maxTRX

Whatever the reason is... balancing or unbalancing sounds like a possibility. Now, Andrei brought up the sidelobes... I don't think so. When I have time I'll make a detailed test following some books on the subject. There's a thick layer of dust that has collected on them and that is the reason why I'm hesitant to elaborate on the subject at the moment, until I look it up. 'Beamscanner' could probably answer this in one quick post... if he stumbles on this thread.

Nah, the entire radar needs to be doppler-shifted... forward.

Sure, the only tracks I can provide right now are the lookup and lookdown setups. They are fairly short and simple. My actions were a bit chaotic since there were other people in the room and there was concurrent yapping going on. In one of the tracks, the lookup one iirc, toward the end, there was some 'flailing around' since I stumbled on the 'ghost' track bug and it looked like part of this bug might be related to HMD and the radar definitely was going nuts. This problem has been reported numerous times already. I didn't play around with PRF in these 2 hops. Even if you try high PRF at the start of intercept, it would not make that much difference, at least not here. LookDown.trk LookUp.trk

More silliness: In a look up, on the average - little over 14nm. In a look down (after swapping altitudes with bandit F15E's) - little over 28nm, bandits flying at 800ft AGL over hilly terrain.

and... if the target to the West was closer, the bomb would guide at a steeper angle, faster, so, it depends.

OK... I give up on the question about differences between last OB and the previous one . I must have messed something up in one of my old 'creative' missions that I used for testing. After creating a brand new mission today and setting up identical flight profiles for all jets involved, everything worked the same way as in previous OB. With all jets above 30k, hot aspect: Mudhens detected at 44nm., Vipers around 42nm. So... only one question remains related to lower lookup detection range.

You guys are still discussing the techniques. I would still focus on 1 question: Why is the detection range only 15nm (target F15E loaded with junk) when the only background behind the target is the sky. Scanning radar is at 1k ft AGL/5k ft MSL and pointing up at the target at 21k, hot and descending. I think I still might have a track from previous OB version showing common intercept scenarios (not just lookup). Sometime later I'll try to run the identical setups in the latest OB. The radar performance 'should' show a downgrade.

Sounds about right. Also, it might be a good idea to haul ass, as low as possible then nodge the nose up to just barely above minimum safe drop alt. then release (even when transonic... nothing bad will happen ).

Neither do I... all I can do for now is write and rewrite my own flight and TAC manuals. For high drag bombs... just have to line up with the wind, more or less. Damn, all these bugs can make you just forget the Hornet and move on to fancy Apaches and other platforms but I'm a stubborn old goat...

Yea, it's strange though that for dumb bombs in auto, the ASL corrects for crosswinds. It's not exactly done the way it's supposed to be done, according to some folks here, but it sort of works, with moderate winds.

I could be wrong but it's been this way since the OB release. For 10 or 20 knot crosswind, it doesn't take much correction into the wind at 'in range'. I always check how much VV differs in 'windage' from the reticle and take about half of that. With the dispersion we have, some rounds are gonna hit for sure

I like to get some opinions on occasion about possible issues, not necessarily bugs, a confirmation perhaps that others are seeing the same thing. In this case I wanted to focus on 2 questions: 1. Does anyone else see the significant drop in Hornet's radar performance between the last 2 OB's? 2. Why the lookup detection range is different from level? Now, what happens to you from time to time? and... I provided a track yesterday in the bug forum, related to a different issue... it still says 'needs track' and is happily sliding down the page into oblivion.

No, I didn't watch 'like a boss' video... I rarely use more then 4 sec. and if I do, I only go to 8 and yes I'm aware of incorrect modelling of track age. The main issue here is the APG73 detection range. First, the decreased performance compared to the previous OB build. Second, the significant difference between 'high/co-altitude/hot' detection range and 'lookup' max. detection range.

I was really hesitant to update to latest OB, besides there was nothing new there for the Hornet... or was it The radar overall took a little step back. Also, can someone explain what is it that downgrades the radar even more when looking up. In this clip, the radar is looking up at 2 Mudhens, loaded with Mk84's and fuel bags. Radar tracked at 15nm

I created a simple mission with 4 a/c only, over an entire Syrian map. I was able to reproduce one of the different types of phony radar or HMD tracks. This time it showed only on radar (RWS) and was prioritized as AACQ. When something shows up as AACQ cross, it should easily be locked in SST. I wasn't able to acquire the track in SST. In the last few seconds of this 'track'... if it plays correctly Radar test2.trk

@Hornet experts: Are these ranges realistic? (roughly )

I won't try to sound like an expert on overall performance of this APG73. My 'experienced' gamer evaluation can be summed up as... Now, just focusing on detection ranges, Viper size target, above 30k ft. co-altitude, RWS soft lock at 43nm, LHAQ at 30.5nm... I can live with it. In a look up situation though, say I'm on deck painting the bandit 34k ft. above (RWS scan w/ AWACS feed and my elev. adjusted), I can only soft lock him slightly above 12 nm. LHAQ the same. PRF makes no difference.

I've seen this bug number of times already. After shooting down multiple bandits, I can still see a radar track (soft lock) or an AACQ cross, usually 5, 6nm away from me, at 0 alt. and running at -400 kts. closure. The target box on my HMD was pointing directly below me though and traveling at the same speed as I was. I wasn't able to get a STT lock on it. I will try to get a short track showing this. All I have is a vid for now. I'm sure there are other folks that have seen this bug.

In very unlikely situations where things change and designations need to be refined/targets VID'd/re-prioritized, etc.

No boredom on our boat:

I guess onset of senility is setting in slowly and I forgot what I discovered months ago when testing this... The bug is still there. It manifests itself at altitude. At 20 ft, no problems. At 6000 ft big CCIP error.

I'll check it out later.

When the bug was reported a few months ago, the first thing I checked and tested was the type of ammo used and correct ballistic profile selected on DDI. I've always used HEI-T with Mk50 selected. Switching the reticle to PGU will not make that much difference at max effective range. The impact point will change around a degree (roughly). At least in my test. The bug was causing the impact point to shift around 7 ~ 10 deg. upwards, but only after selecting or using certain guided bombs before. The gun reticle v. type of ammo was never changed.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/297695-ag-gun-after-using-jdam-issue-no-more/?do=getNewComment