Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
  1. SRS-DCS doesn't achieve anything i mentioned and i don't think that will ever achieve it. As far as I know SRS only uses plain single channel radio links for AM and FM radios. He treats BOTH FM and AM as the same, i mean as it is implemented radio volume gets lower the far you are from the emitter, which makes some sense for AM and not so much for FM (as in FM the voice isn't modulated as amplitude so the attenuation when propagating shouldn't affect as in AM, where directly attenuating the radio signal means attenuating the voice amplitude). It isn't simulating MIDS. MIDS as far as I understand for what stands for is a military network. Meaning talking over MIDS means converting your voice transmitting it through this link as a set of bits. So no SRS doesn't simulate MIDS because MIDS is a military network not only used to send voice but any data (targets, waypoints, AWACS calls, monitor targets, etc). https://www.usna.edu/COVID-19/Remote/MIDS.php So SRS only simulates and very simpler, without any frequency switching or SS, classical AM and FM radios used ONLY for voice. Just to make things clear KY-58 it's an analogical cipher. It's only used with FM and AM because that type of modulations re-transmit your analogical voice. MIDS cipher it isn't made by the KY-58. Some digital algorithm encrypts data sent through the network link. Imagine MIDS as if your PC with WIFI was an aircraft connecting to a private network made by other PCs (aircraft, soliders pda, command control offices, etc), that's MIDS. And you send digital packets to other members of that network with your PC (aircraft), which could be audio, targets, etc. The guy doing SRS is doing just an app to connect via VoiceIP guys playing DCS on the same server, but a bit fancy. That means that you can interactuate with this VoiceIP app (like discord for example) with your DCS buttons on the aircraft. For example (simplification) changing your AM frequency changes your APP (think like discord) voice channel to a new one. SRS cannot create the other things (like all the stuff i talked about) it would have to duplicate all the iternal network that DCS aircraft and subsystems have to implement it. SRS it's just a VoiceIP APP like discord or TS. Not a militar telecomuncations network simulator, which it's needed to have some real life coherence with regard ECM, JAMMING, ECCM, Chiper, IFF interrogation, etc etc etc. The implementation has to be internal, because all the aircraft systems are actually tied to this things. That's why i don't understand it isn't implemented
  2. Yesterday i was reading through the COMM-NAV systems described on "NATOPS FLIGHT MANUAL NAVY MODEL F/A-18A/B/C/D161353 AND UP AIRCRAFT" and i noticed that all practical and not technical details of this technologies are well explained and enumerated. Knowing that, why we still have an Arma3 like systems when the documentation is there? If DCS stands for Digital Combat Simulator then it should simulate the most important aspect on today combats: Telecommunication Systems. No source available? Not true. You don't need to simulate the mechanisms exactly as the USN does or whatever. DCS could have a general API for all this systems. You don't even need to calculate wave propagation. Use simple propagation equations to calculate the power density of signals. Frequency switching you can program it as a simple channel switching (say you divide the spectrum in fixed frequency lengths which you number as channels and treat it as 1-2-3-etc), for the "enemy" trying to jam or intercept the signals that is getting frequency switched you can simulate a channel scanning searching for certain power level threshold (so every x seconds this algorithms checks the channel n for a power level above whatever threshold, the channel scanning can be sequential or variable). Spread Spectrum techniques can be simulated as a low power signal distributed a long many frequency channels, for "allies" that know the pseudo-random sequences used to spread the signal (im talking about DSSS) can obtain the signal easily, for the "enemies" that don't know the sequence cannot distinguish noise level from the actual signal (at long ranges from the sender and enemy listener). At closer distances or very well calibrated and sensitive enemy jammers you could use a high number of spread spectrum bands (i.e 4 spread spectrum bands that fill 5 frequency channels each) you could create a SS (Spread spectrum) channels that all transmit the same information. The jammer could jam one of the SS channels and the ally receivers only read the channels that aren't getting jammed (rake receiver). There's also more techniques some based on the fact that the ally systems are all synchronized on a global time reference and can send information on certain time slots or with certain time characteristics. If we already know that this techniques are on the aircraft and the details on how to select and use each of these techniques are open to the public, what prevents you from modeling it? If it's for the technical and physical implementation don't worry about. You don't need to simulate the bits per second that a system is receiving regarding the fading of signals, doppler effect on telecom signals, multi-path reflections, directivity of antennas, electrical noise, interference between other telecom systems, etc etc. You can divide the frequency band on channels, use simple calculations of power density and propagation, use SNR (jamming signals are considered noise) levels to know if that telecom link is good ( no errors in the signal no degradation), medium (some degradation), bad (very high degradation, lose of link). For SS the jamming system would have to jam all the SS spectrum with A LOT of power (which means that the jamming system first has detected the SS that wants to jam) to transform the link into bad state. For SS with rake receiver the jamming system would have to jam all the SS channels involved with A LOT of power (very unlikely) to bring the link to bad condition. For frequency switching the jamming system would have to identify the switching pattern that the aircraft is using and timming to jam the link correctly. Most of the frequency switching use a pseudo-random generator that is feed a seed number which generates a deterministic sequence (that feeds it self) of a very high length. This sequence seen as an outsider looks as if it was a random sequence (if the outsider doesn't know the seed). With this random sequence the two communicating systems can perform a know frequency switching for them, but a random switching for external viewers. This way the enemy cannot induce a deterministic sequence from listening and detecting the frecuency switching. Above all of this with the use of the KY-58 to cipher the voice that is going to be transmitted through this links. For the Ky-58 you don't need to simulate anything only if the voice is encrypted or not. The capability of the aircraft to act as relay would be also important. This way aircrafts can form an internal net between them without the need of external systems (i.e satellites, ground systems, AWACS, Air control, etc). Also if aircraft act as a relay between close squadrons they can transmit lower power signals which are more difficult to detect by the enemy (which could mean enemy not jamming that signal). A lot of Anti-Jamming techniques use the links between other aircraft to communicate and transmit information data even in very high jamming conditions. Because the aircraft form a low range links between them which are very difficult to jam (require massive power, not possible) and eventually one of the aircraft nodes that has a link with the global network can transmit all the information of aircraft net. This techniques are also used in satellites for example, that are designed forming a constellation where all the satellites act as nodes and re-transmit information between them when some of the satellites has direct link connection with ground bases. Some of the navigation systems are also capable of being transmitted through this links making TACAN and GPS navigation even in jamming environments. I only covered the simple stuff, in the Manual I'm mentioning there's a lot of things that we don't have yet. Regarding GPS alignment, TACAN navigation and secure communication techniques that you can select on the aircraft. I hope this brings light to aspects that need to be polished and/or worked on if you want to achieve a simulation. And regarding the jamming techniques, SS, etc. I just wanted to make you know that it's not that difficult to simulate it and that IMO it should be simulated as is the basis for aircraft that we have and yet are to come. Probably this post will moved to whatever place and unseen, just as the last post where i pointed out that FCS system isn't well simulated acording to this Manual. Well Anyways, Thank you for taking your time to read this :).
  3. Carrier landings are fine for me just trim the E and dont touch it more along the recovery. Its all about throtlle control. I just posted this because i want the virtual aircraft to simulate as accurate as posible the real one. Seeing some key aspects are still not being fixed in almost hornet release is concerning.
  4. As the title says i wanted to point out some features that aren't implemented in comparison to the real aircraft. So in FCS an FCS BIT related stuff i have found a lot of problems when o try to follow the NATOPS manual to start my plane. Most of these problems are related to FCS and FCS BIT. Luckly i found bug posts from 2018 that already stated this problems. The thing is that this posts are totally forgoten by devs, which in my opinion is bad because we are talking about a main feature of the aircraft the FCS and not a fancy weapon which its operation time doesnt match with our hornet. Please devs take a look at this bug post https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/180980-fcs-reset-with-wings-folded/?tab=comments#comment-181007 and fix the remaining issues with this system. Having FCS modeled correct it's important if you want to release the hornet as a finished product. Thanks
  5. MrWolf


    So it seems that US airforces are switching to this kind of explosive (PBXN-109) because of safety. https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/pbxn-109.htm
  6. What is this ACL, it even signals the wave off when the LSO signal it ( notice W/O). This isn't implemented as far as i know, is this going to be implemented? In case the video didn't start at the time i set, i'm talking about min 22:10. https://youtu.be/up7V79QzCog?t=1330 btw how do i do to make the youtube video watchable from the forum itself?
  7. Since amazingame posted a dogfight with him wining vs spit, i think the problem is solved. Now i just have to get better.
  8. WOW amazing, so i can be done, thank you soo much now i have confidence in trying vertical fights until i master this fight, i didnt try this type of engagement because i thought it was useless, but i was wrong, thank you. Also what are you DCS and gpu settings, because with my settings is very dificult to spot planes. It maybe the aliasing because planes mimetize with the ground or sky becoming invisible. I play at 2k, a spotting/high visbility focused settings would be much apreciated if you share it with me Thanks a lot
  9. Yeah I do that, it's what I said I get distance (most I can do is 50km/h difference at 5m/s climb), I turn, face on, he cobras, he is behind me he engages afterburner(or whatever this mthfkr plane has which makes him regain velocity at 150-100 km/h level flight without stalling with those big winga) and ends with a velocity 20km/h lower but behind in the next turn (even waiting to try to separate from him) he gets behind CLOSE. Sometimes at this moment if I'm not already dead I try to force a vertical scissors, but its impossible, spit can fly super slow 30km/h without stalling and rolling good too so it stays behind me no matter what.
  10. New AI spit thing, I saw it climbing 70-80 km/h vertical and it didn't STALL he put his nose down and flyed straight after that. Is this just AI or spitfire is GOD's plane? It's like I was fighting vs a hornet with FCS and afterburner. If spitfires are like this in real life I don't understand why it took so long to win Germany on WWII
  11. Mustang it's quite easy for me, just engage a vertical fight and eventualy you win. For reversing a mustang, same, vertical Scissors. On the other hand, I cannot do shit against a spit, well maybe eject once identified, to save time of my life. "Zoom and boom" classic, I try it we have same energy at start, I force AI into a dive because he will mostly waste energy turning like crazy, okay he does that. Then I regain altitude, I have more energy, now I can do 2 things go "zoom" which ends on him turning at who nows g's onto my tail and there he stays until I die. Other option, climb 500km/h, until getting separation 1000ft, go in, spitfire turns with the power of a su27 cobra onto my tail, stays there until dead. Well then I can try also vertical, which ends with spitfire on my tail and dead. Of course I try turning with him if I want to die quickly. I just don't get that spitfire can turn 180 degrees instantaneously and then match my climb without stalling?? Just stupid plane. I saw a spitfire climb at 150km/h aiming like it had a gunner. I seen videos Dora vs spitfire with Dora wining, but all those videos where in situations where the energy on planes wasn't the same. Typically Dora sneaking onto a spitfire. I want advice for 1v1 SAME CONDITIONS, but maybe its imposible, maybe I just have to run when I see a spit.
  12. Happend to me the other day after the last patch. I Could only launch one of my 4 gbu12. I did reset everything on my aircraft, even checked BIT (no implemented i think) . Had to return the aircraft carrier because of fuel after trying to bomb for 15 min, trying auto, cpip, diferent multiple settings, changeing profile page, etc. Nothing worked.
  13. Yes, of course: Fish: CAP BRAVO Hooters: SEAD Pickles: SEAD Trimmer: CAP CHARLIE Loadouts: Fish & Trimmer flights: Fuel:100% Total Weight:43411 lbs -Pylon: 1.Aim9-x 2.LAU 115-AIM120C 3.LAU 115- 2xAIM120C 4. AIM120C 5. Fuel Tank FPU-8A- 330 gal 6. AIM120C 7. LAU 115- 2xAIM120C 8.LAU 115-AIM120C 9.Aim9-x Hooters & Pickles: Fuel:100% Total Weight: 43881 lbs -Pylon: 1.Aim9-x 2.LAU 117-AGM65F 3.AGM88C 4. AN/AAQ-28 LITENNING 5. Fuel Tank FPU-8A- 330 gal 6. AIM120C 7. AGM88C 8.LAU 117-AGM65F 9.Aim9-x
  14. So i got this problem, which i don't know if it's a bug or it's just how the real hornet works. The things is that when starting up a COMPLETLY emptied f18 that has been refuelled it cannot start up as if fuel wasn't been feedeing to the engine, which is rare as refuelling also fills the feeders of each engine. Steps: 1. Load an f18 emptied of fuel on the tanks. 2. Start it up either with APU or aux air/power. 3. Wait until fuel on engines itselfs empties, in which point the engine will stop working. 4. Start engine again, i prefer aux air for this, to check engine is empty. RPM stays at 30 5. Refuel f18. 6. Check tank feeds are getting fuel (use aux power). 7. Star engine with fuel on feeders. 8. (FINAL) Engine doesn't Start Up. WeirdFuelBehavior.trk
  15. I come with prove. AI is crushing into ground because is flying very low. Also i don't know why in the track Fish goes landing when he is assigned CAP BRAVO with RTB condition out of AA missiles and its full of AA missiles. Hooters 32 decides he wants to go home and drops his loadout. First one to kill himself Trimmer 51, then Trimmer 52, then pickel 42, then hooter 31, then pickels 41. Hooters 32 dies too? Non of them killed by enemy. File too Big: https://mega.nz/file/AF5WzALI#mZbTNfEG7G7Ifpxu5WvsmYGfawQz99TF7Oc3ePGwYAs
  • Create New...