MARLAN_

Sounds like the same issue yeah I think the topic name should be changed to SARH or Missile usage (or something like that), since in my tests they used AA-10C and not AIM-7.

B-b-b-but Mode II

Agree 1000%, hopefully, ED spends some time improving the AI BVR tactics to be much smarter. The current AI tactics feel like they came from a Youtube content creator.

I locked the AI in the first test, was wondering if locking them matters. In this test I was hands off the controls except to slightly move towards the end so I didn't just fly into a dead missile. FYI: This is ACE AI AITrashTheirOwnMissiles2.trk

Because AI do the "dive to the deck" BVR tactic, the end up trashing their own missiles 100% of the time, noticed this while trying to test missile kinetics and after 10 attempts could not get a single test where the AI didn't trash their own missile. Would be good to look into improving AI BVR tactics with more realistic tactics (i.e. shoot, crank, skate) rather than always diving to the deck and losing support of their missiles, and ending up with very low offensive capability due to their now low altitude. I think AI could incorporate timelines (straightforward logical flow), I'm happy to explain in detail if needed. AITrashTheirOwnMissiles.trk

Switching to TWS AUTO is correct, I am not sure about it preventing you from leaving TWS AUTO though, I would think that part is a bug.

It could be programmed to account for these situations though.

I haven't noticed any FM changes personally, but I only did one test.

You before MT: CPU max perf: xxxx GPU max perf: xxx Total perf: xxx After MT: CPU max perf: xxxxxxxxxx GPU max perf: xxx Total perf: xxx If you got a new GPU CPU max perf: xxxxxxxxxx GPU max perf: xxxxxxxxxx Total perf: xxxxxxxxxx

Per the latest update (though I haven't had a chance yet to test it personally) it sounds like ACLS in MP has been resolved.

I don't think that's what he's saying. It's not an emergency for a fighter jet to be in a merge, but there are situations that would likely be considered an emergency (e.g. a missile is tracking you, you're behind timeline, and jamming, countermeasures, and manuevering has all failed) but end of the day it's up to the pilot to make that call, and then whether or not your CO agrees with you when you recover.

I don't think @Hulkbust44was referring to the entire wings coming off as he specifically mentioned A/G stores and TGP damage. Particularly because the entire wings breaking is already implemented in the F-18.

Does that video show A/G stores being ripped off or targeting pod damage?

@WagsAny update on this issue? Has your internal testing team tried to reproduce this in multiplayer with multiple human participants? ACLS is a wonderful feature that ED implemented, it's a shame it currently is only usable in singleplayer.

I agree, what you showed in the video is definitely a bug, it should be acquiring the L&S. This is very frustrating when I've encountered what you showed, makes STT much worse than it should be.

To clarify, technically this would be FACQ (fast acquisition), but yes the implementation in DCS is correct. FACQ - Fast Acquisition - Commanded by SCS towards RDR ATTK display, acquires any TUC (target under cursor) or L&S into STT. If there is no TUC/L&S it will enter AACQ which will acquire the priority target (should be based on TTG and some other parameters - although in DCS it is just the closest target unless they have fixed it since I last checked although it was not in any patch notes). If you already have an STT then it will command bump acquisition (not implemented in DCS) which will reject the current target, generate a temporary exclusion zone around your STT target and try to acquire the next priority target for 2 seconds. If it fails to acquire another target it will return to the existing target.

Ball has been unusable for as long as I can remember. That's one of the reasons the IFLOLS overlay even exists.

According to our groups Hornet pilot, the AMRAAM delay is too long, it should be there, but its too long. He came back to fly after a long break and was bewildered he needed to hold it down so long and his missiles weren't firing.

I don't know for sure, I looked through pubs and can't find anything, but I feel like the current implementation is correct, I don't think it would make sense to override the waypoint name. For example, real world the bullseye is often coded, e.g. "ROCK", and I think it would be an anti pattern to override that. Prior to ED changing the bullseye to automatically be waypoint 59, it had to be set by the mission editor and they often named it "BULLSEYE" which is shortened to "BULLS" due to the 5 character limitation.

Just a feeling, but it seems like atmospheric drag affects missiles too much in DCS, high altitude ranges seem fine to me though.

Yea BRAA should definitely be magnetic, this also conflicts with the true/mag mode set in the aircraft.

You can set up your programs, pre-plan coordinates and anything else on the ground/deck for sure, but you'd switch to A/G Master Mode at the "ATTACK" which is generally at the DP (correction from before, its at the DP (decision point) not IP (initial point), but often IP/DP are collocated) so there should be no problem with your radar switching over since you're no longer sanitizing post-ATTACK. I think you are trying to do both A/A sanitization while also performing A/G tasks, that is not the designed flow of the F-18, you do one or the other. Even if you're executing a strike mission, you'd remain in A/A mode until your DP which is generally about 30 seconds to release.

IRL they won't switch to A/G until their "ATTACK" which is typically at the IP, which is typically about 30 seconds to release for the exact reason that they should be searching for any potential threats until they make themselves vulnerable by switching to A/G. You can set up everything on deck prior to the IP and then switch over the A/G, run your checklist and employ. As for the coupling, I recall one of our F18 pilots mentioning it shouldn't be this way, but I'd have to ask again to clarify because it's been awhile and there's often more nuance to it. If I remember right, couple has to be reselected before it takes on the new path. I'm not understanding what you're saying about TDC.

Master Arm should remain off, it doesn't come on until prior to employment, for A/A that is at commit, and A/G that is at attack.

Works for me, are you sure you're pressing the Cage/Uncage Button (with the HARM Seeker page set as TDC Priority - diamond in top right corner) and not TDC Depress (not sure what you mean by "LOCK/UNLOCK command")?