Jump to content

SPA / SKU recognition mode is not tracking ships or am I doing something wrong ???


edineygomes
 Share

Recommended Posts

In SPA / MÅL recon mode, I can store the target and it is marked as a yellow M1 for me. Then when I double-click on the SPA / SKU button to transfer the target it is marked as a blinking red S1, after a few seconds the marking is fixed. After 4 minutes, I click again to update the target position but it does not show me the direction and speed of the ship when I press the fix trigger TV. My question is this: Do I need to make more than two markings after the target has been transferred to SPA / SKU mode?

 

Master mode selector is in SPA, data selector mode is in AKT POS, but the FÄLLD LAST light is blinking in recon mode. Could that be the problem?

 

I'm not using any weapons on this aircraft.

 

 

Can anybody help me ?:joystick:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure the function to track a moving ship isn't properly introduced yet. I remember trying it out a few months ago using instructions from the real life AJS-37 SFI (manual) and it didn't perform as expected at all. I am however somewhat sure you should anly have to either transfer the target and mark it once more after a certain time, or mark it twice in SPA/SKU mode. I could however be wrong.

 

I haven't tried it since and I haven't been able to find any info saying it's properly implemented, so my guess is that it still isn't properly done... sadly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi! All features of the reconnaissance suit in Viggen was fully implemented years ago. I haven't tested it for a long time so possibly something has broke since then. Sorry for late response and the issue.

DCS AJS37 HACKERMAN

 

There will always be bugs. If everything is a priority nothing is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All features of the reconnaissance suit in Viggen was fully implemented years ago.

That's interesting. Last time I tried SPA / MÅL it was not working as expected. Basically same as JanTelefon mentioned.

 

At that time I thought it was not implemented yet. If it was implemented and working even before the release it might be worthwhile to do a quick test it again. I guess many things changed in DCS and the module itself meanwhile.

A warrior's mission is to foster the success of others.

i9-12900K | MSI RTX 3080Ti Suprim X | 128 GB Ram 3200 MHz DDR-4 | MSI MPG Edge Z690 | Samung EVO 980 Pro SSD | Virpil Stick, Throttle and Collective | MFG Crosswind | HP Reverb G2

RAT - On the Range - Rescue Helo - Recovery Tanker - Warehouse - Airboss

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah you wouldn't believe how much regressions happen.

 

It's sad to read this, I can imagine how frustrating it has to be

 

A bit OT, but isn't it possible to create a batch of self-test cases that you can run automatically in DCS before any main release, to detect regressions like this one?

 

Regards



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I currently have 500+ unit tests that needs to pass for a release, most of them is for the flight model as thats the most tricky part of the whole module. Code breaks in the most unexpected ways though, like that time when StarForce stopped some functions within the module from being executed (the unit tests, as well as most manual testing was run before SF was applied). A lot of manual testing is needed though, which myself and our QA-team lead by our QA-lead JediTeo takes care of + EDs testers. Issues will get through though, and more likely with features few people use (if the gear handle stopped working we'd noticed a lot sooner).

DCS AJS37 HACKERMAN

 

There will always be bugs. If everything is a priority nothing is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I currently have 500+ unit tests that needs to pass for a release, most of them is for the flight model as thats the most tricky part of the whole module. Code breaks in the most unexpected ways though, like that time when StarForce stopped some functions within the module from being executed (the unit tests, as well as most manual testing was run before SF was applied). A lot of manual testing is needed though, which myself and our QA-team lead by our QA-lead JediTeo takes care of + EDs testers. Issues will get through though, and more likely with features few people use (if the gear handle stopped working we'd noticed a lot sooner).

 

Cool insight thanks! I can relate, I was involved in SW development for airborne equipment and the level of testing was insane! We actually spent more time developing the testing environment that the SW itself, it's really an art

 

Regards



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...