All Activity

As far as you are concerned do you feel this subject is closed Magnitude? i.e level flight speed and engine settings are where they should be?

The most ridiculous part to me is how they cut cost on the power delivery, so you are still at risk of having the connector melt.

It still doesn't make sense to me to just use a tv mode in the center which has the same level of zoom (absolute zoom, i'm not talking about the fact that the tv zoom has to zoom further than the ir to get the same picture). Not just in the TGP and flightsims, but as a general rule, PIP's are used to give a more zoomed in detail of a larger view. Think electronic microscopes for a second for example. The pip's on those monitors show a higher level of zoom than the general area the camera is aiming at and not just a crisper image. I get that the quality of the image is better in tv mode (what about at night?) but the zoom level itself in my opinion should also be higher. I cannot fathom that any airforce would miss something like that. I can even imagine that one could simple set the level of zoom of the pip itself. With the old TGP, i normally would set a zoom level where i can distinguish potential targets as small dots, and then inspect those dots using the FOV button, and if it is not a target, i zoom out again and scan further using that general level. Thus inspecting each potential dot. With the PIP, i would have expected this to be able to do in 1 pass. With the higher zoom in the PIP. So it is not intended to work like this? I would call that i missed chance. Unfortunately i don't have any documents or sources to show any of this, i am just very much wondering and speculating about the functionality and usefulness of the PIP here. If it just works like this in real life, fine. If we wanna do it as real as possible, no arguments there. It just that it seems a waste of potential functionality.

Isn't this more a question of what units should and should not have EPLRS? Maybe that needs checking.

Maybe certain features, yes, like high res mesh, but we're in the lighting thread and I'm sure because lighting visibility is just a number in the config and dynamic lights work independtently of the map used.

Different Modders have made things amphibious in DCS so we know it’s doable. A Catalina would be great. I’d really love a Sunderland though, my Grandad flew on em as a WOpAG

These two seems contradictory, try using only one at a time. If you want it to shoot at HARMS, just set up "engage air weapons" to on and evade ARM to off.

Hey Kenny. Thanks for reporting this. The issue you have follows on from today's update that has added security controls to the scripting environment. We will have this in every mission. BIGNEWY has provided a fix in the link above which involves editing your autoexec.cfg file and pasting a few lines into it.

New model from R-77 family starts to fly. Looks something like 300-350mm longer rocket and if I would give dual impulse to any rocket, this one would be that

Correct, i missed that in the radio chatter regarding the cleaning up part with guns. My bad. My confusing arise from, if i choose to attack alone, i can only kill one of the armed vehicles with a MAV, since i only have one MAV? Unless the cleaning up with guns part, involves taking the 2nd armed vehicle out with guns? Please take this as constructive criticism. Your work is great !

No issues with MIST and Moose AFAIK. I don't know the EW script but as long as it's not passing information between Hooks and the mission, then it will not be affected. LotAtc is, DSMC, DATIS and from the looks of it DML. I'm still in contact with the Tacview guys about it, can't tell there yet.

Livery creation without the model viewer is too cumbersome to be wort the effort. User created content is an essential part of the DCS experience for many players, so I hope ED just haven't gotten around to fixing this yet. There's nothing except time and development resources preventing ED from implementing model decryption in the model viewer.

I have finished mission 4 so far and the radio chatter is still too low for me. I cant understand what is being said unless i read the text being displayed - and another thing. The text disappears to fast in my opinion (if this can be changed?) for of the transmissions. The Arctic Thunder campaign i finished was made by Reflected, so maybe not similar to yours regarding the radio sounds? I watched a YouTube video on one of the missions. This one with an example of the volume. Even from this YT video i have a hard time understanding what is being said. In my opinion it could be a little louder. The static is fine, its the volume. When the 9-line is being read form Ghost, i cant understand what is being said at all. I have to read the text to understand it correctly. Maybe i am just starting to get hearing impaired if no one else experiences the same? An example of the text disappearing to fast is shown here for the ATIS message. This doesn't happen for all text being displayed. Some have decent visibility times. It is especially important for when information you need, is being transmitted, like coordinates, altimeter and talk on to a target.

Understood. Yeah, I fear you need to add that autoexec.cfg to the mission downloads now. At least that would be the most convenient way for people. I did my best to tell the support guys what to do if they see these errors also, they have a sample autoexec.cfg in place if a user reports it.

My apologies for being obscure. I use doString_in all missions (it's a framework I use, DML, and its 'common' bedrock that provides all services uses dostring_in(), it uses at least one context. The number of contexts used is immaterial. A user who does not know the origins of the error, and who did not open their DCS install, will suddenly receive an error. Because by default, invoking doString_in, no matter which context, produces a nil error. Someone who until yesterday could happily play all these missions and who did not set up an autoconfig file will today have the mission stop with an error.

Yes, it puts the burden on those who developed the scripts to tell people how to run them / what to do to run them. I agree that this is not great but it is how it is now. My message was meant to the guy who seemed to be a starter in regards of DCS scripting.

AI behavior seems unadjusted for the newer frag radius as well. AI P-47s are fragging themselves and killing the pilot with low-level 250lb bomb drops during CAS.

The rectangle becomes visible when foveated rendering is enabled, regardless of whether you're using PimaxXR or Pimax's OpenXR runtime. Alternatively, you could try disabling SSAO to see if that helps.

So you mean you're using net.dostring_in in all possible contexts with all possible scopes? I doubt that. Unfortunately, the documentation is a thing. There's not "the" source and what we get from ED is very limited. I am on vacation rn, so I can not write up an essay about it. If you just started scripting it is quite unlikely that you need this specific API. You can use it for instance to call a function from your Hooks environment inside of the running mission. Or you can now read values from your mission from the Hooks. That can be useful for persistency frameworks, statistics etc.

Really how are you so sure ED has said in the past certain new features/tech for new maps can’t be done to olde maps like the NTTR and Caucuses.

We are not able to reproduce the gear down issue, so please check your bindings and attach a track replay example. thanks

Exactly! Upgrading every 5 years with a very expensive card (whatever relative level this means at the time) that lasts(!) is reasonable imho. Uprgrading every (other) year for a latest luxury card is bonkers for most regular people. (Still their choice though, I'm not hitting on anybody who does/did is. Just for me personally, it is bonkers)

This video isn't a good example; I've already written about this. It's stretched and compressed, though it's still clearer. Regarding IR, the DCS topic is still in development and not finished. Some vehicles are still black even though they're moving. Unfortunately, new textures haven't been implemented in DCS everywhere, and there's still a long way to go.

bonjour. désolé. je n'ai pas vu le message. je n'ai pas été tagué. je vais consulter votre journal pour voir si je peux vous aider. j'utilise Google Translate.