Tarres

Last time I tried it, Freya was WiP even with frequencies assigned. Does it work in the last beta?

Same here. Mainly in warbirds and more subtle, short duration in helos.

Yes, it´s doable. I did it time ago with others on/off controls. On a side note, 29 (all versions), 27, 33 and 15 only have 2 position flaps: up and landing. 29 has a particularity as it uses the same panel to control flaps as planes with 3 positions flaps, with the middle position double as a "landing position" I think. Soviet classic design example of "same panel for everything".

Exactly

The main known issue is that you need different PTT for VC and IA comms. Maybe as Northstar98 said, a "short/long pulse" will be the best solution. One test that I want to made is in the Mossie: IRL pilot controls the SRC and copilot has the control oof the T/R1154-5. In the Huey, we need a separate "copilot folder" in the key assignment part, like in the Hind and Hip.

Solved. It´s the PTT for the radio room.

Tested in the Mi-8 and works with only 1 PTT assigned. Radios are selected with the rotary selector. A10C and M2000C for example need 3 and 2 assignations. They have 3 and 2 PTT IRL.

As per the post title, any idea what is this setting for? There is no reference in the Quick guide for the VoIP.

English and default cockpit. SPO-10 enabled, sound disabled (warning switch off): annunciator "No sound" in the SPO-10 remains off. rwr no sound light.trk

Requested tracks attached. One for each type of missile. Sight off at6.trksight off 9m220O.trksight off 9m120f.trksight off 9m120.trk

Makes sense. So it’s WIP or not planned.

Sniped! Thanks

Front panel, sight doors switch beside the missile power on switch. Ok. Reading the Russian manual seems to be an optional steep.

Not sure if it´s a bug so please close it if it´s correct. Copilot position, sight cover open (observe switch), missile selected, authorization light and sound, missile fired and impact. But the missile cover switch has remained closed by mistake. Is this behaviour correct?

OB 2.7.8 (as 11/24/21) Multicrew, hot and cold start. If copilot assume trim control (left wall, under blue cover), when switch set down (cover open), pilot see the copilot´s canopy opens. Closes when the "assume trim switch is set to default (up) position. Maybe reported earlier.

No light indication in neither of these buttons. According to Manuel RC6, a red-light dot is shown as in DEC and VISU push buttons. DEC and VISU are ok. Red dot on both when DEC and VISU buttons are pressed. Bug is only graphical; both items work as intended according to RC6 manual.

I suspect around the 10th-19th of December. This launch window gives ED a week, more or less, to publish the first patch to correct some critical bugs before the Orthodox New Year festivities in January.

Yes, you should be able to eject. Maybe a bug regarding the jettison proces.

No problems here: i7-9700K 32gb 2xNvme (pciex) rtx2080

I think it´s a WIP feature. If a HInd is set in the ME with the option "equally responsible": copilot can take control with the collective red guard: Correct Pilot CANNOT take control with the "Assume control switch": pilot front panel under red safety guard. Pilot must use the "request control" as in the other option in the ME (Ask permission) I think it´s WIP.

Yes, that´s the point. I´ve read your excellent post regarding this issue.

A silly question. The cyclic in the operator´s cabin is "folded" until you press the unlock button, this releases the stick and "activate" the pedals. (ok) The collective has a red guard that has to be pressed to connect the colective and assume the helicopter control. Both works as intended when you set the "equally responsible" in the ME options, no need to "request control", only press the red guard bellow the collective and you assume control. But in MP the collective has a "mimic movement" connected with the pilot´s colective movement. Is this correct or the collective must be "folded and with no movement" like the cyclic until you press the guard to liberate it and assume control?

In order to make the 5P58D (slave launcher without the cabin) dependant of the 5P58C (master launcher with the cabin fitted with the instrumentation needed) the following line can be changed: line 34: from: depends_on_unit = { { { "S-300PS 40B6M tr" } } }, to: depends_on_unit = { { { "S-300PS 5P58C ln" } } }, The resultant hierarchy: Slave launcher (5P58D) to Master launcher (5P58C) to Track radar (40B6M) to command post (54K6) to Search radars (64N6 and/or40B6MD). From the more moderns S-300PM onwards, all launchers can fire, but we have the early 80´s S-300PS, Thanks in advance. P.D. In the ME, the 5P58D is named 5P58C and the 5P58C is named 5P58D. It´s a reported bug.

Same bug as the reported and corrected related to the EWR radars range. 160 miles as 160000 meters in the definition lua instead of the 300000 meters (300 km), roughly equivalent to 160 miles. Thanks in advance.

Premise: The ST-68U was used as a primary SR in the S-300PS before the 64N6 BIg Bird, more related to the SA-20 (S-300PM/PMU) Could it be possible to add the ST-68U "Tin Shield" SR to the "required unit" as an option apart from the 64N6 that is present in the definition lua? In the S-300PS 54K6 cp.lua, line 16, where the "depend on unit" is defined, add the "SAM SA-5 S-200 ST-68U "Tin Shield" SR" as a unit required. Something like: "depends_on_unit = { { { "S-300PS 40B6MD sr" } }, { { "S-300PS 64H6E sr" } }, {{"SAM SA-5 S-200 ST-68U "Tin Shield" SR"}},}" Due to the miles-km conversion bug that affect the 64N6 (resolved in the EWR luas), the Tin Shield in far more correct for now as in 2.7.7.15038. Thanks in advance.