Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Martin2487

  1. Yes, I can definitely confirm this problem. It also existed before the DCS update to version 2.7. I mentioned it on ED BIGNEWY discord. I would like the ED to give it some priority. It quite affects the air-to-air mission with AI. The problem did not appear with the update, but it existed before. It didn't work that way before. AI knows about the AIM-120C missile almost immediately after dropping when the missile makes a loft. Performs defensive maneuvers immediately and fires chaff.
  2. The IGLA missile does not explode when it hits an AI aircraft. It flies through the center of the aircraft and continues to fly further up. In the game, the debriefing item shows the hit of an aircraft missile. But there is not the slightest damage on the plane. With an airplane piloted by a player, such a problem does not occur. It has been tested many times and always with the same result. I tested whether this problem occurs with Stinger and there is no such problem. The attached track contains a test with an AI F/A-18 aircraft and a MANPADS IGLA. As can be seen from the record, the mi
  3. This is a disappointment for me and at the same time I find it strange. It is strange for an aircraft to be forced to have a TGP and not be able to obtain the contact sent in this way other than through the TGP.
  4. Although I haven't had a chance to test it yet. But all the time I was afraid that this feature would do something similar to the SPI in SADL on the A-10 which I never really liked. Here I see several problems in integration and usability that were also seen in the video. I was surprised to be able to see TXDSG on AG target from all people on NET Link-16 and not just those I have on the flight. I don't want to see what the SA page will look like on some big mission where it will be performed by more aircraft. So the feature that it's being sent to everyo
  5. Yes, the test was in the air. F/A-18 at an altitude of about 25,000 ft above Senaki.
  6. I performed the test, an airplane in the air above Senaki Airport at an altitude of about 25,000 feet. The same problem. Sentry is not able to transmit the position of the air contact above 140 NM. But here's the problem with not seeing or being out of range on AWACS. If you see his position on the SA page, he sends you his position and altitude + identification. This is called PPLI (Precise Participant Location and Identification). It's one of the datalink messages. So the connection between the aircraft and the AWACS E-3A Sentry is established. It's just not able to send air contacts ab
  7. No. It was a typo error. I corrected it in the text. Thanks for your post. But I use some mods in dcs. I deactivated them and performed a DCS repair. The result is the same. The maximum distance to which the E-3A Sentry is able to send an air track is around 140 nm. E-2D Hawkeye works correctly.
  8. Some time ago I created a thread (https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/230410-investigatinglink-16-sends-contacts-to-a-shorter-distance-than-it-should-be/?tab=comments#comment-4501647) where I wrote that the distance to which contacts are sent via Link-16 is insufficient. This means that AWACS is not able to send a SURV contact at a distance greater than 125 NM from the receiving aircraft (F/A-18). A model situation was used on a map of the Caucasus of an aircraft standing on the ground at Senaki Airport. AWACS transmitted its PPLI (one of the Link-16 messages) but was unable to send a SURV contact t
  9. Ok. And how can you display the SURV contact at a distance of 352 NM in an airplane or how did you find out that you were able to detect it. Is there a way to display this on DDI? The SA page only scales up to 320 NM. Thanks
  10. I did a test on the original mission from which the track is. The AWACS on my mission was the E-3A. I received the first SURV contact up to a distance of 126 nautical miles. This means that the problem still exists here. I exchanged AWACS for E-3D. Now there was a great surprise. Not only was I able to confirm your distance values but I even reached the nominal transmission distance. I obtained SURV contact from AWACS E-3D at a distance of 320 NM. The target flew in a parallel course with AWACS so that the test was not affected and it was easy to determine the distance for transmission. R
  11. The checklist page shows a different weight of GBU-32 than in ME. In the mission editor, the weight of GBU-32 is 1030 lbs. In aircraft, the checklist page shows the weight of GBU-32 531 lbs. Evidence Two screenshots from ME. The first is an aircraft without ammunition on pylons. The weight is 36775 lbs. The second screenshot shows an aircraft with one GBU-32 on the hanger. The weight is 37805 lbs 37805 - 36775 = 1030 lbs https://i.imgur.com/JbHhndC.jpg https://i.imgur.com/LV9B9jo.jpg Next are two screenshots from the aircraft displays. The first is the weight of the air
  12. If I want to get the TGT waypoint using the HUD, the AGR should be activated automatically. This is not happening. As can be seen on the track AGR does not activate when I give priority to the HUD (sensor switch FWD). Activation does not occur automatically even if I select a weapon in CCIP. I chose a cannon for the track. As soon as I put the sensor switch forward (on the HUD), the AGR must be activated automatically to measure the slant range and radar ground elevation. It should be automatic. In the current state, it is necessary to select the weapon and press the sensor switch FWD again an
  13. I sincerely hope not. 100 nautical miles is quite a bit. AWACS simply cannot fly so close to the combat zone. And we don't have another sensor (SURV) that would contribute to the Link-16 network in DCS. Even an aircraft carrier does not contribute to the network. I wonder how it is with the transmission distance of Link-4 at F-14 in DCS (from AWACS to plane)? I don't have this plane so I can't test it.
  14. It is strange. However, the TWS radar mod in DCS performs NCTR. . On the radar screen in the TWS is the item named NCTR(boxed). So if according to your message the TWS radar can't do NCTR. So there is a bug that has a different name? "NCTR is available in radar TWS mode". Because as I wrote, if I move the radar cursor in TWS at a distance below 25 nm to the target, the HAFU symbol on the host will change. The only information that can be changed according to the ROE matrix is NCTR (an aircraft that is marked as a hostile in the library). I also don't understand why the topic is marked as Co
  15. If I want to do NCTR in TWS the SA page will not show the aircraft type. The HAFU symbol is assigned correctly, but the aircraft type is not displayed even though it is in the NCTR library of the aircraft. The track is attached. Track
  16. Yes, no AWACS or donor. The track is from a mission where there is one F/A-18 (piloted) and about 3 IL-78.Yes, I saw the targets on the SA page. You can look at my track or test it yourself can be easily verified.
  17. I found that when I switch the radar to AG, I am still able to detect targets in the air. Information on the speed and altitude targets is still updated. I tested the problem, the test is part of the attached track. On the AMPCD, I viewed the SA page and switched to AG with a button in the cockpit. As you can see the radar still detects targets. If AG activates the radar using the SURF button on the radar screen I see the same problem. It is obvious that this is clearly a bug. APG-73 is not an AESA radar. It can operate in one mode only. It cannot track targets in the air and on the ground
  18. If I make a markpoint from a TGT waypoint using TGP, I get an elevation in meters on the HSI-DATA page. However, markpoint elevation cannot be switched to feet on the HSI-DATA page. You can switch the elevation from meters to feet on the waypoint. I think it should work similarly for markpoints. I demonstrated the problem on the attached track. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bOwTrlGuPv3n5Y5JtKMMDGTklelSuV9O/view?usp=sharing
  19. I tried it with AI wingman. I can confirm that I did not receive the position air target from him via the datalink.
  20. Since the end of the year is approaching and a certain time has passed since we received the last function on the datalink, I would like to ask ED what functions he is preparing for us in the F/A-18 for Link 16. We have a road map. But when it comes to Link-16, I don't see much there. Thanks.
  21. At present, I have no data that there is a TACAN at Khasab Airport in the real world, but I can ask the same question at Al-Minhad Airport. Does Al-Minhad have a TACAN in the real world? He was not there at the time the map was released and you decided to add it later. So I still don't understand why on one part of the map it has to correspond to the real world and on the other it can be fictitious?
  22. The TACAN station has disappeared from the map. I recently found out that the TACAN station, which had been there for a long time, disappeared from Khasab Airport. I am aware that some other TACAN stations have been added (such as Al-Minhad) but I do not know why the TACAN station was removed from Khabab Airport. I understand adding new things, but when something is removed, we should know if it's a benefit. And I honestly don't see anything beneficial in removing radionavigation equipment. For the map of the Persian Gulf, for example, the author of the Papi series FLIP charts is created
  23. I have similar results as BIGNEWY The only difference I notice is that BIGNEWY has a slightly sharper image on his radar. At least that's how it seems to me. I attach my screenshots. I don't have as bad results as Harker. @Harker try to do the usual procedure (repair and cleanup DCS) and test it again.
  24. @Harker It is interesting. I can say that it is much better than when I wrote a bug report. I am able to detect 1 tank, which was completely impossible before (at the time when the A / G radar with exp modes came out, but after the update it was not possible). I'll look at the mission I gave Harker. So far, I tried to put 5 pieces of 2S19 Msta on the asphalt, which I was able to detect without any problems. I will try to gradually test the other units in your mission. @BIGNEWY Thanks for the pictures, it looks amazing.
  • Create New...