Atazar SPN

Two days ago I lost my IMPUT settings by mistake and I'm remapping all the controls. From the control options you cannot assign a key to the position light located on the top panel. The switch name does not appear in the controls options window. Thank you. Solved. It's the brightness switch. Thank you.

In my opinion it would be absurd to omit sacred places with the intention of avoiding the production of offensive material because in DCS offensive material can already be produced. No normal person would use DCS to replicate a terrorist attack and spread it with the intent to offend outside the pure context of the simulation which is based on the recreation of war scenarios where the objective is to attack or defend, not to offend. But in case someone with some kind of disorder wanted to offend, they could do so anyway by crashing their plane into an office building in Dubai, the pyramids in Egypt, or one of the hundreds of mosques located at different points on the map. However, the final responsibility would not be that of DCS, but that of the end user and the content hosting platform. As a Christian I wouldn't be offended if someone shared material based on the recreation of a conflict as long as the objective of that material makes some sense within the simulation and is not based solely on stupidly crashing a plane into civilian targets with the intention of offending, but If that happened, I wouldn't blame DCS, I would blame the user.

Is it among the development team's plans to make Jerusalem look like Jerusalem? Would it also be possible to know who is behind this scenario? I'm not asking for names, just to know their previous work on this or other platforms. Thank you.

I recently launched multiplayer SAR missions involving retrieving ejected pilots and all of the Huey pilots confirmed that they cannot see the ejected pilot when he is moving. The ejected pilot is invisible to the rest of the players, so a successful rescue is not possible. As a positive point, the ejected pilot has the possibility of boarding the Huey, although his head protrudes. Regarding the possibility of addressing player-wielded manpads in combined arms online, it is currently not possible. I cannot transport manpads controlled by other players.

Hello everyone. My highest rating here is 72 out of 75. I'm always losing three points for going slow on Ramp. Does anyone know if this is due to wake turbulence? I've seen a lot of 75/75 videos but I don't really know if they have wake turbulence activated. Thank you.

Actually, disconnecting the NWS during takeoff is an old habit acquired in some virtual squadron. I don't have any evidence that turning it off or keeping it on is correct, but if you tell me the NWS should be on, I'll give you credit. But anyway, the impact of the crosswind is now much greater and the authority of the tail rudder is much less.

The boarding logic should change. I hate not being able to embark troops if the action has not been preset from the editor at a certain point. There are times when it is necessary to embark troops outside of the assigned points and therefore the embarkation logic should be based on the proximity of the transport vehicle to the troops using the same radio frequency and receiving the order to embark the transport. Excuse my English. This is a translated text.

Sorry for posting here. I thought it would be more visible. Artificial intelligence is breaking down the formation into downhill turns. I am attaching track replays for two tests in which (AI) performs a turn descending from 3000 to 2000 feet and another replay track for the same exercise with (AI) descending from 2000 to 1000 feet. Turn test 2000-1000.trkurn test 3000-2000.trk

I have several missions dedicated to formation flying and after 2.9, (AI) breaks formation into descent turns. Persian Gulf and F/A-18C required Turn Test.miz

I love the view of the new 3D pilot, good job, but I normally fly with the pilot enabled and now the helmet prevents me from seeing what I have at my six, or checking the status, position and operation of the ailerons. A first-person view of the pilot is not supposed to show the pilot's own head.

Did you change anything about the physics of flight or how the wind affects the Hornet? Yesterday I ran an old mission taking off from a crosswind runway and I could see that the tail rudder has lost authority compared to version 2.8. After the update, crosswind affects the Hornet's behavior more. I know that during takeoff the wind can be corrected with differential brakes, but in version 2.8 it was not necessary to apply them. I'll attach the replay track as soon as possible. Tail rudder authority Test.trk

The sound test for me is unsuccessful but now on the servers I can send and receive without problems.

Detection has improved overall. Yesterday I thought my NDEs were not working. It is much more difficult to survive in a hostile SAM zone, which from my point of view is something that offers more fun.

The same problem. My voice is emitted but it is emitted as if it were the voice of a Smurf robot. (Trust GTX wireless headset)

I would never use a MAV-F on a ship unless it is an undefended ship. Anything approaching a frigate or armed destroyer above 10 feet above sea will be intercepted. The Harpoons are working well now due to saturation. If used well, at least one in four achieves its objective. Regarding designating moving TGP targets on the road, it is true, the light poles are a big obstacle and I think it should not be like that, since a moving vehicle concentrates more heat than the lighting. I could be wrong but it's my reflection. Although accuracy has improved, the FLIR designation and IR pointer of the MAV-F has a level of desynchronization that requires de-designation to make precise adjustments, otherwise the MAV-F would never be exactly on the target and could not be used . However, TGP+MAV-F synchronization on static targets is very good and the IR pointer updates following the FLIR designation without the need for corrections. I only had difficulty with moving targets. I hope I expressed it well. I don't speak English and this is a translation.

You're right. I observed this a long time ago. Interaction with infantry still needs a lot of work. It is not given priority because it is a component of the game itself rather than a specific module for sale. But if one day they want to present a decent Vietnam, the functioning of the infantry and their interaction must be correct. Launching missions in which infantry plays a key role has become a headache. However, this is not a criticism since I long ago understood that Eagle Dynamics is a small team with a huge workload. It would be nice if they showed something more about the progress of the new infantry.

I would also appreciate if the Spanish texture was added to the Spanish Leopard. Two or three years ago it was lost in some update. I made the texture to save work for the team of graphic artists. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/filter/user-is-Atazar/apply/

Fixed an editing error where Su-34s would refuse to engage their targets. Now everything works better and the template is more stable. You can download here: ***Finally edited and shared on the official Eagle Dynamics website. Now, when the T-90s have assaulted the Georgian bases, cargo planes are activated that will land on them to establish SAM emplacements. (We didn't want SA-11 to appear out of nowhere)*** https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3332685/

If you follow this mission to the end, you will see that after the assault there are few surviving units from the NATO side. When the ground armored vehicles annihilate all the antiaircraft defenses, Russian bombers with their escorts begin to take off. The Su-34 bombers aren't doing their job because I haven't configured them correctly, but I'm planning to correct that and add cargo planes that land in the occupied territory to reinforce it with more anti-air defense systems and resupply the armor that captured Georgia.

A year ago I developed a mission in which several convoys headed by eight Russian T-90s had to simultaneously assault the entire territory of Georgia with very good results. I did it thinking that without the intervention of the pilots in the multiplayer mode it would be impossible to repel the attack. Mission attached. Run the mission and watch the progress and development, it's fun. In any case, in wars there are no balances. There is always one coalition/country more powerful than the rest. Use this mission as a template if you want to add human components to both sides. Defensa Georgia.miz

After the last updates, the Spanish pilots have disappeared. The ejected pilot and the pilot outside the Hornet have lost their insignia. This is what it looked like before the update:

The Spanish Hornet units by default still show an incorrect numeral in the tail. This occurs when the unit is artificial intelligence. If the unit is a client, the numeral disappears. I could fix this from the LUA file, but if I do this I won't be seeing what everyone else is seeing in multiplayer.