Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Gripes323

  1. What bugs me most with IR Mavs here is inability to designate the target for the Hornet's MC with other sensors following the designation. If you only have MavF's loaded with no Tpod and have to attack multiple targets in the same area, designating the first target with the first Mav's seeker should keep the designation for the second missile to uncage onto, after the first one has been fired. The second missile would already be looking at the target area and would only take a quick slew to get it to the second target. Currently, the second missile is bore sighted after the first one is fired. Lots of wasted time to get the seeker back onto the area. I don't think it works like this in RW.
  2. I guess I'm just looking for the straight blob with no 'bump' in the middle... or after countless traps, my brain is processing the total picture somehow, I don't know... I've been bitching about it since SC release.
  3. Just messing around... writing 'supplemental' pages to TAC manuals FLIR PTRK ranging is a bit off but the laser worked fine.
  4. This is more annoying then 'blanking'. When looking forward, within few degrees from HUD frame, the reticle jumps making it impossible to lock anything within this area. You have to point the jet either toward a target (bore) or further away to the side of the target to use HMD. It's wasted time. Applies to all reticles, HACQ, LACQ, Aim9x. It's not correct from what I heard. No, I don't have any docs.
  5. Splashing Mi26. First with Aim9X, it took 4 of them! Then... with an Lmav. It took 1, hehe! Not in the vid but I also tested this using an Amraam. 1 did the job.
  6. @lax22 I just tested this. I was able to pick up and hold a steady track on Blackhawks from 20nm, only in level or look up situation. They were flying at 136 kts. I didn't have time to test them at various speeds or hovering
  7. I started the above thread in Hornet's main forum. When flying level at 42,000 ft. I was not able to detect low flying fighter size targets (Su33's). The bombers like Tu160 showed up fine. Look down.trk
  8. I just flew a simple setup: 1 Su33 @1500 ft. hot and 1 Tu160 @ 500 ft. hot, separated by a few miles, line abreast. I was between 42k and 43k. I picked up Tu160 at 38nm, never picked up Su33. At some point I 'conveniently' lost link with AWACS when E3 turned away from me... he was supposed to be in orbit @44k ft. I wouldn't have made any difference as you can see in my vid in the op. I regained the link when the Su33 was at around 8nm on the nose... well, below the nose and I wasn't able to re-acquire. I'm posting a track in the bugs section.
  9. I'll try to get to the flightline tonight and make a simple track, unless someone beats me to it. The one from the vid above is from a 'convoluted' huge mission with loads of jets.
  10. It didn't make any difference from 42k ft. It's weird. I tried to paint the same targets from 35k ft., using mixed PRF and I picked them up at 35 nm. From 25k, the targets show up at 41 nm.
  11. Nope. Its working fine on me. Its even better than Viper radar currently is AFAIK. I can shoot the darn Phoenix coming at me lol Yep. After a while we get used to dealing with these bugs and might even use them to our advantage However I did manage to shoot my own missile once or twice before I picked up new habits in my A/A fights. The TWS is definitely shaky. Recently I go STT in most cases, especially when fighting AI jeffs. They always have some SD10s heading for me before I even pick them up on my scope. Of course their TWS is working great, hehe. This morning I smoked couple of them but they made it easy for me by skywriting at high altitude. LACQ works wonders is cases like this.
  12. 2 Su33's head on, level at 1500 ft. I'm at 40k feet, Hi PRF then INTL. Unable to pick them up.
  13. What's DCO? I've found a number of possible definitions.
  14. Just out of curiosity... I wonder how much they have to be off to create a gaming sim and not infringe on licensing issues ... 2kts/5'AOA or... Is it only for the bottom part of the flight envelope?
  15. They couldn't model? You mean FCS? I'm pretty sure they can knock out pretty fancy aerodynamic model, if they wanted to. That reminds me... in one of the builds, a while back the Hornet would fly like it had thrust vector nozzles, at just below 300. Then ED had to mess it up with realistic alpha and airspeed entry criteria into pirouette logic, damn...
  16. A little insight from a former RIO posted today... yea, I know it's Tomcatz but some general numbers would also apply here. edit: circa '80, '90s https://youtu.be/38FGpJ_6Js4
  17. Since you mentioned function of flight time... does accelerated time function work the same way as actually flying in 1x ? I wonder if your system time is used instead. I'll check it when I get a chance. Perhaps you might know already.
  18. Nothing constructive here but... Didn't they fix it few builds ago? Sometimes it looks like they plug the updates into old builds
  19. No, they won't. He needs to 'nudge' them a little.
  20. Well IvanK, I think you have enough evidence to show the things are not working right. I hope you got your report on the way. Then again... the current implementation could just be half baked, unfinished stuff. I'd send it anyway.
  21. AGR wouldn't fix your attitude issues. Have you looked at ADI discrepancies, bank and pitch in both, INS and STBY? HUD attitude is in its own world on top of that.
  22. There's also an attitude drift present when you look at ADI. I can understand the horizon slightly tilted because of INS line up degradation (?) but not as much from STBY. The HUD doesn't seem to be effected regardless of source. Is it possible that the horizon tilt effects DIL (pointing the same way the horizon is tilted). Also, in case of error, how does ADC corelate data from standby instruments? It's probably a lot quicker to ask here then read up on all this stuff... some day.
  23. More weirdness: I flew 2 hops. Fast forwarded on the first on the first one to get past 30 min. and the DIL line went crooked. I followed NFM-000 procedures for position updates. I tried DSG (via HUD), AUTO and TACAN. Nothing worked. Out of curiosity I switched POS/INS to POS ADC, reset master caution and put it back to POS/INS... and the DIL pointed straight down, go figure. That got me 'thinking'. I went to ADI to see how the attitude indicator changed on INS, it was off a small amount. I changed to STBY and the horizon was tilted 10 deg. the opposite way... OK. Now, it also seems like I stumbled on a band-aid (if anyone wants to fly missions circa early '80s). My mission was set for 1983 and the ATFLIR was in the warehouse. I loaded the ATFLIR, flew for 45 min. and the INS never got out of whack until I tried position update, just for the heck of it. My WPDSG was on runway numbers. The ATFLIR was looking exactly at the numbers but I still followed the procedures for DSG update. As expected, the DIL went almost horizontal and I could see that I still had a TGT lock somewhere. I turned toward it and saw the CCIP cross with a diamond superimposed on it... stuck on the ground point. It seemed like a random point although there is a chance this was a overfly point at the time I pressed TDC on FLIR and accepted it on HSI. I'm done testing this. Someone needs to look at this.
  24. . That was my understanding of how this worked. If you were flying over fairly flat terrain with no elevation changes... who cares if INS drifted 1k meters. You should be getting a good range and the DIL should point down... unless, the MC and the standby instruments didn't know which way was straight down, Even if the drift took you from flat to over a tall hill, the cross would be off but not slanted, would it... I need to play around with this mess and see how all of this stuff works here.
  • Create New...