sLYFa

That won't help since TWS-A is not using DL targets. Most of the time, Jester has no problem STTing a DL target if you tell him to. If he is unable, the target is probably in YOUR notch (as opposed to not being in the E-2's notch).

Is it really? I mean the ghost contact's velocity is insanely high. Shouldn't there be some logic to check for kinematic plausibility of tracks? Not being edgy, just geniuniely intersted in what the AWG-9 is and is not capable of.

I can consistently reproduce a similar, although less extreme issue in SP. Single Mig-31 head on at 34k (co altitude with me). Once it launches its R-33 it starts cranking. Now if I start cranking too, its track will get x-ed out eventually (due to him being in the notch) and a second track appears. The old track either goes wild or retains a reasonable (yet still wrong) velocity vector. These two tracks start drifting apart as the original track remains due to the automatic track hold function. Here, I would expect the radar to reassign the original track to the new one. Another scenario: A single Su-27, same distance same altitude. He will keep flying straight at me until the PH goes active. Until then, I can crank all I want and keep the track. As soon as he starts defending (i.e. PH goes active), the original track goes bananas and a second (sometimes even multiple) track appears which gets again lost and I get a TID full of x-ed out contacts + the correct one. I undestand that TWS will occasionally loose track of a maneuvering target but it seems the radar is discarding old tracks too soon and fails to reassign new radar returns back to the orignal track. I also suspect two targets in more or less close proximity causing issue but I need more testing on that. EDIT Exactly this

Same here, latest patch seriously broke MP carriers

How is having full ATC from CATCC to LSO for CASE I/II/III (including assigned holding pattern and charlie time) no progress at all? Only because there will be one freq for all controllers? I'm sure ED will implement different frequencies at some point. But not having to change radio presets during approach is not really a showstopper IMO. Whether the AI will interact with CATCC is another question. But things are definitely going into the right direction.

Can't confirm that. I regularly see bandits defending only when the missile goes active (at about 15nm distance). Maybe it goes before 15nm active if your radar looses lock. Didn't pay attention to that.

Did the radar show one or two tracks in that situation? If it showed only one, I suspect it will pick up the second target at one point but will not create a seperate track for it, hence the track first track going nuts.

I found similar results in my recent tests. If a single target is flying straight and level at you, you can crank all you want and the track remains correct. As soon as the target starts cranking/defending, you get the ghost tracks. In Quids video, I suppose the ghost tracks appear as soon as the Phoenix went active and the target started defending. Another problem is with two aircraft close to each other. At long range (say 50nm), you will only see on track which however has a rather high chance to start flying off the screen as the radar probably picks up the other target but assumes it is the same target and calculates some faulty velocity for the original target. I'm a little unsure though if this is realistic behaviour. On the one hand this is 60's technology here and I remember an F-14 driver saying on some YT video that the F-14 was good at picking up targets far out but wasn't really good at tracking maneuvering targets in contrast to more modern radars. On the other hand, there should be some logic to detect excessive changes in track speed and direction and discard them. Given the enormous effort HB has put into the F-14 I'm however afraid the current behaviour is more or less accurate :/

Not yet I'm afraid. At least no PH improvement was mentioned in the changelog and I didn't notice any difference in their behaviour with the new patch. TWS-A is very nice however

What is hard to grasp about "its done when its done"? Why share patch notes about something that isnt there yet? What if there is one last-minute show stopper and there will be no patch at all. This is not a feature preview thread and please stop trying to make it one

Tomcat for me (although I have not flown the Hornet in DCS). I like its non-FBW hands on flightmodel very much. It is difficult to fly properly but mastering it is very rewarding. It is also way faster than the hornet and has more fuel. Jester may not be perfect but he gets the job done if you know how to handle him. A real RIO who knows what he is doing is a lot better of course, which another big plus over the hornet: you can fly with a buddy. For VR flying, its the perfect plane IMO. No hard-to-read MFDs/HUD, all analouge gauges + the huge VDI that I can easily read in the oculus CV1. It's less capable then the hornet without a doubt and you don't have all the nice DL/SA gimmicks but then again, fewer stuff to learn/handle. And you also get to carry AMRAAMs on steroids (i.e. the Phoenix) instead of the normal AMRAAMs which does give you an edge in a2a combat, although its by no means an uber-missile some people believe it to be. Buttom line, if you are more into modern weapons and systems and like to do a bit of everything (a2a, a2g, SEAD etc.) the hornet is probably your plane. If you are more into flying than clicking buttons (no offense to Hornet drivers), go with the Tomcat.

Has the excitement àbout the SC release impaired your ability to read? There is a lot of information on both what to expect from the SC module and why it has not been released yet.

Do you have a source for that? Because all information I found(both in english and in russian) state that the R-33 is INS+SARH. ARH was considered during development but was dropped in favor of a cheaper SARH system. The RWR behaviour is indeed stange. Sometimes you get a launch warning and sometimes only a lock warning despite a missle inflight towards you. Sometimes I only got 31 ticks on the RWR, despite the missile still tracking me.

Disable automatic switch to P-STT in the special menu tab

What problem exactly? ED staff stated several times that they are still aiming for the 15th. What else could you possibly want/expect? Would you feel better if Wags swore a blood oath on livestream or something?

Outrageous!

What insanely crucial part of information about the SC are you lacking exactly? ED have provided a ton of information about what the SC module will and will not be. Wags even posted a list of issues to be adressed prior to release, something I've never seen before in DCS.We also have the price, a release date, a manual, several videos and a lot of written infos here on the forums. I really can't see anything else you would need to know other than maybe how the performance will be compared to the current stennis. IMO ED has done pretty well this time. Todays newsletter not matching your expectations is really no reason to throw out everything else they gave us so far and accuse them of bad comminication because thats simply not true.

I think there are two seperate issues. One issue is client aircrafts getting desynced in MP and since all airplanes are moving with the carrier, they will start to slide back and forth into the direction the carrier is moving when pings get bad. The other issue is the aircraft/carrier contact model, which occurs in both SP and MP. Notice that while the engines are off, your aircraft wont move even if the carrier is turning/pitching. Once the engines are running, your aircraft will start wobbling on a pitching deck. The more the carrier is pitching (i.e. the stronger the wind), the more your aircraft will wobble. Same happens when the carrier starts turning. Apparently, the contact model is unable to exactly change your aircraft's direction/orientation with the carrier deck. I noticed that the latter issue got improved with 2.5.6 (although it might be my imagination) and will probably vanish on the supercarriers. The MP desync issue is more tricky I'm afraid but that doesn't mean ED won't come up with a solution.

Out of curiosity, will the steering T be available only with master arm on or also in the training position?

+1

You must have a lot of insight into ED's development process to make statements like this Guess I'm the exception here. Lag spikes are as good/bad as always on the hoggit servers, FPS didn't change much and I don't need to turn down any settings on my non-10k rig using VR.

Right, if the gyro is still working you can also used SLAVED, didn't think of that :D I think DG could be useful when you land on the carrier to avoid the AHRS being thrown off by the carrier's magnetic field distortion.

Compass mode will turn the BDHI into an oversized whiskey compass, not very useful unless you fly straight and level. Still better than trying to make out the heading on the standby compass but if the gyros still work, DG with the correct heading set is the far better option.

sweeet

Hold the kneel switch down after you press shift+u (or whatever you have bound to carrier cat launch) and it will work. That's the workaround for now.