All Activity

I can't say for sure, but it may have something to do with the leading period in the file name. In Linux the leading period signifies a hidden file. Windows is supposed to treat the period as just another character. That said, I remember having some issues previously with these missions because of the leading period, which went away when I re-named them and deleted the leading period. I haven't had an issue with the latest version in Windows 11 24H2. What Windows version are you using?

Ok, issue solved. Remove the dot "." at start of the filename and it starts without issues. Strange.

Hello, looks like there is a problem with the bort numbers on tail boom on multiple default Mi-8 liveries. Having DCS version DCS/2.9.20.15384 Checked with these liveries: RF FSB Standard RF MVD Mozdok This is how it looks in ME: Is there a known issue or resolution how to edit the description.lua file so I could apply a temporary fix on my own? Thanks Jens

Each unit is responsible for a different glide path, but they remain on the same pilot channel. They do not interfere with each other, but complement each other because they are responsible for different indications.

I've build the lessons.lua myself and that's just a reminder for me . It did not come from the mission builder. However, as the mission just starts normal from the mission editor I wonder why it's not possible to start it from DCS. I've also seen those missions started from DCS. Therefore something must be different in my DCS setup. And it must be possible to fix because I've seen it working. Thanks, it works when placing and starting them out of Saved Games/missions folder. However, what is the root cause for this? Is there a hidden flag somewhere in the mission file? Other missions start from the training folder without issues.

There is only the command "Activate RSBN/PRMG beacon". So even you have localizer and glideslope car separated, you would need to set the channel for the "Activate RSBN/PRMG beacon" to the same number. So localizer car transmits the localizer information and glideslope car the glideslope. Don't have time to experiment with this at the moment.

True enough re the large rudder, but you’ve still got the surface area of the fuselage providing a damping effect as well. Also in-flight cockpit videos of Corsairs in the circuit show no sign of the nose nodding around, but the pilot must be using the rudder frequently with all the power changes going on. But hey, I’m no expert aerodynamicist, and as you say, there are other design factors which might make a difference. Just find it hard to believe that any real aeroplane would be passed by a test pilot as acceptable for an average pilot to fly when it seems to shear around so much! Need some input from a real Corsair pilot here I guess!

It’ll show up sometimes when you use coop because coop is often considered an “anti jamming/counter counter measures mode”

In my testing I can't tell if AJ does anything. It's too inconsistant in my results. CAJ prevents finding and locking targets in search mode, but if you switch to it after locking, it doesn't seem to do anything different to AJ. I have had one instance of jamming showing up on the hud very briefly when I was running down an AI F-14 that was cold, but I can't remember which ECCM mode if any I was trying at the time.

No, my forces are not inverted - but there is indeed a suspicious lack of follow-up posts by other people and I doubt I’m the only one who flies MiG-29 with a FFB base. The issue can be mitigated (not eliminated) by using a dedicated profile just for this one module, but this is generally something I’d like to avoid doing.

Haha! [emoji1] [emoji1303] [emoji1317] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

B(U) us basically the D with the AWG-9 and no IRST. It seems that the idea was to make them as good as the D at air to ground, but without rebuilding them into fully fledged Ds (like what was done with some As).

It is crazy how fast TWS can lock on as it sees a target within missile range Thanks for the testing. I can say manuals do say to keep AP/AJ on all times you use the radar, so I expect ED to expect it to be on atleast for 100% functioning. Lock on after launch does work, if you lose lock and missile hasn’t hit yet, regain it! Also, IRST should maintain lock no problem and give missiles with radar in ILLUM if it’s just picking up the lost lock. The whole dummy part is only needed to get the radar cooperation in IRST mode in the first place.

Considering the massive support and push from Steam towards Linux, who for sure have more insight and data on that then you (we), I think you‘re wrong. Tides are shifting. Admittedly slowly, but they are. The downfall of AAA is also in favour of the shift.

I've done a bunch of testing. It helps a bit if below 5 degrees but even if you remove all chaff dispensers, the Ai magically dumps a ton of chaff on veteran and ace difficulty, which usually will break the lock if they fully beam. Switching from head on to pursuit seeeemms to kinda help if their aspect goes from head on to beaming but it's inconsistent. I've maintained lock on head on mode on a fully cold target if they don't chaff. Definitely need to switch from pusuit to head on if their aspect goes hot on and they get above mach 0.9 The best option i have is lock and then put into coop mode when they get to start beaming, crank back to put your nose on them so your within the gimbal of the irst. When the radar drops lock, the IRST stays locked on, then put radar into dummy and press lockon to reaquire. Other good option is anticipate the radar lock being broken and get nose on to the target and use TWF in head on for when they crank back towards you. It locks right away, and your second missile is fully preped. I can usually beat ACE AI mirage 2000C this way Although it's usually a R-73 that gets the final kill. ECCM modes currently seem to have negligible effects in my testing.

Thanks for the reply. Actually found the issue by comparing both the pilot and the complete aircraft Description.lua. What I found was an error in the location file name (first section in quotes) and found that they were different by 1 letter. Once I changed that, the pilot in the aircraft is correct, but the one with just the pilot model only didnt show correctly. Not sure how that happens, but I got the results I needed. I have been doing skins off and on for years now, and I learn something new every time. Unfortunately,,,, enough time goes by in between doing them, I have to learn most of it all over again...LOL

Unless the cost of porting to Linux was zero it would never be worthwhile for any dev to spent money to get an extra 2-3% of the market. Simple math. Gamers won’t use Linux because there aren’t enough games and devs won’t use Linux because there aren’t enough customers.

The controls aren’t impacted by air flow. But there are graphs and numbers showing strength depending on deflection and ARU and COC-3.

It's like a digital prayer to an ancestor! Maybe they will bless us with a response - look for a sign, everyone!

I have not noticed much drift without RSBN correction. It should be around 4% per distance flown without RSBN and about 800m + a bit for the distance to the beacon with RSBN. How about this, set up to have an RSBN that your nav system corrects off. And you’ll only ever be around 800m off.

I plan to test from 5 degrees below the target so they can’t notch

This oh and VR

And all my gadgets. I have my doubts it will ever happen.

My first advice in almost all cases will almost always be skip meta link and just go for virtual desktop. I just did another try last couple days with meta link and just convinced me even more how better virtual desktop is. It just gets better and better with each update, totally unlike meta that just breaks, removes useful things and gets less and less user friendly for dcs.