scoobie

TRK = track file. Fly your mission where you present the problem, it's best to make it as short as you can (longer track files tend/tended to get corrupt), then quit the mission and in the debriefing window you have this row of buttons, at the bottom. One of them reads "SAVE TRACK" or something like this - click it, give the file some name, save. It's not a bad idea to then check if your track file works on your PC (it may NOT). On the main screen in DCS I think it's called "REPLAY" (or similar). Click it, load the saved track file and watch if it plays OK, i.e. if what you see in the replay is actually what happened in the mission. If it is, attach the file here, so fausete can grab the file and investigate.

I never auto-start-stop, so I don't know about this one, but I can confirm the second issue! It's not only about BE, I've had it happen in CE, too. It certainly bit me with SAMP 250 HD bombs (retarded). Not entirely sure if it happens to ALL weapons (I think it might not be the case, but I don't want to muddy the waters here). Regardless - 250 kg chute bombs for sure get glued to pylons once "rearmed" in flight, with Unlimited Weapons on. You may say it's not so much a big deal, but OTOH Unlimited Weapons is a great feature when you're practising (or just enjoying) weapon employment in a new aircraft, especially more manual ways of weapon employment, as is the case with all A/G weapons in F1 BE/CE/EE. And which is sweet and cool

Sorry for the strange title. Tested in CE, but probably it's the same in EE and BE, too. Settings as in the screenshot: "BOTH" and "PRGM". Slap the release button - the program set on that fancy panel behind the seat gets started. So far so good. Now, BEFORE the program completes, try "re-slapping" the button, numerous times if you like. Each slap (the program is still running) will release chaff - cool, but WILL NOT release a flare - not cool. In other words, for the time it takes to execute CM program, manual release of flares is disabled. Chaff work OK. I may be doing something wrong (but what?) or otherwise that doesn't seem right. It may get you killed, I doubt the real device really worked like that. When I need another flare, I need it badly. Since I knew something wasn't right, later I set a very specific program to test it easily - another screenshot. One chaff/flare, 8 seconds of delay, another chaff/flare.

No joy I don't know what happened on your side. I took the Mossie for a super short ride, daytime, 5 minutes in the air, but the book logged time properly. However, looking at the screenshots closely... I don't know if "44h 60min" is an OK hour on the clock. The last time they tought me clock it would have to be read as "45h 00min", but that was long time ago Anyway, the book added new flight time properly. No idea how you got that effect, sorry. EDIT: For the record. The mission was of my making. First I flew it from main menu -> "Missions" -> "My Missions" (it's an old mission of mine), then I ran Mission Editor, modified the mission (added a new Mossie hot on the runway), and launched it without saving changes. Both times logbook was correct.

It is a hack, because there are no in-game tools for tinkering with the logbook, and that's because the logbook normally just works, no need for tools. You SHOULD be able to count on the logbook. If this weirdness happened to you, it's probably some kind of a bug or maybe there's something strange going on in your computer, with you DCS installation or something of this sort. BTW, I don't think it has anything to do with Mission Editor - flight time logging must be a separate thing (I think). Maybe you're just the first guy to have stumbled on a new bug? I'll try to check when I'm home today. PS. There used to be (briefly) a bug where day flight hours would be counted as night hours and vice versa. I can't remember if it was module-specific or global for DCS.

Uhm... I just want to point out that in this case you don't really need any helpers - this is exactly what you need do to get the thing cracked yourself. The only, really only trick is to do it with the right schedule: every day, no days off (if only possible), 30 minutes or so at a time - only to the point when you get frustrated enough, not a minute longer. Getting beyond that point is totally fruitless, there's no reward for torturing oneself, cerebellum needs certain time to make new connections, if it didn't, it would be cancer. Then come here and bring the issue up, no problem as far as I'm concerned. And then just forget about AAR for a day. Just don't try the typical "time compression" (e.g. single day for 10 hours and I'll get there, I don't need days etc.), everyone thinks they're gonna trick the system (I thought that, too) and that is guaranteed not to work. After a few days or 2 weeks at the longest, you won't write anything more here. Don't ask me how I know. Yeah, I know you think I'm being "oh so funny", but I'm not, talk to TonyRS about it (his post with fantastic videos is above). EDIT: Oh, heck, Aernov beat me to it!

Regarding what @Tippis wrote 2 posts above. Oh, OK - full control by AI, probably, I guess. I didn't even know you can pass/take control from/to AI to/from flyable, one day I must read some documentation to DCS But full control is simply a different feature from what PhantomHans is asking for - a fully automatic AAR (make your coffee or pick your nose etc.), whereas he'd like a guided or handheld-AAR (what?) to ease the learning process. Something like a Russian autopilot, where the A/P has about 20% of authority and the pilot retains the remaining 80%. Maybe that's easy and can be done "once for all modules" - if so, cool, do it. I'm not sure if it actually helps anybody, but meh - if it's easy, why would I care? But if it's not so easy, and it has to be done for each aircraft separately, I wouldn't like it to be implemented. Other urgent items on the TO DO list, you know. Still, something tells me it may not be as easy as it is suggested in this thread, because - my way of thinking - if it was easy-peasy ED would have implemented the damned feature long time ago and would have had the recurrent forum commotion out of the way. As for the perspective, "how it looks from the cockpit", yeah, but... there are plenty of YT videos where you can see that. It looks the same on Youtube as in DCS. And I watched all those videos thinking I would discover some kind of "secret" that would suddenly make me know how to AAR, but... no. Not a bit. A motor skill, not an IQ-related task, no secrets or anything. EDIT: And regarding those crucial "alignment lines" - the ones that tell you that you have to have this element on the canopy bow aligned precisely with that feature on the tanker's wing/fuselage... Frankly, I never cared about them, I find them more of a distraction. I'm playing in 2D. When I connect (I mean the basket now, not the boom) I just look at the tanker at an angle so that I can see its both the wing and the fuselage and try to take a "mental snapshot" of how it looks. The wing then tells me when I veer off position left/righ/up/down (left/right is easy, the hose is telling you this, up/down is less easy), while the fuselage tells me if I'm falling behind or heading forward too much. The wing is also OK for forward-aft movement, but the fuselage is more precise. Something of this sort. Not that much important for me at least, just a basic guideline, "that looks about right" rule. As for the missions, some of you have mentioned there are no or not enough of them in DCS out of the box, maybe that's true, but - again - it doesn't matter as there are plenty of them in the User Files, for various planes. And, just like some have explained, they won't teach you anything, they only give you opportunity to get down to practising quickly. It's those where you can get right behind the tanker quickly. Some of such missions are... a bit unwise as the first "phase" is to fly to the tanker using TACAN. Which takes 10 minutes. Sorry, is it a TACAN lesson, or AAR lesson? These missions make no sense, find one where you get behind the boom/basket within a minute, or 2 maybe. But I digress, sorry.

"Magic enlarged basket" wouldn't be a big deal. Just like the Minsky's "cuboid bubble" wouldn't, or my "spherical bubble" wouldn't, whatever the type. That's relatively easy, I think, that's why I wouldn't be against it. But you also proposed "fake autopilot" for boom AAR planes, one that would guide you to the boom and help you stay on the boom, with adjustable autopilot "strength". Sorry, a DCS plane is either AI, or flyable, they're separate aircraft, so it seems it would actually have to be an AAR-autopilot, for EVERY such aircarft separately - Heatblur now must sit down to write their own AAR-autopilot for Tomcat, ED for the Viper/Hornet, Aerges for the Mirage F1 etc. That doesn't sound easy peasy, lemon squeezy. If you look at it from some kind of "computer science" perspective, than maybe it's no big deal, I know, people have been to the Moon etc., but let me remind you that the "sound bug" in the Sabre took 6 years to solve. And it wasn't a minor one. That's why some people are worried, or at least I am. You don't want to spend 1-10 hours to learn AAR, so instead you want devs to spend hundreds (maybe, in total), while other urgent improvements or bug-fixes will grind to a halt during that time. I just... I don't want to be an "obstacle to other people's happiness" (don't know how you say it in English), you know, that's not what I desire in life, but OTOH there are jobs to do and actually we're talking about this when ED got down to work on core improvements (MT etc.), so that they can keep the platform afloat, make DCS ready for new CPU/GPU intensive improvements, such as the AI be able to "see" clouds etc. I'd very much like them to continue. I think, BTW, that the recent spate of new 3rd parties might have something to do with it. Maybe ED need... like "external funding" (from 3rd party module sales) so that can finance core features development - which, in their business model - doesn't make any money for them. Modules do, core doesn't.

Oh, yes - getting rid of the current automation altogether is part of my idea: Even without adding any new patent as the replacement for the current automatic system (e.g. without adding this "Default Bindings" patent from the original post) - this would also be a good option. I mean - a BETTER option than the current system. Just as you and Vakarian said - currently this automated assignments are more of a nuisance than help. Though, to promote my idea a little bit - you woudn't HAVE to bind anything in "Default Bindings". No, no! You don't want to - you don't define, nothing will happen, nothing will be automatically assigned. You CHOOSE what you want to have auto-populated to new modules (by assigning it in "Default Bindings"). There are quite a few defaults common - axes (obviously), but also zoom commands, camera position commands and some others. I'd immediately assign pitch / roll / yaw / toe brakes (I need special "Axis Tune" for them) etc. and I would leave "POV hats" unassigned. Currently I always have to delete asigments for three POV hats (one on the joystick, one on the throttle, one on my button box).

I've been thinking how one could improve the current mess with "automatic control assignments", those that appear on their own as soon as you install your new module. Currently, if you have multiple controllers (which most of us have), you get double-triple-quadruple assignments, for example for axes, POV hats etc. People keep coming to the forums and ask about strange "spikes" in an axis and are routinely advised to check for double bindings. Again and again... It occurred to me this problem can be (I think) solved relatively easily, i.e. using the current GUI. So, we have this drop-down list at the top left corner in the "Controls" window. You select the module there, but also there's at least one "generic" item on that list, called "UI Layer". Good! Create a new "generic" one, called "Default Bindings" (or "Defaults" or whatever). In it, create entries such as "Roll", "Pitch", "Yaw", "Thrust", "Thrust Engine 1", "Throttle", "RPM Lever", "Toe Brake Left", "Collective" etc. (that's for axes) and some, just a handful, of generic buttons, such as "Trigger", "Weapon release", standard view commands, such as "Zoom in slow", "Cockpit camera - move up" etc. Not too many of them, because aircaft are often very different (think of the Viggen ) and many buttons/switches in the cockpit are aircraft specific, relevant to only a particular platform. The other reason for staying succint with buttons is that if you create 5,000 default bindings, people will kill themselves with their own fist trying to find what they need Many is good, too many is bad *) The users can assign their PREFERRED assignments in the "Default Bindings", including "Axis Tune" for axes. Now, whenever a new module is installed, DCS is trying to match the control assigments in the new module to the list in the "Default Bindings". If a module does have a binding called "Roll" or "Trigger" (etc.), DCS takes the assigment with the same name from "Default Bindings" and just copies it into the respective binding in the module (together with "Axis Tune", if it's an axis). If not - no match - nothing happens, and DCS does NOT assign anything to that particular binding. Of course the hardest part of the job would be to name the default bindings wisely, no typos, no wild white space, consistent lower-/uppercase usage etc. Some premeditation would be neccessary here. For example, if we agree that the axis for pedals is called just "Yaw" (instead of "Rudder Pedals" etc.), then OK, let it be "Yaw", but just STICK to it. If we agree we want "Master Arm ARM", don't fool around with "Master arm: arm", "Master ARM - Arm", "Master Arm - ON" and all sorts of such foolishness. Stay consistent, disciplined. *) Well, maybe you could have quite a lot of default button assigments provided that "Categories" would be defined. Just as in aircraft modules - you have "Control Stick", "Weapon System", "Navigation" etc. These categories would be IGNORED when looking for matches between "Default Bindings" and the module - match by assignment name only, ignore category. The Categories would be there only to help the user browse through Default Bindings. PS. Actually, DCS is doing a similar job already when making those "automatic initial assigments", it runs through the assigment list and tries to assign whatever it can. It's just it works bad I think it's quite an elaborate algorithm, it seems DCS "knows" some typical controllers and if finds a match, it assigns axes and buttons quite properly (although it repeats the process for other controllers, thus creating multiple conflicting bindings), but when it finds an unknown controller (e.g. a DIY button box), it assigns things top-bottom: Axis X will be "Roll", Axis Y will be "Pitch" etc. (and a button box with a potentiometer or two is NOT a joystick, you don't roll the aircraft by turning a small knob on a button box - try it, it's a bit hard to fly like this ). Why it's not a good idea in the first place? First of all, keeping up to date with controllers currently available on the market is a lost battle, a never-ending pursuit, which is not even done because "the teams are busy" etc. Secondly, the current algorithm just fails miserably. My proposal is EASIER and once a user makes assignments in the "Default Bindings", he/she will be happy as all newer modules will get populated with THEIR standard assignments. Users know better what gear they've got and what curvatures etc. they like - better than even the smartests algorithm (and the currently implemented isn't the smartest). Throw away the algorithm, let people define their defaults.

G'day, Sir! Strap in and enjoy the ride. Don't worry, making all the control assignments takes shorter, maybe 2 hours in total (once you know very well what you need and how you like it), it only feels like a week Judging from the serious gear set you've ordered, you'll have plenty of options. There are more planes with relatively simple weapons systems, depending on how you define "simple". One day you may want to try the "forever free" A-4E-C Community Mod. You may think that a community mod can't be as good as a paid module, but... not in this case, the Scooter is fantastic (rolls like mad, but one can decrease "Saturation Y" to cicrumvent it). Whatever you choose, for starters or later - wish you lots of fun

Go figure... I find this community friendly and - more importantly - amazingly helpful. Got a bunch of spot-on pieces of advice here countless times. Including AAR - someone said "dude, it's like learning the piano" (of course the piano is way harder than AAR). I followed, it worked. Well, as many people as many opinions, I guess.

Oh, boy... so you, PhantomHans, want the whole set of functionalities, multiple elaborate AAR help options etc. Look, unlimited ammo was relatively straightforward to add, because planes must be rearmed on the ground via the Rearm/Refuel window. Once you program that, you can sort of use the same code to "rearm" in flight. You just have to check when a particular pylon gets empty etc. and trigger "automatic rearm" with the same type of weapon. Not too much work. No damage is virtually for free - you keep your code for taking damage as it is and either go around it, if no damage option is on, or do something similar. Now, your AAR options seem laborious to program! And for what purpose? You think such options will get you where you want to get, but you really ignore the most important fact that AAR (or formation flying) is a MOTOR SKILL and there's one and one only method to aquire motor skills - regular repetition until it clicks. Not because I say so, but because that's how brains work (the cerebellum in particular). Your IQ doesn't matter here, you may be as smart as Stephen Hawking if you like - it doesn't matter. You just need as many repetitions as it takes, divided into short sessions (until you can't cope with frustration). If you're young, maybe 3 sessions in total. For me it took some 10 days, I think! Yeah, it felt awful, terrible, but I kept doing it for half an hour a day (or 2 or 3 sessions on a free day - morning, mid-day, evening), day by day, no "holidays", no excuses, shut up and try again next day. And then... it just clicked. Pretty suddenly, by the way. Problem solved. Nobody's a newbie forever, it's always a transitional state, temporary phase. And you don't become a newbie ever again - that's permanent. Yes, you need refreshing every now and then, but it's never nearly as hard as the first time. That's the PROVEN way to get there, while your AAR helping options are, so far, imaginary ways to get there, you IMAGINE they will help you. I doubt they're worth the time to implement. If it was a simple "bubble", I wouldn't mind, beacuse it would probably take relatively little time for a dev to implement it. But you want the whole slew of elaborate crutches, while in reality... you will still need to practice regularly until it clicks. If you think you can somehow "trick" it, learn it without that painful boring repetitions, you may as well insist you can learn to see infrared with own eyes or hear ultrasound with own ears. It's the brain, you can't do anything to "work around" it. You might think people are just vicious/malicious/malevolent or something, because they've gone through this s**t and now they want you to suffer just as they did. No. Not at all Those people just know how it works and they want you to stop dreaming, wasting time, and just follow the only known path to get there. You may disagree, but, well, in that case you're stuck where you are. I learnt AAR using A-10C (because I wanted to "master" the Hawg), but later I discovered that probably the easiest plane to AAR is the Hornet.

Personally I don't have a problem with people asking this, BUT... just to point out that those "horrible realism-breaking options" are NOT the same, as you seem to suggest. It's a "narration". Unlimited ammo and no damage options are didactic aids, they help you LEARN something. They should be used with a little bit of mindfulness, otherwise they may teach you bad habbits, but still - they are basically didactic aids. On the other hand, easy AAR, such that - for example - you fly into a mile-wide "bubble" around the tanker and fuel gets teleported to your tanks (can't remember AAR in LOMAC), is not a didactic aid. It's the opposite - prevents you from learning. Is it bad that people keep asking for easy AAR? I don't know. Honestly, I don't care, either. I know they're making themselves a disfavour (by not learning AAR), but it's their business what they do, not mine. Would I prefer ED to focus on other subjects that I consider a lot more important, such as bug-fixing etc., instead of getting "distracted" by easy AAR? Yes, I would.

Late to the party, as always I'd also like to thank Aerges. F1 is still WIP, but I've fallen in love already, even if "on the paper" such a flying dart shouldn't be my thing... and it's a jet, after all, I prefer helos and warbirds. Like jets, but they're not my first choice. Still, it's not too modern (which tends to be boring) and it's such a cool module, feels so good to sit inside and fly around or shoot/drop things from it (I'm slowly learning). Like people above - I don't exactly know why I like this dart so much, it just... feels good. Silly or not - I don't care, I like it! Yesterday I tried AAR in the F1 for the first time. At one point alternator 2 yelled at me, yellow caution, ALT. 2 offline. I thought "WTH!", but since alternator 1 was still OK, I kept sucking fuel and thought I would investigate the case once she's full. Soon after alternator 1 failed, at which point I got angry, thinking: "Oh, come on! They sold me a broken airplane!". I paused and dove into the manual or perhaps it was the Chuck's guide... and, of course - there's a paragraph about less than perfect alternator ventillation in F1, there was a graph with 2 "forbidden zones" (altitude vs. speed), and I had set (long time ago) this particular tanker to fly as slow as 220 KIAS or thereabouts - pretty much inside of one of the forbidden zones for the F1! I'm loving this thing! It's not broken, it's Hi-Fi. That's when suspension of disbelief happens to me - when the damned alternator fails Also, it may be worth noting that "F1 saga" in DCS is a very special case. We get 4 variants. Since I'm doing DCS only in SP, I have not much use for the BE, but the remaining 3 variants are VERY different. It's not the same plane in 3 different "costumes", 3 or 4 quite different planes. Awesome deal! Thank you, Gents!

There's something weird going on... maybe people don't know about "button off" feature? ED didn't advertise it, so... maybe? "Else" commands have been redundant/unneccessary since... about a year ago. Or two years, can't remember. You can create "else" commands on the fly from "stateful" commands - any "else" commands you like - reasonable ones or crazy ones, you choose. Stateful commands are those which set an in-cockpit control to an explicit position, for example: "Master Arm - ARM" and "Master Arm - SAFE". They're not "relative", like "next position", "increase", "toggle", but explicit - or "stateful". On top of that, the last time I checked "else" commands were still bugged. They are prone to "falling asleep", they WON'T react if you switch your toggle switch "ON" (it's got to be "ON"), then, for example, jump out of the cockpit with "F2" key, then jump back into the cockpit with "F1" and switch your toggle switch to "OFF". This "OFF" movement will be ignored. You now have to switch it back to "ON" (this "wakes up" the switch), and now again to "OFF". In other words, DCS ignores ON->OFF transition sometimes. It never ignores OFF->ON transition, though. There are more situation when "else" commands fall asleep, I think it's got something to do with "cockpit losing focus", but I've never exactly put my finger on it. Stateful commands, in turn, are not bugged, they work every time. For example, bind "Master Arm - ARM" to one of your toggle switches. Normal thing, no explanations needed. And now "Master Arm - SAFE": bind it to THE SAME button, a "conflict" will be displayed (it will read that this button has been already assigned to "Master Arm - ARM"), don't worry about it, just click where the window shows "JOY_BTN15" (or whatever button that is), the list will unfold, now find "JOY_BTN15_OFF" and click it. There you go - your "else" command is ready. The module authors only need to provide "stateful" commands. And "relative" commands, but that's a different topic. Let's say I want to have flaps lever, which goes in 3 positions: "UP", "HALF", "DOWN". Let's say my 3-way toggle switch (ON-OFF-ON type) is buttons 15 and 16 - switch up is button 15 pressed, switch down is button 16 pressed, switch in the mid position - both buttons are off. Here's how the bindings will eventually look like: Flaps UP: JOY_BTN15 Flaps HALF: JOY_BTN15_OFF, JOY_BTN16_OFF Flaps DOWN: JOY_BTN16 For 3-way latching toggle switches you can even make weird assignments, if you choose to. For example: gear up/down (the upper "half" of the switch) combined with "landing light on/off" (the lower "half" of the switch). When the switch is up, gear is up. Switch it to the middle position - gear goes down. Switch it further to down position - gear is still down, but now landing light goes on. You can mix 2 things that are related to each other - like in this example - or you can mix things mutually exclusive, if you like. For example AAR Fuel transfer ON/OFF and HUD approach mode OFF/ON - provided you don't often AAR while on the approach to the runway This way you may utilize a 3-way switch for 2 different things. I've just done it like this for Mirage F1 - had a spare 3-way switch. If it hadn't been for the "button off" feature in DCS, I would have NEVER been able to do it (without tinkering with Lua files, which some people just refuse to do).

+1 YES PLEASE for the aspect ratio! My eyeballs routinely turn from spheres into spheroids when I'm looking at such distorted kneeboards. It hurts! Had it been a wild wish topic, I'd have added here a kind request to replace "Make shortcut" command with "Toggle shortcut". Not for the first time, by the way. You know, Baltic Dragon likes looong missions, oh yes he does! Some other campaign creators like it looong, too. At some point in the long mission you're done with certain "bookmarked" pages and new ones become important, you kind of enter a new "stage" of the mission. Currently you can press a shortcut to, well... make a shortcut, but you have to grab a mouse to delete it. Not entirely logical if you ask me. Oh, and grabbing mice is sick!

Crikey! Silly me! I used this general manual "Manuel de VOL SA342M-projet-1970" from this very website and there are only a few pages about NADIR in it. Didn't notice there's also the full-fledged manual for NADIR itself... and this one lets you select text and copy-paste it into the translator! Winner, winner (chicken dinner)! Thanks for waking me up! I need brain transplant. Yep, read the Chuck's guide, who doesn't read them! Basically I know what I can do with NADIR (yesterday I just wanted to dig deeper, "solve puzzles" etc.). Waypoint creation works, so you can navigate and that's most important. It's just the little bugger is quite bugged and a few very handy functionalities are missing. Thanks guys!

Wow! Cool stuff, thanks for pointing out! Well, I wrote it in the hope that maybe NADIR update gets on the "TO DO" list at Polychop one day. Sure thing the flight model is priority one, also for myself, but perhaps NADIR... one day? I tried to use the in-game manual initially, but the one for NADIR was written... uhm, erm, oh boy... you know how it was written, you can see it yourself So, yesterday I got my hands on a RL manual, looks pretty old, written on a typewriter. I can't speak French, but there are nice drawings intertwined with the text, so you can figure out a lot. I also used an online translator a little bit, when in doubt.

_Hoss, I do it, too. I use Joystick Gremlin a lot, I also use (a huge lot) my three Stream Decks with invaluable Charlie Tytler's DCS plugin and my handcrafted export scripts. All of these make lots of new tricks possible. However, the request for toggle commands is not a fit of a spoiled brat, it's a normal thing to expect. Folks, just look at A-4C Community Mod - how rich are its control commands! In most/many cases they are "functionally complete" - you get stateful commands and toggle/previous/next commands. There are also "else" commands, though these are no longer neccessary in DCS. They even went to great lengths to implement all axes in two "flavours" - "absolute" (normal "direct" axis) and "slew" axis (to be driven with a minijoystick or a similar thing). That's wild, no one else does that! Hmm... but it's a community mod, not a paid product. Don't get me wrong - I'm loving F1, but control commands are currently limited below a typical level in DCS... which is, in my book, often insufficient, total hit or miss. And my point has been kindly proven by the A-4 team - i.e. that you CAN make a full list of functionally complete commands. If only you cared. I'll go get my tea before I get too salty

Yesterday I sat down to the Gazelle to "study" NADIR a little bit more. Got a notepad and a pen and the plan was to write down everything you can do with NADIR. The only thing I actually wrote was "NADIR" at the top of the page and... I stopped there - so many things seemed not to work as expected. For example: 1. (I described this particular bug in another topic on the forum, only later I noticed NADIR seems to have more problems. For clarity I'll repeat this one here.) Long press on "EFF" is coded wrong. It waits until the user releases the button and only then it checks how long it has been pressed. That's not how such things are programmed. You do start a timer when the user presses a button (or you take a timestamp with sufficient resolution - e.g. 0.1 s or so), but then you "monitor" the button and if 2 seconds have passed since the button press, you invoke "long press" function on your own, without waiting for the user to release the button. Later you must make sure you won't react to the button release, the button has been "reacted to" already. 2. It doesn't seem to be possible to enter Lat/Lon "forward", starting with N/S (or W/E) then digits. Am I doing it wrong? Seems like you have to "backspace" (with "EFF") previous coords then enter new ones. The RL manual in French doesn't even mention it. (CORRECTION: Detailed NADIR manual does mention that, both methods should work - forward entry and "backspace" entry). Maybe you can do it in the real NADIR, but you definitely should be able to "forward enter" coords - both RL manual and Polychop's manual state that. Maybe this used to work and later it got bugged? IDK. 3. NADIR display, at least as depicted in DCS:Gazelle, truncates leading zeros, but happily displays "09" instead of "9". I think I saw "09" in wind data, but that might have been some other of those auxiliary data you can select with "parameters selector". 10 and bigger numbers as well as 8 and lesser numbers are displayed truncated. CORRECTION: Detailed NADIR manual shows that NADIR does show leading zeros in some cases. Also, it shows degree symbol (a LED diode stuck between 7-segment digits) especially when a pair of "heading - speed" data is being displayed. This helps understand which line is for heading and which one for speed. E.g. wind data does that. 4. General programming (a mess). I can enter an "invisible data entry mode". I think I pressed "ENT" in PP mode, then turned the parameter selector to "BUT" and couldn't select waypoints. Only when I pressed and held "EFF" long, the "invisible data entry mode" would quit and I could select waypoints again. Also, I'm not sure how I did that, but I was able to zeroize a waypoint's coords with just a few erratic button presses (NOT with editing the waypoint's coords). I'm a pro! 5. "GEL" icon in the top-left area of the display doesn't illuminate when you "GEL" something. 6. The "ground" icon should look like an inverted "T", but looks like "0" on the display and it seems to never show up. (BTW, I think there's a unicode character that looks like inverted T.) Apparently it should illuminate when position fix was pressed but the fix wasn't accepted yet, i.e. "position fix procedure" hasn't been finalized yet. 7. I couldn't get position fix procedure to work (which might explain the point above). There should be 2 ways - manual position entry and "copy from a waypoint" method. Does NADIR drift at all? 8. Does "ERR" ever illuminate? It should when the operator presses something stupid - not according to the procedure NADIR expects. 9. Does "G1" lamp ever illuminate (the red round light over the "ENT" key)? It should get lit when some kind of data is "now ready to be memorized" by pressing "ENT". 10. Does "G2" lamp ever illuminate (the one over the "DES" key)? It should when NADIR is waiting for pressing waypoint number button. 11. Does "G3" ever illuminate (the one over the "AUX" key)? It should when in "AUX" mode NADIR is waiting for a specific AUX function button to be pressed. AUX mode does work, and prevents you from using NADIR "normally". You cancel the mode with "EFF" long press (this works too), but there's no indication you are in this mode. May be misleading at times (when you forget you were in AUX and you later try to use NADIR in normal mode).

To keep the party going... +1 for toggle commands "Stateful" commands are imporant, too, and I very much appreciate Aerges made them (which isn't so common in DCS), but toggles are equally important. Without an "interface" for toggling in Lua, we can't even write our own commands, hands tied. For example: - gun trigger "flap" open/close, - gun safety in/out, - master arm safety cap, - selective jettison stores safety cap, - emergency jettison stores safety cap, - jettison missiles safety cap, - probably a dozen others, these above are just off the top of my head.

Hi, DimSim. Welcome to the Club Of People Thrilled With Control Assignment Commands Written By AI . In short The PTWCACWBA Club. We need to think of a shorter name for the club. To answer your question: No, you can't throw a separate file in Saved Games... I mean technically you can, but while it won't break anything, it won't do anything, either. And no - there's no easy way around what you want to achieve. I wish there was! If you don't want to modify game files - which in itself is a viable option but requires a means to PRESERVE your changes across DCS updates - you may also use the "Quaggle's Input Command Injector" (link below). What the thing does is more or less what you're thinking about - it "injects" additional control commands on top of "official" commands in game files, using commands stored in separate files put in the Saved Games folder, exactly as you wish. Personally I don't use the mod, but frankly... I SHOULD! One day I'll get down to it. Then you might want to peek at Munkwolf's "DCS Community Bindings" (again, link below). It's a sort of control commands library that can be used with the aforementioned "Injector" (or without it). It contains thousands of handcrafted commands not available in DCS out of the box. https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-input-command-injector https://github.com/Munkwolf/dcs-community-keybinds PS. I especially like it when a CRS or similar knob, in some aircraft, when driven by a rotary encoder or such, has a "step" not being a multitple of 1°. For example, 0.916541°. That's fun!

Haven't had the opportunity, got Gazelle only a week or so ago, so now it's time... I'd like to thank you all, people, for the missions in this thread! I'm having severe "Gazelle frenzy", she's so insane fun and thanks to your missions I can enjoy this Little Bee even more Yes, Cedar Spear was sooo coool, very well put together mission, thanks Don Rudi! So far I've only taken the "easy" approach, but the "hard" one will come later.

Thanks! A small update. The texture guy will certainly know how it all works, but since I'm not a texture guy, it's all magic to me. UV/backlight are not enough for the "second texture" (that pale yellow one) to pop up. You need two things: 1. UV light and/or instrument backlight turned on. 2. Shine some external light on the instrument, maybe it has to be white light, but I'm not sure. It can be daylight or at night - the flashlight. Yesterday I was doing a bit of night flying and to my surprise the tachometer looked good with UV. Then I "grabbed" the flashlight and was moving it around the cockpit so I could see switches etc. and no sooner had I illuminated the tacho than the "second texture" showed up. Again, it's probably obvious for gfx artists, but I thought I should add this clarification here, just in case.