Tyro-AWG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_and_Palau_Islands_campaign https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Saipan https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/2182752/us-china-battle-dominance-extends-across-pacific-above-and https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IF11208.pdf There's way more and it's only a Google away. These islands have had historic, strategic significance for maritime nations around the world as their power ebbs and flows. Maybe educate yourself before you start mud-slinging?

I wonder if anyone can help me, I'm trying to dynamically spawn groups in an uncontrolled state and then task them to activate them. It seems to work with E-2s and Reapers but not with any other asset types! I did a trial mission this: Placed a Yak-40 with group name "YAK40" on the ramp in an uncontrolled state Placed a Trigger Zone called HoldZone above the unit. Run the MOOSE framework at missions start followed by this code... local HoldZone = ZONE:New("HoldZone") local TaskedCS = GROUP:FindByName("YAK40") local PatrolTask = AI_PATROL_ZONE:New(HoldZone,3000,4000,200,400,"BARO") PatrolTask:SetControllable(TaskedCS) TaskedCS:ClearTasks() PatrolTask:__Start(5) local REDSelISR = MESSAGE:New("Yak 40 is tasking",10) REDSelISR:ToAll() I get the message saying that the Yak 40 is tasking, so the script is executing, but the aircraft just sits there. I can get the result I want by respawning the aircraft and destroying the old one, but I can't use this method in the context of my intended mission. Can anyone help me out here? Again, it works if I make the asset an E-2 or Reaper, using the exact same code. Is it a bug or am I missing something obvious? Thanks.

Great, rassy7 thanks! I'll have a play with this tonight. Hopefully in the next few weeks I will get to something that I can release for 'peer review'. Hoping that it's something the community hasn't seen before. I'm struggling now with how to activate a unit spawned as 'uncontrolled' without respawning it. I can get it to work with an E2 and Reaper but nothign else!... wish me luck!

Thanks for all the responses. I've got the capability to show and hide/detect and undetect targets at will pretty much sorted. Now I just need a means of applying that logic only to moving units within certain areas.

I think my game plan at the moment is to have a unit in place that can detect the ground units, as all air units seem to have ridiculous detect/geolocate capabilities. Then use invisible tag to control whether it shows on the F-10 map. I've tested this and it works, but now I'm trying to get it to depend on unit speed and struggling!

Hi everyone, I'm somewhat new to scripting and I'm definitely not a software engineer, but I've taken the time to try to learn enough LUA to make MOOSE useable. As part of a broader multiplayer concept, I'm trying to emulate off-board sensors and intelligence feeds such as GMTI and I've hit a conceptual stumbling block that I can't think of a solution for. I have a mission in which all ground units default to 'invisible' in the ME. I need a script that should monitor all ground units of the opposing coalition and set the 'invisible' tag OFF only when units are moving, and set it back ON again when they stop. In this way Tac Cdrs and JTACs will only see units in the F10 map if they are moving at the time. Anyone got any ideas? Thanks again for your help.

Unless you're flying QFF ;-)

If you need someone with an authentic "funny British accent" to read it, let me know!

How about DCS: AW101 Merlin? Then everytime someone whinges about a CTD ED can legitimately claim it is part of the realism!

If you had the exact coords its feasible. I was working on this for one of my own missions only the other day. Before the days of JDAM however (and specifically in Bosnia and Kosovo) pilots of the UK's Harrier force were dropping iron bombs CCRP onto gps coords marked on their HUD. Now that's A-Level! Of course, (and this is getting into the realms of weaponeering and I'm nowhere near being a QWI) you have to match the projected accuracy of your delivery with the size of the bomb you're dropping and take into account the likelihood/acceptability of collateral damage. E.g. I can only guarantee getting within 500m of the target, I can drop a 2000lb bomb but there is a nunnery 800m away and a school 700m in the opposite direction. Everything is a compromise!

Of course! Thanks Zenra, I feel pretty stupid now! Cheers

Hello Gents, I'm designing some missions for online "missioneered" play and it seems that the Lat/Long given in the ME and in the in game map (F10) don't match those that the CDU is giving. For example, having tried to enter coordinates to drop GBUs on using target coords from the map, the bombs fall short. Looking at my own present location on the CDU it gives; N42*24.234 E041*33.285 and the F10 map gives my loc as 42*24'16"N 041*33'16" Why the discrepancy? Am I being slow? I operate a CDNU (v similar to CDU) as part of my job, and I'm not aware of any inaccuracy or conversion that needs to take place when a lat/long is being input. Any thoughts/solutions would be gratefully recieved. Jon

Still prototyping, will be deciding over the next two weeks whether it is profitable to sell the panels just as panels or whether to go for switches and backing plates too and up the cost. At the moment I'm trying a few things and talking to the laser cutting company about costs. The estimate is £25 for a panel alone, I have a £100 ESTIMATE for a functional UFC without the master caution light function. More news in a fortnight, max.

Military Sea King Mk5 here, plus a bit of civil aerobatics when I get the chance.

Ok, prototype arrived today. This was cut from/engraved onto clear 8mm acryllic, the paint then applied by me (in the production versions the paint will be applied first). I then masked and applied black paint, hence the slightly uneven lines. This should give everyone an idea of what the finished article will look like. I expect a full production set to be complete this time next week. Any questions feel free to give me a PM. Enjoy, Jon

Certainly newer generation (double-digit) Eastern-Bloc SAM systems are extremely capable, although current tactics and modern EW and CM mitigate some of the threat. I can only speak from a rotary-wing point of view, but with modern CM like DIRCM, Multi-spectral flares etc, the tactics vary a lot depending on what's being shot at you (generation-wise). Bottom line is that the pilot taking evasive action is a last ditch effort to survive and if the mission goes to plan will never happen, as most of the time, if you're evading, you're jettisoning your stores and you're sure as hell not going anywhere near what just shot at you. Therefore, the defeat of AD comes from layers and layers of preparation prior to even walking out to the ac. A typical sortie in a low threat environment would involve; 1) The pilots in question having recieved rigorous training on evasion, EW and CM. 2) The denial of enemy access to SAM or complex AD. 3) Ongoing HUMINT/SIGINT/ELINT to determine/counter placement of AD assets, types of Radars, tactics, weaknesses, frequencies etc etc etc. 4) Programming of friendly systems specifically to counter known threat. 5) Perhaps EA and ESM sorties to provide real-time Int/Defeat of AD systems. 6) Thorough intelligence briefing to crews about known types/locations of AD. 7) Discussion prior to launch about actions on missile launch, checking and double checking of any CM fitted to the aircraft. 8) Complete secrecy about types/capabilities of CM. 9) Flight planning taking into account known AD and maximising time spent outside the threat band. 10) Evasive manouevres/pre-emptive defensive fire/CM release in high threat areas. 11) Reactive evasive manoeuvres when/if fired upon. And that's in a low threat environment, I am sure you can think of somewhere that this example might fit.

Duckling, Potentially yes, I have limited experience with resin casting and plan to make custom throttles and sticks. First things first though! The panels are the first run and are not 100% accurate replicas, with some concessions being made to aid standard switches and mounting options. They are the correct width with the right Dzus spacing, however. Can't wait for the first batch to arrive back from the engravers!

All, I know these aren't of the finished article, but they should give you an idea of what to expect. This is the complete set of panels ready to be sent to the engraver. The acrylic is sat in my garage awaiting cutting and engraving. Image doesn't seem to load on clicking, if you right click and "save as" it should be viewable.

OK, wasn't really expecting such curt replies really, but to deal with the last two points asparagin - my reference to building your own sim was meant to be humourous, I suspect you might have taken it a little literally - I am aware that building a cockpit is impractical, expensive and would pose its own problems! And NFlight, I agree, it is just saturation, but my point was that the HUD frame/cockpit etc should be out of focus, as the goggles are focussed to give maximum clarity to the outside world.

Yeah tell me about it! Sad fact: I was in the sim here at work and we've recently had a big (multi million GBP) update to it's graphics package, somebody commented that the new sea effects were awesome and I just though "well, actually DCS is probably better!" In terms of what's achievable on the average home PC, I think ED and Co are pushing the envelope in flight sims, and thank goodness they are! Just need them to do some UK fixed wing stuff now!

I can imagine it'd be difficult. The solution might be build a cockpit, get NVGs, enjoy 100% realism - but unfortunately that also has...downsides!

Hey guys, Just thought I'd post my thoughts on the NVG simulation in the sim, and see what everyone thinks. Something really nice about the modelling of NVGs in DCS A-10C is that you look at the instruments under the goggles, and the NVG lighting in the cockpit - both very representative. Also, in terms of the NVG image, its pretty representative of the kind of image you'd get in low-moderate light levels, i.e. 2-20 millilux; particularly with the halo effect around lights. Things that I feel could be improved are firstly, the focus of in-cockpit items such as the HUD, instruments and cockpit coaming through the goggles. Through NVGs you just can't see them, they're out of focus as the goggles are focussed way beyond them, thus giving a view similar to looking through a lens; the cockpit appears slightly disjointed at the through/under goggles boundary. Also, the ground resolution drops dramatically through goggles, visual accuity comes down to the extent that it's impossible to make out individual trees at altitude, and in light levels under about 10 mlx, its bloody hard to make out fields above about 500' agl. Finally, when you first activate the goggles, there should be no gradual switch on/fade in effect, the goggles are either on or off. The focus/alignment is done prior to crewing up. Anyone else got any thoughts/observations? So far, the NVG modelling is one thing of many that has really impressed me with this sim.

I will be posting pics of the panels as soon as I have them prototyped. I'm not an engineer, and the tools are not mine but being new to cockpit building (although it has interested me for some time) selling surplus panels will be a way of me minimising the cost of my own setup, rather than making money. I'll post again once I have the prototypes, have designs in the works for UFC & CDU. Thanks for your replies, Jon

Hi everyone, Please forgive me if this is posted in the wrong place, I have tried to place it in the most appropriate forum! Throughout the Beta releases of DCS A-10C I have been developing a suite of backlit panels for home-cockpit builders. The first tranche of these panels is nearing completion, and will include at least the AHCP. The panels are not absolutely 100% accurate, but have workable Dzus spacing and I have worked hard to get the dimensions as close as I can within the bounds of cost. They will be manufactured from 5mm extruded acryllic, base-coated white and then top-coated black. They are then laser cut to size and laser engraved. The holes for switches and LEDs will be cut into the blanks prior to engraving. I must stress that these are panels only, without switches, LEDs, buttons, an aluminium backing plate or any electronics. I fly military helicopters for a living and have been able to take measurements of real panels and casts of various other avionic paraphernalia, which I hope to develop at a later date, more of which at the end of this post. For the time being, I would like to know which panels would be most widely recieved within the cockpit-building community (if at all) and whether there would be a market for non-backlit MFD panels at a cheaper cost. My prototypes will be ready in roughly 2 weeks, with production to commence before the end of March. The cost at the moment is looking like an average of approx 20GBP per panel, with larger units like the CDU costing slightly more. Depending on take-up, I have blueprints for all of the A-10C panels, including a bespoke button cap set (backlit) for the UFC and CDU. Please post your thoughts, and preferences for panels. Sincerely, Jon

Tornado makes a lot of sense logically, if not commercially! Then again, if you'd have told me a KA50 sim would have been commercially viable 5 years ago I'd have laughed in your face (and then bought it, invalidating my point) Anyway, I think most likely is; F16 - Open source data available and as multi-national as it gets F18 - As above but fewer variants to model Harrier - Multinational and complex, though difficult to model Tornado - Limited US market but data easily obtainable My thoughts only, obviously