I used this source to improve the Eurofighter’s MFD quality about 11 months ago, but they basically dismissed me. Same with the stretched HUD around 5 months ago.
Hope they listen to you.
MFD’s (The useful ones): Community Bug Reporting System
Stretched HUD: Community Bug Reporting System
Please provide 5 OEM manuals proving that the HUD is not supposed to be stretched.
“Forwarded as a suggestion.”
Clear marketing lie.
If I’m being entirely honest the US one is annoying as hell to listen to and I use soundmods that disable it specifically because I just cannot bear it while focusing on an engagement. the correct VWS is pretty high on my wishlist.
I’m sure they’re aware of the problem. What surprises me, and makes me doubt their efficiency, is that it’s been almost 6 months like this and they don’t seem to care, or it’s simply not a priority for them. And they haven’t said anything about the problem, like it doesn’t even exist, and that’s a shame at this point.
And Rafale & Eurofighter were both released in tandem.
Rafale got UV tint on DAY 1
Eurofighter still has no UV tint, 1 YEAR & ongoing
because there is already an accepted report on that
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/c2Z40ouQ7Fzb
We’ve decided to buff the Rafale instead
Yeah, I get that they didn’t want to improve the MFDs because that’s starting from scratch and isn’t easy, but they ended up doing it and that’s appreciated it looks gorgeous. But fixing the HUD, man, it’s as simple as putting it back like it was, unless they’ve got a complete mess there. The HUD has nothing to do with the MFDs, unless the code somehow links them in a way that makes it hard to fix.
I have been waiting for almost 6 months, I can wait longer until it is done properly and fixed.
Hear me out, NIMROD AEW.3 with 2 enlarged higher power ECRS MK.2’s….
Can anybody tell me why german eurofighter gets 180x180 however british and italian get 200x180?
200x200 (the 180 is a bug)
Basically Hensoldt advertises the ECRS Mk.1 (on German EF) as ±90 while Leonardo advertises the ECRS Mk.2 (on the other two) as ±100.
They have the exact same repositioner iirc, but unfortunately that’s what the sources say.
They don’t, Mk2 uses a different one, Mk 0 (which has ±100 FoR) and Mk 1 (which has ±90 FoR) on the other hand do have the same repositioner.
But not the same antenna. As thats the only component that it appears Hensoldt swapped on the Mk.0
then why was this report for ground NCTR accepted as a general report when it only offers sources for the Mk.1?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/p2M4QWoOOnG2
If anyone has an idea how to call the part I am open for Ideas…
Uh… this is ECRS Mk.2, is this also a known bug?
Yes that’s established, but the lock/acquisition patterns (all of them!) are now 180x180