reported DCS F-16CM APG-68v5 look-down issues and also weird AIM-120C behavior

[dureiken]

Hi

I also had this problem on my last flight : 2 mig 29 at 20NM in front of me, just a little below. DL track and radar track, can't TMS up on them, multiple times. And finally at maybe 15NM I was able to lock them.

I can't show a track because my plane crashes once again.

 

[Magnastro]

Hi

i also noticed weird behavior from the AIM-120c, they seem to be broken..they loose the tracking very easy even from a non escape zone. Before the last update was perfect...

[Blinky.ben]

Having the same issue, it’s almost as if the range doesn’t matter, it seems like the white box has to be displayed for awhile before it can be selected. I haven’t actually tested this just more of a observation during a online session.

Edited April 30, 2022 by Blinky.ben

[BIGNEWY]

this is reported and the team will take a look

thanks

[Ramstein]

any news on updates for F-16 Radar? Thanx

[mobua]

Any news on this issue? The F-16 is severely crippled in MP as of late. I also suspect there is a connection to the HSD/L16 as the abnormalities appear to effect the FCR and offboard systems concurrently.

[NineLine]

I think we are still waiting for the track file. 

[Nuggetz]

I can provide a track file but the size will be much bigger than the 5MB allowed. (see first post)  

If there is a way to send it to ED please let me know and I will oblige. 
 

Current experience can result in BVR targets not being able to be locked until 20-15 miles, placing the F16 of increased risk from enemy missiles. 

[BIGNEWY]

It is possible to use a cloud link like google drive to share track replays, but if they are to big and to long it creates problems for reproducing the issue. 

I will suggest waiting until after todays patch and see if you notice an improvement. 

thanks

[Nuggetz]

Will do thank you. 

[TheBigTatanka]

There was no improvement in today's patch when it comes to F-16 radar modeling. The key problems persist:

1. Look down penalty is applied as a 5% reduction per degree of look down regardless of the actual signal/noise ratio. I.e. ED isn't actually modeling signal/noise and is instead just applying the 5% per degree penalty.

2. The misunderstanding between detection and track ranges and radar energy for a 4th gen digital radar continues to be the opposite of reality. IRL, If you can see a contact between 40-45nm in scan, you can lock it right then and there, and there's a good chance you can track it well beyond that max detection range once your radar has it. DCS does this the opposite of reality.

3. The notching effects of a MPRF radar, like the one in the F-16, are much exaggerated in DCS.

The result of these three issues is that the F-16 cannot be employed in BVR as it is meant to be (even in the limited DCA role that it has today).

On a positive note, the AMRAAM changes in today's patch made the missile much more deadly -- it's on its way to becoming a more believable weapon. It still needs HPRF/MPRF modes and a significantly longer battery timer. But.... It's at least making progress when employed well.

In the meantime, until this radar is fixed, I'll be moving mud.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

[okopanja]

39 minutes ago, TheBigTatanka said:

IRL, If you can see a contact between 40-45nm in scan, you can lock it right then and there, and there's a good chance you can track it well beyond that max detection range once your radar has it.

Sounds like multiple contradictions... Or you meant something else?

 

[TheBigTatanka]

Nope, i meant what i said. You can lock stuff as soon as you can see it, and you can hold that lock further than you can detect something (for instance if it turns around and moves away from you).

Let's say you can see something at 40nm and lock it there. Then you crank and the locked contact turns around and drags away.... You can hold that lock further than the 40nm you initially saw it. This is because a lock focuses your radar energy and gives better returns than when the radar is scanning a wide area.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

[Nuggetz]

Having flown multiple sorties in both SP & MP since yesterdays update my analysis reveals that targets can be detected between 40-45 but cannot be locked despite repeated TMS up selections until within the 40 mile bracket. 
 

Typically locks are achieved between 23-36 miles which is an improvement over the 15-20 miles initially being experienced. That said all locks are achieved at high altitude against clear sky with no background clutter interfering. 
 

Hopefully future tweaks will refine the RADAR performance. Thank you

[Scotch75]

Having flown multiple sorties in both SP & MP since yesterdays update my analysis reveals that targets can be detected between 40-45 but cannot be locked despite repeated TMS up selections until within the 40 mile bracket. 
 
Typically locks are achieved between 23-36 miles which is an improvement over the 15-20 miles initially being experienced. That said all locks are achieved at high altitude against clear sky with no background clutter interfering. 
 
Hopefully future tweaks will refine the RADAR performance. Thank you

Yes, I experienced this today also on SP in a BVR mission with an AWACS. This unfortunately resulted in me eating SD-10s that were launched well before I could lock a target (JF-17) and launch to get them on the defensive. No BVR for the F-16 unfortunately.

Cheers!



Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[geshabuL_]

I want to point out that I have sent tracks to @NineLine for that same reason a few weeks ago, like 3-6 tracks. Those could be investigated as they pretty much show everything that was complained about. Before the F-16 could lock most targets from ~40 miles, but now a white dot appears on the radar that is impossible to lock for 5-20 seconds, depending on range, which could get you killed in most BVR fights. It's extremely frustrating.

Edited May 19, 2022 by geshabuL_

[Hobel]

23nm Lock at 40kft > 30kft
32nm Lock at 30kft > 40kft

is this behavior correct?

there shouldn't be any difference at the height, should there?

[TheBigTatanka]

Hobel, it's not correct, but ED thought it was. They've coded in this 5% per degree look down penalty regardless of actual ground clutter interference.

Should ground clutter produce problems for an F-16 radar? Yes. But.... What should that look like? It should look like false radar hits that get through the signal/noise filter, and it should affect the radar when your own jet is low (like below 10k feet). It should not cause problems when up high and looking down, as it currently does in DCS.

I'm hopeful it will get fixed. There are SMEs trying to educate ED on how to read the manuals ED has. It's really just a problem of computer guys trying to interpret aviation stuff. Fighter Pilots can't code this sim, and software engineers aren't fighter pilots... But everyone wants the same thing, a realistic implementation, it just takes the work of interpretation. I'm confident the sim will get there.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

[BIGNEWY]

20 hours ago, TheBigTatanka said:

There are SMEs trying to educate ED

Please PM and let me know who it is 

thanks

[Nuggetz]

Hopefully I have attached the correct version of the track file.

Simple mission me vs 5 x Mig23 (all with heaters to allow me to get closer) Note range the Migs are detected and repeated time TMS is selected without gaining a lock.  The Migs are well within the 40 mile range bracket before locks are achieved. It is not uncommon for the lock to drop delaying a relock.  In the earlier days of the F16 detection and lock was possible beyond 40 miles - so what has changed?

Obviously had the Migs been armed with Fox 1 or Fox 3 missiles I would have been in big trouble.  Hope this helps with your analysis.

 

lockFCR BUG.trk

[Moonshine]

17 minutes ago, Nuggetz said:

Hopefully I have attached the correct version of the track file.

Simple mission me vs 5 x Mig23 (all with heaters to allow me to get closer) Note range the Migs are detected and repeated time TMS is selected without gaining a lock.  The Migs are well within the 40 mile range bracket before locks are achieved. It is not uncommon for the lock to drop delaying a relock.  In the earlier days of the F16 detection and lock was possible beyond 40 miles - so what has changed?

Obviously had the Migs been armed with Fox 1 or Fox 3 missiles I would have been in big trouble.  Hope this helps with your analysis.

 

lockFCR BUG.trk 2.64 MB · 1 download

looks like you describe what has been reported over multiple bug reports already, most notably this one: 

 

 

[Nuggetz]

Agreed but I did start this thread in the middle file of February so it has been ongoing for a while. 

Given the number of threads relating to the RADAR/Missile performance in BVR engagements I am surprised that ED have not been able to identify these issues more readily. 
 

Certainly in the early days of the F16 module there were no issues detecting bandits at 40+ miles, gaining and maintaining a lock. Something has changed which often leads to a frustrating end to a sortie  

 

[Lanzfeld113]

I played alot of SP BVR today in the viper. Could never lock up a fighter sized target over the 40 mile scale. Didnt try larger targets. Could paint target at 50 miles but could NEVER lock until well below 40 miles. RWS or TWS. 

 

Bug?

Edited May 25, 2022 by Lanzfeld113

[Moonshine]

Yup it’s ridiculous. by now i hope ED has enough tracks and videos provided by a lot of people showcasing this issue and hope for a rather quick fix to this.

[Lanzfeld113]

Small update today with no fix.