1.2.4 bug reports

The Black Shark 2 Deployment campaign seems bugged in a number of missions.

In mission #3 where one approaches the insurgent fortifications, there is no exchange of fire going on between the units as described by the friendlies.

Mission number 4# is now impossible to fly, as small arms fire prevents taking off due to too much damage. A workaround from the BS2 forums has fixed this for now. Also, no illumination flares are dropped by Su-25s as in this report: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=84323 ... though I don't know that this is a standard event.

No telling what other missions are bugged as I haven't been through them. Though one can assume that certain variables that have changed with the last patches cause certain campaign missions to play out differently.

EDIT: No illumination flares dropped by the Su-34 in mission #5 "Night Hunt" although this should be an integral part of the mission.

Please see this thread on the helicopter damage models and the attached tracks:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=107140

Helicopters are still unrealistically difficult to take down.

yes there is a big problem with SEAD and AI.

 

AI are not efficient against sa10 with agm-88. most of time SA10 engage the sead and sead pack will jettison their missile to engage defensive move...stupid. Even if they fire the AGM, the missile is not able to destroy the radar of the SA10 group in one shoot !!!! Fix this please !!!

 

So the mission 5 and 6 of the F15 campaign are impossible to complete...very sad.

Agree, 3 of my missions now are crap unless this is fixed. Tried FA-18 and even SU-25T with SEAD packages and exactly what you described above is happening.

In fact here is the real way it works in the SU-27:

"Indication of the type of target is flashing a green label on the scale types. Indication of the main threat of flashing is given by yellow label on the type label.

Indication of the dynamics of rapprochement with the radar is flashing labels on the scale gradations of power. The closer the plane will fly to the radar, the greater the number of lines illuminated simultaneously (tags growing anti-clockwise).

Indication of the dynamics of convergence of aircrafts' attacking missiles are flashing moving tags gradation of power. Label of rocket moves clockwise (alternately blink on and off label grading capacity). The startingof the label corresponds to the calculated “missile launch” signal given by the rocket.

Indication of the engagement are the main means of attacking one of the flashing marks on the scale gradations of power."

This is extracted from the joined ducument, first part is orgininal russian flight manual, and second part is a partial translation.

SPO Russian translated.pdf

Since I see that staff/testers are not answering the single posts, then I presume this is an aggregate thread for all of us made to make their job easier. So, this is what I have to report... SUM UP:

1. Su25T HUD is displaced in a manner that when you put your target designator far-left-bottom or far-right-bottom it's invisible. Alpha chanells displaced probably.

2. In Su25T when you turn on your TV device, and your Laser Designator - when you turn off the TV device, Laser Designator gets reset. That was never like that, and since these are two independent devices - I report it as a bug.

3. Since I finally found a person, a real life pilot, to confirm this logical idea that I had, I will make a following request:

In real life - engaging your ECM will jam your own radar and electronic devices that are subject to the ECM frequencies. It will also jam your wingman if he is in the efective field of ECM operation. So, if you want to jam and your wingman to engage - he must take appropriate combat position so that your ECM does not affect his systems.

But - that will make sense to implement only if you make the effects of ECM a bit more realistic, starting from how it's displayed on HUD up to the point that the planes in the effective range (longitudinal and directional and all relevant aspects) are affected in a manner that they can not succesfully engage enemy using electronic devices that may be subject to the ECM frequencies.

So, sum up:

1. ECM must jam all those in effective range

2. ECM denies you from using your own equipment that is influenced by ECM

3. ECM graphical display on HUD and MFDs must be fixed at last so that it does not show clearly the source (bearing) from where ECM is emmited. As it is - ECM has the use of showing the direction where your enemy is - thus obliterating the meaning of ECM.

4. Fix the autoscrolling on the multiplayer server list. You've done a good job in FC2 - just repeat the good job :) I am sick and tired of game changing my selection because it scrolled. At least make it so that when it adds newly discovered servers - it does not mess up your selection on the list.

5. Occasionaly, in-game messages that are displayed in top-left corner get bugged for unknown reason and dont dissapear when should. It comes to the point that sometimes it uses up to half of the screen or more. Occasionally it happens that kill messages or chat messages stay for too long. Simple solution: add the "clear on-screen messages/history" command via code to be used from console.

6. Su25T and all other planes functionality issue: It is about time to start work on adding the emergency release/lock of the landing gear command when your hydraulic oil is spilled. Most of the planes have that. In some (like Su25T) you even have the pull-knob made that does that. So: If Hydro damaged - use emergency mechanical gear drop/lock, then game checks if it is stuck (by means of being hit or struck - that is modelled at least for Su25T), if it is not - landing gear is deployed by means of physics affected by mechanical solutions implemented in the landing gear and the gravity.

Thank you.

"3. ECM graphical display on HUD and MFDs must be fixed at last so that it does not show clearly the source (bearing) from where ECM is emmited. As it is - ECM has the use of showing the direction where your enemy is - thus obliterating the meaning of ECM."

Depends on the type of jamming. Basic Noise jamming (what I think we have in DCS) is typically displayed as "jamming strobes" or strobes along the emitter azimuth and also in elevation. In the case of multiple strobes manual gain reduction (if available) will easily isolate the main jamming strobe which lies on the emitter azimuth.

So emitter bearing in both azimuth and elevation is known and displayed. Most fire control radars can easily lock on to the jamming strobe. Angle information is available. In this case the TD box will lie over the emitter. What is not available until burn through is range. Range can be determined by Angle ranging ... basically trigonometry its pretty rough but better than nothing and a common technique.

IMO basic Noise jamming is pretty well represented in DCS.

So, sum up:

1. ECM must jam all those in effective range

2. ECM denies you from using your own equipment that is influenced by ECM

3. ECM graphical display on HUD and MFDs must be fixed at last so that it does not show clearly the source (bearing) from where ECM is emmited. As it is - ECM has the use of showing the direction where your enemy is - thus obliterating the meaning of ECM.

Also ECM do not disabling wingmans radar. ECM can only make that ur wingman will have problems with determinating range to your aircraft by his radar.

ECM do not preventing anyone from "locking on" you in azimuth and elevation. It only causing that radar cannot determinate range or speed of jamming aircraft till it is burn trought range.

Burn trought range is determinated by power of jammer and power of radar. Also frequency can be important.

If enemy is burning trought your jammer it can determinate range and speed of your aircraft and do not have any problems with engaging you. Using jammer when enemy is burning trought jammer is pointless.

ECM graphical display on HUD and MFDs must be fixed at last so that it does not show clearly the source (bearing) from where ECM is emmited

In reality radars can determinate bearing of jamming aircraft even without burning trought.

Enemy (both planes and more advanced SAMs with active or semi active radar guidance) can even launch missile that homing on your jammer. Its called HOJ (Home ON Jam).

Here you have very realistic SAM simulator: https://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/ You can learn about different aspects of jamming using this simulator.

Sorbytsia (Станция активных помех Л005-С. Активный ретранслятор.) is an active jammer. One of it's abilities is to decoy and give false targets to radars that are searching for it.

That is not what you're all talking about. And I have only one more thing to say that will crush your theory of ECM being modeled properly in DCS:

You really believe that all those different jamming devices have the same effect? And that they all work and manifest the same way - as it is set in sim?

"IMO basic Noise jamming is pretty well represented in DCS." - yeah, but it is set to devices that do some other things. I think you will agree that is unrealistic.

For those who are willing to go and explore - they will search and find out.

After that, find someone to make you a translation of this. Not a machine, but a person.

Станция активных помех Л005-С.

Активный ретранслятор.

Назначение:Станция предназначена для защиты самолетов семейства СУ-27.

ТТД:

Обеспечивает одновременную постановку помех в переднюю и заднюю полусферы.

Работает в 3 см. диапазоне волн.

Энергетический потенциал 1000Вт.

Против 2-х импульсных или квазинепрерывных РЭС, и 10 непрерывных РЭС.

Помеховое воздействие:

Нарушение работы каналов АСД, АСС и АСН.

АСД:

Высокочастотный шум (ВЧШ)

АСС

.ДШ.

АСН

.ПЧС.

.Ложных целей по боковым лепесткам.

Принцип действия приемного устройства:

Приемное устройство – многоканальный супергетеродинный приемник. Решает следующие задачи:

1. Поиск по частоте и прием сигналов РЭС в рабочем секторе изделия.

2. Определяет направление на РЭС.

3. Вид излучения

4. Выбор наиболее опасного РЭС в данной обстановке

5. Подключение выбранного для прм. и прд. лучей прм. и прд. антенны ко входу прм. и выходу прд. сооответственно

Приемная антенна – многолучевая с игольчатой ДНА. Представляет собой полусферу на которой размещен 31 рабочий облучатель и 4 компенсационных.

Впереди облучателей находится диэлектрическая линза. Ширина парциального луча – 11,5 град.

Разветвитель-переключатель предназначен для параллельной передачи принимаемых сигналов на все входы 37 канального смесителя и выбора формирования помех луча по входу. Смеситель + Гетеродин предназначены для

получения сигналов промежуточной частоты. Временной различитель предназначен для повышения разрешающей способности станции по направлению и блокирования сигналов, принимаемых по боковым лепесткам ДНА. Определитель вида излучения предназначен для селекции сигналов всех видов излучения,

принимаемых по рабочим каналам. Определитель вырабатывает сигналы на разветвитель-переключатель и устройство управления лучами для коммутации выбранных каналов.

Канал ретрансляции

Предназначен для формирования помеховых сигналов типа ДШ и ЛЦ БЛ. Помеха ДШ вырабатывается путем частотной модуляции ретранслированного сигнала узкополосным доплеровским шумом. Ширина спектра помехи 5КГц.

Система определения и воспроизведения частоты

Решаемые задачи:

- замена принимаемых импульсных и квазинепрерывных сигналов непрерывным сигналом той же несущей частоты.

- формирование сигналов, сопряженных по спектру с сигналами облучающих РЭС.

Эти задачи решаются на промежуточной частоте 38-62Мгц. Понижение частоты входных сигналов производится с помощью смесителя и гетеродина. На выходе гетеродина вырабатывается сигнал разностной частоты fпр = fис – fг. Для получения заданного значения fпр производится поиск по частоте гетеродина.

Поиск по частоте производиться в два этапа: грубый (шаг 200 МГц) и точный (шаг 2-3 МГц). Признаком окончания грубого поиска является равенство fпр’=38-240 МГц, признаком окончания точного поиска fпр’=38-62 МГц. С окончанием поиска гетеродин начинает работать на фиксированной частоте.

Формирователь сигналов. Схема преобразования входных импульсных сигналов в непрерывные представляет собой фазовой автоподстройки. В измерителе мгновенной разности фаз с тактом Uтз определяется мгновенная разность фаз в виде двоичного кода. Значение разности фаз запоминается в ЗУ и считываются

преобразователем «вход-напряжение», входными сигналами которого осуществляется фазовая модуляция. В результате импульсный сигнал «превращается» в непрерывный. Измерение мгновенной разности фаз

прекращается при пропадании входного импульса, но считывание из ЗУ продолжается и в паузах между ними, так достигается непрерывность фазовой автоподстройки – ФАП. В смесителе непрерывный сигнал восстанавливается до высокой частоты uвс.

Передающее устройство UВЧШ, помеха типа высокочастотный шум;

UПЧС, прицельная по частоте сканирования;

U0, огибающая потока входных сигналов облучающих РЭС.

ВЧШ вырабатывается путем амплитудной модуляции сигнала высокой частоты с шириной спектра 1,5МГц. Негативная модуляция снижает вероятность наведения на самолет ракет , наводящихся на источник излучения.

ПЧС вырабатывается в результате негативной модуляции сигналов РЭС с коническим сканированием антенного луча. Помеховые сигналы в ПРД усиливаются по мощности в усилителе мощности до 100Вт. Устройство

управления лучами подключает вход усилителя мощности к излучателю передающей антенны с номером, совпадающим с номером канала приемного устройства, по которому принимаются сигналы РЭС подлежащие подавлению. В ПРД антенне отсутствуют компенсационные облучатели.

Stop being so childish and go out, search for facts instead of trying to be friendly with ED.

They are perfectly aware of the fact that this is not realistic at all. Puting a realistic effect of a device "A" as a realistic effect of some other device "B" is not realism.

I am tired of talking to people that stuck their heads in the sand and keep saying the same all over again.

"yeah, but it is set to devices that do some other things. I think you will agree that is unrealistic."

Yes but the point is the only ECM that is modelled in DCS is Noise Jamming. It would be great to have all the other myriad types of jamming (like Range gate pull off, swept spot, Deception, False target generation etc) available but we dont. What we do have (Noise jamming) is done pretty well and the presentation we see is in fact very representative of basic noise jamming ... i.e jamming strobes on the emitter azimuth.

"Stop being so childish and go out, search for facts instead of trying to be friendly with ED"

Well I have done a bit of Real life practice/research I have chased sufficient jamming targets (using the whole gambit of jamming methods) using both the Cyrano IIB and APG65 ... to know what a noise jammer (and the other types of ECM) look like :)

Same issue here AI SEAD are not going after the Dog Ear Radar even when attack unit is used.

Have the devs acknowledged the issues with SEAD as a yet (as of yesterday's update 5/27) ? These issues make it pretty much impossible to complete FC3-F15 Mission 5.

So far I have seen 2 issues, SEAD flights are often times not engaging the S300 until they are ~10nm, sometimes even closer. I would expect them to engage long before this.

Second, I have see it take 3 AGM-88s just to bring one of the S300 radars to less than 30% health. Can someone confirm if this is working as designed ? I would have expected a single AGM-88 to take out a radar.

I have reported the damage model on SAM Radars is too low when hit by an ARM. I am working with the coder on this issue.

I have reported the damage model on SAM Radars is too low when hit by an ARM. I am working with the coder on this issue.

Thanks Dusty.

Regarding the engagement range. I think this should be given some attention as well. I've done some testing the AI are waiting far too long to start firing. I'm not sure if they are unable to detect the SAM site until very close but it usually ends badly.

Can you clarify what should be a reasonable engagement range for AI SEAD groups targeting an SA10 site ?

I'll do some testing and reporting back to the coder on this issue. 10 miles is way too late unless it is not being engaged. Lets see if we can get a baseline and see what the Dev has to say. I can't tell you what they tell me but know that it is getting attention and being worked on.

I just conducted a test with 4 F16BLK52's, against a complete SA-10 site in 1.2.4 12913. The SA-10 engaged the first flight of two (the second flight goes back to the first detection circle), at 38 miles with 3 missiles. The F-16's engaged the SA-10 site at 36 miles with 2 AGM-88's. The first flight of two that engaged was eventually shot down due to them trying to press the attack to use guns as I gave them no further missiles besides air to air missiles (issue that has been reported). So everything seems to be just fine. The 2 HARMs damaged their respective targets but did not destroy them (issue that has been reported and being worked on).

So the only thing to report to the DEV (which they have already been reported) is the damage model of the Radars and the F-16's trying to press a guns attack when out of ARM's or any other Air to Ground munitions.

As the 1.2.4 12913 update should be the last one before 1.2.5, please don't forget to deal with the most annoying bug (to me) : CCRP on FC3 russian aircrafts.

This bug is supposed to be reported and understood by the Dev team but in case of ... I fully detailed it in the FC3 bug Report section :

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1773125&postcount=1218

I just conducted a test with 4 F16BLK52's, against a complete SA-10 site in 1.2.4 12913. The SA-10 engaged the first flight of two (the second flight goes back to the first detection circle), at 38 miles with 3 missiles. The F-16's engaged the SA-10 site at 36 miles with 2 AGM-88's. The first flight of two that engaged was eventually shot down due to them trying to press the attack to use guns as I gave them no further missiles besides air to air missiles (issue that has been reported). So everything seems to be just fine. The 2 HARMs damaged their respective targets but did not destroy them (issue that has been reported and being worked on).

 

So the only thing to report to the DEV (which they have already been reported) is the damage model of the Radars and the F-16's trying to press a guns attack when out of ARM's or any other Air to Ground munitions.

Ok. I will need to have a look at my mission setup to see if something was off with my testing. Thanks for looking into this!

Ok. I will need to have a look at my mission setup to see if something was off with my testing. Thanks for looking into this!

It's what I do ;)

As the 1.2.4 12913 update should be the last one before 1.2.5, please don't forget to deal with the most annoying bug (to me) : CCRP on FC3 russian aircrafts.

This bug is supposed to be reported and understood by the Dev team but in case of ... I fully detailed it in the FC3 bug Report section :

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1773125&postcount=1218

+1 Fouga good testing.

Based on your post I re visited CCRP in all the Russian aircraft. The SU27 is clearly the worst affected. When you press the pickle button in the SU27 to designate the target The diamond does indeed drop way short of the Pipper designation point. CCRP then works but the bombs impact the false low designation point. i.e. the diamond which is always grossly short of the target. its easy to test. Just Press and hold the pickle button with the pipper on a specific target. Then push the nose down to see where the diamond sits .... well below the desired target. Its repeatable on every CCRP pass.

The MIG29 does the same but the designated point (diamond) does not drop quite so short as it does in the MIG29. Bomb impacts are still short at where the diamond ends up.

The SU25 is a little harder to test as you don't get the diamond on designation, however weapon impacts in CCRP seem to be ok.

The SU25T is similar to the MIG29. The diamond drops about 150-200m short of the designated point. below the designated. Weapon impacts then occurring at this point.

I tested all types using FAB500.

Like you Fouga I think this is a serious bug that needs addressing. Posated in the FC3 bug thread as well.

"yeah, but it is set to devices that do some other things. I think you will agree that is unrealistic."

 

Yes but the point is the only ECM that is modelled in DCS is Noise Jamming. It would be great to have all the other myriad types of jamming (like Range gate pull off, swept spot, Deception, False target generation etc) available but we dont. What we do have (Noise jamming) is done pretty well and the presentation we see is in fact very representative of basic noise jamming ... i.e jamming strobes on the emitter azimuth.

 

"Stop being so childish and go out, search for facts instead of trying to be friendly with ED"

Well I have done a bit of Real life practice/research I have chased sufficient jamming targets (using the whole gambit of jamming methods) using both the Cyrano IIB and APG65 ... to know what a noise jammer (and the other types of ECM) look like :)

And yet you just confirmed (regarding your last sentence) that they've modeled all devices to work under one rule. Which is unrealistic.

It's well modeled / noise jamming? Good. Now "well model" jamming for other devices. This is A SIMULATOR, so don't give me " It would be great to have all the other myriad types of jamming (like Range gate pull off, swept spot, Deception, False target generation etc) available but we dont." WE DON'T because they choose to act as if they did a good job but in fact they did not and they ignore communities yields to fix it. There is enough data out there to make ECM better.

With the existing logic - it would be perfectly fine to fit any capability onto any device. THat is not a simulator.

Anyway I said I won't argue about ECM anymore because they don't give a twat to use bunch of data available to make it CLOSER to realistic. They just don't care. This is still a game. I hope it will grow into a simulator one day.

P-51 (Fuel booster pump) there is still no sound? Or is this supposed to be?

So the only thing to report to the DEV (which they have already been reported) is the damage model of the Radars and the F-16's trying to press a guns attack when out of ARM's or any other Air to Ground munitions.

Just wanted to share a workaround that I will be using until the damage model is corrected. I created triggers for the SA10 radars that the AI was struggling with during SEAD (example FC3 Mission 5 and 6). The trigger is, when unit damaged, explode unit. Pretty simple. I did this for each of the radars in the FC3 campaign that were key to mission completion.

I have 1.2.4 version of world

I have A10C stand a lone

I have A10C incorporated within DCS World.

My keyboard command have been duplicated in the keyboard column and the Ch Controller column...both keyboard commands and axis commands.

The Axis commands are duplicated within the "CH Controller column.

I.E. Rudder...has JOY RX + Joy RX and is red.

I tried to hit the clear button for the CH Controller column that has all the duplicated key commands, but they re-populate when I restart and now the third CH Controller Column has missing axis inputs and I cannot add any new commands.

What do you do.

How do you fix this.

Should I delete DCS World and re-download.

Have you tried deleting the A-10's input folder found in C:\Users\UserName\Saved Games\DCS\Config\Input folder

Doing so will force it to rewrite the input folder and all the commands next you load it up.

After playing the A-10C Tutorial "HOTAS Fundamentals", I then crashed into the ground and was unable to use Escape to exit out. All I could do was use F8 and F10 to view units/map and I had to Alt-Tab out and kill DCS.

Black Shark 2 problems

This is what I've noticed playing the Black Shark 2 module

My machine is a o/c'd i7 920 with 5850 gfx.

Frame rate is much worse for me than 1.2.3. I'm STILL having to delete the file "smokecloud.pfx" in the bazar/effects/PFX foder otherwise the sim is a slide show for me with an avg frame rate of 10 in a mission sometimes going down to 2 or 3 fps when flying low. This bug has been around for a very long time now and there are quite a few people who have this problem.

I can't get a lock when lasing a target more than 5kms under any circumstances. 4.9kms is fine.

When flying mission 1.4 in the Georgian Oil Campaign (haven't tried others) and having a wingman recon I do not receive any datalink targets when he finds them (I've tried multiple times in multiple situations). If I setup a test mission I do receive them OK.