yes - as announced it would be Hornet already out of Early Access?

[AstonMartinDBS]

In the DCS E-Shop the Hornet isn't marked anymore as "Early Access"

as is still the case with the Viper, for example:

When and why did the Hornet leave the "Early Access" state, as there are still several planned features, which are currently not implemented?

Thanks.

[NineLine]

The F/A-18C is feature complete based on what we advertised, plus a LOT more we did not advertise on the store page. There are some additional items in progress that we are still working on, some of which are not confined to the F/A-18C. Out-of-early access does not mean the end of development. 

The only unique, new feature is Radar Bump Mode, but even that is in progress and never advertised as a feature. It's an item that we later added to further improve the product.

Thanks!

[Silver_Dragon]

1 hour ago, AstonMartinDBS said:

In the DCS E-Shop the Hornet isn't marked anymore as "Early Access"

as is still the case with the Viper, for example:

When and why did the Hornet leave the "Early Access" state, as there are still several planned features, which are currently not implemented?

Thanks.

The F/A-18C has more features on progress and ED continue working on them.

2024 and beyond show the features on progress...

Quote

DCS: F/A-18C. The biggest task for 2024 is a refactoring of the flight model and flight control system, landing gear physics, and improved external lights. Once the new external lighting system is complete for the F/A-18C, this technology will be used for other aircraft modules.

 

[AstonMartinDBS]

Thanks for clarification @NineLine.

I am familiar with these posts @Silver_Dragon, I just missed an official announcement, that the Hornet already left Early Access.

[Chaffee]

13 hours ago, NineLine said:

The F/A-18C is feature complete based on what we advertised, plus a LOT more we did not advertise on the store page. There are some additional items in progress that we are still working on, some of which are not confined to the F/A-18C. Out-of-early access does not mean the end of development. 

The only unique, new feature is Radar Bump Mode, but even that is in progress and never advertised as a feature. It's an item that we later added to further improve the product.

Thanks!

Congrats to the team! It's a great module. Looking forward to further development.

[AegisFX]

Oooh wee! Now we can begin working on the Hornet 2 like the black shark and Warthog! See ya in a few years!!!!

[Weasel]

Oooh wee! Now we can begin working on the Hornet 2 like the black shark and Warthog! See ya in a few years!!!!

My biggest wish

[Viper33]

19 hours ago, NineLine said:

The F/A-18C is feature complete based on what we advertised, plus a LOT more we did not advertise on the store page. There are some additional items in progress that we are still working on, some of which are not confined to the F/A-18C. Out-of-early access does not mean the end of development. 

The only unique, new feature is Radar Bump Mode, but even that is in progress and never advertised as a feature. It's an item that we later added to further improve the product.

Thanks!

But the pre-EA roadmap is not complete yet? I'd realy like to soon see the radar phase 3 stuff and MSI improvements as well as new lights before it's pushed out of EA. 

[Weasel]

This could have been worth a note in the mini update thread, so that everyone is aware that the F/A-18 was taken out of early access. Anyway, this is really good news and I am looking forward to futher improvements/additions

[Andrei]

On 4/6/2024 at 9:12 PM, NineLine said:

The F/A-18C is feature complete based on what we advertised, plus a LOT more we did not advertise on the store page. There are some additional items in progress that we are still working on, some of which are not confined to the F/A-18C. Out-of-early access does not mean the end of development. 

The only unique, new feature is Radar Bump Mode, but even that is in progress and never advertised as a feature. It's an item that we later added to further improve the product.

Thanks!

Not exactly what was advertised during the early access though  

I recall there are at least some weapons missing.

Edited April 11, 2024 by Andrei

[CaptPickguard]

6 minutes ago, Andrei said:

I recall there are at least some weapons missing.

A moment of silence for the sea mines. 

[Wizard_03]

What are: "Additional MSI functions?"

[SharpeXB]

Woo Hoo

[Harker]

What are: "Additional MSI functions?"

Actual sensor fusion, as in the ability to designate trackfiles without radar contribution, or slave sensors to them. Another thing would be the ability to use sensors other than the radar to contribute to and/or create MSI trackfiles.

Lastly, there's a system to "rank" sensor importance/priority, to determine which one is the most reliable, and thus use it as the primary source of data. Like how the radar is higher priority than MIDS right now (even though you get information from C2 and/or F/F, your MSI trackfile's position, altitude and velocity is primarily determined by your radar).

[MrWolf]

So hornet is out of EA....

But are the major bugs fixed? There was a bug as old as I can remember that made dropping bombs with the hornet without gps availability impossible. I've seen recent updates about the Viper INS, does the hornet have it fixed? Or we are obliged to fly with GPS in order to have the aircraft correctly working?

 

Slant range drop calculation for bombs in ccip shouldn't depend on ins anyways, just radar range and mathematical computer calculations.

 

The original bug threads were closed and I don't recall seeing the solution anywhere.

[BIGNEWY]

3 minutes ago, MrWolf said:

So hornet is out of EA....

But are the major bugs fixed? There was a bug as old as I can remember that made dropping bombs with the hornet without gps availability impossible. I've seen recent updates about the Viper INS, does the hornet have it fixed? Or we are obliged to fly with GPS in order to have the aircraft correctly working?

 

Slant range drop calculation for bombs in ccip shouldn't depend on ins anyways, just radar range and mathematical computer calculations.

 

The original bug threads were closed and I don't recall seeing the solution anywhere.

Hi, 

any bugs that remain open will continue to be worked on. If you think something has been over looked please make a new thread in the bugs section so it can be checked, we are happy to. 

Some issues take longer to fix than others but as mentioned above work continues and leaving early access is not the end of development. 

thank you

[Rissala]

On 4/7/2024 at 6:46 PM, Weasel said:

This could have been worth a note in the mini update thread, so that everyone is aware that the F/A-18 was taken out of early access.

On 4/6/2024 at 11:48 PM, AstonMartinDBS said:

I just missed an official announcement, that the Hornet already left Early Access.

This. With the monumental amount of effort put in to this module over several years, it seems odd that there isn't an announcement for official release...

Edited April 12, 2024 by Rissala

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

And on the DCS main menu the Hornet still has the “EA” tag…

[BIGNEWY]

19 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

And on the DCS main menu the Hornet still has the “EA” tag…

We will get that changed,

thanks

[BarTzi]

9 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hi, 

any bugs that remain open will continue to be worked on. If you think something has been over looked please make a new thread in the bugs section so it can be checked, we are happy to. 

Some issues take longer to fix than others but as mentioned above work continues and leaving early access is not the end of development. 

thank you

How about wrong implementations, like the TGP offset? Will we ever see it prioritized?

Edited April 12, 2024 by BarTzi

[Hobel]

vor 20 Stunden schrieb Harker:

Another thing would be the ability to use sensors other than the radar to contribute to and/or create MSI trackfiles.

Other sensors? For example, can I create a track with the TGP and then I or a wingman can shoot an Aim120 on it?  

  Is it also possible to triangulate several RWRs with each other and create a track and shoot it?

[BIGNEWY]

Please don't turn this thread into a wish list / bug report thread. 

If you have an issue please use the appropriate forum area and make a report with a track replay, please ensure you are not duplicating reports by searching first. please PM any supporting public unrestricted evidence for your claim.

As mentioned any bugs or remaining tasks are being worked on, development has not stopped. 

thank you 

[BarTzi]

6 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Please don't turn this thread into a wish list / bug report thread. 

If you have an issue please use the appropriate forum area and make a report with a track replay, please ensure you are not duplicating reports by searching first. please PM any supporting public unrestricted evidence for your claim.

As mentioned any bugs or remaining tasks are being worked on, development has not stopped. 

thank you 

The community does a great service to the devs by reporting bugs and providing the required documents. Sadly, we have no idea what bugs were assigned to the devs, and when - which is the downside of the bugs sub-forum. We also can't '+1' those threads anymore since they are locked after the bugs are reported.

I think it's time to be more transparent about what bugs are assigned to devs. 

 

[NineLine]

4 hours ago, BarTzi said:

The community does a great service to the devs by reporting bugs and providing the required documents. Sadly, we have no idea what bugs were assigned to the devs, and when - which is the downside of the bugs sub-forum. We also can't '+1' those threads anymore since they are locked after the bugs are reported.

I think it's time to be more transparent about what bugs are assigned to devs. 

 

Bug reports are marked as reported and ONLY closed when they have been submitted to the team to be fixed. Your '+1' does nothing to help forward the process and it only makes more posts for us to look at. Also:

1.14 It's forbidden to create threads/topics containing in their title/body:

- hyperbolic, rude or strong language, also partially or completely masked by other symbols like @#$%^, etc;
- no relation to forum section (flame);
- no relation to the topic (off-topic);
- please avoid low-effort posts like "+1", "me too", and similar (flood);
- same information covered in other sections/threads/posts (cross-posting);
- over 70% of capital letters for except for abbreviations;
- non-informative content/titles like: "Help me!", "I have a question...", "rant", "I don't know what to do", "+=Super Pack=+" or meaningless set of symbols and letters.

Titles or posts that break this rule will be subject to change or deletion of the thread/post. Repeated offences can result in warnings.

As seen here +1s are against the rules anyways. So we cannot be any more transparent about bugs assigned to the devs than we are already being by saying they are 'reported' means they are indeed assigned to the devs. Thanks.

[BarTzi]

10 hours ago, NineLine said:

Bug reports are marked as reported and ONLY closed when they have been submitted to the team to be fixed. Your '+1' does nothing to help forward the process and it only makes more posts for us to look at. Also:

1.14 It's forbidden to create threads/topics containing in their title/body:

- hyperbolic, rude or strong language, also partially or completely masked by other symbols like @#$%^, etc;
- no relation to forum section (flame);
- no relation to the topic (off-topic);
- please avoid low-effort posts like "+1", "me too", and similar (flood);
- same information covered in other sections/threads/posts (cross-posting);
- over 70% of capital letters for except for abbreviations;
- non-informative content/titles like: "Help me!", "I have a question...", "rant", "I don't know what to do", "+=Super Pack=+" or meaningless set of symbols and letters.

Titles or posts that break this rule will be subject to change or deletion of the thread/post. Repeated offences can result in warnings.

As seen here +1s are against the rules anyways. So we cannot be any more transparent about bugs assigned to the devs than we are already being by saying they are 'reported' means they are indeed assigned to the devs. Thanks.

NineLine, this is not what I asked. I want to know which bugs are being worked on. This is very different than bugs submitted to the team. I'm sorry, but '+1 -ing' a bug report seems like the only way to get attention because some of those bugs just remain reported for years. The 'OFFSET' implementation is a great example of this. 

Edited April 14, 2024 by BarTzi