Kreutzberg
-
Posts
119 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Kreutzberg
-
-
Thinking the issue may have been patched, I tried the full mission again and got the same bug. I saved the track, and posted it here for Heatblur:
Anyone with additional data, please feel free to contribute!
-
1
-
-
The last mission (#11) of the Red Flag 81-2 campaign uses the GBU-8 HOBOS. The mission is quite complex. When making the attack run, I have been unable to get the GBU-8 to release from the aircraft. It locks onto targets as expected, but does not release. Several other players have had the same issue as described here:
I've attempted to reproduce the issue in a smaller scale environment. However, air starts, hot starts and cold starts in other situations do not reproduce it. Even starting Mission 11 of the campaign and immediately launching the bombs after takeoff (with the full startup procedure in the campaign) works normally.
When I did those tests, I figured the issue might have been corrected in a recent patch. However, I recently re-attempted the mission in full and got the same issue. Therefore, it may be something with a longer mission or something later in the mission or targets that is causing the bug.
Of note, I was eventually able to get the bombs to drop by targeting different object, and after being hit by ground fire. It's possible that something in the object recognition isn't quite working or something of that nature. Normally, the bomb will release with a contrast lock on just about anything (even another aircraft), even if it can't actually hit it.
I have a track file, but it is too large to post in the forum (because of the same complexity that likely causes the issue). If there's another way to get that track file to you, please let me know! Thanks!
-
I completely agree that a toggle would be useful. I don't see it specifically mentioned, but the AH-64 Apache already has precisely this capability with an "IHADSS monocle visible" toggle box--it could be just like that.
-
2
-
-
Thanks--we know it's not on your end! For what it's worth, I couldn't reproduce the issue today even on the campaign. It's possible that something's been fixed, as I did notice a slight change to some other things in the Phantom after the small patch.
-
Thanks.
I went to try to reproduce the issue with a cold start on a different mission and couldn't do it. There must be something else that's more subtle that's breaking in that mission. Without a track, I'm not sure HB will be able to figure it out, though, and I vaguely recall that tracks may not even work when using the Jester UI (which is basically necessary to start the plane).
-
This issue apparently still persists even after the most recent patch, which addressed some Phantom things. I just had it today, but foolishly didn't save the track. Does anyone have one to post in the HB forum with a bug report and link to this thread?
When I flew it today, Jester did call out as if I hit and I got full destruction and TOT points. Is that an interim solution because it's broken?
Thanks.
-
I've done quite a bit of practice with Shrikes. Looking at the mission again, my feeling is that the attack profile itself isn't that likely to get hits. The Shrike really needs to come in at a steep angle to have the best chance of hitting. A popup attack like in this scenario really needs to get pretty high to get a reasonable angle.
I also agree that the Shrike is a fairly limited weapon! And that one real benefit of this campaign is that we can take a training lesson and progress.
-
Thank you!
-
I've also struggled to hit with Shrikes on this mission. I have been able to take out the SA-2 with guns, but have gotten killed by AAA to get close enough. The briefing makes it sound like success is not assured, so perhaps it's programmed to make the missiles unlikely to hit.
-
Are the details of tanker location for each mission somewhere I'm missing? The briefing for the missions gives a callsign, but does not specify a location or altitude. Page 13 of the inflight guide has the general tanker tracks with locations levels and even A/A TACAN, but I'm not seeing a direct connection between the two.
In Mission 2, for example, Texaco 6-1 is definitely in AR-641A. I used the inflight guide to find it using TACAN, but only after seeing that the tanker was in that sector. It was also at FL 240, and the guide says that the maximum altitude is 230. It's easy enough to figure it out with the F10 map, but is there a more immersive way to figure out the refueling plan of the day?
By the way, the overall level of immersion in this one is outstanding. When there was a minor glitch in the aerial refueling that caused Jester to switch to the wrong frequency, I was able to address it by checking the guide for the tanker frequency and then dialing that in and taking command. Love the attention to detail!
-
I'm getting the same thing. Here's my track file. Interestingly, even loading the track causes the same crash.
-
50 minutes ago, Saxman said:
And while I agree with bringing in the ranges (at least one account has Marine Corsairs with guns centered at 100 yards) the measurements should be done in yards, not meters, since that's what was actually used.
Definitely! I'm not sure DCS can do anything other than meters, but it would definitely be better to use the correct units.
-
Building on the topics described here, I noticed that I felt much closer than 400 yards when the 50 mil circle covers the wingtips. I set up something in the mission editor, and at 200 yards, the FW190 wingspan (34.5 feet) doesn't even quite cover the whole 50 mil circle. Doing the math, 1 mil is 3.6 inches at 100 yards, so 50 mils at 200 yards should be right at 30 feet. The reticle probably isn't quite perfectly sized yet, but the 50 mil inner circle is more like 200 yards and the 100 mil outer circle is more like 100 yards.
All that highlights the need for some shorter convergence settings. As it stands now, something like a 150-200 meter convergence would be ideal. 150 meters is right about 500 feet as well.
If the reticle gets a bit more accurate, I imagine 200 meters would be best, as that's very close to 200 yards.
-
Big +1 for this. The Corsair's guns are very dependent on convergence.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Saxman said:
The real important consideration here is you were shooting in convergence.
Thanks for that detailed explanation! I agree that convergence is very important to the whole story (it appears that the convergence setting also affects elevation so that the guns are zeroed for that distance in both horizontal convergence and elevation). One useful feature will be the ability to change and check convergence on the ground, which Magnitude 3 has already confirmed is coming.
-
The F4U has been my first warbird. Lots of fun, but it seems to take a lot of hits to actually bring down an enemy aircraft. Even against relatively low skill AI, I can only ever get two before running out of ammo, firing only at quite close range to save ammo. Some of that is surely my own lack of aerial gunnery skill, of course, but it does seem like the damage thrown by the Corsair's .50 caliber guns is a bit weak (especially because I usually go down to a single burst of enemy fire).
The topic of .50 caliber damage has been discussed before. Here's a somewhat recent and fairly thorough discussion:
My question is how the new Zero model will hold up. It should be a little easier to bring one of them down than the FW190s we have now. Hopefully, that can "feel" a bit better.
-
Given that I'm getting into the PTO WWII stuff, I went ahead and bought the asset pack on sale the other day. It's a cheap enough purchase that it's also a good one to use miles if you have any.
-
3
-
-
I agree completely! We have a similar topic over in "bugs" as well:
-
1
-
-
On 6/21/2025 at 1:07 AM, skywalker22 said:
Mig-21 has the same logic, same developer
I doubt they will change that.
Even if that's their preference, I think a lot of players would at least appreciate a toggle in module settings!
-
1
-
-
I would agree. The basic included missions shouldn't require extra modules. I may try to snag the pack on sale, though.
-
1
-
-
In most or all modules in DCS, a right click moves a switch up or a rotary switch clockwise, and a left click moves it down or counterclockwise. It seems that the F4U switches are opposite. I would characterize this as a bug, but it could also be a wish list item to at least add a setting.
It looks like this convention is pretty well-recognized. Apparently, ED switched the A-10C back in 2020 to conform:
It would be best for the F4U to get that sooner rather than later so we don't build bad habits!
-
4
-
-
I agree that more binding would be very useful. My personal wish list also includes bindings for each flap position and each fuel selector position.
There's a similar topic over in "bugs" as well:
-
1
-
1
-
-
I agree that more binding would be very useful. My personal wish list also includes bindings for each flap position and each fuel selector position.
This may be better in the new "wish list" section as well, if any mods want to move it!
-
3
-
-
I was playing the mission over the weekend, and the SEAD trigger didn't seem to be working (there are two flags with slightly different names). It probably got mixed up in some patch along the way. Here's a fixed version for anyone interested. I also fixed the trigger to display the mission complete/RTB message.
-
2
-
GBU-8 and TV weapons do not release after long mission
in Bugs & Problems
Posted
The track does show the weapons not releasing (and you can see me mashing the bomb release button). Interestingly, the bombs never release in the track, even though I eventually got them to do so in the actual mission as described. I don't know if that would make it more or less useful, but I'd be happy to provide it if helpful.
Alternatively, you could probably reproduce it in-house by flying that mission. Quite a few seem to report the same thing.