-
Posts
34 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by McCallaway
-
So apparently this was corrected in todays hotfix under "Error in wMessage::buildSpeech() ("F-15E - Communication issues with high-digit call signs, support high digits callsigns)". Tested it in the F-14B as well. And in the F/A-18 even though it was almost ok already. I'm talking to myself but oh well.
-
If an aircraft group has a callsign with a flight number on multiple digits, interactions with AI ATC/AWACS/Tankers wont work correctly, or at all. Not necessarily a big deal, though in some cases this seems to cause problems to activate a tanker or get info from an AWACS. For example: With test aircraft is an F-14B plopped in a empty mission, cold at the ramp in Anapa. Test procedure is to plug external power, turn on the radio on 250 (Anapa frequency) and requesting startup. Results are as follow: Callsign Enfield-9-1 => message out is spoken as Enfield-9-1 => Anapa answers with audio Callsign Enfield-10-1 => message out Enfield-1-1 => Anapa answers with audio Callsign Enfield-19-1 => message out Enfield-9-1 => Anapa answers with audio Callsign Enfield-20-1 => message out Uzi-1-1 => Anapa answers with audio Callsign Enfield-50-1 => message out Ford-1-1 => Anapa answers with audio Callsign Enfield-75-1 => message out Pontiac-5-1 => Anapa answers with audio Callsign Enfield-79-1 => message out Pontiac-9-1 => Anapa answers with audio Callsigns with flight number over 80 (tested with Enfield-80-1, Enfield-81-1, Enfield-99-1, Enfield-100-1, Enfield-101-1) => there is no message out ==> Anapa responds with no audio (only text is shown). It's in this last case that some users reported inability to interact with a tanker.
-
Thanks bal2o, I did tinker with that a bit and it's indeed a way to do it. I would still love to have integrated MIDS in the Voice Chat, but we'll see
-
Is there a reason why and do we know if there are plans to implement these MIDS someday ? (I have a feeling that has to do with these radios not using explicit radio frequencies like the other ones) This new voice chat looks amazing but I like using a MIDS for inflight coms and we used to do it with SRS. I will miss them.
-
A future release of Skynet IADS will get back to using setAI for HARM defence. This will greatly reduce the impacts of this DCS issue. Still hoping this will get acknowledge by ED. Also note that even though this thread was move in the F/A-18 section, it seems to be a more general problem with the HARM. The same problem can be encountered in the F-16 at least.
-
Please find attached two tracks and the mission used. Again please realize that the problem is only present in multiplayer, and when connected to a distant server - not in solo and not on a self-hosted server. First track is demonstrating the issue (radar turned off with enableEmission(false)) Second track is for control : same mission file, but in this test the radar is turned off with setAi(false) instead. Here is what is happening : SA2 is ahead 50 nm and on the rough location of WP1. Just the default DCS template dropped in the editor. First track - setEmission(false) - HARMs kill the Flat Face - We can see the [S] on the HARM TOO page (LMFD) and the RWR (RMFD) as is expected. - Trigger enableEmission(false) on the group. - [S] comes off the RWR but stays on the HARM TOO (indefinitely). - Launch 2*HARM in PB on WP1 (SA2 location) with 122. - HARMs track and kills the Flat Face. Second track - setAi(false) - HARMs miss the Flat Face - We can see the [S] on the HARM TOO page (LMFD) and the RWR (RMFD) as is expected. - Trigger setAi(false) on the group. - [S] comes off the RWR and the HARM TOO. - Launch 2*HARM in PB on WP1 (SA2 location) with 122. - Both HARMs miss. TestEnableEmission.miz TestEnableEmission-20230104-114128_emissionoff.trk TestEnableEmission-20230104-114701_aioff.trk
-
Hello, This happens only in multiplayer, when connecting to a server. NOT in solo or on a local server. - F/A-18C, 60 Nm hot on an SA-2 site, FL350, M0.8. The S from the P19 radar shows on the RWR, and on the HARM TOO page. - SA-2 site is turned of using enableEmission(false) - S disappears from the RWR, but stays on the HARM TOO page (indefinitely) - If fired the HARM will track the P19 I'm not sure if it is a bug but it sure looks like it. At least, I don't see any good reason why it should be different between solo and multi. Is there a reason in real life why the HARM seeker should "see" radars that the RWR won't ?
-
Thanks for the share I will give it a try. Can you explain why you said the altimeter is "QNH 31.1inHg" ? It seems in fact to be an standard 2992 at least in the NM version, but I don't understand why you would put something as high as 3110. I think the F18 altimeter cant even go above 3100.
-
Came to this thread trying to understand what I was missing in BFT-10, ended up finding on my own. Here it is : 1- Waypoint coordinates (lat/long) are given in min/sec, and should be converted to min/dec before entering in the CDU. This one seems not to be a big problem, I guess the trigger zones are big enough to account for the variation, but it can be a factor. 2- Offset from bullseye seems to be given in geographic heading, and must be converted in magnetic before entering in the CDU (so 030° geo is ~024° mag @ Batumi). I wonder if this is on purpose of if maybe magnetic declination was not in DCS at some time ? Also (3) About the violent aileron movement in manual reversion, seems to be a DCS bug when the A-10 is not loaded. Adding a TGP and a pair of cap AIM9 corrected the problem for me. Hope it can help someone along the way.
-
Well, I don't what this log means but it's in Moose 230 and 231. env.info(( 'Init: Scripts Loaded v1.1' )) As well as this, in both versions : -- don't change these routines.majorVersion = 3 routines.minorVersion = 3 routines.build = 22 Still, funkyfranky is right, I was using 231 with DCS 2.5.0 which is not ok. I tried with 230 and it works. Again thank you very much, I was really lost with that and did not seem to find any info anywhere !
-
Hey all, I've been trying to get MOOSE to work with no luck so far. Got the "moose.lua" file at the start of this thread and followed the first tutorial, this one : Nothing happens. So I decided to have a look at the log and I've got this error (for tests purposes the only script loaded is Moose.lua@mission start, nothing else) " 2018-06-04 22:31:09.550 INFO SCRIPTING: *** MOOSE GITHUB Commit Hash ID: 2018-04-14T05:30:11.0000000Z-38622fa8d5b66376cedd502194ca7d149508a99b *** 2018-06-04 22:31:09.550 INFO SCRIPTING: *** MOOSE STATIC INCLUDE START *** 2018-06-04 22:31:09.550 INFO SCRIPTING: Init: Scripts Loaded v1.1 2018-06-04 22:31:09.550 ERROR DCS: Mission script error: : [string "C:\Users\Flogas\AppData\Local\Temp\DCS\/~mis00005D8F"]:5387: table index is nil stack traceback: [C]: ? [string "C:\Users\Flogas\AppData\Local\Temp\DCS\/~mis00005D8F"]:5387: in main chunk " Line 5387 of the "moose.lua" file is a table initialization using some DCS values (I think) as keys. One of these keys - S_EVENT_MARK_ADDED - does not exist in my DCS it seems : " [world.event.S_EVENT_MARK_ADDED] = { Order = 1, Side = "I", Event = "OnEventMarkAdded", Text = "S_EVENT_MARK_ADDED" }, " Anybody has any idea why this happens ? Is it a problem with my DCS install ? Is Moose broken following a DCS update ? Am I missing something ? Thanks :)
-
Ka-50 technology videos, 29 June 2006
McCallaway replied to Wags's topic in Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 1 & 2
-
Oh I am sure. I followed all the F-18 building process in this thread (it's in French but still, lots of pictures) : http://www.checksix-forums.com/showthread.php?t=96252 And more stuff he made for using in the dioramas here : http://www.checksix-forums.com/showthread.php?t=124800 The final images are made from photos of the dio, on which he photoshoped some stuff like the crew or the coke can as said above. This guy is amazing :) Oh, and by the way, some people saw the model on display in a model shop in Paris.
-
My first shots from FC, straight from my first few hours of flying the Su-25T. Enjoy : http://www.mccallaway.com/
-
Clickable cockpits ? Sweeet !
-
Course I'm buying !
-
Just relaaaax.