virgo47

I'm a bit confused about the last row in the table from manual p30: I can't find anything relevant about that AL combination. Originally I thought it was some other switch (AR/AL) as there is no other reasonable position on the 3-way lever itself. Then I assumed that AR is "auto rich"... which would lead to a typo explanation?

Yes, you're right, thank you very much. I can't find the info in the manual, but knowing what you told me, one can see the drop in the fuel pressure and if RPM is higher it doesn't happen. Also confusing... this is still marked only as reported, so it's easy to latch on that information. However, there seems to be some fuel in the tanks... with a bit higher RPM. It works with less than 1500 as well, but 1500 seems to be a good minimum value showing the fuel pressure in green. Thanks again!

I've just created a simple mission with full fuel and drop tanks and noticed the engine cough when trying the external tanks on the ground. I was just following advice to check each tank for 30s or so on the ground if they feed properly (based on Reflected's video, actually, although he didn't mention drop tanks). I checked manual for details, couldn't find any. I checked forums and found various fuel-related bugs with drop tanks going back to even 2013. Is this still a thing, or is it something new? If it is a known limitation, is it mentioned somewhere (including manual) in an obvious manner? (I know I don't NEED drop tanks for a typical DCS mission... but they are there, it was one of the first things I wanted to try.)

Without the explanation in the first answer, I'd have no idea how to operate this without bindings just with the mouse clicking. There is a green cue when you go around it, but I'd not figure it out on my own and there is nothing in the manual about how to click-operate it. The switch is distinct from the cover when you open it, but clicking it does nothing (or toggles the cover instead) and the tooltip doesn't help you at all, so from purely UX perspective it is quote poor. You have to know somehow. There is a benefit, of course, it is easy to click on what you want. The cover acts a bit strange in Auto position though, if you click at the upper part where the pin is - it toggles between the closed position for Auto and Normal (different "depth" of the closed state).

I check the thread and I don't believe this is the case. The mission starts immediately. I'd say these are forgotten tracks that can be cleaned.

OK, I don't know about tracks usage, thanks for the additional info - but embedded snapviews make player's snap views useless (just like forgotten ones), which is probably not good.

I randomly chose an Instant action mission and was puzzled by the snap views that were not mine... so I went to look into the mission files. It seems that from all the missions, three Instant action missions contain Config with snap views, tracks and other unwanted stuff. The affected files that should be cleaned up: QuickStart/P-5125 - Caucasus - Train Strafe.miz QuickStart/P-5130 - Caucasus -Train Strafe.miz QuickStart/P51D-IA-Caucasus-Low Level Hell.miz

I don't know what I was doing... I know about stick forward to unlock, I tried in the morning and the wheel is just fine. How sometimes the single most important step gets out of the way of the experiment, I have no idea. Sorry.

I'm testing P-51D and whenever I look from the outside (F2), the tail wheel is straight. Shouldn't it rotate, even quite extremely, when it is unlocked? I can make circles in place, but the tail wheel sits straight. I can't find any bug report about that (perhaps wrong wording), so I rather ask first how it should behave.

This is exactly the thing we need to wait for now. After the major upgrade in TouchPortal, this plugin does not work correctly. You can't work with the actions, you can't change the value (ON/OFF, etc.), you can't drag'n'drop it. We need to wait for the update for the DCS-COINS plugin, hopefully sometime in this quarter of the year.

I'm now waiting for @xoomigo to come alive and have time to update it. I'm a programmer, although no .NET expert, but I'd definitely spend some time trying to make it work if it was on GitHub, because right now I don't use this at all because of the breaking TouchPortal upgrade. I loved this option because it's a flexible and cost-effective alternative to HW panels. The integration is also much better than just plain key-bind emulation, not to mention the feedback to the panel so it can also show stuff or blink. So I hope it will be updated or, at least, eventually published. Fingers crossed.

Thanks for the info. I wasn't sure originally and another thread misled me (and this happened on other module forums too). I've eventually noticed there is no way to mark the solution here. I'll better myself.

Yes, I couldn't find anything wrong in the mission. Your linked thread sounds like the problem, there is the zone check and OR. Thanks a lot. And reportedly, it's fixed internally. Great, can't wait for that!

Kinda +1 for the whole sentiment. I've not been very long with DCS, but most of the time nothing frustrated me more than bugs I encountered only to find out they were reported years ago. Things like long hand on L-39 with pilot body shown, flaps/canopy controls in TF-51D (thankfully fixed recently!), Yak-52 toggle binding not working, minor but annoying Caucasus ATC bugs, etc. There are many other bugs other people care and I don't. I know bug fixing is not fun and you need also to bring in new stuff, but I'd have no problem having a slower year with more bug fixes. Of course, other people (and perhaps most of them) see it differently. I'm really just voicing the sentiment. I wish DCS had fewer long-standing bugs. With or without a public tracker, I'm fine with the forums. In retrospect, I also see some fixes, sure. But I'm not sure the debt is decreasing - especially with all the new stuff coming out. That must mean more maintenance in the future.

Whow, I don't go so long back... Good point. Of course, I don't really care which one is the default as long as it works properly and consistently. My speculation seemed logical, but I'm proven wrong. Thanks for the info.

Or, the issue is RWY 33 with 0 wind. If it was 15 for 0 wind as well, Gudauta would be perfectly OK aerodrome that prefers 15 and switches to 33 when the upwind for it reaches ~3 m/s.

Yeah, I'd also think 33 is preferred for landing (and no problem for takeoff as a default), those mountains are really difficult to ignore on landing. In any case, the current situation is suspicious at least. I don't understand why the default map in DCS has multiple long-standing ATC issues.

When investigating... ...it started to be obvious, that Gudauta acts strange. So I've done some wind-related investigation and the results are: With 0 ground wind, RWY 33 is used - this would suggest that this is the "default" runway unless the opposite wind is too strong. But with any wind along the runway less than ~3 m/s in 151° direction (meteo 331), the RWY 15 is used. Now THIS also suggests the runway 15 is the default one - except for no wind at all. I tried various crosswinds - from either side, RWY 15 is used... of course, unless 0 m/s was set. (0 speed ignores the direction, which makes sense.) This really looks like the "default" runway for Gudauta is RWY 15 and there is a bug which surprisingly uses 33 with 0 wind.

So I've done some investigation and the results are: With 0 ground wind, RWY 33 is used - and this suggests that this is the "default" runway unless the opposite wind is too strong. With any wind along the runway less than ~3 m/s in 151° direction (meteo 331), the RWY 15 is used. Now THIS also suggests the runway 15 is the default one - except for no wind at all. I tried various crosswinds - from either side, RWY 15 is used... of course, unless 0 m/s was set. (0 speed ignores the direction, which makes sense.) What this suggests is that the true "default" runway for Gudauta is RWY 15 and there is a bug which surprisingly uses 33 with 0 wind. THAT SAID... the mission still uses WPs for RWY 33, so the wind should be set to 3 m/s.

So this now seems to be reported as a part of: I guess this is a duplicate now.

After the victory, this mission suggests pressing escape, etc... but there are WPs leading to the home base and I generally like practising my landings. My historic notes suggest that Gudauta default landing RWY is 33 - which would match the direction from WP 3 to the airfield in this picture from the mission: Strangely, even though the weak ground wind (red arrow) seems to match the 33 RWY, the ATC sends you all the way around for the RWY 15 (green arrow). To fix this, a minute change in the ME would be sufficient, just change the ground wind from 2 to 3 m/s. Before hurrying to "fix" my notes about default Gudauta RWY, I tried the same mission with 0 m/s for all the wind levels - and funny enough, it suggested RWY 33 as well. Why RWY 15 is suggested in the particular conditions for the mission is beyond my understanding. Is it some kind of more generic wind-ATC interaction bug or what?

I was just really surprised how my landing got so much better with all the other planes I've flown before circling back to Su-25T. I can't imagine how bad my landings were before, because now even when I scowl at my Su-25T landings or try something really crazy (which I would not as in real life for sure - but that's also why we sim ;-)) my tyres are intact. Sure, I haven't tried to break them on purpose. Funny how time goes... sometimes I thought it super hard to NOT blow them up. Now it's kinda hard to do so. Thanks for the response.

I was trying this mission for a few days and when I finally survived for long enough it often ended in a strange way - soon after the enemy coming within 3000 m to the defended village, the mission ended with failure. I decided to investigate. This is the "Loss" zone: It seems it is used properly in the trigger: Yet, the mission ends like this: And no, no other unit, just recently destroyed, was that far ahead to reach the trigger zone. I saved the track, but it doesn't replay properly. But I made a video of the final less than two minutes, that starts with a glance on the map - and there is no way the units would get that far within less than two minutes. So some ahead unit could have been destroyed, but it wasn't in the trigger: Also, this seems to happen in this very sequence - a group is destroyed and the failure message comes too. I have no clue what happens from the look in the ME. If I manage to get it the next time, I'll try to save the track again.

I've returned to Su-25T for a few missions recently and I was quite surprised that I've had ZERO tyre blowouts so far. Sure, I'm landing better than back in the early days, but I've landed a few times with "there goes my tyre again!" only to find out all the tyres are intact. Is it just me or are they more solid now?

I've been wandering the same thing for well over a year... for Su-25 and Su-25T. There seems to be no lever on a stick, is it using pedals (two axes)? But even one axis would be much better than now, I constantly need to remind myself "this plane has no brake axis!" and use a different button than for all other FC3 planes.