StarLiner

According to the manual, when the AWACS page on the Interactive Kneeboard fills up, new commands should overwrite the ones at the top. This doesn't appear to be happening, and the last command seems to be cutoff as well. See screenshot. Anybody else experiencing this?

Something about Vaicom seems to stop the comms menu (the one normally accessed with /) to stop reliably showing up. A few people in this thread seem to be experiencing it. This interferes with commands I have to say, load troops or check other F10 options that rely on that comms menu.

Howdy! May we have an update for this? The Mig21 still unfortunately doesn't produce a lock tone. I posted the issue on Mag3's bug tracker, and they said the issue is ED related. This is quite an annoying bug on cold war servers in that it renders one of the F5's (and soon to be the Mirage's) main sensors useless. The bug also breaks 'Jam on Lock' events in the mission editor for this aircraft. With the Mirage coming out soon, we'll finally be able to have interesting, crappy fox 1 fights. Unfortunately, the mig will still be able to stealth lock the Mirage.

Ah, so this is what has been wrecking havoc on my stock Voice Attack scripts. I'm probably going to have to just get rid of Vaicom unfortunately, it seems to be causing a few issues with normal VA operation.

In addition to the AWACS page not adding new messages once it fills up, it seems to cut the last message off. This is a picture showing wat I mean. Also note how the new message in the upper left does not appear on the page.

Has anybody run into an issue with the AWACS page not writing down new callouts when the page fills up? The manual says it should start overwriting the top, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

I've heard five different answers from five different people. Some insist it will have one, some insist it won't. So what's the skinny, will we have the ability to independently IFF or will it be Real VID Hours?

This is low hanging fruit that would really earn a lot of good will with the community. I hope ED takes a closer look at this issue.

Quick update, two months ago Mag3 posted the following on my bug report: "We know about this issue for some time now. It appears to be ED related." Unsure if that means ED is the one who has to fix this, or if they have to communicate with eachother to get it fixed. Would love a follow-up on this, as it really takes some of the fun out of cold war engagements.

I did a little more digging to see if anybody else had tried something like this, and @mcfleckran into the same issue trying to do the same thing to the hornet before it was officially added: I wonder if changing whatever they did to the Hornet to apply to other aircraft is within the scope of modding.

Bumping in hopes of getting noticed. I think changed to Jester's IFF accuracy, especially when STT'ing, is something most people would really like to see improved.

Did you know that many DCS Aircraft have a Declare command they can access through the AWACS? Well, actually it's just the Hornet, Viper, and FC3 aircraft. You lock something with your radar and AWACS will declare friendly or hostile. Very cool, but wasted on aircraft with datalink and IFF. No third party aircraft has this feature, not even the F14. So I was curious if the Declare function could be modded into to other aircraft for fun and immersion I looked through the comm lua for a few modules with the feature, and found a line that said Radar = true. For the F14 and F5 it said Radar = False. So, I changed the line to true on both planes, loaded the mission editor, and it almost worked! Declare appeared as an option within the comms menu where it hadn't before, but when you lock a plane and try to use it, no audio plays and no interaction with the AWACS occurs. Other commands like bogey dope work just fine. Any idea what's happening here? I'm guessing that fundamentally the radars on other aircraft don't work like FC3 and 18/16 radars, so they can't be made to work. But if anybody has ideas, I'd love to hear it.

Maybe whoever on the team is responsible for the F18's radar implementation can explain their viewpoint? Because this doesn't seem to jive with what other sources and experts here say.

When I'm playing in 2D, one twist of my rotary knob will turn on an MFD or my HMD. in VR though, it seems to take 4 or 5 rotations. This makes doing things a bit more annoying. Has anybody experienced this issue?

Thanks for the update!

Voice attack helps a lot, but it doesn't fix most of the things that are talked about in this post. It doesn't make Jester IFF more accurately, for example.

It's in the game for PDSTT sparrows. Iirc, pulse fired sparrows don't have this ability.

I think he's referring to STT locks. Jester calls out incorrect STT IFF all the time. He'll say a bandit is a friendly, or a friendly is a bandit. IFF checks are a very easy thing to do as a Rio, and he really shouldn't be getting it wrong as often as he does.

Jester is actually really powerful and very intuitive. There are a few areas though, where it feels like small changes could make him a bit easier to use. Please consider the following modifications: - Small adjustments to Jester wheel locations. STT lock should be a first order option when in AA mode, for example. Change fusing, Ripple settings, and ordinance selection should be a first order selection in AG mode. As it stands, when in AG mode, AG settings is a first order option with a lot of blank space. Moving these options would make setting things up a little quicker. - Eliminate or significantly decrease incorrect IFF callouts. I understand Jester is supposed to be human and humans make mistakes, but these happen way too often. Considering how reliant you are on a rio for IFF and how harsh the punishments are on most multiplayer servers for team killing, I think this is something that should be changed. As it stands, Jester really can't be trusted even at close range. - In addition, please slightly decrease the amount of time Jester takes to IFF - Make default fusing Nose/Tail after takeoff or when entering AG mode. A human Rio would do this I think, and it's one less thing to have to think about with jester, which would be nice, even if it's not strictly by NATOPS. - Add more hotkeys for things like dropping tanks as the pilot, turning the jammer on and off, and, while probably more difficult, confirming IFF. I can't tell you how nice the current shortcut set is for things like TID range, more would be very much welcome. - If possible, add IFF to the STT window and sort them by IFF first, and then range, and then azimuth, instead of just range and azimuth.

@Rinz1erSame issue, was about to come report the same thing. Here's some Track files if you could add them to your post pretty please. TALDfailure2.trk TALDfailure3.trk TALDfailure.trk

TALDfailure.trkTALDfailure3.trkTALDfailure2.trk TALD's do not draw fire from any enemy SAM's. They are, essentially, dead weight at the moment. Please see attached track files.

Would you happen to know if the fix will make it into the next patch? I've been itching to try the included campaign, I've heard it's good!

This is awesome, thank you! Is there any chance future modelling could impact the Hornet's vulnerability to notching when in look down? Both the Tomcat and Mirage's radar modelling has things that realistically deal with a notching target, while the Hornet seems to just completely give up.

I've asked around and so far haven't found anything concrete. One person said it dates back to ED using the logic of old Litening equiped Spanish hornets, but most people seem to have heard it from someone, who heard it from someone. I've also looked around the Hornet bug forum and haven't found anything yet, and Nineline isn't aware of this particular report, though I wouldn't expect him to be aware of every single report in all of DCS. I don't think this DDI behavior is reported yet, but I deeply hope it has been or will be, if it's true. This left DDI not changing behavior would drastically decrease how annoying the hornet is to use.

Actually do you have a source for this? If enough people post about it as a bug with documentation maybe it can be changed