New Patch system, but more Bugs (F16). Dear ED, what's going on?

[Nedum]

I thought the beta patch period is over, and we will get more stable versions?

With each new patch we get a new "behavior" of one of the F16 systems, but no instructions on how to use them properly.

We are supposed to submit a "bug report" without knowing if it is a bug or a new "feature". How are we supposed to do that if we have to guess whether the current behavior of the F16 is the right one?

I don't know right now, is this the right way I'm learning to get the F16 to work, or is this the next new of "1000" workarounds.

The last few weeks I have the feeling that with every patch a lot of things become new, and hardly anything works like before. With each patch we have to wait longer for the next fix, and with the fix we get a new "feature" that doesn't always work right, and we have to wait again until the next patch "fixes" it (or adds a new problem/new behavior).

I feel like the F16 has a lot of new issues right now (INS, scope, laser code, weapon systems, datalink, etc), and with each patch there are coming more.

Actually, I just want to have fun, but ED, you make it really difficult for me to have any fun at all. Fun is currently being replaced by frustration and that really sucks.
It's ok if the F16 systems finally work as they should, but do they? I don't know. How so without any actual manual?
When will we get the newly revised F16 manual? This manual is the basis for learning things and knowing what is right or wrong.

Since the last 4 updates, I have the feeling that changes and how they affect the game are decided by a dice roll (I hope I am wrong). I no longer recognize any system behind all the changes. I'm also beginning to lack the imagination to think that there is still a plan for why things happen the way they do.

So what's going on, ED? What is the right doing, to have fun with the F16 again? How long do I have to wait, the F16 is in a good state again?

And please, don't ask me what's wrong with the F16 right now. If you want to tell me, there is no big problem with the F16 right now, I will give up in believing in you.

Yes, I am frustrated, really frustrated.

[fragal]

Just came back to the 16 after a few months long hiatus and i have to agree with all of the above, what on earth happened how did the 16 go from perfectly workable and fun to this......I have a squad mate who just dropped a ton of $ on some new sim stuff and he's planning to return after a long break, i fear once he see's the state of the 16 he's just going to uninstall and go play the other 16 simulator...sad

[BIGNEWY]

1 hour ago, Nedum said:

I thought the beta patch period is over, and we will get more stable versions?

With each new patch we get a new "behavior" of one of the F16 systems, but no instructions on how to use them properly.

We are supposed to submit a "bug report" without knowing if it is a bug or a new "feature". How are we supposed to do that if we have to guess whether the current behavior of the F16 is the right one?

I don't know right now, is this the right way I'm learning to get the F16 to work, or is this the next new of "1000" workarounds.

The last few weeks I have the feeling that with every patch a lot of things become new, and hardly anything works like before. With each patch we have to wait longer for the next fix, and with the fix we get a new "feature" that doesn't always work right, and we have to wait again until the next patch "fixes" it (or adds a new problem/new behavior).

I feel like the F16 has a lot of new issues right now (INS, scope, laser code, weapon systems, datalink, etc), and with each patch there are coming more.

Actually, I just want to have fun, but ED, you make it really difficult for me to have any fun at all. Fun is currently being replaced by frustration and that really sucks.
It's ok if the F16 systems finally work as they should, but do they? I don't know. How so without any actual manual?
When will we get the newly revised F16 manual? This manual is the basis for learning things and knowing what is right or wrong.

Since the last 4 updates, I have the feeling that changes and how they affect the game are decided by a dice roll (I hope I am wrong). I no longer recognize any system behind all the changes. I'm also beginning to lack the imagination to think that there is still a plan for why things happen the way they do.

So what's going on, ED? What is the right doing, to have fun with the F16 again? How long do I have to wait, the F16 is in a good state again?

And please, don't ask me what's wrong with the F16 right now. If you want to tell me, there is no big problem with the F16 right now, I will give up in believing in you.

Yes, I am frustrated, really frustrated.

Sorry to hear you are frustrated, 

DCS is complex and there will be issues from time to time, the DCS F-16C is having a lot of work done to it at the moment regarding its systems, like with the INS, we did post some details in the change logs, and we also had a newsletter about the INS changes. Wags will also be adding a video soon to show what has changed in even more detail. 

Some of the recent changes to the DCS: F-16C are below

• G effect improvements. Loss of colour, tunnel vision, and black out have been adjusted and all happen over a greater time period. This is most useful AFTER performing a G warmup (4 to 5 G for 90-degrees, and then the same manoeuvre back in the other direction). At 9.3 G and after a G warmup, blackout now occurs at approximately 30 seconds instead of 9.5 seconds.  - work in progress. Sound effects will be done later.
   
• Added embedded INS+GPS logic based on Kalman filter. - work in progress.
   

  F-16C INS+GPS System Overview

  The navigation system on the DCS: F-16C Viper is a complicated mixture of technical solutions that are intended to supply the avionics with coordinates, velocity, and angles,  that are characterised by precision, availability, integrity and autonomy. This is achieved by the cooperative work of the Inertial Navigation System (INS) and Global Positioning System (GPS) whose navigation inputs are processed through a Kalman filter in the Modular Mission Computer (MMC). Let’s discuss each of the components in detail.

  INS

  The Inertial Navigation System is an autonomous device that performs dead reckoning of aircraft coordinates by measuring the accelerations and then integrating them twice whilst taking into account the aircraft’s orientation in space. The latter is obtained from the F-16 ring-laser gyros. This type of INS is termed “strapdown” as there are no rotating parts. Basically, INS consists of three accelerometers, each for one orthogonal axis, and three  gyros.

  The main features of INS improvements are:

1. Autonomy, as it doesn’t require any external signals to do dead reckoning.
2. Stability in a short period of time (5-10 minutes).
3. Noticeable error accumulation over longer periods of time based on the physics of dead reckoning. Together with the integration of accelerations (to update speed) and integration of position (to update coordinates), the small errors at the level of accelerations that are introduced by accelerometer noises and imperfect alignment are integrated twice as well. 

Furthermore, the larger those errors are, the faster they accumulate due to the so-called integral correction of INS, which updates the local Earth gravitational force vector with the coordinates and adds them into the relative angles of the G vector.

Another distinctive feature of INS is the Schuler Oscillation with a period of 84.4 minutes. Due to the integral correction algorithm mentioned above, the INS behaves like a pendulum. In ideal circumstances, it stays in equilibrium while the aircraft moves along the Earth. When coordinate errors appear, it displaces the pendulum from the resting point and it starts oscillating. The larger the errors are, the larger the amplitude of the introduced oscillations. That’s why one may notice that INS errors get smaller at a rate of 84.4 minutes once airborne.

GPS

Global positioning system measures the aircraft position by measuring the signal propagation delay from GPS satellites to the receiver. Satellite orbits are precisely known, the exact positions of the satellites are computed according to an almanack that is transmitted in the same GPS radio signals. That’s why GPS needs a couple of minutes after the cold to start obtaining the almanack. The moments of the signal transmission are also known and are defined by a very precise atomic clock on board the satellite. Thus, in an ideal case, if the GPS signals are propagated through space with the constant speed of light, as they do in a vacuum, the receiver could precisely determine its position by intersecting the surfaces of equidistant radio signal delays from the satellites. You may think of it as spheres with centres located at the satellite’s positions, although it’s a bit more complicated in real life. However, there are two significant factors that prevent us from obtaining the ideal point of the surface intersections; the ionospheric delay and multipath. Both add unknown time to the actual signal propagation time. Multipath happens when the receiver is placed relatively near the ground and the signal may be reflected from ground objects that results in the signal's edges degrading; this is similar to an echo in the mountains where it’s too hard to tell one word from another. When such delays are unexpectedly added by the receiver, the precise navigation solution gets lost and the output

coordinate gets noisy. That’s where military GPS signals help to get a better signal resolution by the use of so-called P-codes, and the usage of dual frequency helps to eliminate the unknown ionospheric delay. 

Integrated solution. Kalman filtering

To summarise the above: we have two navigation systems, both of which have flaws: INS accumulates errors over time, GPS is noisy and prone to interference due to natural factors like multipath and ionospheric delay and to enemy jamming and spoofing. Here is the good news! There is a way to avoid these flaws with the Kalman filter. It takes GPS and INS coordinates together with speeds as its input. The Kalman filter is a great algorithm that is able to get the maximum precision even out of measurements far from ideal, and it takes the best aspects from both systems: the stability and autonomy of INS and the precision of GPS to obtain an integrated navigation solution that is both stable and precise.

Furthermore, the Kalman filter knows, in terms of mathematical equations, the dynamic properties of the aircraft that is moving through space. If the aircraft is moving, it predicts where the aircraft will be on the next filter step. That’s why it is called recursive and the filter won’t let erroneous GPS signals decrease the precision of the output navigation solution. Moreover, it is able to dynamically change its measurements vs. prediction weights to adjust to a degraded navigation precision of any input.
 

 

• data link: When starting or restarting the aircraft, the MIDS switch must first be set to OFF. Only set to ON after the GPS switch has been set to ON for 60 seconds and the DED TIME page displays GPS SYSTEM. 
  
  
  The laser code issue you mention was fixed in a hotfix with some more INS tweaks. 

  DCS 2.9.4.53627

  DCS: F-16C Viper by Eagle Dynamics

  • INS loses data if engine shuts down and EPU is triggered
  • laser code set in ME not working
  • Tuning the IFA alignment - IFA with GPS velocity update fix 
  
  
  As you can see we are working hard and apologise if these changes, tweaks and updates have felt disruptive. 

The new patch cycle and one public version was a system that was asked for by many in the public, it is a better system although it may not seem it to some. Open beta users were used to quicker patch cycles, but stable users who used to go months without a patch now get patches much quicker, and everyone gets to play on the same servers, and get all the new additions to DCS at the same time. 

 

I do hope once things have settled down with all the changes you feel better about it all, again apologies if the new changes, tweaks, issues and updates have felt disruptive for you. 

[Nedum]

Hello Bignewy,

thank you for your very detailed reply. I am well aware that you all (the ED team) are working hard to make sure everything runs as smoothly as possible. Unfortunately, lately I have the feeling that some things are going wrong with the planning. For me, the F16 module has never been in such a bad state without major features being added. And in my opinion, there have never been so many different problems at the same time.
I can't remember for a long time that the F16 was ever in such a bad state.
It's frustrating when what's added or improved isn't even noticeable as an improvement, but makes the F16 much more unplayable.
Waypoints drift as soon as I set markpoints and turn them into STPTs. Boresighting no longer works at all. HARMs suddenly fly around wildly. GBUs no longer find their target. Confusing altitude information for cluster munitions. TGP need and "rearm" to work after a rearm, and many more.
And what's worse, I don't even know whether this is a bug or whether I'm simply operating the system incorrectly now (because I learned it wrong, since it wasn't implemented correctly before). I just don't know anymore, is it me or is it the game.
Please, if at all possible, stop putting in half-finished things into the game that break more than it adds in functionality.
That's all I wish.

[Roy35150]

Sadly have to agree with OP,

The viper is imho the most FUN module to fly in dcs but since last patch ive stopped using my fave all time airframe due to it not being fun anymore,

Cmon devs,

You guys had the F16 in a very stable and almost finished state before the unified patches came out?

For the love of god please stop adding and changing whats not broke...

Very frustrating as half of her systems are not fun to use anymore.

[mukisuki]

I agree, too. As i write in my own "CBU 97 Burst Altitude" thread.... The whole CBU 97/105 system is bugged now. Somebody has marked my thread as "solved" but it is not. It was working perfectly before. 

And now best part of it, they move my problem to "wish list" ...... it was not a wish it worked before, i want it back working.

 

 

 

Edited April 17 by mukisuki

[TobiasA]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb BIGNEWY:

Sorry to hear you are frustrated, 

DCS is complex and there will be issues from time to time, the DCS F-16C is having a lot of work done to it at the moment regarding its systems, like with the INS, we did post some details in the change logs, and we also had a newsletter about the INS changes. Wags will also be adding a video soon to show what has changed in even more detail. 

Some of the recent changes to the DCS: F-16C are below

• G effect improvements. Loss of colour, tunnel vision, and black out have been adjusted and all happen over a greater time period. This is most useful AFTER performing a G warmup (4 to 5 G for 90-degrees, and then the same manoeuvre back in the other direction). At 9.3 G and after a G warmup, blackout now occurs at approximately 30 seconds instead of 9.5 seconds.  - work in progress. Sound effects will be done later.
   
• Added embedded INS+GPS logic based on Kalman filter. - work in progress.
   

  F-16C INS+GPS System Overview

  The navigation system on the DCS: F-16C Viper is a complicated mixture of technical solutions that are intended to supply the avionics with coordinates, velocity, and angles,  that are characterised by precision, availability, integrity and autonomy. This is achieved by the cooperative work of the Inertial Navigation System (INS) and Global Positioning System (GPS) whose navigation inputs are processed through a Kalman filter in the Modular Mission Computer (MMC). Let’s discuss each of the components in detail.

  INS

  The Inertial Navigation System is an autonomous device that performs dead reckoning of aircraft coordinates by measuring the accelerations and then integrating them twice whilst taking into account the aircraft’s orientation in space. The latter is obtained from the F-16 ring-laser gyros. This type of INS is termed “strapdown” as there are no rotating parts. Basically, INS consists of three accelerometers, each for one orthogonal axis, and three  gyros.

  The main features of INS improvements are:

1. Autonomy, as it doesn’t require any external signals to do dead reckoning.
2. Stability in a short period of time (5-10 minutes).
3. Noticeable error accumulation over longer periods of time based on the physics of dead reckoning. Together with the integration of accelerations (to update speed) and integration of position (to update coordinates), the small errors at the level of accelerations that are introduced by accelerometer noises and imperfect alignment are integrated twice as well. 

Furthermore, the larger those errors are, the faster they accumulate due to the so-called integral correction of INS, which updates the local Earth gravitational force vector with the coordinates and adds them into the relative angles of the G vector.

Another distinctive feature of INS is the Schuler Oscillation with a period of 84.4 minutes. Due to the integral correction algorithm mentioned above, the INS behaves like a pendulum. In ideal circumstances, it stays in equilibrium while the aircraft moves along the Earth. When coordinate errors appear, it displaces the pendulum from the resting point and it starts oscillating. The larger the errors are, the larger the amplitude of the introduced oscillations. That’s why one may notice that INS errors get smaller at a rate of 84.4 minutes once airborne.

GPS

Global positioning system measures the aircraft position by measuring the signal propagation delay from GPS satellites to the receiver. Satellite orbits are precisely known, the exact positions of the satellites are computed according to an almanack that is transmitted in the same GPS radio signals. That’s why GPS needs a couple of minutes after the cold to start obtaining the almanack. The moments of the signal transmission are also known and are defined by a very precise atomic clock on board the satellite. Thus, in an ideal case, if the GPS signals are propagated through space with the constant speed of light, as they do in a vacuum, the receiver could precisely determine its position by intersecting the surfaces of equidistant radio signal delays from the satellites. You may think of it as spheres with centres located at the satellite’s positions, although it’s a bit more complicated in real life. However, there are two significant factors that prevent us from obtaining the ideal point of the surface intersections; the ionospheric delay and multipath. Both add unknown time to the actual signal propagation time. Multipath happens when the receiver is placed relatively near the ground and the signal may be reflected from ground objects that results in the signal's edges degrading; this is similar to an echo in the mountains where it’s too hard to tell one word from another. When such delays are unexpectedly added by the receiver, the precise navigation solution gets lost and the output

coordinate gets noisy. That’s where military GPS signals help to get a better signal resolution by the use of so-called P-codes, and the usage of dual frequency helps to eliminate the unknown ionospheric delay. 

Integrated solution. Kalman filtering

To summarise the above: we have two navigation systems, both of which have flaws: INS accumulates errors over time, GPS is noisy and prone to interference due to natural factors like multipath and ionospheric delay and to enemy jamming and spoofing. Here is the good news! There is a way to avoid these flaws with the Kalman filter. It takes GPS and INS coordinates together with speeds as its input. The Kalman filter is a great algorithm that is able to get the maximum precision even out of measurements far from ideal, and it takes the best aspects from both systems: the stability and autonomy of INS and the precision of GPS to obtain an integrated navigation solution that is both stable and precise.

Furthermore, the Kalman filter knows, in terms of mathematical equations, the dynamic properties of the aircraft that is moving through space. If the aircraft is moving, it predicts where the aircraft will be on the next filter step. That’s why it is called recursive and the filter won’t let erroneous GPS signals decrease the precision of the output navigation solution. Moreover, it is able to dynamically change its measurements vs. prediction weights to adjust to a degraded navigation precision of any input.
 

 

• data link: When starting or restarting the aircraft, the MIDS switch must first be set to OFF. Only set to ON after the GPS switch has been set to ON for 60 seconds and the DED TIME page displays GPS SYSTEM. 
  
  
  The laser code issue you mention was fixed in a hotfix with some more INS tweaks. 

  DCS 2.9.4.53627

  DCS: F-16C Viper by Eagle Dynamics

  • INS loses data if engine shuts down and EPU is triggered
  • laser code set in ME not working
  • Tuning the IFA alignment - IFA with GPS velocity update fix 
  
  
  As you can see we are working hard and apologise if these changes, tweaks and updates have felt disruptive. 

The new patch cycle and one public version was a system that was asked for by many in the public, it is a better system although it may not seem it to some. Open beta users were used to quicker patch cycles, but stable users who used to go months without a patch now get patches much quicker, and everyone gets to play on the same servers, and get all the new additions to DCS at the same time. 

 

I do hope once things have settled down with all the changes you feel better about it all, again apologies if the new changes, tweaks, issues and updates have felt disruptive for you. 

First of all, thank you for taking the time for a detailed reply. 

The thing is not that we do not appreciate the work going into the F-16. It is... It happened in a lot of the recent patches that saw relevant changes for the F-16 that you take the F-16 for a spin after a bigger patch, and something big is broken. You literally do one single ramp start, and something is off. We went for a quick training like we always do, just a short trip to the range, checking if everything works or if things have changed. I usually take LGB, but this time we went with mavs, LGB and JDAM and out of these, only the JDAM worked. After getting the TGP to work, which took quite some time.

And that is getting really frustrating, especially since it is no longer called Open Beta.

I am not raging and ranting, but in some of the patches, it makes me wondering about how such problems can pass the internal beta test. And I would really appreciate it if we could get a more reliable platform, and things that already work don't get broken two updates later. That being said, I know that the 16 is still early access. 

But I would appreciate it if there would be more bugfixing (like fixing post- designate CCIP) and less new bugs, especially on features that didn't even see a change. It's not some new feature, or that something behaves different. It is that things completely stop working. And that's just sad.

[Tango3B]

5 minutes ago, TobiasA said:

First of all, thank you for taking the time for a detailed reply. 

The thing is not that we do not appreciate the work going into the F-16. It is... It happened in a lot of the recent patches that saw relevant changes for the F-16 that you take the F-16 for a spin after a bigger patch, and something big is broken. You literally do one single ramp start, and something is off. We went for a quick training like we always do, just a short trip to the range, checking if everything works or if things have changed. I usually take LGB, but this time we went with mavs, LGB and JDAM and out of these, only the JDAM worked. After getting the TGP to work, which took quite some time.

And that is getting really frustrating, especially since it is no longer called Open Beta.

I am not raging and ranting, but in some of the patches, it makes me wondering about how such problems can pass the internal beta test. And I would really appreciate it if we could get a more reliable platform, and things that already work don't get broken two updates later. That being said, I know that the 16 is still early access. 

But I would appreciate it if there would be more bugfixing (like fixing post- designate CCIP) and less new bugs, especially on features that didn't even see a change. It's not some new feature, or that something behaves different. It is that things completely stop working. And that's just sad.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. We do appreciate all the work going into the F-16. But the current state of the F-16 forced me to park it in the hangar for some time. I am a Viper guy from the very beginning but at this time frustration keeps me from using it which is truly sad. I hope we will see an improvement in the very near future. Be it a quicker rollout of bugfixes between major patches or whatever. The current situation is not okay, though. 

[RyanR]

I gotta chime in as a new guy to DCS. These problems have a financial reality for ED. I've been simming for 30 years, and I was real close to walking away from DCS. As it is, it's hard to consider another "serious" module. The F-16 is a flagship for DCS, as it's one of the things that ED does well that no one else really does at all.

As folks have mentioned, it's really hard to tell if a change is a bug or a feature. This is pretty easy to solve: Better communication with the community. For a software developer, ED is pretty dreadful when it comes to communication with its user base. The changelog is pretty weak when it comes to explaining the affects of a change. 

In my first weeks of DCS, I learned more about workarounds on YouTube, than I have features from the user manual. A number of training missions don't even work. 

I still think the F-16 here is a fantastic effort, and I'm having a blast with it.

-Ryan

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

IMO, it all boils down to ED having too much on their plate (and that plate keeps piling on with new EA modules every year) and the fact that we are in a perpetual beta sim environment. That's just the way it is with this sim. If every module could have the attention and focus we saw in Deka's JF-17 development (except for the lack of an English manual to date!) that would be awesome.

[skywalker22]

20 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

G effect improvements. Loss of colour, tunnel vision, and black out have been adjusted and all happen over a greater time period. This is most useful AFTER performing a G warmup (4 to 5 G for 90-degrees, and then the same manoeuvre back in the other direction). At 9.3 G and after a G warmup, blackout now occurs at approximately 30 seconds instead of 9.5 seconds.  - work in progress. Sound effects will be done later.

I haven't noticed that yet anywhere, so I will ask right here, since reading about it...

About this new G effect and performing warmp-up maneuvers. How much time has to elapse without any maneuvering, that warm-up does not have any influence any more?

[LePaul]

Same feeling of disappointment.  As I posted elsewhere, now the Targeting Pod is fubar.  You power it on as part of pre flight ,take off, and you are stuck waiting for 10 minutes for the thing to show Stand By and Not SOI.  Then after a longer wait, you now have this new A/G mode button to finally use the pod.

I don't understand how no one of the testing team spotted that gee, the pod sure takes a long time to work.  Before, the only real delay was for the JDAMs so synch up.

G effects really don't mean much to me.  Some aircraft have a bigger issue with it.  Do a tight turn in a Tomcat and it'll go instant black and never come back (til you go BOOM).

On my wish list would be the F-16 Little Buddy's, to counter the SAMs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/ALE-50_towed_decoy_system )

Edited April 18 by LePaul

[dutchili]

21 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Sorry to hear you are frustrated, 

DCS is complex and there will be issues from time to time, the DCS F-16C is having a lot of work done to it at the moment regarding its systems, like with the INS, we did post some details in the change logs, and we also had a newsletter about the INS changes. Wags will also be adding a video soon to show what has changed in even more detail. 

Some of the recent changes to the DCS: F-16C are below

• G effect improvements. Loss of colour, tunnel vision, and black out have been adjusted and all happen over a greater time period. This is most useful AFTER performing a G warmup (4 to 5 G for 90-degrees, and then the same manoeuvre back in the other direction). At 9.3 G and after a G warmup, blackout now occurs at approximately 30 seconds instead of 9.5 seconds.  - work in progress. Sound effects will be done later.
   
• Added embedded INS+GPS logic based on Kalman filter. - work in progress.
   

  F-16C INS+GPS System Overview

  The navigation system on the DCS: F-16C Viper is a complicated mixture of technical solutions that are intended to supply the avionics with coordinates, velocity, and angles,  that are characterised by precision, availability, integrity and autonomy. This is achieved by the cooperative work of the Inertial Navigation System (INS) and Global Positioning System (GPS) whose navigation inputs are processed through a Kalman filter in the Modular Mission Computer (MMC). Let’s discuss each of the components in detail.

  INS

  The Inertial Navigation System is an autonomous device that performs dead reckoning of aircraft coordinates by measuring the accelerations and then integrating them twice whilst taking into account the aircraft’s orientation in space. The latter is obtained from the F-16 ring-laser gyros. This type of INS is termed “strapdown” as there are no rotating parts. Basically, INS consists of three accelerometers, each for one orthogonal axis, and three  gyros.

  The main features of INS improvements are:

1. Autonomy, as it doesn’t require any external signals to do dead reckoning.
2. Stability in a short period of time (5-10 minutes).
3. Noticeable error accumulation over longer periods of time based on the physics of dead reckoning. Together with the integration of accelerations (to update speed) and integration of position (to update coordinates), the small errors at the level of accelerations that are introduced by accelerometer noises and imperfect alignment are integrated twice as well. 

Furthermore, the larger those errors are, the faster they accumulate due to the so-called integral correction of INS, which updates the local Earth gravitational force vector with the coordinates and adds them into the relative angles of the G vector.

Another distinctive feature of INS is the Schuler Oscillation with a period of 84.4 minutes. Due to the integral correction algorithm mentioned above, the INS behaves like a pendulum. In ideal circumstances, it stays in equilibrium while the aircraft moves along the Earth. When coordinate errors appear, it displaces the pendulum from the resting point and it starts oscillating. The larger the errors are, the larger the amplitude of the introduced oscillations. That’s why one may notice that INS errors get smaller at a rate of 84.4 minutes once airborne.

GPS

Global positioning system measures the aircraft position by measuring the signal propagation delay from GPS satellites to the receiver. Satellite orbits are precisely known, the exact positions of the satellites are computed according to an almanack that is transmitted in the same GPS radio signals. That’s why GPS needs a couple of minutes after the cold to start obtaining the almanack. The moments of the signal transmission are also known and are defined by a very precise atomic clock on board the satellite. Thus, in an ideal case, if the GPS signals are propagated through space with the constant speed of light, as they do in a vacuum, the receiver could precisely determine its position by intersecting the surfaces of equidistant radio signal delays from the satellites. You may think of it as spheres with centres located at the satellite’s positions, although it’s a bit more complicated in real life. However, there are two significant factors that prevent us from obtaining the ideal point of the surface intersections; the ionospheric delay and multipath. Both add unknown time to the actual signal propagation time. Multipath happens when the receiver is placed relatively near the ground and the signal may be reflected from ground objects that results in the signal's edges degrading; this is similar to an echo in the mountains where it’s too hard to tell one word from another. When such delays are unexpectedly added by the receiver, the precise navigation solution gets lost and the output

coordinate gets noisy. That’s where military GPS signals help to get a better signal resolution by the use of so-called P-codes, and the usage of dual frequency helps to eliminate the unknown ionospheric delay. 

Integrated solution. Kalman filtering

To summarise the above: we have two navigation systems, both of which have flaws: INS accumulates errors over time, GPS is noisy and prone to interference due to natural factors like multipath and ionospheric delay and to enemy jamming and spoofing. Here is the good news! There is a way to avoid these flaws with the Kalman filter. It takes GPS and INS coordinates together with speeds as its input. The Kalman filter is a great algorithm that is able to get the maximum precision even out of measurements far from ideal, and it takes the best aspects from both systems: the stability and autonomy of INS and the precision of GPS to obtain an integrated navigation solution that is both stable and precise.

Furthermore, the Kalman filter knows, in terms of mathematical equations, the dynamic properties of the aircraft that is moving through space. If the aircraft is moving, it predicts where the aircraft will be on the next filter step. That’s why it is called recursive and the filter won’t let erroneous GPS signals decrease the precision of the output navigation solution. Moreover, it is able to dynamically change its measurements vs. prediction weights to adjust to a degraded navigation precision of any input.
 

 

• data link: When starting or restarting the aircraft, the MIDS switch must first be set to OFF. Only set to ON after the GPS switch has been set to ON for 60 seconds and the DED TIME page displays GPS SYSTEM. 
  
  
  The laser code issue you mention was fixed in a hotfix with some more INS tweaks. 

  DCS 2.9.4.53627

  DCS: F-16C Viper by Eagle Dynamics

  • INS loses data if engine shuts down and EPU is triggered
  • laser code set in ME not working
  • Tuning the IFA alignment - IFA with GPS velocity update fix 
  
  
  As you can see we are working hard and apologise if these changes, tweaks and updates have felt disruptive. 

The new patch cycle and one public version was a system that was asked for by many in the public, it is a better system although it may not seem it to some. Open beta users were used to quicker patch cycles, but stable users who used to go months without a patch now get patches much quicker, and everyone gets to play on the same servers, and get all the new additions to DCS at the same time. 

 

I do hope once things have settled down with all the changes you feel better about it all, again apologies if the new changes, tweaks, issues and updates have felt disruptive for you. 

@BIGNEWY sorry to be direct, but the request was to update the manual, not to copy/past the news letter into the forum.

And with every release.

[Red Dog]

I agree, it would be better if ED had a better beta test system in place which would prevent breaking things more than adding new things.

But I do not agree that a manual would be the solution,
I also feel the changelog isn't too bad
What ED critically need is better Q&A and at least checking not only the new features but also the old features to ensure nothing was broken by inducing new feature. (i.e: betat test)
That's a Q&A dept and that Q&A dept could issue instruction to devs and issues small mini procedures for the community to overcome the broken things until they are fixed in the next release.

I know a bit about writing F-16 sim manuals  and I can tell you that this is already very hard to do when all is more or less stable. And it takes quite a while (usually during which dev cycles continue)
Doing this for FCS F-16 in it's current cycle of updates is a big no no. The writer would turn crazy in less than 6 months. 
He would basically suffer the same issues you guys are reporting. 

My past experience taught me it is almost impossible, frustrating and a source of conflict to write a manual when the software is being contantly updated and when 1 step forward induces 2 steps backwards most of the release cycles.

I did start writing DCS F-16 manual  but it is pointless as long as the above points are not addressed unfortunately.

So here's a vote for better Q&A ED 

 

Edited April 18 by Red Dog

[BIGNEWY]

Sorry you feel this way, I hope in the future we can meet your expectations. Please try to understand the complexity of what we are dealing with in DCS core and its modules, and that systems and processes on aircraft in development can change when new public unrestricted information is found. We are constantly working on the DCS: F-16C so please you will need to be patient as we refine the module. 

QA have improved by a huge factor over the last year or more, which is why it has allowed us to move to one public version, statistically fewer crashes are being seen in our automatic crash collector than before, the efforts of our volunteer testers and QA team members impressive frankly, and the reports and feedback from the users is invaluable for early access development. There will always be bugs to find and work on, we reproduce, report and fix as many as we can.

Enjoy what you have currently, thousands of people are flying DCS and having fun, know we are constantly working and advancing DCS already over 15 years and we will continue to. 

As soon as I have more information about the next patch date I will let you know and the change logs will include the work that we have been doing. 

Boresight issues will be fixed as soon as possible, and we are looking at an auto boresight option for a future patch. 

thank you  

 

[Moonshine]

While i welcome the improvements going into the Q&A part (hope to see more of it), as a customer, the current quality of the module is not acceptable. Yes it is early access, however the decline in quality, the constant issues with systems being broken is not okay.
While i dont know the very process after which testing is done prior to releasing a patch, it is questionable how, after 2 minutes of installing the patch and starting the jet in an effort to do an integrated systems test (cold start, align, takeoff, employment of systems and weapons) some major bugs like the boresight and the laser code can be immediately found. 

„Just enjoy it as it is“ is reeeeally difficult that way and the frustration is noticeable throughout the viper community by the looks of it. This is what i want to see changed and it would be appreciated to hear something about the efforts ED intends to take in this direction 

Edited April 18 by Moonshine

[BIGNEWY]

12 minutes ago, Moonshine said:

This is what i want to see changed and it would be appreciated to hear something about the efforts ED intends to take in this direction 

I have passed the feedback on, we are working on a fix for the boresight issues, a video is being produced to show the INS/GPS changes in more detail, laser code issues have already been fixed. 

 

[Nealius]

I've been enjoying the F-16 a lot recently, especially after the FM tuning, but I have to agree there's a few issues that make it particularly unpleasurable over multiplayer. Mainly INS issues requiring a new jet because a re-align breaks the INS more instead of fixing it, markpoints not properly overwriting, DGFT/MRM mode getting their missiles mixed up after multiple cycles of rearming, the current TPOD going offline during rearm despite not removing the TPOD, long-standing issue of the external tanks not being refilled during hot-pit refueling, laser code on kneeboard not transfering to bombs, etc.

Edited April 18 by Nealius

[BIGNEWY]

Just now, Nealius said:

I've been enjoying the F-16 a lot recently, especially after the FM tuning, but I have to agree there's a few issues that make it particularly unpleasurable over multiplayer. Mainly INS issues requiring a new jet because a re-align breaks the INS more instead of fixing it, markpoints not properly overwriting, DGFT/MRM mode getting their missiles mixed up after multiple cycles of rearming, the current TPOD going offline during rearm despite not removing the TPOD, long-standing issue of the external tanks not being refilled during hot-pit refueling, laser code on kneeboard not transfering to bombs, etc.

 

Hi, 

as mentioned the INS/GPS changes will become clearer once the video is out, Wags will go into more detail and I am sure it will help. 

TPOD power needing to be cycled after rearm has been reported 

The refuel for external tanks is not a DCS: F-16C issue, it is a DCS core request that has been made, but I have no news to share. 

DGFT/MRM mode issues please PM me the thread reporting issues or any evidence so I can take a closer look. 

Please do not do it here in this thread, it will get lost and this isnt a bug report thread. 

thank you

 

[WHOGX5]

1 minute ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hi, 

as mentioned the INS/GPS changes will become clearer once the video is out, Wags will go into more detail and I am sure it will help. 

TPOD power needing to be cycled after rearm has been reported 

The refuel for external tanks is not a DCS: F-16C issue, it is a DCS core request that has been made, but I have no news to share. 

DGFT/MRM mode issues please PM me the thread reporting issues or any evidence so I can take a closer look. 

Please do not do it here in this thread, it will get lost and this isnt a bug report thread. 

thank you

 

I think what is clear from this thread is simply that ED should wait longer with pushing new features. You can still output the same amount of content at the same pace, just do it a month or two later and give both your QAs and developers more time to find and fix any bugs. That feels like it should be enough to stop all these bugs, because it feels like every DCS F-16C patch is two steps forward, one step back (at best).

I also think ED needs to be more receptive to bug reports. It is very difficult to get bugs reported, and so many threads which are clearly describing incorrect behaviour gets marked as "correct-as-is" and locked to prevent any further discussion or context to be added to the matter. I know both myself, and a lot of my DCS friends, have simply stopped reporting bugs on the forums because it feels like a futile endeavour, when you've spent hours sometimes researching an issue and providing all kinds of information, and still it gets marked as "correct-as-is" and locked. The community is more than willing to help ED make the DCS F-16C the best it can be, we just need to be given the opportunity.

[_SteelFalcon_]

4 minutes ago, WHOGX5 said:

have simply stopped reporting bugs on the forums because it feels like a futile endeavour,

me too.

[buceador]

5 hours ago, skywalker22 said:

I haven't noticed that yet anywhere, so I will ask right here, since reading about it...

10.00 minutes in he looks at the new G introduction.

[BIGNEWY]

28 minutes ago, WHOGX5 said:

I think what is clear from this thread is simply that ED should wait longer with pushing new features. You can still output the same amount of content at the same pace, just do it a month or two later and give both your QAs and developers more time to find and fix any bugs. That feels like it should be enough to stop all these bugs, because it feels like every DCS F-16C patch is two steps forward, one step back (at best).

I also think ED needs to be more receptive to bug reports. It is very difficult to get bugs reported, and so many threads which are clearly describing incorrect behaviour gets marked as "correct-as-is" and locked to prevent any further discussion or context to be added to the matter. I know both myself, and a lot of my DCS friends, have simply stopped reporting bugs on the forums because it feels like a futile endeavour, when you've spent hours sometimes researching an issue and providing all kinds of information, and still it gets marked as "correct-as-is" and locked. The community is more than willing to help ED make the DCS F-16C the best it can be, we just need to be given the opportunity.

I will be frank, sometimes it feels like we can not win, so we do our best. Some say wait longer to release stuff, others say hurry up and release, you get the point. 

Regarding bug reports, we deal with many reports, and requests, not all can be fixed or granted how a reporter wants, we have to be careful what information we use in DCS, as many of you know we can only use public unrestricted information, sometimes people share information that just isn't correct for our version, or we may have better information. We are always happy to look into issues, I deal with them every day. If you don't feel like reporting issues I understand.  

thank you

[Furiz]

I think this all comes down to understanding what Early Access means:

--------------------------------------------

What is DCS World Early Access?

Early Access is an option for you to play this module in an early state, but it will be incomplete with bugs. The time a product remains in Early Access can vary widely based on the scope of the project, technical hurdles, and how complete the module is when it enters Early Access. Eagle Dynamics and all of our third parties strive to make this period as short as possible. Once the module exits Early Access, you will automatically have the Release version.

---------------------------------------------------

It even says it right there "incomplete with bugs".

So I really don't get why are you guys upset, Bignewy is being more than polite with you, a feature you won't see anywhere in game world.

And as we all know ED is improving modules with every patch, sometimes it needs to go back one step in order to go forward again. INS/GPS change is clearly affecting more features of our Viper, so be patient and let them do their work.

I'm not happy with Maverick atm, but I wont bust their balls about it, it is only one weapon. Current bugs will get fixed probably next patch, so I don't see whats the big deal.

 

I know EA is work in progress, and I know that it can last a very long time but what we get in return is an epic representation of a real plane. So if you buy a module in EA, you get it at lower price but with bugs since it is not complete, at the same time you are supporting the teams effort. You get it early with EA,

Viper was announced in 2019 video and if it wasn't for EA you would still be waiting for it. Would they even have funds to carry this out? Think about that.

Edited April 18 by Furiz

[Nedum]

58 minutes ago, Furiz said:

I think this all comes down to understanding what Early Access means:

--------------------------------------------

What is DCS World Early Access?

Early Access is an option for you to play this module in an early state, but it will be incomplete with bugs. The time a product remains in Early Access can vary widely based on the scope of the project, technical hurdles, and how complete the module is when it enters Early Access. Eagle Dynamics and all of our third parties strive to make this period as short as possible. Once the module exits Early Access, you will automatically have the Release version.

---------------------------------------------------

It even says it right there "incomplete with bugs".

So I really don't get why are you guys upset, Bignewy is being more than polite with you, a feature you won't see anywhere in game world.

And as we all know ED is improving modules with every patch, sometimes it needs to go back one step in order to go forward again. INS/GPS change is clearly affecting more features of our Viper, so be patient and let them do their work.

I'm not happy with Maverick atm, but I wont bust their balls about it, it is only one weapon. Current bugs will get fixed probably next patch, so I don't see whats the big deal.

 

I know EA is work in progress, and I know that it can last a very long time but what we get in return is an epic representation of a real plane. So if you buy a module in EA, you get it at lower price but with bugs since it is not complete, at the same time you are supporting the teams effort. You get it early with EA,

Viper was announced in 2019 video and if it wasn't for EA you would still be waiting for it. Would they even have funds to carry this out? Think about that.

 

Seriously?
What do you think would happen if we all just kept quiet or stopped participating in the early access program altogether?
Do you even remotely believe ED could continue to fund itself?
But apart from that. You should realize yourself that, if anything, you've made the worst argument ever.
Even if it is the early access program, it should be possible to make justified criticism. Trying to shut us, the customers, up or even portraying us as stupid children is more than cheeky.
We know very well what early access entails, and yet it must be possible to point out that something is going exceptionally wrong without you making us out to be possible idiots.
What's wrong with you?