What is missing from the JF-17 to be complete?

I think Harliquinn has it mostly right, I’ve seen what looks like the SD-10 having perfect mid course updates even though the modern teen fighters have limited mid course updates implemented it seems. I have never lost lock that wasn’t in a notch for a couple seconds or gimbal limit, it really does seem to read target position immediately with no updates. I’m sure it will be just as realistic as the F-18 once it’s done, I know the transition to 2.5.6 and having elevation measured differently probably helped push those radar plans a bit farther back

 

Like I saw the recent F-16 thread about TWS and ACM, and people confirming that TWS is just as unreliable as pilots have always said:megalol:

I mean notching radars is one thing, and modern radars aren't that easy to notch, with smaller gates and prediction and all. And you can notch the KLJ-7 at least. Though I wonder how good it is vs the Viper/F18 radars in that respect.

I just hope Deka is working on it, and the SD10's to use the new missile API/model/CFD stuff.

I'd like to see where you read that. Specifically for the KLJ-7

I hope you're not taking my word as 100%. I'm not even sure. Am I even confusing it with the Tomcat? Who knows.

Also it has nothing to do with the magical update rates we see for targets.

If you have a specific example, I'd be interested in what is actually going on.

Like a fighter? You just shot at?

Take a look at heading and speed of bugged target. Put it on 2bars 60 degree for least amount of updates. You will see speed and heading constantly update even when the radar beam is nowhere near the bugged target.

 

 

To be honest, I didn't really notice. I had noticed it seems rather quick to pick up contacts, but tracking them seems to be OK? It doesn't seem "magical", as least as far as the display goes.

 

 

If you have a specific example, I'd be interested in what is actually going on.

What Aria said.

Take a locked target in RWS/TWS etc, and if he's maneuvering or changing speed you immediately know it in the Jeff. The way it works in other planes is that the track file is basically a series of "states" captured by the radar as it passes over the target. Now I'm going to absurdly oversimplify this to explain it but:

First pass you know he's at bearing X, elevation Y and his range R. Not a lot of info. Next pass of the radar, you now know he's at bearing X1, elevation Y1, and range R1. Now you have 2 points to work with, and you can do "math". Based on the difference between those values you can figure out, direction he's going (Vector), when combined with your own INS data, you can also figure out his speed. Each time the radar passes over that contact, that info gets updated. But only each time he does so. Its never really instant, though STT lock is about as instant as you can get. But in the Jeff radar its instant at all times at the moment. The reason TWS is typically not used to fire on targets is because the update times are relatively "slow" so in the 1-4 seconds between passes, you don't actually know where the plane "is", your computer just assumes its going the direction it computed based on the last pass or two. And 500kts is ~250 m/s so, your missile is guiding anywhere between .25km and 1km off in that case depending on your update rate.

You can see this in the Viper or F18, F14 radars those bricks and their heading lines don't get updated very quick. In the Jeff its instant, I even know when a missile hits, because the contact does this very happy flippy floppy death dance of rapid heading changes. Again, not terribly realistic.

Lol I do the same thing for seeing missile hits.

I would hope that when implemented, if the real plane has it if there is some sort of “LOST” cue or something like that. Right now when someone goes off radar it seems the MFD just keeps it in memory for a few seconds and that’s it.

I imagine it could possibly extrapolate a G acceleration and apply that, but the rate of change in speed and heading would be constant between updates

We are getting true vertical scan pattern next patch, so it seems radar will be getting some work done:)

1) True, they're working on it, you have to keep in mind that is a complete plane, so it has to be at least a 300 pages of manual, as it has literally everything in DCS in an innmense Level of Detail.

1) The Deka youtube videos with the lady commentator are awesome. Indeed, manual could be huge, but still missing to complete it, along with training missions and a working campaign.

2) Either like the M2KC, an option to skip alignment or where coordinates and elevation are pre-set. I find this part of the startup irritating to say the least, and if it is like this on RL even on home base it is a waste of time. Ill try the suggested ground crew method, that could be a solution. Minor annoyance though, the aircraft indeed feels very complete.

3) Yes, shortcuts. Changing from flares to chaff take forever on VR, for example, precious time especially when you have so little CMs to spare.

I do agree that this module is in a good stage, it is completely functional. A decent campaign would go a long way to wrap it up.

1) The Deka youtube videos with the lady commentator are awesome. Indeed, manual could be huge, but still missing to complete it, along with training missions and a working campaign.

 

2) Either like the M2KC, an option to skip alignment or where coordinates and elevation are pre-set. I find this part of the startup irritating to say the least, and if it is like this on RL even on home base it is a waste of time. Ill try the suggested ground crew method, that could be a solution. Minor annoyance though, the aircraft indeed feels very complete.

 

3) Yes, shortcuts. Changing from flares to chaff take forever on VR, for example, precious time especially when you have so little CMs to spare.

 

I do agree that this module is in a good stage, it is completely functional. A decent campaign would go a long way to wrap it up.

I use the ground crew to input the starting coords all the time, it works great

Yeah radar modelling is arcadish at the moment but they have acknowledged it and stated they are working to bring it closer to reality

Yeah radar modelling is arcadish at the moment but they have acknowledged it and stated they are working to bring it closer to reality

what do u mean by arcadish can u explain pls ( really i dont understand )

what do u mean by arcadish can u explain pls ( really i dont understand )

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4406262&postcount=29

i hope for more skins and detailed pilot model like shoulder patches and rank etc.

major parts:

• manual
  
• texture
  
• more skins
  

slaved to ED progress:

• ag radar
  
• new sd10 missile scheme *
  
• new cm802akg missile scheme (using SLAM one) *
  

* schemes not ready or stable, so ED suggested not to use them at this moment

Any information on minor things that are missing?

I noticed a VIP bombing mode (not selectable), will more weapon delivery modes be added in the future?

Are there any MFD pages that are missing and what are their functions?

major parts:

• manual
  
• texture
  
• more skins
  

 

slaved to ED progress:

• ag radar
  
• new sd10 missile scheme *
  
• new cm802akg missile scheme (using SLAM one) *
  

* schemes not ready or stable, so ED suggested not to use them at this moment

Internal cockpit engine sounds please, Thanks.

Also, is through canopy ejection still planned ?

Internal cockpit engine sounds please, Thanks.

They’re already there? Or do you want an option for them to be louder?

They’re already there? Or do you want an option for them to be louder?

Not sure we speak about the same thing.

It's the RD93 sound (In-cockpit) that is not that good.

There is a strange irritating looping sound (same as the DCS Mirage 2000).

I just looked at the last video of Wags (DCS: Syria - Bekaa Valley), and the in-cockpit sound of the F-18's engine, seems very good.

I fly from time to time the Mig29 and the In-cockpit sound of the RD33 is great too.

It would great if we can have the same sound quality with the JF-17.

Not sure we speak about the same thing.

It's the RD93 sound (In-cockpit) that is not that good.

There is a strange irritating looping sound (same as the DCS Mirage 2000).

I just looked at the last video of Wags (DCS: Syria - Bekaa Valley), and the in-cockpit sound of the F-18's engine, seems very good.

I fly from time to time the Mig29 and the In-cockpit sound of the RD33 is great too.

 

It would great if we can have the same sound quality with the JF-17.

Looping? Maybe it’s ECS, it was made louder. You can try turning it off and seeing if that’s the cause of the looping sound. I hear engine perfectly fine

.. You can try turning it off and seeing if that’s the cause of the looping sound...

Ok will try that, thx AeriaGloria

The ground crew parking coord update works wonderfully. Thanks!

major parts:

• manual
  
• texture
  
• more skins
  

 

slaved to ED progress:

• ag radar
  
• new sd10 missile scheme *
  
• new cm802akg missile scheme (using SLAM one) *
  

* schemes not ready or stable, so ED suggested not to use them at this moment

Hi Uboat, How much time for SD-10 scheme?

major parts:

• manual
  
• texture
  
• more skins
  

 

slaved to ED progress:

• ag radar
  
• new sd10 missile scheme *
  
• new cm802akg missile scheme (using SLAM one) *
  

* schemes not ready or stable, so ED suggested not to use them at this moment

Thank you for sharing some of your plans. Much appreciated. I hope texture improvements also include adding more detail to cockpit. Is BRM1 also not slaved to ED progress at the moment?

I have picked this aircraft back up again. Really entertaining doing strike missions again. Currently, it has replaced Viggen's role for me when doing percision strikes.

ahhh, forgot brm1, that slaved to APKWS scheme, don't know when ED will make it

Is a 3D cockpit pilot model planned? Same for the through canopy ejection and the ejected pilot model not being the stock F15 one?

Are the caution/warning audio sounds final? EN1 or EN2 surely can't be what the real jet has, can it?