Yurgon

Correct. The mod has not been updated in years and likely won't ever receive an update.

I'm also unsure what this refers to in this particular case. Anyway, SkateZilla is a forum member who provides a bunch of really useful tools for the community, and I doubt any of these tools would have an effect on the campaign. But I agree, when tools aren't even used, I'd also opt to simply remove them.

Excellent report! I'm not at my PC right now and will check later. Just to confirm: does this only happen when reloading weapons in the mission? And/or does it happen after loading/reloading the DSMS?

Klar, das ist kein Problem. Folge einfach den Anweisungen von Bignewy, die du in diesem Post findest:

I don't suppose you can record a short track to share with us? The TGP is ground stabilized, and in order to look anywhere other than straight ahead, the head has to rotate on 2 axes. There are limits to how much they can roll before getting tangled up. When the motion of the aircraft is too much for the TGP to handle and it reaches its limits, it'll usually show a "GIMBAL ROLL" message (or similar). Did this happen in your case? Next, the TGP has a kind of "blind spot" somewhere around 3.5 degrees below its horizon line; when the TGP is looking straight ahead and a little down and it passes through this spot, the head has to roll in order to resume tracking, and when this happens the TGP more often than not jumps and loses the spot it had been tracking before. At short slant ranges and/or high zoom levels, it'll be pretty difficult to find the original spot from where ever the TGP is looking now. Did you double check that the HUD reads MARK in the lower left corner, and did you command "Slave all to SPI" afterwards? TMS Right Long does not "make a SPI", it makes the last created markpoint SPI. Going by your description, that markpoint should be where ever the IFFCC calculated your last used weapon to have impacted the ground. Assuming that you hit the general area where the hostiles were located, it should be fairly straight forward to find them in the TGP from markpoint Z. Anyway, story time. It's pretty easy to lose situational awareness when you're focused on the soda straw view of the TGP in one of the MFCDs. Avoid that. Look out the window. Acquire your target visually, understand the lay of the land, find landmarks that will help you re-acquire the target after egress (and evasion, if you're getting shot at). This is really the most important advice. Don't limit yourself to staring at the screens, or you'll always have at best 10% of the SA you'd have by looking out the window. All that said, the jet can help you. Drop markpoints. As soon as you find a noteworthy target that you can't access through waypoints or through a quick slew from a waypoint, just hit TMS Right Short and you can easily come back to this markpoint at any time. Just make a quick mental note or even scribble something on a piece of paper to note down which markpoint is what. This totally applies to moving objects as well! Maybe a column is moving away from a markpoint and you lose them. Well, call up the markpoint, slave the TGP, and slew it in the direction the column was moving. You may even drop a series of markpoints and a quick glance at the TAD or in the HMCS may show a straight line A -> B -> C -> D and so on, allowing you to extrapolate the position of the column based on TAD/HMCS alone.

Yes, I'm pretty sure that's the case. Though in all likelihood you wouldn't have found an accurate F-104 sim back in the day when it was still brand new, even if home PCs and the simulation genre had existed back then - for lack of documentation and because of a shroud of secrecy surrounding the latest and greatest that the US Air Force had available. Speaking of the golden age of flight sims in the 90s, those sims certainly took some liberties. Then again, they had gameplay aspects going for them that aren't exactly the focus with DCS nowadays. Not saying either way is better, that's like comparing apples and oranges. I'm just saying, the level of detail and realism has certainly increased since then. And while the 90s saw the biggest variety of flight sim companies and products, I'd say we're now in the silver age (or maybe upgrade that to the platinum age?), with less variety in regards to companies, but still some strong competitors that are all pushing the boundaries of what's possible to simulate on a home PC. I mean, routinely flying two-seat attack helicopters on multiplayer servers with other air and ground assets, coordinating CAS with virtual JTACs using simulated radios in a changing weather environment - I can't say I really miss the opportunity to fly an F-22 or an F-35 or a newer tranche Eurofighter Typhoon. What we have is a pretty solid foundation, and just a couple of years ago the announcement of an AH-64, and a D model at that, would have made me cry tears of joy (which it did ).

Die Transition Altitude in den USA beträgt 18.000 Fuß. Sowas Modernes wie Hektopascal kennen die nicht, dort wird auf mittelalterliche 29,92 Zoll Quecksilbersäule gestellt. (Ist exakt das gleiche wie 1013,25 hPa, nur in einem anderen Einheitensystem) Ich hätte jetzt gesagt Platzrunde typischerweise auf 1000 Fuß über dem Platz und Overhead-Pattern (für den Overhead-Break) auf 1500 Fuß über dem Platz (lokale Abweichungen sind natürlich immer möglich).

a) I would qualify that as a change to the flight model, not a change to the controls-setup, which was the suggestion I responded to. b) Could you clarify in what way this affects the original poster, when he very unambiguously stated "This isn't just for the 64, it's all the helicopters in DCS. Just can't get them level."? In either case, OP hasn't logged in to the forum since he posted his opening message, and at this point anyone's guess seems to be as good as anyone else's as to the source of OP's issues.

I don't want to derail the topic, but just to add a different opinion, my configured controls tend to remain stable for years and years in almost every single module. Of course the flight model does change in an Early Access product like the Apache. That is to be expected and we are strongly encouraged to check the changelogs and keep our eyes out for announcements on the forums, on places like Discord or Youtube. Anyway, I don't think any flight model changes or controller setting changes are affecting OP, since he said this behavior was consistent across various helicopters in DCS.

Also check the game's options for "Game Flight Mode" and make sure it's not checked. Doesn't sound like this is your issue, but still worth making sure it doesn't interfere with realistic helicopter behavior. Earlier this year I got a short joyride in an actual, professional helicopter simulator for a Eurocopter. While my hovering was bad and I consistently used the collective the wrong way around because of the habit patterns I've developed at my home PC using a throttle as collective, all things considered I felt that flying helicopters in DCS had done a fantastic job of preparing me for it. A short track showcasing your problem would definitely be a big help to sort out the problem at hand.

LOL. Im Spanischen übrigens das gleiche, in allen anderen Sprachen scheint es okay zu sein (EN, IT, FR jeweils 23:59 GMT, RU kann ich keine Zeitangabe erkennen und CN scheint auf die dort vorherrschende Zeitzone lokalisiert zu sein).

Good to know it's working as intended now.

A squad buddy recently showed up to a CAS exercise with a single Mk-84 on his Hornet. This was after I'd submitted a CAS request a day prior that said nothing about leveling a medium sized warehouse. I felt the option actually lacked the finesse I had been aiming for. Eventually had him kill a (cold) Zu-23 with it, only to realize it was well within danger close distance for the dozen grunts some Hueys had dropped into the target area a few minutes earlier (The only casualty, though, was a grunt ignoring all the warnings about staying clear of tail rotors. And maybe the guys suffered a burst virtual eardrum or 24). I guess some people just can't get beyond the "go big or go home" mantra.

Can't you just hit "Save Track" after ending the mission, in the Debrief screen? Alternatively, you'll find the latest single player track here: C:\Users\{Your Windows Username}\AppData\Local\Temp\DCS.openbeta\LastMissionTrack.trk

It makes sense to carry LGBs when the jet is equipped with a TGP (not "TPOD" - this ain't no Hornet), but I believe during the shift to guided munitions it would not have been uncommon to bring a mix, so in this case maybe one GBU-12 and one Mk-82. But of course that depends on the mission. Against static and isolated targets, dumb bombs would work better than against moving targets or where collateral damage is going to be a factor. In CAS missions, I would always prefer guided munitions to mitigate the risk of blue-on-blue, but guided munitions also sometimes fail or miss. In the opening stages of the 2003 invasion, I assume many sorties were targeting ahead of friendly ground forces and operating in a non-CAS environment with less strict weaponeering restrictions. Going against these kinds of weapons could be CAS, but doesn't necessarily have to be CAS, as far as I understand the doctrine. Either way, it's your mission/scenario, so you can decide whatever you think works best.

What's that in reference to? I don't think anyone asked about the Mav being SOI or not. What do you mean by "standby" in this regard? Not sure I understand the description. Please record a short track of the problem and share it with us. Which version of DCS do you run (Stable or OpenBeta)? You'll find the full version number in the lower right corner of the DCS main screen.

Starts with S and ends in R, almost nailed that su...r.

In welchem Krieg/Konflikt hätte sowas stattfinden können? AFAIK haben deutsche Tornados lediglich in der ECR-Variante aktiv an Einsätzen teilgenommen, um Flugzeuge der Allianz zu schützen.

Are you sure you've actually selected the Maverick as the active weapon profile in all test cases? Does the MAV screen show "SEEKER" "SENSOR" in any of the test cases? Please record a short track of the problem and share it with us. Which version of DCS do you run (Stable or OpenBeta)? You'll find the full version number in the lower right corner of the DCS main screen.

That is my understanding, yes. The early adaptation of TGPs was putting them on station 3 or 9 and making the jet basically interface with them like Mavericks, so in OIF (having just learned that A-10s did indeed carry TGPs there in 2003) it would have been pretty unlikely to see a TGP on 2 or 10 to the best of my knowledge. But now I'd have to really hit the books for the details which year they upgraded the wiring in the wings to carry the TGP on 2 or 10. I hope some of the resident experts will have a better memory regarding these details. Either way, I'm not sure if they ever carried a TGP on 3 or 9 and then a LAU-88 on the opposite side. Possibly yes, probably not. TGP on 2 or 10 and LAU-88 next to it, I don't think this has ever been used operationally.

Darn. I've got that, but didn't think to look at it. One other thing that just came to mind: Kim "Killer Chick" Campbell got pretty well known for bringing her badly damaged A-10 back to base during OIF. She's given interviews and these should be pretty easy to find on Youtube. I don't recall if she talks about loadouts, but this would be a good starting point for a first-hand source.

I've read books about pretty much every other conflict A-10s were engaged in, just not this one. AFAIK, they started fielding TGPs right around that timeframe, but did so in Afghanistan first. OAF in '99 was still binoculars only, no TGP to the best of my knowledge. So in Iraq in 2003 I would assume that they would bring lots of Mavericks, probably the last time Mavs were carried on LAU-88s, and probably only 2 per side (lower and outer rail, to prevent the inner Maverick from potentially damaging the landing gear on launch). Maybe an occasional GBU-12 to be lased from an offboard source like a Strike Eagle or a Tomcat or someone on the ground, but otherwise probably a bunch of Mk-82s, CBUs, and rockets, possibly including smoke rockets to mark targets, especially for AFACs. But all this is just guesswork on my end.

Was sind das denn für Missionen? Klingt nach CAS/CAP combined, wenn dir 4 AAMs unter den Flügeln pro Flugzeug nicht ausreichen. Andererseits, CAS mit Mk-84, da wäre ja Danger Close die halbe Postleitzahl...

Should be able to, but there's always a risk that the LOS gets blocked by terrain and the bomb falls dumb. The AI JTAC won't anticipate that, and may unexpectedly say something like "Abort, abort, abort" or so. GBU self-lase should work fine though. I'm not sure either, but I would estimate that it'll have a hard time hitting anything at 2 NM and I'm fairly certain it won't even fire at 3 NM or more. In fact, DCS players have made it a sport to kill Shilkas with the GAU-8. Start with good altitude, open fire at around 2 NM, break away aggressively after a 1-second-burst and you should be good. APKWS definitely outrange the Zu-23 and ZSU-23.

The virtual hangar tour is really nice, definitely some very cool aircraft in there!