consistent. The 83 is the most accurate one, alway hit smack on the middle, inside the area marked with the red circle. The 82 hits close enough, but its always a little longer, i couldnt get a single one (when firing singles) to hit lower than the center of the X. The 84 always way shorter, not a single kill. Using latest beta version. P.S. : ops, sorry BIGNEWY for the foul language :D

Did you fire multiples or singles? what altitude? level delivery or in a dive?

My experience is consistent with Deano87's, the 83 is very accurate and the mk-84 is always short. I did some testing with the mk-82 in the same mission i posted above, it seems to perform closer to the 83.

Ok, so i went ahead and created a very simple mission to test this. I put some static vehicles arranged in a X about 300ft wide. I put a waypoint right in the center of the X so i would not have to use the hud to designate every time and risk misplacing the diamond. There was no wind, temperature was 20 degrees celsius and QNH 29.92, the standart when you create a new mission on the ME. Tracks attatched. I made my runs as short as possible so to make replaying the tracks more consistent. Testing was made using the latest open beta branch. Tested with the mk-83 and 84. Every run starts about 10000ft, i set up my bomb and set the waypoint as my target, at about 20 seconds to release i start a 5 degress dive. I know my technique is not perfect but the bombs performed consitently for me, even with less than ideal releases. mk-83test1Single.trk mk-83test2Single.trk mk-83test3Single.trk mk-84test1Single.trk mk-84test2Single.trk mk-84test3Single.trk So, i didnt expect pinpoint accuracy but what i found was that the mk-83 hits very consistently around the center of the X, always good enough that i get at least one vehicle destroyed, while the 84 always hit short, not even damaging anything. As i said, didnt expect pinpoint accuracy so i also made a couple of runs releasing multiples, 4 bombs, 100ft spacing. Same result, mk-83 hit about center of the X, mk-84 short not damaging anything. mk-84test1Ripple4.trk mk-83test1Ripple4.trk

ED could at least comment, I mean, someone took the time to label this thread, it would be nice to at least give a more concrete answer to those findings this issue.

Just give up, this guy is imune to reason, last time he was shown 3 distinct oficial manuals and was told so by a real pilot, but that wasnt good enough for his gut feeling, just dont feed the troll.

Can we go back to demanding airspeed on the F-14 HUD now? :P

Yes please.

Same here since last update.

It's been like that since day one of open beta, one year later and no hopes of a fix. Very promising.

I understant you are giving us a best case scenario here, but could you please clarify this a little? I mean, are you saying that the intention is to have the hornet out of early acess by the time the f-16 hits early acess? I ask this because we still have no word on major features of the hornet like the IR renderer or the AG radar, not even a single picture, and with only 4 guys working on the hornet systems (if this is still the case) i really dont see that happening before autumn 2019. Always hoping for the best though.

They are aiming to release the litening in June, they still showed absolutely nothing about the ATFLIR and the much more important update (IMHO) of the new IR renderer. For all we know those are still months away.

Wags answered that in very similar named thread in this very same page of the forums. I quote: "it all comes down to available data that we are comfortable using. As such, we must stick to a 2007 based on the very public available sources."

Thank you for replying, but im aware of that, ive been checking these foruns everyday for the past 10 years at least :P The thing is, the hornet is out for a while, and now they anounce the F-16 with a feature list very similar to the hornet, incuding A/G radar and now the Sniper XR pod... and still not a single pic to show of things that where announced a year ago for the hornet. I agree with you in that i also dont think the ATFLIR will give us a fundamentaly different capability from the litening, but from some older newsletters i got the impression that the new IR renderer is linked to the ATFLIR development, and thats what im looking forward the most, a realistic IR picture, not the trees looking hotter than tank engines. I dont really care for a new 3d model and diferent interface.