All Activity

It is my belief that there is no Baro ranging in the Mig29A. All you have is laser and radalt. Going through the available ( limited) documentation IRL there is no way to input target elevation ( preflight) into the INS/WCS so the system has no knowledge of target altitude. (Happy to be corrected here). The displayed solution is first bomb of the stick not the centre. So to centre the stick you need to pickle short... easy in CCIP ... dont know how you would achieve that in a CCRP release.

умничай по спокойней ЕД сейчас сделало так что включив РЛС на излучение запирается СПО с ППС пока не переключишь переключатель в квази-режим, и тогда СПО отпирается и не реагирует ни как на включение РЛС скажем для замера дальности ! Считаю что Л006Л запирается согласно алгоритма запирания/отпирания приемника самой Н019 на момент импульса, естественно должна быть разовая команда ,так как это быстрее всего "есть" или "нет" характеристики сигнала не знаю 100 кГц или 500 кГц при 0.1 В или 400 В ... ЗЫ делать не рабочей СПО со все полусферы ППС (а это 180 градусов) на все время работы своей БРЛС ,то есть на весь воздушный бой это полная глупость ! ! !

A software-only workaround is possible using vjoy+joystick gremlin. Vjoy can be used to create a new virtual device that will show up in DCS. Joystick gremlin can do a lot of stuff, including remapping your ejection handle pull to "3 pushes of button 1 on the virtual device". Then in DCS map "virtual device button 1" to the ejection control

This is the one startup element which requires me to use the mouse, which is very annoying. Everything else is bound in my cockpit.

Set QNH for ground atttck presumably, otherwise there would be no need for setting a target point elevation. This also assumes that, by design, you must ensure the target is co-located as closely as possible with your current Waypoint.

Sorry, missed that part. [emoji1] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Thank you for the response. In the track, I demonstrate both L&S automated interrogation, AUTO INT automated interrogation, and manual interrogation. The result is the same in all three cases: friendlies do not reliably respond positively to F/F interrogation. As regards Link 16, yes it is on (you can take control during track play to confirm), although I suspect IFF should be able to operate independently from Link 16. Or am I wrong?

I took a closer look ... here're suggestions for Germany and the UK, just WW2. I went over all the bombs, rockets and checked the data. WW2-US-ordnance will follow. I tested all the stuff and "my" values in single-player DCS-test-missions. Using your script in server-missions for me never resulted in differences to single-player. So hopefully testing in SP is good enough. The values for the explosives are copied from the sources and show kg of the original explosive fillers. There was no conversion into any kind of "TNT-equivalent". If there's a need to balance blast- and fragmentation-damage via the weight of explosives it's up to you, please. In three cases I did changes myself. The German cluster-bomblets got an explosives-upgrade and the British AP-rocket a small charge, too. There's a remark in the comment. The other rockets need an adaption certainly. Newcomer bomb from Fw-190 A8: ["SC_250_T3_J"] = { explosive = 127 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose Newcomer rocket from Fw-190 D9: ["R4M"] = { explosive = 0.5 }, --Germany, R4M Rakete 4kg Minenkopf, 4 kg rocket, ca. 1kg thin-walled warhead, 0.5 kg explosives, blast Suggestion for the WW2-chapter: ... explTable = { --*** WWII BOMBS *** ["British_GP_250LB_Bomb_Mk1"] = { explosive = 31 }, --UK, general purpose, blast and fragmentation ["British_GP_250LB_Bomb_Mk4"] = { explosive = 31 }, --UK, general purpose, blast and fragmentation ["British_GP_250LB_Bomb_Mk5"] = { explosive = 31 }, --UK, general purpose, blast and fragmentation ["British_GP_500LB_Bomb_Mk1"] = { explosive = 65 }, --UK, general purpose, blast and fragmentation ["British_GP_500LB_Bomb_Mk4"] = { explosive = 65 }, --UK, general purpose, blast and fragmentation ["British_GP_500LB_Bomb_Mk4_Short"] = { explosive = 65 }, --UK, general purpose, blast and fragmentation ["British_GP_500LB_Bomb_Mk5"] = { explosive = 65 }, --UK, general purpose, blast and fragmentation ["British_MC_250LB_Bomb_Mk1"] = { explosive = 51 }, --UK, medium capacity, blast over fragmentation ["British_MC_250LB_Bomb_Mk2"] = { explosive = 51 }, --UK, medium capacity, blast over fragmentation ["British_MC_500LB_Bomb_Mk1_Short"] = { explosive = 102 }, --UK, medium capacity, blast over fragmentation ["British_MC_500LB_Bomb_Mk2"] = { explosive = 102 }, --UK, medium capacity, blast over fragmentation ["British_SAP_250LB_Bomb_Mk5"] = { explosive = 19 }, --UK, semi armour piercing, penetration, fragmentation over blast ["British_SAP_500LB_Bomb_Mk5"] = { explosive = 41 }, --UK, semi armour piercing, penetration, fragmentation over blast ["SC_50"] = { explosive = 25 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose ["ER_4_SC50"] = { explosive = 25 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose, 4 bombs in ER-4-bomb-rack ["SC_250_T1_L2"] = { explosive = 127 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose ["SC_250_T3_J"] = { explosive = 127 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose ["SC_501_SC250"] = { explosive = 127 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose, fits to SC-500-bomb-rack ["Schloss500XIIC1_SC_250_T3_J"] = { explosive = 127 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose, fits to SC-500-bomb-rack ["SC_501_SC500"] = { explosive = 255 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose, fits to SC-500-bomb-rack ["SC_500_L2"] = { explosive = 255 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose, ["SC_500_J"] = { explosive = 255 }, --SC Minenbombe, thin-walled, blast damage, general purpose, ["SD_250_Stg"] = { explosive = 80 }, --SD Splitterbombe, thick-walled, Stg Stahlguss cast steel; penetration capable, fragmentation over blast ["SD_500_A"] = { explosive = 180 }, --SD Splitterbombe, thick-walled; penetration capable, fragmentation over blast --*** WWII CBU *** (moved to cluster) -- ["AB_250_2_SD_2"] = { explosive = 100 }, -- ["AB_250_2_SD_10A"] = { explosive = 100 }, -- ["AB_500_1_SD_10A"] = { explosive = 213 }, --*** WWII ROCKETS *** ["3xM8_ROCKETS_IN_TUBES"] = { explosive = 2 }, --USA, 18 kg 4.5-inch-rocket, ca. 13 kg warhead, 2 kg explosives, fragmentation ["WGr21"] = { explosive = 10 }, --Germany, WGr21 WerferGranate 21 cm, 110 kg rocket, 39 kg warhead, 10 kg explosives, fragmentation and blast ["R4M"] = { explosive = 0.5 }, --Germany, R4M Rakete 4kg Minenkopf, 4 kg rocket, ca. 1kg thin-walled warhead, 0.5 kg explosives, blast ["British_AP_25LBNo1_3INCHNo1"] = { explosive = 1 }, --UK, RP-3, 29 kg rocket, AP-1 11 kg steel penetration warhead, no explosives, kinetic, original no explosive ["British_HE_60LBSAPNo2_3INCHNo1"] = { explosive = 6 }, --UK, RP-3, 45 kg rocket, 27 kg SAP HE warhead, 6 kg explosives, blast and fragmentation ["British_HE_60LBFNo1_3INCHNo1"] = { explosive = 2 }, --UK, RP-3, 44 kg rocket, 21 kg fragmentation warhead, 1.5 kg explosives, fragmentation ... --*** CLUSTER BOMBS (CBU) *** ... ["AB_250_2_SD_2"] = { explosive = 0, cluster = true, submunition_count = 144, submunition_explosive = 1, submunition_name = "SD-2" }, --WW2 Germany 144 SD-2 fragmentation bomblets, original explosive 0.2 kg ["AB_250_2_SD_10A"] = { explosive = 0, cluster = true, submunition_count = 17, submunition_explosive = 5, submunition_name = "SD-10A" }, --WW2 Germany 17 SD-10A fragmentation bomblets, original explosive 1 kg ["AB_500_1_SD_10A"] = { explosive = 0, cluster = true, submunition_count = 37, submunition_explosive = 5, submunition_name = "SD-10A" }, --WW2 Germany 37 SD-10A fragmentation bomblets, original explosive 1 kg ... --Table for cluster submunitions clusterSubMunTable = { ... ["SD-2"] = { explosive = 1 }, --WW2 German cluster bomblet 0.225 kg explosives; AB_250_2_SD_2=144 bomblets; fragmentation, original explosive 0.2 kg ["SD-10A"] = { explosive = 5 }, --WW2 German cluster bomblet 0.9 kg explosives; AB_500_1_SD_10A=37 bomblets, AB_250_1_SD_10A=17 bomblets; fragmentation, original explosive 1 kg ... Somewhat work in progress for me are the cluster-bombs. First of all: the German-WW2-cluster-bombs are somewhat effective now and useful finally - THANK YOU! I adapted your settings for tests with the German-WW2-cluster and the cold-war BL-755-cluster. All these CBU don't use a rotation of the container to spread the sub-munition. Resulting in a lengthy distribution pattern, 2:1 to 3:1 in real-life. Unless you decide to use different spread pattern for different types of cluster-bombs some "square-"settings might offer a compromise. ... ["cluster_enabled"] = true, ["cluster_base_length"] = 150, --Base forward spread (meters) ["cluster_base_width"] = 150, --Base lateral spread (meters) ["cluster_max_length"] = 300, --Max forward spread (meters) ["cluster_max_width"] = 300, --Max lateral spread (meters) ["cluster_min_length"] = 80, --Min forward spread ["cluster_min_width"] = 80, --Min lateral spread ["cluster_bomblet_reductionmodifier"] = true, --Use equation to reduce number of bomblets (to make it look better) ["cluster_bomblet_damage_modifier"] = 1.3, --Adjustable global modifier for bomblet explosive power ... With that settings your script-produced "cluster-display" is a bit better in line with the (usually) more dense and concentrated cluster-pattern produced by DCS. The DCS-cluster-spread-pattern imho are far from real-world-data, too. It's all we have ... Looks like your script-produced "cluster-display" is lagging behind a bit, usually. The DCS-cluster-centre mostly seems to be in the forward 25 - 33 % of the splash-damage-script. No deviation to the sides and maybe more obvious with smaller cluster bomblets ... any idea why?

That‘s what I meant, yeah.

Here's a simple and cheap solution to make a button input pulse with no software, arduinos, etc. https://forum.dcs.world/topic/299916-guide-simple-cheap-standalone-electronic-solution-for-single-pull-ejection/

And we should set barometric altitude to QFE or QNH for the Mig-29 regarding ground attack?

Does this mean that jamming is currently in testing on dev built? Why else would there be placeholder units in our built? Can you share something about planned scope of the feature? GPS Spoofing AND jamming? Radio comms jamming? Datalink jamming?

The discord link is not working.

Turn down the world volume slider? Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Thanks, Grinnelli mod actually does work for me as well as it turns out. It would be great to have more airshow objects if you have them but I'd rather not use any mods which are not publicly available. Perhaps you could upload them on the user files section for all of us? if not no worries. Thanks anyway

Sorry! Here's one attached.OH58D tailwind.trk

Ah, there you have it. DCS does NOT support curves and changes to saturation with FFB. Well known issue. Cheers! Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Thanks, but which part of the calculation? Just density? Right now it appears only barometric altitude is used in the slant range calculation, not laser

Additionally, "opening" Qusahwira would require reworking the whole area which is currently a barren wasteland (no mesh, no GIS data, no proper textures). Probably too much of an investment for such a remote location on a map that has been considered complete for years. (But for the record, I'm two thumbs up for the idea.)

Absolutely! Totally! Let's hope they read this, and have had a good look at BeyondATC!

How embarrassing for me right? lol Bought the East now and everything is cleared up!

Hi HawkEXO, this is a known issue and will be tweaked in a future patch. thank you

Oh cool. Thanks for point that out to me. That's encouraging. I should have checked there myself.

@SharpeXB@MAXsenna Fair enough. If ED released something like this tomorrow, most people simply wouldn’t have the hardware to run it locally anyway, and only a few would be willing to pay an AI company to make it work. In a few years, however, even mainstream PCs will be able to run a lightweight LLM alongside DCS without issue. The STT/TTS and NLU integration is something we’ll hopefully get with the improved ATC (and it would be a disappointment if not). If ED is reading this, I’d just want them to consider future-proofing it by designing the system to be modular enough for an API hook. Those optional LLMs could then be fully community-developed. ED would “only” need to provide a robust API, which - in the grand scheme - isn’t that much work actually. Assuming STT/TTS/NLU are all in place for the new ATC/AI communication: the API hook would sit in front of the TTS in the AI response pipeline. Instead of the TTS receiving input directly from the scripted system, the script-generated reply would go to the API together with auxiliary game-state data. The community-developed LLM would then generate a richer reply from those data points, which is finally sent back to the TTS. I would argue the difficult part is the STT/TTS/NLU and scripted logic, which ED is hopefully already working on. The API is comparatively easy. Tuning the LLM through LoRA to work with the provided data in an optimal way could then be a community effort.

Its a known issue and listed as such in the patch notes - AP oscillation problem is a priority for our FM team currently and we want to tackle it next.