Crash2

Nevatim Parking 8-22 cannot accommodate large aircraft. The spots are supposed to be able to accommodate C-130's, KC130's or KC135's. They currently cannot accommodate any. All the spots from 1-23 can only accommodate 5 large aircraft. This is far smaller than what should be able to be accommodated on the ramp.

Seeing this also at Nevatim tried parking spots 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 23, 27, 53, and 71

I agree with this. I make a lot of missions and it would be nice if we had some placeable barriers that could go with portable SAM's like the SA-6 and SA-11.

Hopefully, I guess we are looking at Holidays 2022 if testing goes well I guess.

I mean it can be done, the F-14 in Pulse mode returns a ton of false returns and it changes based on terrain height and the radar antenna elevation. So its possible. I personally think this is not the final version of the radar but one they could make as a start. This jet is incredibly detailed in a lot of parts especially the engine. Which their last module the team worked on the C-101 had a ton of stuff in how the aircraft behaved that a lot of other modules don't.

So far I have gotten it about 7 times on multiple times I was testing the range of the Mirage F1 on the SA map with temps set at about 11C. I would get an ALT2 Failure at about 30 minutes after cruising at about FL200 at about 350-370 indicated. ALT1 would usually fail another 30 minutes to 1 hour after that. Loadout was 6 runway denial bombs with 2 drop tanks. And the avionics coolant switch was switched on, along with the aircraft was a hot start on the runway for testing. After doing more testing I have been able to cruise at 16-18,000 at around 380-420 knots without issue, even following the climb schedules published in the manual. And last night I was able to consistently reproduce the issue at FL200 but lower altitudes seem harder to get it to trigger consistently. Will try to get a track either tonight or tomorrow, hopefully it will help narrow it down. Got the track, took place about 21 minutes into the mission. Mirage F1 ALT2 Failure.trk

I will say that without any information on where the tank could be it was impossible. I cheated and took a look in the ME. Once I knew the general area I was able to scan it better zooming in with the sight. Even then it was difficult to spot and took over 2 minutes to see it. Its been a long time since I did some combined arms driving. But it sounds like others had the same problem.

I have noticed there are some LOD issues on the Damage textures for the Perry class frigate. When the camera is close the damage disappears however when it gets a little farther away the damage becomes visible.

So I am working on a mission and in it I have B-52's launch a large numbers of AGM-86's after the update to 2.7 I have noticed that the weapon once launched begins to wobble by pitching rapidly up and then back down again. This causes them to impact the terrain before reaching the target. I made a short test mission and tested B-52's at high and low altitudes and couldn't get the missile to stay straight and level it always pitches up and down. Track attached from test mission, real mission would be too long. Update: seems to work fine over land but not over the sea. Note this is on the syria map AGM-86 missile wobble 2.trk AGM-86 missile wobble.trk

So the argument continues about why can't RWR pick up on DL signals associated with a launch of a Phoenix in PD-STT. I will point out that from my understanding of the changes, P-STT should still act as it did before with a launch warning given once the missile has left the rails. I was never saying that all STT modes would allow the missile to track without a missile launch warning, but as PD-STT uses SARH/DL it will not give an RWR launch warning. Now back to why RWR's do not detect a datalink signal transmitted between missile and launching aircraft. This is mostly down to the principle of false alarms, make a sensor too sensitive and too many false alarms decreases pilots trust on the very device meant to keep them alive. While RWR can detect long range EWR systems and track radar's signatures all of these signals must be processed and analyzed by the computer to determine the threat type. And as I do not have access to documentation able to help me understand how the datalink between missile and aircraft works there are a few things I do know about radar and radio's in general. Now from what Heatblur have provided we know two things one that PD-STT when launch above 10nm uses the same radar mode as TWS as has been stated in the changes at the beginning of this post. Second we know that TWS does not give a launch warning due in part to the function and design of TWS. To be able to track and launch on multiple targets at once. This the radar system must do by itself with only radar sweeps every few seconds to update the pathing information on the target. Now we take that same radar mode and we give it constant radar information updates and we get the new PD-STT. Now the radar detection systems on the Tomcat are not the newest systems in the game, in fact that honor goes to the JF-17 and that system has the same limitations it cannot detect a TWS launch. Even if the receivers on the target were able to pick up the datalink signal they would also have to know what it is and decipher it as a missile datalink signal, which is more than likely encrypted and may operate on different frequencies to avoid collisions with other aircraft. This alone could make detection and deciphering much harder if not impossible in the time of a missile flight. Next problem the false alarm problem. The RWR system obviously has a threshold for how often a radar sweep is detected and how much energy is being directed at the aircraft. Too low and you perceive a threat which is not there and start a shooting war when no hostile action was actually taken. Or worse the pilots don’t trust the instrument and when the threat is real don’t react. These are possibilities which designers of these systems must take into account when making them so as to prevent the false alarm problem, better known as crying wolf. Now you maybe saying but the system on the A-10 alerts pilots to every launch, yes it does and do you know how many times pilots in DCS have popped flares and chaff due to a friendly Maverick launch. Now you maybe saying well that isn’t so bad better to be on your toes than not. Until you get 5 in a row and none are a real threat so when the 6th comes along you don’t think it is real and bang, dead. In the long run better to have a system which is reliable and indicates accurate and true threats than false ones.

Yes a similar technique to how the R-33 operates. The radar provides updates to the missile mid flight then terminal guidance is provided by a radar lock. This is why you get a launch warning from the Mig-31 during the terminal phase of the R-33's flight to the target.

So the way the RWR works is it is a receiver on the aircraft looking for radar signals hitting the aircraft to which it is attached. The system uses the emitters and a computer to interpret the radar waves hitting the emitter and using a data base of signatures determines what the radar belongs to. It then takes the data of strength from the receivers which are being hit and extrapolates the best heading base on the emitters which are being painted. While this works great in 2D space doing so in 3D space would require many more emitters and more processing power to extrapolate from the radar beam the location in 3D space in relation to your aircraft. This is why RWR's can be prone to incorrect directions and in fact the F-14's radar was so powerful that Mig-23 RWR's would get overwhelmed and flip the direction of the emitter by 180 degrees from the actual heading of the F-14. In response to the things which have been posted about the SARH/DL in PD-STT and TWS. The many things posted about the radar giving a chirping at the beginning of a launch is in relation to a Fox 1 launch. The Chirping is a part of the ECCM system on the Tomcat to counter ECM emitted by the target. A Fox 1's tracking requires a radar beam to reflect off of the target and bounce back to the missiles seeker head in order to track the target. This is why reflections off of the ground and chaff can spoof a Fox 1 missile, as the missiles seeker is looking for a radar's beam reflection to guide it to the target. SARH/DL on the other hand is another matter. The system in TWS is using the radar sweeps to build a track on a radar target to enable missile launch on said target. This data is gathered over several sweeps and enables the system to fire on more than one target at the same time. To another point is the system is strained when tracking and updating 6 missiles at once as after all this is 1970's computers after all. So once the track is built the system has a rough idea of the targets trajectory via the radar sweeps. Once the missile is launched the radar stores the track information in memory and continues to extrapolate trajectory via the radar sweeps until unable to do so. If the track is lost the radar will guide the missile to the memory target and will do its best to extrapolate the current altitude and heading of the target from last radar contact and previous data. While in flight the missile is receiving updated guidance via the datalink between the mothership (firing aircraft) and the missiles antenna. This is why the RWR does not notify you of a missile launch in TWS is because it is just a normal radar sweep over the aircraft. The system then uses the TTI from launch to tell the missile to go active a search for a target at a predetermined time. In this case 16 seconds from TTI. When in PD-STT the system is using the same update method to the missile but the radar system on the Tomcat is now hard locked or tracking the single target allowing the computer to update the missiles guidance constantly in flight as the weapons system has to only track one target. The downside the missile is solely reliant on datalink for the updates to its trajectory and will not go active if lock is broken and target is lost. When in STT mode the radar emits a constant beam of energy at the target which the RWR receives as a lock tone similar to a SAM site. However when a Fox 1 launch is commanded the system might be going into a higher powered state which indicates to the target RWR that a missile has been fired. This can sometimes be spoofed by radar operators to trick the target into thinking a missile has been fired when none actually has. This specific radar wave at launch is what the RWR is detecting and what gives you your launch warning. However the Phoenix when fired in PD-STT in SARH/DL mode is not relying on a radar pulse to guide it to the target but the computer onboard the F-14 extrapolating data from the hard lock about the aircrafts current altitude and airspeed and relaying the trajectory updates to the missile to ensure detonation. Also Radar guided missiles only have to be so accurate as they are proximity fuse detonated in real life using their warheads and shrapnel to damage enemy aircraft. This is why radar missiles are so big is to accommodate the larger explosive payload and the shrapnel. IR and TV guided ones can get even closer and sometimes actually come into contact with the aircraft which decreases the explosive needed to damage the aircraft.

Short term answer, no. The limit in your case is the single threaded nature of DCS. Right now the single core speed of your processor is the limiting factor in performance right now. Once multi threading is implemented your computer should vastly increase in performance as it will use more than the one core it is using right now.

All of the custom liveries I have for the F-16 have this 0 at the front of the aircraft, which is annoying mainly because I don't need a board number there. All of the other numbers on the aircraft I have managed to make disappear but this one is just sticking around. Only appeared after the recent Open beta update. Attached is the skin I was testing and the description.lua file. Maybe I missed something. description.lua