DCS FIGHTER PILOT

After doing a bunch of tests, I have found that it is even more difficult to get a kill than before seeing as how the missile looses its speed just too damm fast. So, the Aim-120b/c are really that bad in real life? I mean who am I to say ED is wrong? It’s also been verified by tons of community members so I guess that is that. One thing that is still quite troubling is that the SD-10 is still leagues ahead, even more so now, of the AMRAAM. Is this accurate?

From what I can see it’s even worse now than before when it comes to speed. My update must have been corrupted because I see absolutely no difference in deceleration between OB and stable AMRAAMS.

Well two possibilities exist from what everyone is saying, One, either I am nuts or two, my update was somehow corrupted. I just ran two tests, one in the stable version and one in the new open beta. There is absolutely no question that the missile in the open beta hit its target about 200 knots slower than in the stable version. Just by eyeballing both missiles during flight, the drag seems to be identical but seeing as how 200 knots of top speed was lost in the new amraam, the OB missile appears inferior. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3WCgOyc2T8 STABLE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVTbMXoT0BI Open Beta AMRAAM SHOT OB.trk AMRAAM TEST STABLE.trk

As some of you know, ED released their new Aim-120 model today. What do you guys think of it? I have only tried it once but it seems as if it is even slower than before. Another 200 knots of max speed was lost.

RWS, Hi/Med PRF, 6 bar elevation and 140 degree azimuth scan. Bugged an F-16 at 85nm today too. As I said I actually really like this and hope it stays this way.

No AWACS present. Personally I like the long detection ranges, just wondering if it is representative of the real hornets radar that’s all.

Why not both? You can change to the one you want in the menu.

I don't ever seem to recall being able to see a fighter sized target on the Hornets radar from 90 miles out. Is this a bug or an update to the F-18 radar? The target I could see was a Su-27 at 30000ft hot on me at mach 1. My altitude and speed were the same.

Will the F-16 ever get custom RWR sounds for each type of contact or is that not representative of the real RWR?

It looks like the last update has nerfed the SD-10 quite a bit. Top speed has been reduced by about 300-400 knots when shot under "ideal conditions," and drag seems to have increased. I'm not going to lie, the SD-10 before the update did seem a bit overpowered. I mean, a top speed of 2700-2900 knots for a MRM is probably a bit too much in my humble opinion. My biggest concern though is why was none of this mentioned in the changelogs? Who is trying to be sneaky here?

In the recent update it appears as if the SD-10 got a nerf, and probably a much needed one. It seems as if the drag has been increased and the top speed of the missile when fired at over mach 1 at 30000 ft is now around 2400-2500 knots instead of a whopping 2700-2800. BUT MOST OF ALL, WHY WAS THIS NOT MENTIONED IN THE CHANGELOGS? Is someone trying to hide something? Why are these things never mentioned? It makes it very hard to follow what is going on in the development process.

Would you say you are optimistic about their CFD work Nighthawk? It looks like they have indeed put a great deal of work into it so I would say that I am optimistic .

Tracks and Tac View Show everything no need for detailed explanation on the differences, which is still night and day. And before anyone criticizes for making comparisons, if the two missiles are in the same sim, then comparisons must absolutely be made. Its rather silly to say otherwise. Now I get that the Sd-10 would probably enjoy a higher top speed than the AMRAAM since it burns longer but wouldn't it suffer from more drag? I would certainly think so seeing as how it has those rather large guiding fins when compared to the 120c. Now if I recall, nighthawks CFD said that Deka's SD-10 modeling was pretty much spot on when it came to the aerodynamic coefficients and that the ED AMRAAM is still a bit draggy. Is this correct nighthawk? Again I am asking this because it seems like no one knows if the current Aim-120 is the finished product or if more work on the drag model will be done. Based on these tracks I would certainly hope a bit more work is planned. Also in the future, would it be possible to include Aim-120's with different motors? This would greatly add to the dynamics of BVR. https://drive.google.com/drive/u/2/my-drive SD-10 VS Aim-120C 1.trk SD-10 VS Aim-120C 2.trk AIm-120C Ideal Shot.trk Sd-10 Ideal Shot.trk

I have been working on creating custom sounds for the RWR in the A-10C and F-16 for DCS WORLD but cannot figure out a way to assign a custom sound to aircrafts like, the Jf-17 or Heatblur F-14. I am using the RAE mod as a springboard but am running into trouble as you can see below. How do I assign a custom RWR sound to these 3rd party aircraft?

Again, Elaborate PLEASE. Just because in your mind that it is overpowered does not mean that it is busted. In fact at the moment it is still "underpowered," since its mid course guidance is all screwed up. The Truth of the matter is that it was an extremely deadly missile. Historically, enemy aircraft would simply avoid fights with the tomcat all together. Now if it is truly going through mountains in the sim, then that is a different story.

Elaborate please

Yes I know that, but what I don’t know is what changes have taken place since then other than the lofting. I have seen nothing new in the changelogs about drag changes and when I emailed ED asking about it they said they still had some work to do. They also said had a new virtual wind tunnel that would be used to remodel all the all the missiles. It does indeed loft now, which is great, but from what nighthawk is saying, a bit more work needs to be done.

Would you be able to interview them somehow (through video or an audio recording)? Like Pikey suggested, this sort of thing might be able to move mountains with ED. Also I heard a few months ago that ED had a new virtual wind tunnel that they would be using to remodel the drag of all missiles. Has this been done yet for the AMRAAM? Since I have seen nothing on the changelogs about a drag change since, I will assume no. Perhaps there is still hope that ED can fix it themselves.

They also really need to fix the lofting for other missiles, particularly the Aim-54. Mid way through flight it has to change its course violently to avoid overshooting much like the F-18 AMRAAM at the moment.

Im sorry but how is this an issue (as of 4/9/2020)? I have recorded two tracks that show me firing an AMRAAM under two different scenarios. In both, I drop lock soon after launch. The missiles fly as straight as an arrow and do not go after the target at all. With that being said, if you are within the seekers scan zone when it goes active then yes, of course it will go after you! Perhaps the real issue (if any,) is the size of said scan zone. Aim-120 No Follow 1.trk Aim-120 No Follow 2.trk

When shooting the Aim-120 at long range in the F-18, the missile lofts too much and then makes a violent maneuver to avoid overshooting the target. This does not appear to be an issue in the F-16 or the F-15, as the Aim-120 glides into its target perfectly. Also as I'm sure your aware, lofting in other missiles like the Aim-54, also seems to be buggy. They make violent pitch changes (killing their airspeed,) halfway through flight instead of a smooth pitch adjustment. Just wondering if this will eventually get addressed. Tracks recorded in latest Open Beta. F-18 Aim-120 Lofting Issue.trk F-16 Aim-120 Lofting .trk F-15 Aim-120 Lofting .trk F-14 Aim-54 Lofting issue .trk

I have been wanting to change the RWR sounds for the F-16 with my own sound files but I don’t know how to accomplish this. For the non ED aircraft, I.e Heatblur F-14, I can just go into the sounds folder, see the sound files, and change them as I wish. For ED aircraft there is this sound.edc folder with several dozen sub folders that appear as if they have nothing to do with sounds. Any suggestions?

It would be most helpful to have a Jester option that allows him to narrow or widen the scan azimuth and adjust the bar scan settings on the radar. Now I know for TWS there are only a couple of azimuth range and bar scan settings the radar must use to track targets but for RWS there are many more options. It would also be great if we could add into the scan elevation settings the degree that the radar be tilted up or down. Do you guys agree?

Jester “MISSILE 9 O’CLOCK, HOT, BREAK LEFT, shit my bad, BREAK RIGHT!!” Lmao and of course, Jester “HERE WE GO AGAIN!”

A bit old but it seems pretty legitimate http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-54.html