Jump to content

One of the best modules


jopasaps

Recommended Posts

I got this module right after the last big update and haven't noticed any major issues with the radar or A2G capabilities. Maybe I am missing something. Can someone tell me what is bugged? Also in what way does the INS not work? It seems to work as described for me, although I haven't tried bombing via INS or adding offsets/new waypoints.

 

The following bugs have existed for at least a year and a half:

 

1. INS ignores position update, instead resolving position error to 0. Essentially ignores what you actually input.

2. Waypoint positions are bugged. Waypoints don't appear in the game world where you set them in the ME. This, coupled with #1, makes IP bombing useless. It also means the Mirage cannot drop on a waypoint or perform any cold war style strike mission.

3. IP bombing is not consent to release like it should be

4. CCRP bombing will always drastically overshoot it's targget in less than a 30deg dive, making it useless. This, coupled with #2, means the mirage cannot drop bombs level

 

That's just a few of the issues, but they are prominent and hit you right away when you attempt the training.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

========

Not sure what you mean about the first one. I get into A/G mode fine. Also, I can't get the radar range to change in dogfight mode unless I exit dogfight mode first. I'm not sure how you know for sure that the altitudes aren't accurate next to the targeting brackets. I haven't noticed I guess. I think you're right about TWS only showing one target though.

 

I haven't had too much trouble finding and engaging planes with the radar luckily.

 

I did already post a YouTube video with AG gun.

The normal procedure is to select AG options on PCA long in advance, return to NAV with WEAPON SystemCMD AFT, and go into attack mode when needed with WEAPON SystemCMD FWD when needed.

That flow is disrupted with close combat radar mode on first try.

 

If you use keyboard shortcuts or mapped HOTAS command you can change radar range in close combat mode, I managed to lock at 12Nm, but I didn't perform a maximum range test. Nothing past 10Nm should be locked in close combat mode.

 

For the scan elevation I built a custom mission with B-52 flying head on at the same altitude (FL250) from 80Nm.

When adjusting elevation the B-52 will disappear while it should be within scan zone according to min & max values next to radar cursor set at target range.

If someone pass you a contact to find, you will have to set your radar elevation randomly to find it, you can't do it effectively on the first try.

This isn't "clean", it used to work fine.

 

For the list I published in previous message I tested everything after last DCS update.

I'm not here to post BS about the module, it doesn't please me at all.

 

I will be happy to report if it's fixed, but both good and bad things must be reported.

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following bugs have existed for at least a year and a half:

 

1. INS ignores position update, instead resolving position error to 0. Essentially ignores what you actually input.

2. Waypoint positions are bugged. Waypoints don't appear in the game world where you set them in the ME. This, coupled with #1, makes IP bombing useless. It also means the Mirage cannot drop on a waypoint or perform any cold war style strike mission.

3. IP bombing is not consent to release like it should be

4. CCRP bombing will always drastically overshoot it's targget in less than a 30deg dive, making it useless. This, coupled with #2, means the mirage cannot drop bombs level

 

That's just a few of the issues, but they are prominent and hit you right away when you attempt the training.

 

2- I will retest when home, but the last time I checked it was ok for waypoints, and using a software for IP offset, it was OK for that kind of attack...minus the release consent which is bugged.

4- apart for high drag bomb in CCIP (where it's actually mandatory), M-2000C doesn't really do level bombing, not in CCRP.

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CCRP is for Level bombing. For dive bombing you dont Need CCRP. So if you say the Mirage dont do levelbombing, why she has the CCRP-Mode ???

 

No CCRP is for bombing a designated target without having to put the target in the hud upon weapon release. Mirage has a different mode of CCRP delivery than other aircraft by having to go into a dive but in practice the principle is the same. You just have to adjust to it and plan around it and it is perfectly usable as a CCRP bomber.

 

Also LGB delivery you can do in level flight.


Edited by orcbuster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

....

I think they need to pour 100% into one of their existing modules and get it to release candidate. They're clearly very talented but I speculate they are spread too thin.

Maybe it's just a language thing and i misunderstood you here but the M2k isn't an Early Acces module, they removed that tag years ago in the DCS shop. So, we are talking about a fully released Module here....

 

I hope Raszbam can get this beauty fixed in 2020....

Modules: KA-50, A-10C, FC3, UH-1H, MI-8MTV2, CA, MIG-21bis, FW-190D9, Bf-109K4, F-86F, MIG-15bis, M-2000C, SA342 Gazelle, AJS-37 Viggen, F/A-18C, F-14, C-101, FW-190A8, F-16C, F-5E, JF-17, SC, Mi-24P Hind, AH-64D Apache, Mirage F1

System: Win 11 Pro 64bit, Ryzen 3800X, 32gb RAM DDR4-3200, PowerColor Radeon RX 6900XT Red Devil ,1 x Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 2TB NVMe, 2 x Samsung SSD 2TB + 1TB SATA, MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals - VIRPIL T-50CM and VIRPIL MongoosT-50 Throttle - HP Reverg G2, using only the latest Open Beta, DCS settings

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CCRP is for Level bombing. For dive bombing you dont Need CCRP. So if you say the Mirage dont do levelbombing, why she has the CCRP-Mode ???

 

Go at time 10:00.

Mirage 2000N performing live delivery during Red Flag 1995.

 

https://www.ina.fr/video/CPC08003568

 

Mirage 2000 uses radar ranging.

The mapping mode isn't good enough to perform radar designation.

The radar beam (at least the main lobe) is 3° wide.

 

With a flat angle for designation it's less accurate, so they designate in dive.

Not more than 30°, and IRL rad alt is selected as back up in case of radar failure, and rad alt is +/- 30° wide.

 

I prefer to keep the French acronym to avoid confusion with US fighters, CCRP = CCPL.

 

The idea is to use low drag bombs with CCPL to maximize release range and avoid over flying the target area.

 

High drag bombs are released level at low altitude and high speed.

 

The choice depends on tactical considerations.

 

CCPL + PI is a back up mode in case you can't designate for direct CCPL*, the CEP greatly increases (from 20m to around 100m).

But CCPL + PI is affected by 2 issues:

- release consent bug (the bombs are released as soon as you press the trigger)

- DCS map/ mission editor ruler isn't accurate enough.

 

*like low clouds over the target area, this is what happened to French Super Etendard bombing a target in Lebanon in the 80'

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go at time 10:00.

Mirage 2000N performing live delivery during Red Flag 1995.

 

https://www.ina.fr/video/CPC08003568

 

Mirage 2000 uses radar ranging.

The mapping mode isn't good enough to perform radar designation.

The radar beam (at least the main lobe) is 3° wide.

 

With a flat angle for designation it's less accurate, so they designate in dive.

Not more than 30°, and IRL rad alt is selected as back up in case of radar failure, and rad alt is +/- 30° wide.

 

I prefer to keep the French acronym to avoid confusion with US fighters, CCRP = CCPL.

 

The idea is to use low drag bombs with CCPL to maximize release range and avoid over flying the target area.

 

High drag bombs are released level at low altitude and high speed.

 

The choice depends on tactical considerations.

 

CCPL + PI is a back up mode in case you can't designate for direct CCPL*, the CEP greatly increases (from 20m to around 100m).

But CCPL + PI is affected by 2 issues:

- release consent bug (the bombs are released as soon as you press the trigger)

- DCS map/ mission editor ruler isn't accurate enough.

 

*like low clouds over the target area, this is what happened to French Super Etendard bombing a target in Lebanon in the 80'

 

This is true, but the RELEASE is done level, or pulling to level or climb. This doesn't work in this module. You must actually release the bombs in the dive or they will overshoot everytime.

 

Also, if it were modeling disepersion of the radar beam, you would expect a dispersal of bomb patterns over multiple tries. In this module's case, the bombs always fall long the exact same distance every time. The bombs are very precise, but not accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm explaining you how it should work and how it's different from US simulated fighters. So you know the background.

 

In game, the work around is to aim with the top of the diamond rather than the center.

It's more likely a parallax error (or lack of compensation).

Known old bug :(

Also I see sometimes in videos guys doing a designation from 10Nm and then flying level until release. This isn't the good way to do it.

 

Yes the release is done automatically during pull up.

A level release would be a stabilized level flight.

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm explaining you how it should work and how it's different from US simulated fighters. So you know the background.

 

In game, the work around is to aim with the top of the diamond rather than the center.

It's more likely a parallax error (or lack of compensation).

Known old bug :(

Also I see sometimes in videos guys doing a designation from 10Nm and then flying level until release. This isn't the good way to do it.

 

Yes the release is done automatically during pull up.

A level release would be a stabilized level flight.

 

Ah ok I see thank you.

 

Yes, I think you're right about parallax. I believe the same bug is in effect when waypoint placement is off. There's some mismatch between aircraft systems and the actual ground map in DCS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... I think you're right about parallax. I believe the same bug is in effect when waypoint placement is off. There's some mismatch between aircraft systems and the actual ground map in DCS.

 

When testing in 2.5.2.x (INS drift disabled), the waypoint was perfectly aligned with the ground target.

 

But the cross / diamond centre point was 7-8 pixels (@ 1080x1920) below the waypoint in the HUD during the run-in from 10 NM.

 

By way of comparison, the misalignment in the Harrier's HUD is 2-3 pixels.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=190222&stc=1&d=1531965542

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3570548#post3570548

 

This means you can't use the centre of the HUD diamond to designate targets or update the INS, instead you should estimate a point a little above the diamond centre (1/3 up or 7-8 pixels@1080x1920).

 

Note: waypoint INS update errors aren't modelled and are always "perfect" i.e. it doesn't matter where the HUD diamond is placed when doing the update in DCS.

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a navigation test on Nevada a while back.

INS drift disabled.

 

The + appears at range < 10Nm.

 

If you are at low altitude, the + seems to seat below the actual waypoint, under the ground.

And the as you close in you see it move up inside the HUD.

 

This is why I'm thinking of parallax.

 

For direct CCPL, with dive designation and using the top of the diamond, I can reliably hit a building.

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that the center point of a lot of these HUD elements are misaligned. E.g. if the complex pictures of diamonds, squares, etc. on the HUD were replaced by a single pink pixel at 0,0 you'd find that the positioning was quite good.

 

You see a + shape and assume the location indicated is at the intersection of the horizontal and vertical segments. But what if it isn't? What if it's the top-left corner of the pixel grid of the square picture that the system draws on or the top of the 12 o'clock segment or the bottom of the 12 o'clock segment? Or the top of the 6 o'clock segment?

 

There are tests that can determine what the "zero point" of a pictographic HUD element is that represents a position.

 

I've done a fair number of trials with the weapon designation diamond and I'm convinced it's not the center dot nor is it the top point of the diamond. It's about 1/3 of the way from the top point to the center dot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that the center point of a lot of these HUD elements are misaligned. E.g. if the complex pictures of diamonds, squares, etc. on the HUD were replaced by a single pink pixel at 0,0 you'd find that the positioning was quite good.

 

...

 

I've done a fair number of trials with the weapon designation diamond and I'm convinced it's not the center dot nor is it the top point of the diamond. It's about 1/3 of the way from the top point to the center dot.

 

You can adjust the position of the HUD elements in

 

• "DCS World\Mods\aircraft\M-2000C\Cockpit\VTH\HUD_definitions.lua"

 

the line you are looking for is

 

• "vth_base_init_pos = {0, 92.5, 0} -- 92.5"

 

on my screen, 1 unit = approx. 2 pixels, so

 

• "vth_base_init_pos = {0, 96.5, 0} -- 92.5 -- Position fix, approx 2 pixel per unit"

 

raises the HUD elements by ~8 pixels and works quite well (any value between 96.0 to 96.5 seems acceptable).

 

ZCvBdQ6.jpg

 

I haven't checked how the adjustment effects other HUD modes i.e. A2A*

 

* Checked CCRP Diamond - doesn't match up (still 7-8 pixels out), each HUD page/mode will need adjusting if it's to work well. Above adjustment only "good" for waypoint position (if lucky).


Edited by Ramsay
Got to test Mk-82 CCRP designation/accuracy.

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following bugs have existed for at least a year and a half:

 

1. INS ignores position update, instead resolving position error to 0. Essentially ignores what you actually input.

2. Waypoint positions are bugged. Waypoints don't appear in the game world where you set them in the ME. This, coupled with #1, makes IP bombing useless. It also means the Mirage cannot drop on a waypoint or perform any cold war style strike mission.

3. IP bombing is not consent to release like it should be

4. CCRP bombing will always drastically overshoot it's targget in less than a 30deg dive, making it useless. This, coupled with #2, means the mirage cannot drop bombs level

 

That's just a few of the issues, but they are prominent and hit you right away when you attempt the training.

 

 

You can add this regarding the INS:

If you switch the INS on back up mode (SEC), you lost only waypoint steering. You should lost Flight path marker and firing solutions because INS is just an AHRS in this mode.

If you switch it off, same (you can fly with eveything working exept waypoint steering with an INS switched off :music_whistling:).

This may appear as a tiny detail but this is symptomatic how systems are modeled in a simplistic way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice if the Razbam Team would at least show some presence here...

 

Though the thread title isn‘t probably to helpful in that regard.Maybe we should open a new thread called „PRESENT/PERSISTENT MIRAGE BUGS“

and throw it all in there.Maybe thats a bit more of an attention getter..

 

Regards,

 

 

Snappy


Edited by Snappy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They do have a bugs section, Maybe ask a moderator if they can transpose the comments regarding bugs onto a new thread over there to save re-typing them?

 

There's not much point in all honesty, many of these bugs have been reported before and are now in the "resolved bugs" section.

 

For example the misaligned HUD waypoint/designation position was reported in 2016 (possibly as early as 2015).

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=174914

 

That's not to say the M-2000C hasn't improved or had many bugs fixed over the years, just that some fairly basic issues (i.e. being able to accurately designate a target) have been classified by the dev's as minor "non-issues" and continue to persist.

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just noticed another really weird thing about the M2k, the IR warning system seems to have complete forward detection, but in the Chucks guide it shows it only is supposed to detect in two 135 arcs in the back. It actually looks like what we have is backwards, detection everywhere EXCEPT those arcs which are supposed to be the coverage areas? I get IR missile launch warnings from directly ahead all the time even though it supposedly can't do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just noticed another really weird thing about the M2k, the IR warning system seems to have complete forward detection, but in the Chucks guide it shows it only is supposed to detect in two 135 arcs in the back.

Best practice is to report new bugs, separately in their own thread and include a short track, example mission or video to make it easy to test/reproduce.

 

The accuracy and functionality of the M2K's IR detection has varied over the years, sometimes it's worked well, other times it's been almost non-functional - perhaps due to core DCS changes.

 

I'm not sure of it's current status as there were recent reports that the A-10C's MLWS wasn't being triggered by igla/stinger launches.

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just came back to flying the Mirage after not having flown it in over a year and was thinking: WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO THIS MODULE?!

 

So many stuff is broken, a lot of it is stuff that worked fine before. And yes, I am aware of the changes to HOTAS controls and weapon systems logic, so that's not the issue.

 

Most of the issues I encountered have been listed before, like here and here, but what has not been mentioned yet is how broken the new UHF radio is: If you play around with the mode dial of the UHF radio it looses track of what setting is which switch position, meaning that the OFF positon then becomes the FF position function wise and so on...

Also if you dial it all the way it does jump back one step at some point. The barometric altimeter does the same btw if you scroll the pressure setting through an altitude of 0ft...

 

The reason why I started flying the Mirage again is because a buddy of mine, who has only flown warbirds so far, has choosen the Mirage as his first jet module for some reason and asked me to give him some introduction training lessons. I thought this is a great opportunity to make myself familiar with last years changes to the module. Well it was pretty embarassing at times to discover all these issues and having to explain to my buddy that this isn't how it should be and that he made a bad decision by choosing the Mirage...

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many stuff is broken, a lot of it is stuff that worked fine before.

 

That's the most frustrating. Bugs in a new feature/system is one thing, breaking stuff is another and is way more frustrating.

But at the same time, i am very happy with the cockpit update (and new VR pilot coming should please even more people) with the MLO concept to make it more realistic and partnership with AdA

Being French and dreaming to fly in a Mirage 2000 since being a kid, this module is my absolute favorite. But it also drives me crazy to be that close to the perfect module for me, but to have regular bugs on major systems like radar that prevent us to enjoy it fully.

 

Razbam mentionned that the plan is to finish the module this year (along with the Harrier), and Elwood already mentionned that going over all reported bugs was part of his planned tasks.

The only thing we can do on our side is to log all bugs in dedicated section with as much details as we can.

 

To get back on topic, if we do get a bug free (on major systems at least) version on 2020, it will be the best module for me until the 2000-5 comes out (eventually) :D

But everyone has his own definition of 'best module'. Features wise, i guess the F14 is the best module (multirole, mutli crew, carrier ops, implementation quality) but i'm not interested in it.


Edited by Steph21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing that bugs me from the very beginning is the limited function of the CCIP pipper for AG guns and rockets - mostly it is not accurate because of a simple issue - it's movement is limited to the datum line and above, but mostly the aim point would be below the datum line, except for when being up really close. Try shooting rockets from rather long distances (like 1.5-2nm) and see how everything falls short. Then repeat it with the plane inverted and see how things hit rather well...

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- radar elevation control bugged: you can't trust the min/ max altitude values next to radar cursor as soon as you move up/ down the scan zone.

 

 

Can you elaborate on this, I'm curious. I got the Mirage recently and I haven't noticed anything wrong with this. Is the single number also wrong if you change it to the mode where it shows center of scan zone?

VC

 

=X51= Squadron is recruiting!

X51 website: https://x51squadron.com/

Join our Discord: https://discord.gg/d9JtFY4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...