Hulkbust44

They are not, but will automatically become MSI track files if one of the eight slots are open. Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

To be clear, the only incorrect statement is regarding the SCS direction as listed above. Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

Post a video of it happening in a recent build, a lot of behavior has changed since then. Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

Nope, EOM is actually different. It is a TOO 'RANGE KNOWN' function. LAR is 0 to +/- 135 Not available in PB. (Correction it seemed it was in 2002, but with a note that it ended with 163XXX, so it was a function on some that was removed later, TOO EOM stayed.) This relies on us having TOO range functions first... Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

I certainly have it, passive ranging for the -73 and ATLFLIR is known due to data block for each. I'll see about making a report/request here. Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

Yes this is a bug in that we can’t change the chart type individually from the scale. You can decenter the map to get a larger scale for a lower level chart. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Combination of trigonometry, the DTED, and the radar if in the radar FOV. In DCS you can see that the radar is contibuting by RADAR or AGR on the HUD. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That’s why you use the AZ/EL, you can see how everything is stacked. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The real Hornet heavily utilizes the AZ/EL and additional MSI properties. You're supposed to be able to just step through the MSI tracks regardless of whether your radar sees them at that moment or not. Additionally, the TDC on the SA should be "magnetized" and snap to any track or point making this whole thing a lot easier. Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

That’s the same as using the TDC, it’s the same cursor. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

How were you testing this? Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

Got it, thanks! That’s a step in the right direction. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What does that IFF rejection line mean for the Hornet? As I understand there is no mode/code simulation so rejection wouldn’t be possible anyway. Also the EXP slew line needs some more context it seems. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There are a few odd lines in the changes today, but what on Earth does “Wrong IFF code rejection behavior” mean? As I understand no CIT/IFF modes/codes are modeled for any Eagle Dynamics aircraft, did that just change? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No, in the Hornet you use the AZ/EL as a visual representation of the altitude stack and radar elevation. Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk