tech_op2000

Is it intended behavior that the F-16 Helmet alignment "AZ/EL" starts wherever the helmet is pointed when M-SEL is pressed. In this video, watch how I set the Coarse alignment close to the center, then move my head before beginning AZ/EL. The top cross for alignment does not appear where the coarse alignment was finished, but instead where the helmet was moved to. If it is the way it works in the plane that is fine. I am used to the hornet where the fine adjustment starts where the coarse alignment ended. Thoughts?

I have noted that the hud has to be in nav mode, not air to ground mode for it to work too. I had a nasty habit of turning on my mavs and harms before trying it and forgetting to exit a-g

The comms worked well for me on the mission. All the way until switch to tower for the recovery. I'm not sure if I was supposed to actually switch to tower again or stay on marshal. I thought the game required staying on the carriers marshal freq to get all the proper recovery comms. I never got the deck is charlie call and got a no grade do to improper comms. I also could not kiss off my wingman do to that transition to tower not working. going to try it again, but change to tower freq when directed. As far as mission specific comms: If it is transmitted by a helicopter, I will say I nearly took out a heli when launching on cat 2. it was out infront of the boat low and in my way. Maybe that could have messed it up for you? Also, I think a lot of the comms scripts are triggered by locations. Not being in the right spot seems to cause some problems from time to time. I noticed on this mission they wanted waypoint 2, tacan 210 radial at 30. Since the boat is moving, that tacan reading wont line up with waypoint 2 after the boat has moved a bit. I ignored the tacan and hit waypoint 2 to circle. I switched comm 1 to tower before clicking the comms option to push from waypoint 2. And was very quick on my startup and launch(note the warning about taking too long to takeoff) Update, I also got the comms for landing to work on a second playthrough. I had to enter the stack and wait for "Clam" to land, then my wingman and I got clearance to land. (stayed on preset 10, Marshal)

awesome, thanks

hmm, sounds like I just chose a really bad time to try it in the harrier for the first time then. lol

@Comrade Doge Thanks for this great mod. Im having trouble getting coordinates into the Harrier. Do you have any guide or tips for how to make it work in there. I'm on Syria. Can I get the coords to overwrite premade waypoints. Can it do markpoints or target points instead of just waypoints? what screen do I need to have up when I start transfer? It seems like it starts trying to enter if I have the ehsd up but doesnt actually fill out or change any waypoints. Just pushes a lot of buttons.

I am sorry you feel that way. I guess I can cover it here then: This is from the "DCS FA-18C Early Access Guide EN.pdf" Located in the install location, .../Mods/aircraft/FA-18C/Doc Page 89: RAID/FLIR FOV select button [I]. Depending on the controlled sensor or weapon, this button has multiple functions: • Selects the RAID mode when the radar set operating mode is Track While Scan (TWS) or Single Target Track (STT). • When HARM is selected, cycles HARM targets from center outwards. • When ATFLIR or TGP is active, cycles between FOV settings. • When in Maverick mode, toggles FOV. To be fair, there is not a section for the NWS/Undesignate button that expressly says "depending on the controlled sensor or weapon" followed by "When HARM is selected, Hands-off target to Harm" Page 287: How to Employ the AGM-88C HARM in TOO Mode 1. Master Arm to ARM and Master Mode switch to A/G 2. Select HARM from the SMS page ***3. Set TDC to the HARM format page*** 4. Press [I] to select / cycle detected radar emitters 5. Hand-off target to HARM by pressing Cage/Uncage button or [C] 6. With threat emitter boxed on EW Page or EW HUD with H-OFF indication, press weapon release button or [RAlt] + [Space] to launch the missile

Sounds to me like he believed his sensor of interest was indeed on the harm display and the function of cage/uncage was not functional. specifically "sensor of interest is setting up into the good DDI" So, I would disagree with you about this statement.

Raid/Flir FOV and Cage Uncage do all sorts of functions based on what sensor is sensor of interest. Lets assume for example you have the harm display on one screen and the Targeting pod display on the other. Both of these buttons have functions on the targeting pod. The aircraft needs a sensor of interest to be determined so it could determine what action the button should perform. SCS to the Harm display tells the system, "use these buttons to do harm actions instead of other actions these buttons can do" This specific forum thread was marked as such because the original poster has not yet provided any further information to help determine the exact cause of his bug. It cannot be reproduced with out further instruction from the O.P. about what conditions the O.P. was in when his Harms failed to uncage. In response to his question multiple users tested the Harms and did not encounter an issue like the O.P. stated. They do this because it is always possible that an update caused the system to start malfunctioning for everyone. Unless the original poster or another user can consistently reproduce an actual bug, the developers can not investigate the bug further. A track file is the best way to help users reproduce and identify a bug. It allows anyone who views the track to actually see the positions of every switch and button in the users cockpit. and what button presses were performed. It then allows a viewer to take over at any point and try something else to make it work. Its very helpful. That would be why it was marked accordingly. If you are having issues with the current implementation or questions about why it is the way that it is, It may be helpful to start your own thread for it.

I have found the MK20 Rockeye's to be highly effective if successfully dropped on target. It is true that they will not always destroy a tank but I don't think that would be accurate to real life anyway. I suspect a Rockeye IRL would disable a tank, perhaps destroying its engine, making its turret and gun non functional, killing crew, and disabling tracks. Maybe not all of those every time. But unlikely to completely destroy it. Perhaps their DCS performance deficiency is more of a tank damage model problem than a Rockeye problem. This Matt Wagner Video shows them being quite effective even up to MBTs.

If the goal is to drop as many bombs on target as possible with the f18 the answer is 10x dumb bombs. Either MK-82s or CBU-99s. It takes significant precision flying skills to get all of them to hit their targets, the targets have to be close enough together to allow you to do it in a single dive, and you are exposing yourself to increased risk of AAA fire or sams. But it can be done. You may have some luck on moving convoys with the Cluster JSOWS by just carpet bombing the area you anticipate the moving convoy to be with all 8 of them. A bit high on the collateral damage with that one though. And timing is key. If you have more time in the AO to re-engage, 8x laser guided gbu-12s can have a 100% success rate against 8 different targets. You can master using the helmet or HUD to designate each target initially, quickly adjust the position with the TGP, and drop. It is important to remember that DCS attempts to simulate these aircraft as realistically as it can. In Real Life, a single F-18 isn't expected to take out more than a tank platoon( 4 tanks) and likely not even that many. It is more likely that a flight of aircraft would have that mission and each aircraft would carry maybe up to 4 bombs and take extra fuel tanks. In the case of a convoy, A hornet might only destroy a single vehicle in it to stop its progress until a cas asset can engage it, like an A10 or Apache(cant wait!!!)

actually, I can't even get it to do it at all now. So maybe it was just a problem with my not updated graphics drivers. Disregard this and I'll bring it up again if it starts happening again at some point. Thanks @AlphaJuliet

This happens to me sometimes too. I notice that when it happens, clicking the ODU will not produce a value in the ufc. It stays blank. Whenever that happens I cannot enter a value. If any value shows up when I press the ODU, even such as a Zero, it will let me enter and save a value. I only noticed it in multiplayer and wondered if it had to do with errors in the mission file, perhaps from carrying over spawns from older versions. Such as if a mission maker just kept editing the same old mission as DCS updates. Maybe there was some data saved to the spawn that caused the problem.

I encounter it when launching the night time training missions from the main menu. Occasionally when launching the same missions from the ME. I need to do further testing as I can not consistently reproduce it.

You do not set an efuz. Just MFUZ to PRI or VT. That is all it has. If I understand it correctly you also cant adjust the deploy height. The HT supposedly just affects the aircraft calculations but does not modify the bomb fuzing. The Program shows EFUZ and MFUZ because some weapons have E fuzes and some M fuzes. But not all munitions have both. To elaborate Further: (And I'm speculating, I am not an expert in these systems) An EFUZ or Electronic Fuze is a a proximity sensor. so EFUZ INST would be telling the munition to detonate as soon as a senor detects something other than air in the immediate area of the munition. A D1 D2 etc would be a Delay to tell the munition to start a short timer once it detects something, then explode. This would be useful if you wanted the munition to penetrate the target before detonating An MFUZ or Manual fuze is a physical switch on the munition that will detonate the munition only once that switch makes contact with a target. or in the case of CBU-99 there may be some sort of pressure or altitude sensor. Only one Fuze type should be selected for each weapon release based on the pilots preferred detonation characteristics. I imagine in the case of a gbu-12 laser guided 500 pound bomb, An EFUZ could detonate when the bomb encountered the leaves of a tree, whereas an MFUZ would travel past the leaves and only detonate once it hit the branches or the ground or a tank etc. Anyone know if that is correct and if so if DCS simulates that behavior? For the CBU-99 cluster munition. an EFUZ is not necessary as the munition is not intended to detonate by proximity to a target. It is ONLY intended to detonate at a set distance from the target/ground, Then spread out its bomblets.

The VREST page will display your Gross Weight as GWT. You can select VL, VTO, or STO to see additional calculations based on that weight to determine aircraft performance for vertical takeoff and landing or short takeoff. Unless edited manually by the pilot, the GWT will update automatically when stores are added or removed, fuel and water are added or removed. Fuel is used, weapons are used, etc. The F+W value on VL and VTO represents the maximum weight of Fuel AND Water combined that the calculations believe may be on the aircraft to perform a vertical takeoff or landing.

Having to hold the bomb release down for a second or two definitely caught me off the first time I tried dropping GPS bombs in the harrier.

Is there a way to reset user input data in the VREST pages? Specifically the GWT. Example: I enter in a custom GWT. It now has an asterisk next to it. Can I remove the asterisk and switch it back to automatically updating GWT as I fly or Rearm?

I've got a weird bug. My Harrier stays bright inside at night and sensors dont look right, also water has day like reflections. I originally thought it was due to the training missions, as that is where I encountered the bug. In testing though, I dont believe that to be the case. I opened a night training mission in the editor, changed the weather preset and launched it. I then had normal night illumination. After that I tried a whole bunch of training missions at night and they all then had good night illumination. however, shutting the game down then reopening it, I get back to this sort of illumination.

@BIGNEWY Thinking of possible ways this could function I actually think the second of the two options I suggested but tweaked would be a pretty good implementation. It could work as follows: For players who have "Realistic TDC Slew" Enabled, no change in functionality. For players who have "realistic TDC Slew" Disabled, pressing and holding TDC Depress when using an EXP mode would cause normal current functionality. Pressing and releasing TDC Depress quickly (holding for less than maybe .5 seconds) would make the EXP mode simulate a depressed TDC, the user could then slew the EXP cursor as though TDC were being held down. Another quick press of TDC depress would release the simulated mode and a new target would be selected. It would of course need to be written in such a way that deselecting the EXP mode or switching Sensor of Interest etc. would not cause a problem. The simulated held down TDC would have to only function in the EXP mode.

Could you provide a bit more context: Was this an isolated occurrence? Does it now happen to you all the time? Does it only happen in a specific situation? (Like trying to use a maverick) What were the aircraft conditions when it happened? Air to ground, Air to Air, No master Mode. Weapons onboard. Single player/Multiplayer If it is reproducible, could you make a short track file of it and upload it?

I like that there was a 3 year gap in the middle of this thread!

I wont be able to try it until Monday but I wonder how long it would take to recenter the aileron if it was trimmed to full deflection (held to one side for around 2 minutes)

awesome, Keep up the good work. To quote the movie "Airplane" - "I just wanted to let you know, Good luck! We are all counting on you!"

In the case of it throttling back too much perhaps. In terms of its basic functionality I don't believe so. I may be completely wrong about this system as I don't have any real experience with it but based on my aeronautics experience and my assumptions about this system, here are my thoughts: Prior to the addition of the approach capability of the ATC, if it were enabled in a landing configuration, it would attempt to maintain an airspeed. This would be perfectly acceptable for level flight and gradual climbs and descents. This would not be desirable for turns though. It would also be a bit sluggish to respond as I'll describe below: When a plane rolls to enter a turn, some of the lift is directed sideways instead of up. In order to maintain altitude in a turn, the plane must generate additional lift. It can do this by either increasing AOA or by increasing speed. In the non approach implementation this would cause the plane to maintain the same speed with ATC in a bank and the pilot would have to increase AOA to maintain level flight. With the approach Implementation, I believe the plane will now increase thrust as necessary to maintain AOA in a bank, resulting in an increase in airspeed. (an increase in thrust results in an increase in speed if AOA is maintained, causing a proportional increase in lift) Also, in the approach mode, a deviation from the desired AOA will immediately begin a throttle response, even though speed hasn't yet changed. In the non approach mode I don't believe the throttle response would be as immediate.