I’ve reported other targeting pods and been told it’s a game engine limitation each time.
If only they had the money to make a better game engine :)
1 Like
Is there any variant with APG-68 that can even carry 8 AMRAAMs?
The wording of the whole passage makes me think it’s talking about launching them without datalink updates … (Like Tornado F3 did initially, before they added the datalink update capability later on)
When used with the APG-68 fire control radar, the AMRAAM can launch up to eight all-weather, all-aspect
radar-guided missiles beyond visual range; the missiles then become autonomous That is,
the aircraft radar acquires potential targets, tracks them, and highlights them for the pilot.
If the pilot decides to launch a missile at a target, the system feeds initial reference data on
the target and the launch vehicle into a computer on the missile. Following launch, the computer guides the missile to a midpoint where a target seeker on the missile becomes
active and continues to guide the missile to the target. Several missiles launched by the
aircraft can do this simultaneously. In the meantime, the pilot is free to maneuver.
Then I guess the number should be the maximum targets that APG-68 can track in TWS, which is 10.LOL
But I really can’t think of any aircraft with both APG-68 and 8*AMRAAMs (obviously not F-16)
There can be other limitations e.g. how many missiles the FCS can address on the data bus etc
But the text very explicitly talks about how the missile becomes autonomous after launch and flies to seeker range using the data that was loaded into its computer before launch and then actives its seeker for the terminal phase; And how the pilot is free to maneuver after launch; With no mention of mid course updates …
is the dutch 13.0 f16 good? or do i go for the 13.7 one? I’m very excited to fly the f16, it looks like a formidable jet
Don’t want to crash the party, but I think MLU tapes can’t be used for bug reporting as they are still export restricted.
I sent the covers to a Senior Tech Mod and he said they are good to use.
1 Like
Well, damn. I had to sit there for like 2+ years, knowing the manuals are just a few clicks away to fix all the problems, like the Belgian F-16 not having IR slaving and radar going up to 40NM in HMS, but was told no, lol.
Also, 12 days turn around on the Maverick sights is nuts.
Optics changes that get accepted tend to go through to live fairly quickly. It’s a fairly simple and bug-free thing for them to mess with, it seems.
so can someone answer my question please ;_;
Both are pretty good options, I’d recommend playing the 13.0 one to grind the 13.7 one so you get a feel for the F-16
friends recommend i skip the 13.0 one because its overtiered and IR missiles at that BR are not enough for a novice like me, are they correct?
Well, can’t you report it now if you want to?
Unfortunately yes, they’re correct. thanks to the current brs, there’s no reason to play it when there’s the F-4F ICE and F3 late at the same br with better missiles. Tho this doesn’t mean it can’t be fun, Just means you gotta be more aggressive and smarter with your plays. Still would recommend giving it a shot. For all you know you could enjoy it
Keep in mind that I’m not really worried about US laws.
All I care about is whether those documents are acceptable for Gaijin or not …
If you live/travel in the US or somewhere that has extradition treaty with the US, you want to be extra careful so that you don’t end up in prison like that DCS dev.
Because I don’t think the courts will accept “Senior Tech Mod said it’s OK” as an answer …
2 Likes
Well, sudo did most of it already.
F-16A MLU & F-16AM misalignment of AGM-65 HUD Reticle and AGM-65 missing HUD symbology and radar slaving:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/BGlSWNjMcd6A
1 Like