-
Posts
1529 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by okopanja
-
The module is at the moment OK-ish when it comes to A-A (e.g. it has some unique features such as target size and front/back ECM. A-G there is a number of issues that await for fixing. If you use the glide bombs LS-6 on servers where "unrestricted sat nav" is not enabled, as red side you will face the problem of precision. It looks like ED thinks the degraded GPS signal is still a thing in 2024, but that was removed in 2000 IRL, and meanwhile GPS is so much widespread that turning degraded signal on would have severe consequences not only for enemy, but also allies (I would understand if they bring jammers and spoofers to the game). Drawbacks in A-A include: subsonic speed (you need to climb/high dive to get it at about 1.3-1.6 Mach). This is visible both in attack and specially defending. Even the hornet will be able to catch you in a chase. missiles do not have INS in DCS (old API), so they require you to guide practically at least until the missile starts downward part of trajectory (otherwise they go stupid and even level the flight!) only 4 BVR missiles ( I typically fly with only 2: hit and run) I started playing with it in September 2023 (I was very skeptical about it, and I regret that), and I must say I enjoy it despite the need for minor overhauls.
-
I always wonder why afterburner disappears much sooner than a modest street light. We know for a fact that it should be visible from 10s of km. To paraphrase F-18 pilot: "once you see the afterburner plumes of Mig-25 in the distance, there is very little doubt on what that might be" (book is not with me)
-
A good Software Architect will identify the need to cover the possibility of covering the multiple sub-variants of the 9.12 and in particular those that can be added with minimal effort in near future. This not only works toward user benefits but also cost savings for the ED as company. Some of those sub-variants require more effort and/or mean legal issues, but there are those which are likely not that troublesome to add at later time. Fortunately the later also include the improved processing of radar and ability to support R-77, and even limited multi-role capability. Overall these less capable variants certainly will not pose a larger threat to much more modern modules that are already in the game, but will enable more capable players to utilize them in more modern scenarios without being a plane cannon fodder.
-
Let's wait for Mig-29A in its original form, but I would not go so far to claim we will not see sub-variants based on upgrades. We know that DCS allows for sub-variants within the same module (several examples already), so I would not be too surprised if this occurs with Mig-29 in future. Upgrades that were offered or implemented did range from under-the-hood changes (e.g. making longer ranged more ECM resistant radar capable of guiding R-77), toward relatively minor cockpit modifications (e.g. replaced HUD repeater with MFI-55) toward really comprehensive changes where the cockpit is radically changed (SMT).
-
First thanks for answering, My point here is the following: - GPS can be affected externally either by rightful owner of 3rd party, e.g if e.g. civilian signals get degraded (e.g. if we are talking about China produced glide bombs) - Also some traditional military signals offer only protection against spoofing and ECM - Only the latest M code offers the protection which prevents other side using high precision due to the encryption I see no reason why the same physical hardware would not be capable to utilize same precision for both blue/red since unless you implemented weapons to utilized encrypted mode, which would make it available only to one side in the conflict. Until now: - no GPS jammers exist in DCS - no GPS spoofers exist in DCS - no ability to enter the encryption codes - It appears we have only the GPS in game (not sure about Glonass, BeiDou, Galileo, perhaps others). IMHO: the mission editor option to disable this is a good idea as long as your simulation in this respect is incomplete (I was hoping you would confirm to which extend you simulate and where actually mimicking starts). Last but not least a comment on general situation on with so called game-changing decisions: Finding out about this through at least 2 bug reports (where even 3rd party vendors are not aware of the changed rules) is far from ideal. Instead it would have been much better of ED stated this game rule explicitly. IMHO: there should be part of DCS Encyclopedia where each of such critical decisions/rules is properly documented e.g.: Radar range for hornet/viper Ever more realistic FM model changes Countless AIM-120C changes AIM-54 drag impact R-27 no relocking R-77 RWR launch warning of the rail ... All such decisions should be documented and should reference the release/beta version where it got introduced, together with some sort of justification (I do not really expect you to provide 100% details, but bare minimum which is understood by common player would be OK).
-
1. removal of FC3 does not mean that AI or player FC3 will be gone (the external models are always included) 2. removal of FC3 does not mean you can not reinstall it at later time. I think we covered all dilemmas.
-
No, you will not loose them. All DCS modules consist of mandatory part available ingame and paid part (cockpit).
-
@Lord Vadercan we have more in-depth reasoning for the difference between blue/red? E.g. which signals are actually simulated in DCS?
-
Shark Planner: waypoint entry into Ka-50 ABRIS and PVI-800 from F10
okopanja replied to okopanja's topic in DCS Modding
v1.6.0 Improvements in Waypoint list and Crosshair information + important bug fixes. What's Changed Features [Crosshair] display of coordinates and altitudes by @okopanja in #120 [Crosshair] display of object model by @okopanja in #131 [Waypoint list] Allow altitude change by @okopanja in #121 [Waypoint list] Reordering of waypoints/fixpoints/targetpoints (Drag&Drop) by @okopanja in #124 [Internal] Implement internal camera interface by @okopanja in #119 Bugfixes [Hotkeys] Fixed issue with hotkeys by @okopanja in #114 [JF-17] Fixed clearing of waypoints by @okopanja in #129 [JF-17] Prevent selection of non existing waypoint in JF-17 by @okopanja in #123 [Internal] Remove inspect utility from camera.lua by @okopanja in #127 Full Changelog: v1.5.2...v1.6.0 -
In MP, I would say this very likely due to the ED not sending update made on client to server and other clients. Also note that in MP scripts get executed mostly on server. In addition in SP, at least FC3 updates the waypoints. This gets reflected in the cockpit (only after cycling the modes once). However this information is not propagated in MP
-
Shark Planner: waypoint entry into Ka-50 ABRIS and PVI-800 from F10
okopanja replied to okopanja's topic in DCS Modding
Yes, I did not yet announce it, wanted to do it with 1.6.0, with 1.6.0 considered as experimental and 1.5.3 as stable. -
Expectation on Air to Air missiles of the MiG-29A?
okopanja replied to pepin1234's topic in DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum
good point! -
Expectation on Air to Air missiles of the MiG-29A?
okopanja replied to pepin1234's topic in DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum
I think that 3.6s TWS update provides you with just raw input on the target movement. From here the extrapolation is calculated using specific algorithm and this can easily be on the needed 1s update interval. True: it will not be as precise as e.g. STT, but still feasible and kind of acceptable until the seeker gets the proper reflection signal. -
Can you tell us more what is the difference between blue/red JF-17?
-
I asked in other topic...
-
Is it possible to provide some more technical explanation for this feature. E.g. the only thing I could correlate to was the Selective Availability which was in effect until May 2000.
-
Link?
-
Once upon a time precision was limited for civilian use. Someone recently mentioned that speed limit is still being enforced. I am not deep into that topic, so do not consider it as accurate.
-
@uboatsI just reran the mission from @sylkhan, this time I did it in following way: 1. set hot JF-17 with no weapons on nearby AB 2. request 4xLS6-250 3. setup 2 profiles with each pylon having it's own bomb 4. waited for full align. 5. took off climbed until 25000 and waited for marker and a bit further 6. launched first 2 bombs using profile 1 for stations 2 and 6 (PP 36/37 - finally realized how these thing actually work) 7. launched second 2 bombs using profile 2 for stations 2 and 6 (PP 38/39) 8. out of 4 bombs one did hit and destroy the targets. All other targets were not even scratched. Precision is obviously not great.
-
I suggest we leave this topic alone for now if there is nothing to contribute to it. Other issues/feature requests you can report in Bugs session or as separate topics.
-
I have a feeling that this topic goes outside of the intended context, still few of my observations both positive and negative on the state of JF-17. there was an attempt for Deka last year to introduce the SD-10 with amraam API. It was an experiment that resulted in PL-12, which we currently use in some of the servers. Clearly Deka is working on this and we can see that they are preparing to update the A-G bombs. I assume this is still work in progress. I as a newbie to JF-17 do enjoy it, and can actually thank to you for finally trying it out (I was very, very skeptical before), however there are bugs and I have the feeling that 2.9 changes might have disrupted many of the A-G weapons, e.g. glide bombs do have accuracy issues and non functional features. May I suggest you look at the list of active bugs for JF-17? (namely one related to glide bombs). Your experience would be very precious since you were there from the very beginning.