Yurgon

I'm not sure I understand the issue. The A-10C keybind "Engine Start Left" moves the left throttle from the OFF detent to the IDLE detent. Incidentally in the A-10C, this also begins the engine start cycle. This keybind is almost identical to "Throttle (Left) - IDLE" in the F/A-18C, except that the Hornet requires another switch to begin the engine start, and then at a given engine RPM the pilot is supposed to move the throttle from the OFF detent to the IDLE detent. Likewise for the right throttle and for the respective Stop-keybinds. Long story short, I don't see anything missing in the lua files you provided, and they look exactly like mine. Learn something new every day! That's good to know, I'll submit a request to do so. I don't think they're missing. They don't exist in my "...\Input\A-10C\joystick\default.lua" either, nor in "...\Input\A-10C\joystick\Saitek X52 Pro Flight Control System.lua". They do exist in "...\Input\A-10C\joystick\Throttle - HOTAS Warthog.lua" however, which makes sense, given that the A-10C was the first DCS module with default keybinds dedicated to a specific flight sim controller. (And it doesn't make much sense any longer because numerous vendors now have similar products - I'm not trying to defend the status quo, just explaining it to the newcomers ). Either way, for the X-56 this shouldn't matter because it doesn't have an OFF/IDLE detent as I understand it.

So are the duplicate keybinds still there? As for the engine start and stop commands, they're not in the Engine Control Panel category. You should have: Systems: Engine Start Left (default: RAlt + Home) Systems: Engine Stop Left (default: RAlt + End) Systems: Engine Start Right (default: RCtl + Home) Systems: Engine Stop Right (default: RCtl + End) Special For Joystick, Systems: Left Engine Throttle Set OFF Special For Joystick, Systems: Right Engine Throttle Set OFF The last two may only exist when DCS detects a throttle connected to the PC, I'm not sure. The X-56 doesn't have a dedicated engine stop position, or does it?

A total eclipse of the sun was visible in parts of Mexico, the US and Canada today. Las Vegas wasn't in the path of totality, but a partial eclipse happened there as well. So a buddy recommended to try a mission out of Nellis set to 8 April 2024 around 10ish AM The moon partly obscures the sun. Consider my jaw dropped.

There are two places DCS stores information about keybinds. The base functionality is located in the DCS installation directory: C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS\Mods\aircraft\A-10C\Input\ and C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS\Mods\aircraft\A-10C_2\Input\ And then your individual settings and overrides go to Saved Games\DCS: C:\Users\{Your Windows Username}\Saved Games\DCS\Config\Input\A-10C\ and C:\Users\{Your Windows Username}\Saved Games\DCS\Config\Input\A-10C II\ (These are the default paths; if you've installed DCS in another directory you'll probably know where to look, and in a French windows localization "Users" and "Saved Games" are probably something like "Utilisateurs" and "Jeux Mémorisé" or similar; you'll figure it out ). Since you've already uninstalled and reinstalled DCS, it stands to reason the base files are probably okay. Even so, you could still run a DCS Repair from Windows Start Menu -> All Programs -> Eagle Dynamics -> Repair DCS World and select a slow repair and remove any additional files that DCS can't identify. More likely is an issue with your files in Saved Games, because the DCS installer doesn't necessarily delete that when uninstalling and reinstalling DCS. For a quick test, I'd try to close DCS, rename the entire C:\Users\{Your Windows Username}\Saved Games\DCS to something else, start DCS and check if the keybind conflicts disappear and if the engine Off/Idle binds show up again. In any case, you can then delete the newly created Saved Games\DCS directory and rename your original one back. Let us know if any of these solutions help you out.

Well, 12 years later I'm still in awe of Long Distance Calling. Long Distance Calling - Black Paper Planes (Live from Hamburg 2019) I met a couple of guys who were there. Cursed be they for not telling me ahead of time. Did I say curse? Well that's obviously always worth a repost. Long Distance Calling - Metulsky Curse Revisited (Live from Hamburg 2019)

What would those residual parts be? As I understand it, the 3 individual map parts all overlap. So there doesn't seem to be a reason for owners of all 3 parts to have access to anything less than owners of the full map. As I understand it, even that penalty is an issue ED is aware of. I don't recall the timestamp, but I'm pretty sure Wags said when interviewed by Casmo on this topic that ED will eventually have to offer people who purchase all 3 parts individually some kind of discount/compensation so they don't get "punished" for not purchasing the full map right away; this is the full interview:

Oh okay, I see. That is actually a quite common problem and not limited to your hardware. I see the exact same on my TM Warthog with that same keybind. There's a setting to synchronize HOTAS controls on mission start, but that then sometimes causes other issues. My personal SOP is to set 3 position switches to the middle position after a flight or before spawning in an aircraft. In a cold start, I'll cycle the flaps anyway as part of the checklist so that'll take care of the sync issue. It's not ideal, but I'm okay with it. And I actually prefer this over jumping into an airstart only to get the flaps to come full down immediately because my HOTAS flaps switch was still in the down position after the last flight, or similar issues.

Like Max said, there's a category "Special For Joystick" with the keybinds: Bind these to the respective Up and Down positions of your 3 position switch, and you should be good. Or are they not available for said panel?

It'll be interesting to see a side-by-side comparison of high and low detail areas. Sounds like this'll only really manifest when East Afghanistan is released as an individual map. For dynamic MP servers, it might be a bit hard to tell players which part of the map they'll need for certain. Downloading a mission for a map we don't own is pretty simple: We can't run it. Flying a mission that says "Requires Afghanistan" only to find out that players who've only purchased West/East/North Afghanistan run into unexpected obstacles - I think that's what I'm afraid of from a mission creator and server operator point of view (not that I do much of either, but the question is still there).

The issue is about mission and campaign creators, not about what I see.

The questions many people ask are not about any one person's choice, but how this is going to work in Multiplayer and for missions and campaigns where authors can no longer assume that a player who has the product will see it in the same way as the mission creator. Sounds like any campaign and any mission set in Afghanistan might have to be custom-built for either of the 3 regions, or exclude players who have not purchased all regions, or work around issues that arise from players seeing low detail content.

Will the map extend to the Gulf of Oman to allow carrier operations? Personally I wouldn't mind if Pakistan was modelled at low detail as long as there's an option to include the Supercarrier and naval aviation. Edit from a couple days later: Wags said very clearly that this is not an option with the current terrain engine.

Aww man, glad to hear all is well, but that sounds terrifying!

Can you check how it behaves in your DCS? I have one installation that's about as Vanilla as it gets, and I observe the same behavior in that version that I see in all others (still running the old 2.9.1 Stable and 2.9.3 OpenBeta).

Ich vermute das sollte eine Frage sein? Kann ich nicht bestätigen, nein. Die Lichtregler links sind in der Tat etwas schwer zu erreichen, wobei das Problem weniger die Sicht mit TrackIR ist sondern eher die Kevlar-Platte, die die Sicht größtenteils versperrt. Möglich, dass Piloten im echten Heli das besser sehen können, wenn sie sich etwas vorbeugen, oder vermutlich müssen sie mit ein wenig Erfahrung gar nicht mehr auf das Panel schauen, sondern können es blind allein durch Ertasten bedienen bzw. die Schalterstellungen überprüfen. Ist halt eine Schwierigkeit für eine Simulation wie DCS, in der wir diese Haptik nicht zur Verfügung haben. Freie Tasten oder Buttonboxen vorausgesetzt, könntest du dir die entsprechenden Schalter natürlich auf irgendwelche Tasten mappen. Ich fand das rechte Wallpanel im Ka-50 anfangs ziemlich schwer zu nutzen. Irgendwann hab ich mich aber mal hingesetzt und 1 oder 2 Stunden damit zugebracht, TrackIR so einzustellen, dass ich alles immer gut sehen kann. Um auch im Dogfight gut nach rechts und links hinten schauen zu können, ist mein TrackIR recht aggressiv eingestellt, übersetzt also meine echten Kopfbewegungen in sehr starke virtuelle Bewegungen. Damit lässt sich aber auch das Wallpanel im Ka-50 und das Lighting Panel im Apache gut und ohne große Probleme erreichen. Ich vermute, dein Problem hat weniger mit dem Apache zu tun und eher damit, dass du an TrackIR ein wenig herumstellen musst, damit es in allen Flugzeugen für dich gut funktioniert, oder du könntest für verschiedene Muster verschiedene Profile anlegen (ich bevorzuge definitiv ein Standardprofil für alle Muster). Ist das als Kritik am AH-64D-Modul gemeint? Und beziehst du dich da allein auf die Probleme mit der Sichtsteuerung? Ich finde den AH-64D in DCS absolut brillant; die Simulationstiefe ist einfach abgefahren, das IHADSS funktioniert in 2D ziemlich gut und soweit ich gehört habe in VR sogar genau so krass wie in echt, George AI als CP/G ist durchaus brauchbar und die Zusammenarbeit mit einem menschlichen Mitspieler als CP/G ist einfach nur genial. Für mich zählt der AH-64 zu den besten DCS-Releases aller Zeiten, auch wenn am Anfang ganz wesentliche Features noch gefehlt haben und jetzt immer noch einige offen sind. Aber mit dem Modul kann man echt viel Spaß haben. Oder anders gesagt, aus meiner Sicht bekommt man hier ein absolut fantastisches Paket, und das wird irgendwann mit dem Ende des Early Access nur besser werden.

Not seeing any issue either; activating the APU via the APU START switch on the TM Warthog base, the in-game APU switch moves accordingly. This is independent of battery and inverter. Besides potential controller conflicts, I'd double and triple check any mods or modifications to DCS. In order to start clean, first run a DCS repair from the start menu (Windows Key -> All Programs -> Eagle Dynamics -> Repair DCS World) and then rename the folder Saved Games\DCS (typically: C:\Users\{Your Windows Username}\Saved Games\DCS). Upon the next start, DCS will recreate this folder with fresh defaults. If the problem still persists, this definitely warrants further investigation. In either case, you can then delete the freshly created Saved Games\DCS and rename your backup back to Saved Games\DCS in order to get all your configuration back.

The Ignition switch always reacts to a right click by moving to the Ignition position while the right mouse button is held down. In order to move into and out of the Continuous Ignition position, left clicks are required. This is not consistent with any other clickable 3 position switch. Left clicks should always move the switch to the next lower position: from Ignition to the unmarked center position (not applicable here because releasing the right mouse button will already do that) from the unmarked center position to the Continuous Ignition position Right clicks should always move the switch to the next higher position: from the Continuous Ignition position to the unmarked center position from the unmarked center position to the Ignition position (momentary/while held down) As a comparison, the F/A-18C EXT PWR switch works as expected. Right clicks will only move it to the temporary RESET position when it is in the center NORM position. In order to go from OFF to NORM, a right click is required.

The following input commands all act as toggle switches, when in fact they should not: Left Console/Throttle Lever/Flight Control: Throttle Idle Detent - IDLE Left Console/Throttle Lever/Flight Control: Throttle Idle Detent - STOP Left Console/Throttle Lever/Flight Control: Throttle Idle Detent - Idle/Stop (2 pos switch) Testing scenario: Bind the STOP command to a button. Every press of the button will toggle the position of the switch. Same for the other two commands. Observed in both C-101EB and C-101CC. I'm using a Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog throttle. Checked in the latest DCS 2.9.3 and 2.9.1. Expected behavior on button/key press: Throttle Idle Detent - IDLE: When throttle in stop detent, move throttle to idle detent. Otherwise do nothing. Throttle Idle Detent - STOP: When throttle in (or very near) idle detent, move throttle to stop detent. Otherwise do nothing. Throttle Idle Detent - Idle/Stop (2 pos switch): Button pressed: When throttle in (or very near) idle detent, move throttle to stop detent. Otherwise do nothing. Button released: When throttle in stop detent, move throttle to idle detent. The only command that should actually toggle the throttle detent on every key press is: Left Console/Throttle Lever/Flight Control: Throttle Idle Detent Toggle

After post punk band "Der Rest" from Hamburg broke up, the singer and lead guitarist formed a new band, "Die Brennenden Wälder": Saw them live 2 weeks ago, amazing sound as always!

SRS does not adjust the volume of the ARC-210 channel selector when in a menu. @Ciribob is this something you can add for the A-10C II?

I believe the M282 have been decreased a good long while ago, after initially being very strong against basically anything less than an MBT. It would probably take a series of tests and average scores to tell in what way their strength may have been increased.

The document posted by Stuka describes the function of the CHANNEL selector as follows: Unless something changed in the meantime, it seems like volume control inside of the ARC-210 control head in indeed not possible at this time. The ARC-164 does have a dedicated volume control knob, located between the function dial and the frequency mode dial: But it's so tiny, it's pretty easy to miss.

Zum Glück ja. Im Webbrowser am Desktop einfach mit der Maus über das Profilbild des entsprechenden Users hovern, dann klappt ein Dialog auf, in dem unten rechts die Ignore-Funktion zu finden ist. Im Browser auf Mobilgeräten bin ich gerade nicht sicher, aber da wird es vermutlich ähnlich sein.

Die Meinung kannst du natürlich gerne haben, aber das ist schon hart an der Grenze zu übler Nachrede (bin den Text gerade am Schreiben als Hiob den gleichen Gedanken hat ). Wobei ich Heatblur nicht so einschätze, dass sie für unbedachte Äußerungen enttäuschter Kunden gleich mit dem Rechtsanwalt kommen. Die Sache ist, man kann es nie allen Recht machen. Hier im Forum haben sich Viele gewünscht, die F-4 käme schon früher raus, auch wenn sie noch nicht fertig ist und/oder Fehler enthält. Persönlich halte ich das für einen unsinnigen Move für einen Entwickler, weil dann halt ein paar Leute Glücklich sind mit dem was sie haben, während der Rest die Kommunikation gar nicht liest und sofort Videos raushaut, wie verbuggt der erste Release ist und es so aussehen lässt, als wären dem Anbieter seine Kunden komplett egal und es ginge nur darum, mit halbfertigen Produkten Geld zu scheffeln. Ich hatte auch schon Projekte, wo ich eine Woche vor dem Release Bauchschmerzen hatte, aber der Überzeugung war, das kriegen wir hin! Wird eine stressige Woche und ist noch mehr zu tun als zu diesem Zeitpunkt geplant, aber wenn jetzt nicht noch unerwartete Probleme auftauchen, können wir den geplanten Termin halten. Was passiert 5 Tage später? Klar, es tauchen unerwartete Probleme auf, und wenn man dann mal ganz realistisch in sich reinhorcht, wäre es schon echt cooler, nicht einfach den Termin um eine Woche nach hinten zu schieben, sondern vielleicht lieber 4 Wochen, und davon erstmal einen Tag Schlaf nachholen und mal was anderes machen als gestresst auf den Monitor starren und die ganze Zeit die Uhr im Nacken zu haben. Also, will uns Heatblur hier abzocken und noch schnell mit einem verschobenen Release Kohle scheffeln (was ist das überhaupt für eine Logik?!) oder lieber die erwartbaren Reaktionen hinnehmen und zusehen, dass sie mit etwas Verspätung ein sauberes Produkt abliefern? Muss wohl jeder für sich selbst entscheiden, wie man das sieht. Aus meiner Sicht hat Heatblur noch nie einen geplanten Termin gehalten und liegt mit den ersten Schätzungen gerne mal Monate daneben, wenn nicht mehr. Und am Release-Tag sind alle begeistert über die extrem hohe Qualität. 4 Wochen später sind immer noch alle total begeistert, weil man dann Zeit hatte, sich das Produkt im Detail anzuschauen und klar wird, dass die extrem hohe Qualität nicht nur an der Oberfläche besteht, sondern sich durch das gesamte Produkt durchzieht und da wirklich überwältigend gute Arbeit geleistet wurde. Ich wüsste keinen Grund, warum es bei der F-4E anders werden sollte.