DoorMouse

Me too! I was perplexed when I saw this happen. Something got messed up... but its so obnoxious now and this combined with momentary network issues make long range shots a real roll of the dice at times

Thats correct, and its been reported and acknowledged as a bug. TMA (Target under missile attack) tracks should NEVER be put outside the radar cone UNLESS you have two TMA which fly in mutually exclusive directions, and a choice must be made. The computer will trash one of them to save the other.

I've seen a massive improvement on that point, but I've also seen people's tracks with the missile over lofting. Dunno. Different topic. The thing that seems most a problem to me is the last few seconds of terminal guidance, which is vastly improved... But if you watch that guys tacview there seems to be no good indicator as to why those missiles did not connect.

What it looks like is that the missile is turning too far and putting the target outside its basket. Its like its not adjusting proportionally from Lead to Pure, and trying to pull massive lead when its only a few thousand feet away. None of these are going for chaff or being zero doppler notched, the target is quite high and is not in clutter, and the missile has way more than enough energy.... there is no reason these should not be hitting. To be fair - the 120 and other missiles do this (which is a bad sign cause the 120 is on the new API if I recall). This is just ED's (frankly poor) overall missile guidance. I suspect. My understanding is that HB or any 3rd party has no ability to control this, they can only ask ED to adjust things.... which is a whole other discussion.

Ok with thousands of hours in this sim.... Id love a flow chart of missile operation with Mode, ACM Up/Down, PH Active... etc. Every time I think I have it, there is some wrinkle. Especially since the DCS Engine/API cannot replicate the real world operation.... yet. I think I mentioned id take a crack at it and post it. Maybe my Rio and I will do that, unless you have one ready to go

It's kinetically fine. Maneuvering is maybe still a little wonky, but all missiles in DCS have some serious issues with guidance... The last hotfix significantly improved the Phoenix. The issue is all the actual missile modes and features the C had which make it easier to employ. The big one being if you have to defend and stop tracking, the missile still goes active at the right point in space. If you were seconds away from pitbull, that is a huge difference.

This, PLUS just give us all the proper alignment crew coordination options: Fixed Point requires Pilot and RIO. AWACS/Datalink Align. and Re-align on the deck/ground. Its really frustrating having to get a new plane every flight because you have pulled G's and now your INS is off by 5-10 miles from datalink

To add to this. Ive also seen that he cannot switch to PDSTT. Just making sure that is known as well. Really obnoxious when you need to shoot into a merge

Oh my god that is plausible. The TWS weighting right now is pulling targets under missile attack out of the radar cone... Add in that ED has for some reason made missiles have the same RCS as a jf17 or F5... The AWG 9 thinks that contact is a bogey which is a mile in front of you, and it has a very large Doppler signal. Then It slews the radar and trashes the lock. Could be. Something is definitely screwed up

Thank you for posting this, I had been meaning to start to document this as well. The AWG 9 certainly is older and should be more temperamental, but this bug happens on a daily basis and happens in any condition other than solo play. It's most frustrating when the actual target never moved and the track goes flying off into the distance. Edit- @Hawkeye91Seeing this in single player is interesting. Maybe this has to do with ED's head scratcher of a decision to make the RCS of missiles so large that they appear on radar, or you get aim120s breaking lock of a tomcat to track an aim9 instead... I bet it is when they fire the merged contact (known real historical limitation) messes up the awg9. The real issue is that I'm pretty sure the awg9 wouldn't pick up missile sized objects at 60 miles...

I see this said by people a lot, but have yet to experience it - Did it pitbull on your TID? Can you post a track?

You and me bud.

This one is always a headscratcher and happens fairly regularly. I am curious if this TWS Weighting issue is causing much of these problems, as sometimes a new target pops up and pulls the radar cone too far down/over. The second item is not happening during a merge, which is a feature in that it was a real issue in the AWG9... but rather a steady target flying straight will sometimes disassociate and fly off the side of the TID at a speed that would make an SR-71 pilot jealous.

Yes. This would be great. You can see this sometimes when a contact FLYS off the side of the TID at 10,000 knots, because the contact just warped and the TID is like, well I guess they are going that fast now.

F14 - Doormouse/WhiteRabbit

I saw that, and what a great shot. The Aim54 is definitely is better at altitude, even if its slower, because that terminal guidance isnt doing wierd 50 degree pulls dumping all its energy. That being said, that guy was super compliant.

This is the crux of the issue. ED wont accept anything less than a track file, and 50% of the track files you send seem to be corrupt when they try to use em.... that's if you can even get em from a busy server. I think Hoggit allows you to have your own track file but places like GS, 104, DDCS, Enigmas all block telemetry to prevent exploits. So you dont get a useful track.

The doppler filter is ~140 knots closure, this is maybe an exaggeration, and part because I don't think Jester properly manipulates the beam/hot/cold filters properly? Maybe he does i dunno... but if someone is beaming you they are probably actively defending and likely to lose lock quickly. And yeah, if you try to go STT and your closest target is a Datalink target, they could be behind a mountain for you but visible to the E3. So Jester cant lock him. He just does a poor job of telling you why. I THINK you can use a separate menu for Lock TWS track.... actually haven't tried that.

@IronMike The Angle Tracking is not implemented yet, correct? I was just listening to the Tomcast about this.

Make sure you have a RADAR TRACK already for the target you want to lock... Not a DATALINK TRACK. Make sure the target is Doppler Hot, probably over 800-900 knots closure. Otherwise he is flanking and in/out of your filters Don't use "lock enemy/lock target" unless it is in front of you and has an active radar track. Usually this doesn't work anyway unless it's a perfect target profile. DO use the "lock specific target" and use the yellow radar tracks not the blue datalink tracks The issue is jester doesn't say, "can't lock him, he's behind terrain" or "<profanity> he's in the notch". So you have to be aware of why he can't lock him, and I've rarely had an issue where I didn't understand why he can't pick up a lock.

Dcs models RCS values as a single coefficient. Orientation does not matter

Oh no... I love the jester wheel in VR and the granular controls. I have them basically on muscle memory now and can do them very fast. It's actually one of my favorite features. If you ever significantly change it please add an option for legacy mode maybe. I dunno. I only wish he could PH Active and re sort tws targets.

Just to confirm, when the timer starts flashing, that means the AWG9 has sent the pitbull instruction. Correct? Even if the time is inaccurate, the flashing is always the Pitbull command?

yeah all the missiles in game say AIM54C At least have an A model Not that anyone can see it when they slam into you

$20 in the jar per Top Gun reference