THere are really only three things missing in DCS: AV-8B

1. Marine Aviator (aka pilot)

2. Ground power panel switches on stbd aft panel.

3. AGM-65F anti-ship variant.

4. GBU-38 JDAM

 

According to Wiki

AV-8B + can carry AGM-88 HARM and AGM-84 Harpoon. But we don't have Plus. We have N/A.

 

Once those four items are present, the module is essentially complete. Only has to be updated for new builds of DCS.

My favorite module. Magnificently done!

Can the TPOD be slaved to the DMT yet?

Can you make new waypoints without having a waypoint already (without having to work around it)?

If you have a TGT and you make a markpoint, does it take the target's coordinates or just where the aircraft is?

 

Think there's a few more than three things...

There are still a lot more things missing and bugged then your list says.

However, Razbam showed in the last patch that they are really working on it, lets hope that they'll continue.

 

As you are so much impressed by the Harrier, what are your other modules you are constantly flying?#

 

BTW: Whats wrong with your first thread about the same?

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=239298

Edited June 11, 2019 by viper2097

1. Marine Aviator (aka pilot)

2. Ground power panel switches on stbd aft panel.

3. AGM-65F anti-ship variant.

4. GBU-38 JDAM

 

According to Wiki

AV-8B + can carry AGM-88 HARM and AGM-84 Harpoon. But we don't have Plus. We have N/A.

 

Once those four items are present, the module is essentially complete. Only has to be updated for new builds of DCS.

My favorite module. Magnificently done!

 

 

You should post this on Reddit.

Does the ASL line compensate for wind and movers? Oh wait guess thats yet one more to add to the list.

1. Marine Aviator (aka pilot)

 

2. Ground power panel switches on stbd aft panel.

 

3. AGM-65F anti-ship variant.

 

4. GBU-38 JDAM

 

 

 

According to Wiki

 

AV-8B + can carry AGM-88 HARM and AGM-84 Harpoon. But we don't have Plus. We have N/A.

 

 

 

Once those four items are present, the module is essentially complete. Only has to be updated for new builds of DCS.

 

My favorite module. Magnificently done!

I'd like to add HUD bombing modes need to be finished/fixed, basically all of them!

-AUTO misses wind/moving target correction

-CCIP misses reflected cue and transition to AUTO

-LOFT mode missing

-DSL mode(s) missing

 

...and a couple pages on the MPCDs aren't done yet.

 

EDIT ...and though I understand it's technically not possible at the moment, I would still love to have the day FLIR markers indicating hot spots. May be Zeus finds a way with ED together. :)

Edited June 11, 2019 by shagrat

I'd like to add HUD bombing modes need to be finished/fixed, basically all of them!

-AUTO misses wind/moving target correction

-CCIP misses reflected cue and transition to AUTO

-LOFT mode missing

-DSL mode(s) missing

 

...and a couple pages on the MPCDs aren't done yet.

 

EDIT ...and though I understand it's technically not possible at the moment, I would still love to have the day FLIR markers indicating hot spots. May be Zeus finds a way with ED together. :)

 

Yeah, lots of work to do still. But on the plus side the last few updates have added some actual functionality. I haven't tried it yet, but I think the CCIP/AUTO might work now with the new CCIP que.

There is still lots to be done, not exclusive to a handful of items.. And still things that need to be fixed that we already have.

No soldier, airman, sailor, and marine , ever got a perfect fault free, complete weapon system. Dealing with shortcomings and limitations is part of the fun.

No soldier, airman, sailor, and marine , ever got a perfect fault free, complete weapon system. Dealing with shortcomings and limitations is part of the fun.

 

Lol, I'm sure we are all glad you have fun dealing with the limitations and problems of an unfinished/bugged product for which you paid full price, I can even suggest you roll back to one of the previous versions of DCS to enjoy even more limitations and fun :D

No soldier, airman, sailor, and marine , ever got a perfect fault free, complete weapon system. Dealing with shortcomings and limitations is part of the fun.

Oh, shortcomings and limitations are nice if simulated correctly. The TPOD integration and target coordinates, compared to the A-10C is overly complex and not easy to work with. That is part of the realistic simulation. The bugs and missing features are simply that, bugs to be fixed and features missing to represent the AV-8B to DCS standard. I am sure Razbam is currently working on the remaining stuff (@Zeus67 and team: thanks by the way for the flood of recent updates).

I just oppose any "this is finished" announcement, inevitably causing the next shitstorm in the long run.

Razbam has the AV-8B labeled as early access (Work In Progress) for good reason and though we seem to near completion, they are the ones to announce it is finished and release it officially. Until then we have the chance to dig into it, find bugs and help make it a better product on release. :)

No soldier, airman, sailor, and marine , ever got a perfect fault free, complete weapon system. Dealing with shortcomings and limitations is part of the fun.

 

LOL... Trolling I see... If I put my sarcasm glasses its a very funny thread now... :lol:

Oh, shortcomings and limitations are nice if simulated correctly. The TPOD integration and target coordinates, compared to the A-10C is overly complex and not easy to work with. That is part of the realistic simulation. The bugs and missing features are simply that, bugs to be fixed and features missing to represent the AV-8B to DCS standard. I am sure Razbam is currently working on the remaining stuff (@Zeus67 and team: thanks by the way for the flood of recent updates).

I just oppose any "this is finished" announcement, inevitably causing the next shitstorm in the long run.

Razbam has the AV-8B labeled as early access (Work In Progress) for good reason and though we seem to near completion, they are the ones to announce it is finished and release it officially. Until then we have the chance to dig into it, find bugs and help make it a better product on release. :)

 

The fact that the harrier TPOD will have ~100m error in coordinates at 10nm isn't modeled either.

Lol, I'm sure we are all glad you have fun dealing with the limitations and problems of an unfinished/bugged product for which you paid full price, I can even suggest you roll back to one of the previous versions of DCS to enjoy even more limitations and fun :D

 

Rofl hard to come back at that one, touche :D

The fact that the harrier TPOD will have ~100m error in coordinates at 10nm isn't modeled either.

To be fair with the current bomb damage modeling I am more positive about the TPOD being a tad bit more accurate. ;)

The fact that the harrier TPOD will have ~100m error in coordinates at 10nm isn't modeled either.

 

I mean, that shouldnt make much of a difference for our current weapons. Once we get JDAMs though, then it might.

It's also not a hard and fast number. It just means at those ranges (and usual associated slant angles) you could see up to a 100m difference between what you are shown and where the stare point actually is.

 

The grid will be most accurate pulled as close horizontally to the target as you can get (as steep a depression angle as possible), at altitude, in level unaccelerated flight, fully INS aligned, with laser rangefinder on.

 

Anything else is only liable to get you varying shades of "close enough."

It's also not a hard and fast number. It just means at those ranges (and usual associated slant angles) you could see up to a 100m difference between what you are shown and where the stare point actually is.

 

The grid will be most accurate pulled as close horizontally to the target as you can get (as steep a depression angle as possible), at altitude, in level unaccelerated flight, fully INS aligned, with laser rangefinder on.

 

Anything else is only liable to get you varying shades of "close enough."

 

Well there is a table for this, and I **hope** that various sensor errrors get modeled. :)

 

And I hope the ARBS, TPOD, and LRF slant range errors might get modeled too.

 

To be fair I'm not sure to what degree these errors are modeled in other modules.

Well there is a table for this, and I **hope** that various sensor errrors get modeled. :)

 

 

 

And I hope the ARBS, TPOD, and LRF slant range errors might get modeled too.

 

 

 

To be fair I'm not sure to what degree these errors are modeled in other modules.

I hope they model these "imperfections" only AFTER we get a better weapons effect modeling in DCS, especially fragmentation damage!

Currently an error of 5 to 10m with a Mk-82 means you have mostly cosmetic effects on a truck(!) requiring up to 3 or 4 "close hits", that each would have shredded the truck to pieces...

I hope they model these "imperfections" only AFTER we get a better weapons effect modeling in DCS, especially fragmentation damage!

Currently an error of 5 to 10m with a Mk-82 means you have mostly cosmetic effects on a truck(!) requiring up to 3 or 4 "close hits", that each would have shredded the truck to pieces...

 

So, the TPOD errors are when providing ABSOLUTE coordinates, its still accurate for relative type attacks. Many of the errors with coordinates have to do with INS inaccuracy, then aligning the POD IMU with the INS, then you get the various slant range measuring errors. The conclusion to the work was that for JDAM's you couldn't get "good enough" coordinates from the TPOD if you were more than 6nm out, and due to some software SNAFU relative mode for JDAM's didn't work at all. Of course if you had coordinates for JDAM's from a briefing or a FAC they would still work fine.

 

Also, no issues using the TPOD to deliver LGBs. Nor is using the TPOD or ARBS for RELATIVE mode attacks, because the FCS doesn't care where it is in ABSOLUTE terms, it just needs to know target is dead ahead, 30 degrees under me and with 2500m slant range and my speed/angle is known.

 

Part of brought this up is seeing people online provide ultra precise jdam coordinates to hornets, and in reality this wouldn't be happening. At a guess, the Hornet and A10 TGPs among others have similar issues with this, maybe less since the integration might be better.

 

As for weapons modeling in DCS. Yup, borked, but Razbam can't fix that. (well aside from the damn sidearm reticle thing)