MBot

Yes, the latest patch finally fixed them (today for 2.1).

I hazard a guess and say it is related to the Viggen. In 2.1 the Viggen kneeboard doesn't show a map at all.

Since about half a year, SA-6 do not engage targets and I am using SA-6 in every of my campaigns.

Yes, it seems that also the problems with EWR detection were solved. Once these fixes hit 2.1, you can expect some movement again with DCE.

I have no idea how that would be done :) As of now, data needs to be stored and code to be run between missions, which I only see possible outside of DCS.

The ARM script is generic and not tied to specific missiles if I remember correctly. The problem is that not all ARM are returning a target in the scripting environment. I think at least the HARM was recently updated to return its target, so it should now also be compatible with the script. Not sure about the Russian ARMs though.

The attack script is important, the other attack tasks are duds only, merely serving to give a visible marker on all target elements. The attack script allows all (AI) aircraft in a flight to attack multiple static or map objects of a target complex simultaneously. Something which is not possible in default DCS, where the next static or map object is only attacked once the previous was destroyed. So the script allows flights to perform somewhat decent (within the limits of the awful AI in DCS) single pass attacks where every wingman bombs a different target.

In the past 9 months or so I have have made a number of updates and improvements to DCE and all my campaigns are updated and waiting on my HD. But I will wait with releasing anything until ED at least fixes the SAMs. I also have a quite extensive Viggen campaign ready (the bulk of it was actually built even before the Viggen was released), but it also is pending release until AI Viggens can take off from small airfields without crashing.

Absolutely.

Absolutely amazing. Fantastic texture work, fantastic system depth and best of all, JESTER AI. It looks like Heatblur will set the bar for every other DCS module.

Good luck with it, I would love to see it being used in more ASW missions. My script are usually richly commented within, so I hope you can figure out the necessary configurations. At this point I would also have to rely on the comments.

Have you repeated the MissionScripting.lua modification after the latest DCS update? Since each DCS update reverts the file to its original state, that modification has to be repeated each time. Otherwise I think there were some issues with running your programs not as administrator.

I just want to add that also my tracks with the Viggen do not play back correctly. Tracks with the F-5E work perfectly, so this seems to be an issue with the aircraft.

See the screenshot below. This was taken in the approach circle, just after passing LB1 and following directions for the turn to the runway heading. Notice the variometer indicates a descend (the altitude was indeed decreasing). Note how the flight path marker incorrectly indicates a climb instead. A 16 kts wind was present.

Open the mission planner (or be in the mission editor) and select the attack waypoint. You will then see markers on all target elements.

I think this is meant as a loadout for a group of 4 aircraft. So two aircraft with 1 RB 04 + CM, one aircraft with 1 RB 04 + Jammer and one aircraft with 2 RB 04. Frankly I haven't considered ships with S-300, since they are not that relevant for the scenario. Few were available in total in the era discussed and none were based permanently with the Baltic Fleet. Such high value assets would surely have been tasked with combat against US forces in theaters of higher importance. Of the other ships we currently have in DCS, except the S-300 units, I think the RB 04 out-ranges all SAM systems. So you can approach a ship at 500 meters altitude and not fear any adverse effects. I hope we will eventually get the Kashin-class guided missile destroyers, which were the primary heavy units of the Baltic Fleet and provide some appropriate air defense with the SA-N-1 SAM. This SAM should have around the same range as the RB 04, so sea skimming for the final few kilometers would be advisable. Still, no adverse effects would stop you from approaching the targets from hundreds of kilometers out in plain view of the ships air search radar (that is to say if it actually had one in DCS), just dipping down for a few seconds under the SAM engagement envelope. Remember above that Viggens would drop down in the area of Gotland and continue across the Baltic at extremely low level. That was primary a measure to avoid detection. Avoiding SAM fire would only be applicable for the final moments of the attack. Generally, ships in DCS have search radars only for the purpose of target acquisition for SAMs. So the search range is about 10-20% bigger than the range of the SAM. Naturally, ships with long range S-300 have also a bit longer radar range. But they do not have proper air search radars of hundreds of kilometers range, which would be used to provide early warning of approaching aircraft and which would be used to send off some MiGs to investigate. I think this should be the biggest threat to the Viggen in the maritime strike role and this should also be the reason to fly low to avoid it. Sadly this mechanic doesn't work in DCS.

Thank you very much Farks for this excellent and interesting write up. I would like to add some points in regard to the anti-ship mission in the context of DCS. As we can see, flying low at 10 meters above the ocean surface was the primary tactic of the Swedish air force and clearly the AJ 37 Viggen was designed around such operations. But what is actually the advantage to operate at such low altitude above the ocean? I can think of two primary reasons: 1. Avoid early detection by ship based air search radars to decrease warning time for ship based air defenses. 2. Avoid early detection by ship based air search radars to prevent vectoring of interceptor aircraft. As we can see, it is all about avoiding detection by flying under early warning radars, which is highly effective in the naval environment. Due to the curvature of the earth, ship based search radars can detect an aircraft flying at 10 meters at a maximum range of 25-35 km (depends on mast height of radar). While the radar horizon exists in DCS, unfortunately it has no relevance. First, ships in DCS do not require lead-in time to go to action stations and early warning is almost irrelevant to the ship's air defense systems. Second, ships in DCS do not have the EWR trait and are incapable of vectoring friendly aircraft (both player or AI). Therefore there is no advantage in DCS to fly the anti-ship mission at low altitude. It can be flown at medium altitude with exactly the same outcome. Additionally, there are various bugs and problems that further affect the Viggen's low level anti-ship mission: 1. Even if radar detection would matter, AI aircraft are actually incapable of flying at very low altitude: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3077477#post3077477 2. Even if radar detection would matter, ships in DCS only have a maximum radar search range of 25-30 km. Their air search radar sets should typically have vastly longer range (150-300 km). 3. AI MiG-21bis, which should be a common enemy for the AJ 37, has a look-down capable radar in DCS which it should not have: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3087788#post3087788. This further diminishes the advantage of flying low to avoid detection. All this problems unfortunately hamper the proper use of the Viggen in its primary anti-ship mission in DCS. While it is still possible to reenact the low-level mission profile, it is of no tactical necessity in game and therefore is mostly role-playing in nature. The DCS environment is simply not up to the task.

Heatblur's commitment to the surroundings of their modules is exemplatory!

For bombs I use this, which are the values from the real weapons manual: Note that the MILS values in this chart are depression angle from flight path. In the aircraft you have to dial in depression from Zero Sight Line. The precise correction is depending on your actual AoA, put generally subtracting 20 mils from the values in the chart works very well: 7X3A3o2k5C0

As modifications are involved, difficult to tell the problem remotely. I would advise to ignore any DCE campaign until ED fixes EWR and the SAMs. At least that is what I do.

Is this SP or MP? For some strange reason, the radio never worked in multiplayer in the Desert Tiger 76 campaign. The same mission in singeplayer was alright though.

Do you have a source for this? I know about the Russian laws. But I have never heard that ED had an aircraft in development that legal actions were taken against by the Russian government.

2016 ;)

RB 75(T) cannot be locked on scenery objects, such as bridges.

This is still a problem, AI Viggens have problems or cannot take off from smaller airfields. At best they overshoot the runway and keep on trucking along the countryside, which looks bad. At worst, they keep crashing into buildings in their path. For missions this is a big problem, as it means that Viggens (full AI flights or player flights with AI wingmen) cannot operate from small strips, which is kind of what the Viggen is all about.