Jump to content

lamboman43

Members
  • Posts

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lamboman43

  1. Ahh, ok. I guess we're in the same boat. I have a hard time hearing the differences in mil power too. A more pronounced MIL region would be great.
  2. Have you tried using the option in the Audio Settings that makes the AB sound more pronounced? I find it a huge help.
  3. Do you think posting like this is going to help your cause?
  4. :( Can't even blame *closed* beta testers for this. Such an obvious issue just shows that these hotfixes are pushed out without even being looked at. It is SO frustrating.
  5. I don't think it was designed with the accuracy to do that. Everything I've read says that the reason you input the coordinates is to get the missile in roughly the right spot when it hits the terminal phase, after which it turns on the seeker and requires the operator to select the appropriate target. If you scroll to the SLAM section at this link https://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Harpoon.html it explains how the SLAM works and could be employed by the Australian military. But it's also important to realize that the SLAM was just implemented for us. There are more features that need to added for it, and it's very possible that the INS & GPS accuracy could be changed.
  6. This is an important note. The AGM-84E is not a fire-and-forget weapon. You are definitely intended to provide command guidance in the terminal phase (personally thats what makes it fun for me). The AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER is much more suited for fire-and-forget operations, especially if you're using it closer to it's max range of >130 miles, as our datalink pod, at least as it is simulated in game, just won't transmit video at those ranges. But a big part of that is the SLAM-ERs integration of Automatic Target Acquisition. And I doubt ED will be able to simulate that very well. An easy workaround would be to just hard code the missile to be more accurate against stationary targets.
  7. My sympathies are with you. It's frustrating because it's impossible to know what is theoretically supposed to be complete and what is coming in the near or distant future when the person that moved this thread doesn't explain why it is a feature that should be "wished for" and not something that should be fixed. I'd say wait for the patch notes on June 3rd and test exactly the features that those patch notes include. Then if you need to report anything, no one can say it's a "Wish" because the patch notes clearly say that whatever the feature is, should be implemented.
  8. Out of the interest of not bringing this post further off-topic, I'll leave it at this: Going forward from this update, I'll definitely be sure to be more aware how often the game crashes during the future OB releases compared to the next stable release whenever it comes.
  9. I...I just don't understand how they can consider this worthy of being branded "stable"... I'm sure this is going to make the mods angry, but this is simply not stable simulator behavior that should be released to the branch that is considered "stable." It is a feature that is not behaving as intended and should not be included with the branch that ED considers stable.
  10. The devs still haven't even acknowledged our tracks. As soon as they do that and confirm whether the oscillation is their intention or not, I'll be willing to look for information.
  11. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=252970&page=3 Well, according to the second post on this page, it seems like ED isn't even sure how it is supposed to work. So who knows what is correct. Hopefully they can come up with a definitive answer so we don't have so many incorrect tutorials out there.
  12. Yep, the TOO and PP switching is still broken. You still have to use the undesignate workaround.
  13. Don't mean to bump the thread with no additional info, but I do want to make sure that the developers see this. These oscillations are still an issue and particularly pop up when forced to engage in air combat near the end of a mission when lower on fuel, and as a result, weight. If you need more examples with track replays, I can produce more.
  14. Here is a slightly longer track of the oscillations I was able to induce. I find that I was in the same parameters as Preendog said, except I didn't use any rudder input to induce the oscillations. In fact, I didn't use any rudder at all. As you'll also see near the end of the track, I was able to induce and maintain (for a surprisingly long time) an oscillation while also in a turn. As long as I was going about M0.6-0.7 in the turn at ~7.5 Gs, I could probably have maintained that oscillation until I ran out of fuel. Hopefully this helps diagnose the issue. TwerkingHornet.trk
×
×
  • Create New...