Jump to content

AvroLanc

Members
  • Posts

    1051
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by AvroLanc

  1. 34 minutes ago, Mad Dog 762 said:

    Yeah I am thinking its not looking good.  Its been weeks since we have seen a video, and we still haven't got any on actual flying.  And the silence is deafening.  Its too bad, it was looking good and they built all the hype up with the teasers and pre-order, and then........................................................

    I agree that the hype was certainly built up a bit too early. The video schedule was looking good until a few weeks ago.
     

    Signs aren’t too good for a release in 9 days. They may have hit a blocker or something, but it’s best we get bad news sooner rather than later.  The closer we get to the end of the month, the harder it’ll be to take.

    • Like 1
  2. 24 minutes ago, Sacarino111 said:

    Hi. 

    Probably not. I can't recall a similar thing happening for other modules/releases. I may be wrong anyway...

    Saludos.

    Saca111

    They don't officially, but it will be obvious at the time that the release is due. Look for increased tempo of Wag's videos schedule and keep coming to forums to get a feel for the buzz of an impending OB update.....

    It's not hard to time the pre-order to the day prior to release.

    • Like 2
  3. In previous builds pressing the Reference Button on the stick would perform a manual initial course setting when lined up on starting RW. This would produce a noticeable jump/correction to the CI heading indicator....

    Doing this now in latest OB seems to do nothing. No correction is observed.... Did anything change in the modelling to account for this or is it a bug? I'm not sure if the automatic initial course is being performed either.

    Thanks.

  4. 4 minutes ago, WobblyFlops said:

    Well, the A-10's CDU definitely has a lot of pages, the vast majority of the nitty-gritty advanced functions are either not modelled in the game (so you can change them but don't do anything) or they are hardcoded, stactic texts which only exist for immersion purposes. A comparably complex system would be a fully simulated TAD, however for the A-10 the majority of the functons for that are missing. If we had a fully simulated TAD, I'd agree but even if you compare the navigation system, the A-10 in DCS simply doesn't have nearly as many different point types that all represent something different, and for the Apache, it looks like they have the ability to simulate a lot more things than for the A-10 (or any other jet.) Tons and tons of point types, different map types and symbology and so on. I'd wager that the COMM suite will be just as complete while in the A-10 an entire MFCD page that is used to control the radios, transponders and VMF messages is flat out not implemented at all. 

    I’m interested to see what they do with Apaches COMM page. I imagine most of it will be static and non functional. There’s a lot of network configuration and cryptology stuff for the 5 radios that we won’t see I guess. 
    We don’t know, but I imagine we’ll be limited fundamentally to setting 5 frequencies and simple call signs. 

  5. 1 hour ago, MYSE1234 said:

    Waypoints created in the mission editor are not loading. As a workaround for the moment you can use cartridges created from the F10 map, or using the .ini files. They seem to be working correctly.
    The bug has been added to the HB bug tracker.

     

    You can also of course input the COORD's manually using the REF/LOLA function. There'll only be max 9 points plus maybe a couple BX's. I believe the old AJ version had to do this anyway prior to the data cartridge. So kinda the most realistic. I hate the F10 method.

  6. What Wag's has shown so far is no more complicated than the A10C. Perhaps with the possible exception of the multiple WP's/Control Measures symbols. If you're happy with the A10, then the Apache will be fine. Things may get a little more complicated much later when you factor in multi-crew sensor/sight sharing etc, target handovers between the crew, and of course the FCR and datalink when they arrive.....

    If you want a pure stick and collective experience, there's always the Huey.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  7. 6 hours ago, Blinky.ben said:

    So in the end the Viper will only be able to see one enemy contact as well as friendly contacts in the helmet mount display VIA datalink. Not like the hornet display where it shows multiple enemy contacts?

    The Viper will only display one contact full stop. The PDLT. No friendlies as well. Not even wingmen. Of course if the PDLT is a selected friendly or wingman it’ll show that. 

  8. Wags has confirmed that the PDLT (Primary Data Link Track) is coming in the future. This a single L16 track that can be hooked on the HSD. It’s displayed with an octagon on the HUD/Helmet. 
     

    Very unfortunate if that’s just it….Wingman/flight positions at least would be helpful.
    Maybe 2007 was much more limited than we think. TBF the MLU docs from the mid 2000’s make no mention of flight member symbology when describing the PDLT. 

  9. 27 minutes ago, Funkysak said:

    If it is a system already modeled in the A-10 II I don't see how modeling it is "sensitive" for the Apache, it isn't like people are looking under the hood of how the "real" thing works. And as I recall from past discussion data link was coming down the road, just not in early access. 

    Well it’s not the same system as the A10C. It’s quite similar though. But I agree, the widely available docs do show how it should display etc. And that should be good enough for some kind of implementation, considering how simplified the datalinks for A10, Hornet and Viper already are.
     

    As noted above, Apache has a few types of datalinks available, we’re getting the intraflight one, but not the Blue Force Tracker Situational Awareness type one. 

  10. 33 minutes ago, llOPPOTATOll said:

    The Apache doesnt only show the EPLRS (which are the green crosses in the A-10) but it also uses Blue Force Tracker

    Yep, and Wags has confirmed that this function isn’t coming. It’s apparently too sensitive and they don’t have the documentation. Please see Wag’s latest vid and comments. 

    • Like 1
  11. In the D model Apache in the chosen timeframe, there’s no Link 16 or SADL type datalink. So don’t expect to see other friendly flights similar to the systems in Hornet and Viper. The apparent lack of detail/documentation on the SA function means they won’t be modelling ground force ‘green crosses’ ala A10C either, which should be a SA thing.

    What should be available is the sharing of FCR targets/symbols, sharing engagement  ‘Zones’, sharing waypoints, text messages and other simple stuff, purely between upto an 8 ship Apache flight. I don’t think there’s even a real-time wingman PP symbol or anything like that. 

  12. 1 hour ago, QuiGon said:

    I have checked it now and the LANTIRN does indeed not provide ballistics for dumb bombs (they don't even show up on the LANTIRN screen). It only offers ballistics for the various LGBs.

     

    Yeah, this is true to life. Remember that LANTIRN has minimal integration with the aircraft's other bombing systems. All of the ballistics calculations and release cues etc are calculated within the LANTIRN POD itself.

    I do wonder why the USN didn't spec the pod with the ability to drop dumb bombs with it, it is a pretty useful capability. Especially so when the pod was coming into service in the late 90's. Maybe it was a memory limitation or something within the pod.

    • Like 1
  13. 5 hours ago, gulredrel said:

    mmhh... okay, as there is the radar altimeter readout below the baro altitude tape, I don't really see a reason for switching the switch to radar alt. I was just curious and couldn't see a difference. Or is it map-related? Was flying on Mariannas map.

     

    The altitude switch on the HUD Control panel isn't implemented correctly yet. Which is why you don't see any difference currently.

    • Thanks 1
  14. There needs to be a way of commanding Jester to put LANTIRN back in standby mode and to disarm the Laser. It's not very realistic to be returning to base / landing with the pod unstowed and laser armed. For those of us who notice such things. 

    Also, it would be nice to set up a manual lase time. JESTER always lases at 10s TTI, but in some scenarios I'd like a slightly longer lase time. This would also be correct for employing GBU-24, as that LGB needs lasing almost as soon as you drop. (I know DCS doesn't care, but to be role-playing / procedurally correct.......).

    Jester Lantirn features breath new life into the Tomcat and HB have done an amazing job.

    • Like 2
  15. 36 minutes ago, Super Grover said:

    Actually, the "middle" zoom is called NARROW. http://www.heatblur.se/F-14Manual/general.html#description

    The highest zoom level is called EXPANDED, and it doesn't increase the quality of the image as it is only digital x2. Instead, it makes the FOV two times narrower and the pixels two times bigger, effectively reducing the vertical resolution to 128 pixels (256 in NARROW), and reducing pod slewing rates. Jester's eyes are 20/20, and his screen is pretty big, so he doesn't like using that EXPANDED view because he can see much more using NARROW.

    OK, I was half aware I had the terminology wrong. That kinda makes sense though thanks. 

    On a separate point, does Jester ever use Point track mode? Maybe with moving targets? I guess I should play more to find out, but time is limited this morning.

×
×
  • Create New...