One of the best modules

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?

You can do this test:

- place a target in front of you, same altitude (a friendly target is less dangerous :D). B-52 is good because you will detect at max range (head on = 80Nm).

- place your radar cursor at target range.

- move elevation up/ down and watch min/ max altitude values next to cursor (x1000ft).

- you will see that even if the contact is within altitude coverage, the detection is quickly lost.

Now if you look on the left of VTB there is a vertical scan.

- mark every 10° and a bigger one at 30°

There is a moving - which is indicating which line is currently being scanned, and the line number (for instance 4) which indicates the center if scan zone setting.

You will notice that as soon as you adjust elevation, the moving - moves up/ down at twice the rate of line number.

If you set 4 on +10°, the - will be sweeping around +20°, +30° will scan at +60°.

So it isn’t a random bug. It’s a coding mistake which has been there for months, I did report to Elwood, it is still not corrected (or maybe if update since yesterday, I didn’t check update today).

OK I'll have a check, and also check if the single number has the problem as well (I use the Z mode so I have center of scan zone not upper and lower numbers).

Anyway if it's exactly twice you should be aple to approximate the maths for small angles. If the target is 6,000 feet above you then you set your height to 3,000 feet more than your altitude.

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...

Hmm I find the AG rockets and guns to be extremely accurate once you are in range. 1.5-2nm is at the extreme end of the range, so yeah they will fall short.

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.

Chuck updated his guide and it looks like the MWS is correct actually, he just hadn't updated it so it showed an older capability. Currently it works very well, saves me all the time.

I should have the updated manual out in the next 2 weeks, hope this will help with some of the problems or things that are perceived to be bugs but aren't :)

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...

I tried last week, it’s accurate.

Just take note that maximum range is when the circle range (decreasing counter clockwise) is at 9 o’clock and below.

The range isn’t the same for AG gun and rocket, but it’s the same principle. :smilewink:

OK I'll have a check, and also check if the single number has the problem as well (I use the Z mode so I have center of scan zone not upper and lower numbers).

 

Anyway if it's exactly twice you should be aple to approximate the maths for small angles. If the target is 6,000 feet above you then you set your height to 3,000 feet more than your altitude.

This is a new bug introduced by Elwood months ago.

It used to work fine, this is a basic function of the radar which is the primary sensor.

Half or twice value bugs shouldn’t be that difficult to correct. :doh:

I have been a long time supporter of the M-2000C, and I had a lot of arguments with Viper.

 

But this time I am heavily frustrated too.

 

The weapon has never been so bugged since early release.

After correcting PCA logic for AG, and it did work well, it has been broken again for month without any concern to fix it.

The radar is heavily bugged and you would be better with any FC3 module.

And this is not about realism, no need to be type rated to see that radar elevation control is bugged or that radar bore sight and vertical scan are offset to the right side.

 

Break something then work on something else. Great pattern :mad:

Now you know on what they are working:

https://www.facebook.com/RazbamSims/posts/2703636846389603

Great job, as they just have posted that they are not touching anything other then the existing aircrafts until they are finished. 10 days ago.

As you know, their only system coders are Zeus and Elwood (Team 1). Already with 3 bugged and unfinished modules.

Well done Razbam, well done. One lie and empty promise hunts down the next.

So everyone can build his own opinion about that company.

Oh, yeah, and they also want to release the F-15E and Mig-23 this year.

Now you know on what they are working:

https://www.facebook.com/RazbamSims/posts/2703636846389603

 

Great job, as they just have posted that they are not touching anything other then the existing aircrafts until they are finished. 10 days ago.

As you know, their only system coders are Zeus and Elwood (Team 1). Already with 3 bugged and unfinished modules.

Well done Razbam, well done. One lie and empty promise hunts down the next.

So everyone can build his own opinion about that company.

 

Oh, yeah, and they also want to release the F-15E and Mig-23 this year.

That quote actually says something different from what you say. It specifically says the "coding", and then specifically says 2 are hunting bugs and the other is tweaking FM's. Presume CptSmiley is still the FM guy. The artists/modellers dance across projects too as you might expect, given they've done the art/model for the Harrier and Mirage, would you have them unemployed and sit still?

Plus you might infer from the BO 105 picture that there is something of an agreement coming out with the team that were doing this on their own, making a possibility of another "team" to arrive. The concept of holding Razbam to exactly not touching anything across all people for the duration of harrier and Mirage fixes is not achievable or sensible, given the multi discipline requirement of skills to produce one module needing more than one skill/person. That is only common sense and whilst you have been accurate and helpful towards helping out with bugs and so on, it would be better to stick to what they said than incorrectly cite them with reference.

... despite Decoy not being able to count to five in the post! ;)

Normally you are more accurate, sir!

@Viper Could you copy and post the facebook Posting here? I ain't a facebook person :)

Cleaned this thread, please keep on topic and stop hijacking threads

Thank you