Hextopia

I'd put in a pull request on the HDS github if you've got a bug (and fix) that applies to 2.01: https://github.com/Auranis/HighDigitSAMs

In a technical sense, I believe the way units in DCS still work is that night only gives penalties to a unit to "spot" a unit, but once any sensor on the unit "spots" them, the 'Mk1 eyeball' sensor can take over and maintain track of the unit (assuming it is a valid sensor to provide guidance for the weapon the unit is using). So the Tunguska can pick up a unit on radar, and 'pass' the track to the visual tracker, since it's a valid sensor for the SACLOS missiles it has.

Another approach that would help validate the approach used to interpolate aircraft performance from these listed procedures is use the same method to generate a rough flight model for another aircraft with much better documented performance (like say, an F-16 variant, or better yet, another delta wing aircraft), and then compare the model's issues with the known flight test data for it and see if those same complaints are being levied against the Mirage. If there's an underlying issue in the procedure used to build the flight model, it would likely show up in both.

I humbly ask that you really press this issue home with the team and make sure that they understand this is going to be another PR stick in the eye if you simply lock a change like this behind IC without doing something to address the underlying issue its trying to fix. Taking some time to examine this mod in detail and potentially including it as a temporary improvement over the current single pixel system would go a long way towards making the community feel heard when they bring up issues that are low cost to fix and implement but they go unacknowledged by the team at ED.

Just had a crash while flying a mission where, as we used PAL to lock a Mig-23, the DCS crash dialog popped up. Crash log looks like it's related to an access violation with F-14 avionics.dll (log is attached) Haven't had one of these in a long time, so I assume it's related to the latest patch. dcs.log

I've got voice attack, and I'm just not a huge fan of it. I'd rather use buttons/keybinds than try to get voice attack working correctly and not interfere with my SRS/Discord comms.

Is there any chance we can get jester menu axis bindings? It's a pain to use sometimes in VR, and i've got a thumstick axis sitting around collecting dust that'd be perfect for controlling the jester menu.

If this is how you're simulating it, do you think it's possible to either detect bad mulltiplayer tracks (and clamp onto them until they stop lagging and behave) or do some light "fuzzing" of their location when in MP to expand what the WCS will allow to correlate and reduce some of the erroneously dropped tracks?

Is this mod fully integrated into the base game now? I seem to remember reading an update saying that in patch notes over the past couple months and just wanted to verify.

The seeker on the RB-15 almost certainly isn't built to deal with the vastly different environment on land vs a ship on water, so you'd have no idea what it would end up targeting. It might hit a building or bridge or something, but it also might just hit a random tree, car, rock, etc. No way to know what it'd actually hit.

I'm wondering moreso whether any jammer in the FOV of the AIM-7MH should be causing it to go into HOJ. I had an instance where I fired an AIM-7MH at a target at ~5NM away, but the missile turned off target to track a friendly with their jammer on ~10NM away. I'm fairly certain, even with an automatic HOJ logic in the missile, it'd still target and follow the much stronger radar return from the AWG-9 illuminating a target at 5 miles versus the lower power jammer further away. If anything, it just seems like an additional check to look at relative radar return strength should happen to see if the original track is lost and HOJ is entered.

Not sure if this is intended behavior, but AIM-7MH's shot at a target in STT that isn't jamming will guide to a nearby jamming target (even if that target is outside the radar's illumination and further away). I can put together a mission and track if it's needed, but the fundamental question is, should the AIM-7MH be going into HOJ if there's a jammer in the seeker FOV, or is that something the aircraft commands?

It's pretty easy to just compare the EM graphs and see that the Mirage doesn't really have many options against the F-14 (Unless they meet up with a serious payload mismatch where the F-14 is crazy heavy and doesn't jettison stores). The Mirage's only trick is to pull crazy alpha and hope the F-14 tries to get super slow with it, since the F-14 matches it in rate at a much lower speed and tighter radius in a comparable setup. With how much more power and rate the F-14 has though, it's on the pilot to just reject the 1-circle and force the Mirage pilot to the deck, extending on an overshoot instead of trying to get into a scissors where you'd lose to the giant airbrake doing its airbrake thing. tl;dr: The F-14 crushes the Mirage in the rate and radius fight for a similar fuel fraction except at extremely high alpha/low speed, so the only way the Mirage is winning a fight is with a scissors defense that the F-14 commits to, assuming the pilots are of relatively comparable skill.

Compass sync indicator shows perfect alignment when actually unaligned. Most noticeable when taking off from the carrier, I can get it to work correctly by flipping the switch back and forth until the sync indicator moves. Even after getting it to indicate correctly, it will occasionally flip back to perfectly centered while holding the button down to sync the compass. Will post a track when I get a chance to make a short mission to replicate it.

Out of curiosity, why is this such a high priority for you? The HUD and VDI are always perfectly trimmed, so you shouldn't need to mess with the trim knobs.