All Activity

Gentlemen! Tell me, the plane constantly pulls slightly to the left, even without weapons. Trying to trim leads to the opposite effect, the plane starts to pull to the right. What am I doing wrong, and how can I make the plane fly straight?

I do agree as shown above. However calculating a speed of 400 knots would give a distance of 10 Miles over 1.5 min ! Maybe it is a 'here we go again', but according to these calculations, we do not cover this distance at these speeds, it is less.

Yep, the omniscient bots are indeed an urban myth in DCS. In your case you've cheated somewhat by spawning in the blind spot, but, although it is a hard thing to do, it is still possible to actually sneak up on the AI: Well, it does not stop climbing. In the test mission, it changes its pitch angle from 35deg to around 25deg and climbs at that pitch angle at around 220kmh IAS. The latter is impossible for the player, I could only maintain around 15deg iirc at that speed and alt. Anyways, most of your graphs also show the default AI Rate of Climb and Acceleration curves to be out of whack relative to the reference and the mod, for the stall to 500kph speeds.

The only benchmark should be against the real one. Hopefully they will work on the litening to make it more like the real thing but it has nothing to do with the Sniper pod.

I checked your track in both pancake mode and in VR, and you're right: it looks the same on my end. It looks like Draconus was spot on: it definitely looks like a bad LOD model which then interacts strangely with heat blur. When the aircraft are about 450m away, the effect disappears and things go back to normal.

Mother o god... The drama... Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk

For the axes, have you tried recalibration of them using the Moza software? That worked for my Alpha Prime.

Here we go again. In general, if you want the same sensation of speed like in the video, you must match the speed, altitude and most importantly, the FOV of the camera. By the way, this has been discussed quite a few times. Feel free to take at the previous topics to find out what the current situation is. Here's two of them as an example.

First of all. VAICOM doesn't use keybinds at all, so that must have been a custom command you have made. What version of VAICOM are you running? A lot has happened in the past years. Cheers! Edit: And by that I mean both the SC and VAICOM. Are you asking the crew permission to hook up? Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

DCS 2.9.18.12722 re-introduces a_do_script() and a_do_file() return value pass-thru, after a previously failed attempt: Unfortunately, return values are only partially passed thru. Specifically, the last return value is always dropped. That results in no return value being passed thru if a single return value is used: return a_do_script("return 42") Yields a nil return value. %DCS_INSTALL_DIR%/API/Sim_ControlAPI.html gives a more complex example with multiple return values being passed thru: -- original example in Sim_ControlAPI.html local a, b, c = a_do_script("return 1,2,3") -- added return code for illustration return {a = a, b = b, c = c} It results in the following return value (instead of a=1,b=2,c=3): { ["a"] = nil, -- added for illustration purposes ["b"] = 1, ["c"] = 2 } Steps to Reproduce Run the above code snippets in the mission Lua state via a DCS Lua console of your choice, e.g., my WebConsole.lua. Note that this will require modification of autoexec.cfg to provide access to the mission state via net.dostring_in() from the userhooks state. P.S.: This could have been easily caught automatically by a very simple unit test. I'd like to encourage ED to start using these tests to avoid delivering broken releases. As this is not the first occurrence of broken a_do_script() code, it is apparent that your current testing strategies are insufficient.

Should be, as other devs seems to easily support all TM/Virpil compatible grips.

Hi DCS-team, I would like to point out that the default flight speed is too slow in comparison to the real speeds experienced from the cockpit view. The speed applied when using x2 in DCS is more genuine and should be set as default flight speed. Take a look at these video's taken from cockpit video's : F/A 18C Hornet F-16C Now.... does DCS look anything like these speeds ? In my opinion these speeds are x2 the speeds as we have in DCS. Feels more like flying a Cargo plane.... Kind regards RWC.

Standing up for something doesn't always look exciting from the outside. If repeating the facts is the only way to keep the issue visible, then yes... I’ll repeat myself. It may not change everything, but staying silent definitely changes nothing.

yeah had the same happen multiple times now. sadly all in large missions so the trackfile is massive. there is multiple things wrong. why does TDOA command EVERY HTS pod on the team and not just the one from my 3 other flight members? that means it even commands someones pod who might be on the very other end of the map for no reason. plus if the radar "turns off" during TDOA commanding, it bricks the HTS, you get stuck symbols or cant even use the whole pod anymore.

So, if the modules aren't compatible with DCS 3.0, will I get my money back like with F-15E? Even in ED miles? Of course, DCS 3 is a very distant period, it seems that the aspherical earth was supposed to enter here, so I don't think it will be earlier than 2027, but the question will still be valid.

We had this in a mission the day before yesterday when (most probably) another flight destroyed the radar we were commanding TDOA on with a stray HARM, or maybe the radar was already dead when commanding TDOA. There was no despawning of units, and no spawning. We ran MANTIS and footholds zone commander, but no active spawning / despawning while the mission was on. I can't provide a track as it is massive... I was the one commanding TDOA, and my wingmen got "DATA" voice messages every now and then until I powered down my left chin hardpoint. HTS was bricked at that point, with no way back. TDOA message was in HUD until I powered down the jet, even after powering down the chin hardpoint.

Howdy folks, I just picked up the Virpil Flnkr grip to use with my Moza AB9 base. Going into this, I knew there would be some compatibility issues based on posts I had read. For the most part, the grip is amazing, and at the end of the day, I can live with some of the missing features and funky issues. I had also reached out to Moza's support team to get some additional information, but that has since gone unanswered. To get to the point of this post, are these issues a result of hardware limitations, or is this something that Moza can address in a future firmware update? To others interested in using the Flnkr with the AB9, here is what you should expect/know based on my experience: You have to switch the Moza Cockpit profile to one of the other Virpil sticks, like the Alpha. Before doing this, I had a few buttons not being recognized, but after switching the profile, they were good to go. Swapping to the 4-way hat switches is very finicky and has a tendency to pick up the incorrect directional input when pressing it (i.e., you push up and it activates the down input). The thumb joystick axis is not recognized, and presumably the pinky trigger axis as well, although I have not tested it yet. The lights don't work on a foreign base (as far as I can tell). Some of these issues could very well be a result of something I'm doing wrong, and any feedback/suggestions would be greatly appreciated. At the end of the day, I am still very happy with my purchase and have already enjoyed a good few hours using it. If you are thinking about picking one up and the above does not phase you, I highly encourage you to pull the trigger! Ps. When I purchased the stick, it was on backorder; it only took about a week to get delivered, so don't let the backorder status influence your decision too much. Have a great day all!

Agree with this, still not perfect but better than before. It doesn’t feel easier or like an F16 FBW to me. It just feels more like a real aircraft should behave.

Nothing different on my end. Same procedure as before. You didn’t mention whether or not you prime the engine and open the throttle 1 inch before starting. Those steps need to be done. I also take fuel from the reserve, not sure if it matters for startup, but that’s what the procedure calls for takeoffs and landings. After priming 5 seconds, both mags on, battery on, fuel pump on, throttle 1 inch open, RPM max, mixture idle cutoff, and fuel tank set to reserve, my crank procedure is as follows: Hold starter until RPM gets around 500, wait a second, go straight to auto rich, wait another second, release starter. Works every time. Sometimes I gently pump the throttle forward just a bit immediately when releasing the starter and then set it to 750 RPM, just in case it wasn’t getting fuel.

No different for me compared to others

Here's some more Eurofighter pics from "Day of the Armed Forces" at Jagel, State of Schleswig-Holstein, Germany. It's a bit of everything: action shots, detail shots, scenic shots. But hey, I figured, more Eurofighter media = gooder, eh?

It was working yesterday for me after the latest upgrade in a hornet. Maybe post a video or a track to help with diagnosis? I assume you have successfully hooked up and are getting the run up signal from the guy on the deck

Yeah, this is bugging me. We were assured something like the Hawk wouldn't occur again, and now we're staring at something far worse. FAR worse.

That's from the wide angled camera that captures the scene. especially in those right banking turns. Picture this: Pilot's view 12 o'clock sees the horizon, 3 o'clock high sees the horizon and 6 o'clock sees the horizon. The cameras FOV sees almost the whole horizon line at the same time/picture. what else than a massive curve should be the outcome?