Coyle

In most every day aircraft, your F-14s, 15s, even the 16s, the radar works in a vacuum. You tell it where to look, and if you find contacts you can interact with them, otherwise it has no idea whats going on. Even aided with data-link, those contacts are simply plastered over the screen, the radar still doesn't know they are there - thus you must still tell the radar where to look. Not so in our F/A-18. All information fed by various sensors, the data-link, HARM, CIT, ASPJ, RWR, ATFLIR and of course the radar is first fed into the computer where they are all extrapolated into usable, often intractable track files where all these sensors can reference back at, already knowing the shared information they contain. My radar can be looking to the right, contributing additional information to contacts it's currently looking at, but it will know there's contacts to the left, and will easily turn to look at them with a press of a button if commanded to because the radar is not working in a vacuum like previously stated. This is why TWS is a primary deployment method in our jet vs say, the F-15 and even the F-16. The jet often already knows where everything already is so in reality our tracks are that much stronger aided by all sensors. In contrast to this you might hear an F-16 pilot say TWS is 'track while scam' and would never use it. But this is DCS, and TWS has become a DCSism and often works too well for these other aircraft. Sensor fusion, the F/A-18 did it first, the F-35 does it better.

And then you learn that the Navy doesn't fly around with master arm on even upon entering the AO, only when you're about to deploy your weapons - all adding to those precious seconds. Nobody said being a fighter pilot was easy The system works fine as intended, what's not working is our lack of proper MSI, where every track on the MC level is able to be designated. No fiddling with radar or other sensors, etc. This would mostly solve your issue.

I'm fairly certain that it's a misconception that the KC-135 refuels faster with the boom on fighters. The hornet and viper should both refuel roughly the same amount despite their different refuelling methods. The KC-135s boom is capable of refuelling faster, yes, but on larger aircraft that can accept that larger flow of intake. I would ask that you double check the fighters fuel intake rates, and not a blanket fuel rate that the tanker itself can theoretically apply. Edit: If anything, the hornet and viper refuels too fast in DCS. Will send info.

@NineLine No track, but this 100% happened to me on the super carrier. Got launched with the salute animation stuck in place with my controls locked out, it's not just a Forrestal issue.

You turned off your NWS prior to rolling. Don't do that.

This seems to be an easily reproducible crash. Only tested in the F/A-18C, might affect the F-16 too. Setting the new TNDL STN numbers to 1xxxxx or (Ie, the first digit of five to one or higher) will cause the game to crash instantly with air or ground hot starts when you take control of that jet. dcs.log-20231020-202404.zip

Simple logic bug here, no track provided. If you scan center away from the middle in RWS while not using 140 azimuth, going into VS will re-center the scan. If you use TWS BIAS or if AUTO was being used causing the scan to not be centered, going into VS will not recenter the scan, and as there seems to be no method of scan centering while in VS, you must exit VS, go into RWS, then back into VS to get your scan back into center point.

Couldn't view your track, but those lights seem very, very dim. Double check your AoA brightness knob. It's in the bottom most row of the UFC/HUD stuff, just above the AMPCD. User preference of course, but: I take mine down to half brightness at night, and only adjust lower if needed to not blow out while using NVGs. Otherwise full brightness during most day operations.

Should always be there by default unless you're playing around with the HMD formats Reject functions, or potentially do a bad alignment? Hard to know with out a screenshot. See attached if you messed with any of these settings.

I'd avoid using the LITENING, as our ATFLIR should be the better modelled pod in just about every metric and avionics integration since it has come out that we have a Spanish LITENING pod that pre-dates MSI. The one thing we lose out on is not having an IR laser pointer, due to ED modelling a pre-preduction ATFLIR that has neither the NAVFLIR (early pods should) or the IR marker. You have a couple of options with the ATFLIR. You can SCS long towards the FLIR page to go straight from INR to AUTO (the moving target track) with out having to step INR>SCENE>AUTO, or you can go from SCENE to AUTO more smoothly than the LITENING because you can still slew in SCENE mode, requiring just one command of SCS towards the FLIR page. If you decide to use the SCS long HOTAS shortcut you can move your LOS along with the target while it cues to track it, or you could move to AUTO ahead of the target and let it run into the cue, where the pod will then pick it up and track it.

Bump. I can appreciate the work ED has put in on the carrier comms side of things, but there has to be some way for us to connect to the carrier with out going through the AI process when we only wish to fly with other humans making all the calls in a simulated multiplayer environment. A simple radio command that'll skip all AI comms, toss us up on the LSO platform list, tune the lights as appropriate, and automatically attempt to establish ACLS would go such a long way until some of these things can be modelled a little better via super carrier features. Maybe one that could even be bound like the "hornet ball" key bind we have.

Not a bug, as the Cage/Uncage button should invoke another function in the ATFLIR that we are unlikely to get. Being vague on purpose, sorry. But yep, gotta hit the LST button on the DDI.

Hello! with the new hornet model coming up, I would like to request two feature requests that can be user select-able settings (and synced in multiplayer), sort of like the Viper with the canopy bubble tint setting. The first would be the color of the flight suit. I believe it's quite common that USN pilots will wear a more brown/tan suit when operating in desert environments, and we now have four maps such a suit would be appropriate in. The other option I would love to see would be having a remodel of the old mask we currently have. The new mask shown in the recent newsletter is a good change as it's probably long been the new 'standard issue', but it has been stated that it was rather uncomfortable to wear. USN pilots were allowed to source and wear the older masks as long as they maintained them properly. I think both options would add a bit of flair when looking at the pit. Thanks!

ATC holds true air speed, not what's in the HUD. It's working as intended.

With the way TOO works now, a designation must be made each time for each weapon prior to launch. Weapon swaps will not automatically pick up a prior designation. This is so that the coordinates are saved and are not overwritten with out positive action.