Furiz

Yeah, I completely understand the trigonometry, but they said at least 1 away and you are fine, and I did my boresight on a post 2.5 miles away and still it was not accurate. So that's why I'm asking to clarify. I think I'll do my boresight in the air on a vehicle 6+ miles away and then it should be ok.

So to clarify, what distance should we have to an object on the ground when doing ground boresight (GND JETT ON and SIM mode)? I'm asking because I did a few very accurate maverick boresight on a power line post few miles away and it was not as accurate on a vehicle 5 miles away later on when I went up in the air. Or this kind offset is correct? Mav boresight off cold start .trk Power line post location

They are damaged beyond repair, but to be fair, they should be burning since they are full of fuel and a missile just hit them, not much of a wreck too.

Also this article, long read, states that - The JDAM employs the US standard Mil-Std-1760 umbilical interface, incorporating the Mil-Std-1553B digital multiplex bus. Before launch the JDAM's embedded software communicates with the launch aircraft's stores management processor, no differently than a computer peripheral. Prior to release the JDAM is powered up using an umbilical feed from the launch aircraft. The JDAM executes an internal self test, warms up and aligns the HG1700 inertial unit. Once the JDAM is ready, it communicates status information to the launch aircraft, which then downloads GPS timing, GPS Almanac (ie nav message), GPS Ephemeris (constellation) and the GPS PPS crypto key. This information is used to initialise the GEM-III receiver. https://www.ausairpower.net/TE-JDAMPt1.html So if the alignment is happening on the prosessor inside the bomb, there should be no difference in the alignment time whatever the mode the aircraft is in as long as the bomb is powered ON, we currently have 2 different alignment timings, depending on which mode is selected and what is displayed on MFD.

As tagged, remove all mods and post a short track, also you can do cleanup and repair before that. No issues with TGP on my end.

JDAM has Inertial Navigation System, while aligning it transfers navigation data from the aircraft to the onboard system. When the bomb in turned ON on the SMS page it starts the alignment. Therefore it doesn't matter if the AG mode is selected or if the SMS page is selected as long as it is turned ON it should continue aligning at the same pace. Currently we have 2 different align duration times, 5+ min if in Nav mode and SMS page not selected and 2-3 min if in AG mode and SMS selected. Both times should match each other. I only don't know which time is correct. Maybe an SME could help.

When not in AG mode and SMS page is not selected JDAM takes more than 5 min to align, in other case when in AG mode and SMS page is selected it takes less time to align, 2 - 3 min. tracks: Slow align - JDAM slow .trk Fast align - JDAM fast .trk Don't know which one is correct but I guess one of them needs tweaking.

I don't see Balkan as an option

Title of this topic is self explanatory

I didn't watch the tracks, just commented on the picture, but I fly every day and I didn't have this issue he is describing.

When you get jammed that means the radar can not determine range of the target, it can only determine the azimuth, so it shows the target at max range, in your case 40 miles. That's why the target is not moving, cause radar display is showing it at max range all the time.

Altho that magic range is more or less 1nm, if you try to boresight at 2nm you wont get good accuracy on your Mav, For good and accurate boresight atm 5nm is the shortest distance to boresight at. I think testers should re-test that 1nm distance.

Just did a test myself on a cold start, when aligning Mav on the ground the objects are just too close to do a good alignment, when trying to lock targets 7+ miles away there is offset, but when I do the same with a target that is 7 miles away for example, Mav alignment is ok.

Maybe some modders can help there, there must be some1 willing to make female pilot model.

In my opinion if it were all female models in DCS I wouldn't even notice, I'm not here for that, I'm here for aircraft simulation. To me all the human models don't even have a gender, I don't even look at them that way, to be honest until I saw some of these threads I didn't even notice that. F-16 and F-18 that I fly in are aircraft and they are always referred to as "she", same goes for ships, ships and aircraft gender is female. Did you notice people asking ED to make a male F-16 aircraft? Ofc you didn't, cause we don't care about that. Therefore I'm happy we can fly these beauties and enjoy the scenery, as for ED keep up the good work and bring us more toys in the future.

I'm not a fighter pilot but I work in maritime industry and I've spend some time on the sea, when it comes to waves, there is something called "dead sea" it is waves reflecting from shoreline from a yesterdays bad weather, those waves we call deep waves, they are massive and usually below surface and you can only see the small portion of those waves rolling on the surface, then on top of those waves that go in some direction there are surface waves that can go in completely different direction depending on wind ofc. Those surface waves would give you that sense of going fast or slow, depending on your direction towards the wind, since carrier is usually heading into the wind for carrier ops, these surface wave should head in the carriers bow, and recovering aircraft nose, thus giving us the sense of going fast.

In the flight sim part of the video the waves are moving in the same direction the aircraft is moving thus making you feel you are moving slow, if they were moving in the opposite direction like in the real life part of the video you'd have a different feeling. But when you land on the ship they do move in the opposite direction of the ship movement, so maybe adjustment is needed.

Or use the search function on the forum:

Working fine on my end, went up vs SA-6 and it beeped, did you remove mods etc?

And yet best selling aircraft are from the modern era. Where did you get that idea? many ppl love modern tactics, BVR and long range SAM engagements. JDAM, JSOW, LGBs working with TGP to find targets communicating with JTAC etc. Many ppl are not voicing out on the forums. Maybe you got the wrong impression of things.

To add to this discussion, our HARM should explode above the emitter (real world HARM apparently has more fuze settings, explode on impact or proximity fuze) damaging the antenna only, in this video around 2:14 there is a mention of a proximity fuze: As for EWR, they operate at lower frequency than HARM or HTS sensors can detect, so you won't see it as an option to target or attack with HARM.

From the manual page 105: Steerpoints 26-30 are reserved as markpoints but can be used to display MGRS coordinates as well. These steerpoints can only be entered or modified using the Lat/Long coordinate format, and cannot be converted from MGRS. However, they will display the equivalent MGRS coordinate formats on the MARK DED page for reference.

I can only guess what happened since there is a lack of info, this doesn't happen on my end. My guess is this: When you press MSL Override you get FCR on your left MFD and SMS page on your right MFD (if you haven't configured it earlier), so with that configuration pressing DMS DOWN will not do anything and SOI will stay on FCR, pressing DMS UP will select the HUD as SOI. If you select HSD on your right MFD and press DMS DOWN SOI will move to left MFD. Also check your bindings too. But next time if you make a bug report read this before:

Nice video, didn't see that one yet. There is also one with explanation: