Link 4C in Multiplayer

[Scotia]

My squadron is wanting to do BVR training with jammer, and I had heard that for Link 4C to work in multiplayer, the fighters need to be part of the same group?

Is that accurate, or can we just be on the same frequency?  If it is true, is there any way that might change in the future?

[lunaticfringe]

1 hour ago, Scotia said:

My squadron is wanting to do BVR training with jammer, and I had heard that for Link 4C to work in multiplayer, the fighters need to be part of the same group?

Is that accurate, or can we just be on the same frequency?  If it is true, is there any way that might change in the future?

The fighters have to be in the same group as it's currently the only way to maintain the maximum 4-ship limit on the network. 

[Scotia]

Are there any plans to transition away from this method? 

Do we have any insight on how the network would handle 5 aircraft attempting to link?

My understanding is that Airboss can’t handle multiple aircraft in a single grouping.

[The_Tau]

5 hours ago, Scotia said:

Are there any plans to transition away from this method? 

Do we have any insight on how the network would handle 5 aircraft attempting to link?

My understanding is that Airboss can’t handle multiple aircraft in a single grouping.

Said in manual

there are L4C physical limitations

Edited November 2, 2022 by The_Tau

[Naquaii]

We have an idea for allowing the "flight" part of the address to be set using either the ground crew coms menu or the kneeboard. But as mentioned previously it's not as easy as just allowing it to be set as allowing it would add other issues that also need to be solved. Due to that it's a bit further down the list.

Edited November 2, 2022 by Naquaii

[Scotia]

 

1 hour ago, Naquaii said:

We have an idea for allowing the "flight" part of the address to be set using either the ground crew coms menu or the kneeboard. But as mentioned previously it's not as easy as just allowing it to be set as allowing it would add other issues that also need to be solved. Due to that it's a bit further down the list.

 

That sounds like a great solution!  Thanks for the feedback!