virgo47

Great, I can confirm that with Canopy Jettison + Ejection (3x) - in this or reversed order - I was able to eject. Thanks for the fix.

After the latest 2.9.0.46801 (MT) I can't reconfigure tons of previously bound commands to my HOTAS for F-15C. The scale is staggering: I'm a firm believer - if it can be bound to a keyboard, let us bind it to a controller/HOTAS buttons as well! I know, this is just a regression, but you should somehow make some order in these matters, please. I hope that F-15C is popular enough that we will get some quick patch for NOT being able to turn even the radar on with HOTAS!

Yup, noticed this with Su-25T as well. Seems to be caused by DLAA, as it blurs the HUD with or without DLSS when DLAA is enabled. RTX 3060 12GB in my case.

This makes sense! The zone is quite small - if the graphic is precise - because it is quite likely I aligned just in front of the numbers 09! I'm not sure if the zone can be enlarged without triggering lots of QA on your side, but I'd suggest to cover the wider area - e.g. anything fromt he start of the runway for the most "borderline" pilots. What could have happened when it did not work with the axis and then worked with the +/- binds is that I moved a bit, just to get to the zone. If it checks the gauge (and not the binding) it is generally the right logic. Thanks, Flappie, this all makes sense. EDIT: Why can't I remove/change the "solution" mark? Or is it possible somehow?

I'm totally puzzled now. I tried today and couldn't reproduce it either, although previously I definitely managed to repeat it a couple of times - otherwise, I would not be able to figure out the "workaround" and I'd not dare to report it. So I guess it's "cannot reproduce" for now. Sorry about it. If you see something suspicious in the script, cool, but while I'm not 100% sure it's OK, I can't do more about it now.

So it is flaky somehow? I'll get back to this and provide the trackfile, it was pretty reproducible in my case, I could repeat the test a few times and nothing, but I'll double-check and get back to you.

Yes, I forgot to mention I know the trick. The report is about official training missions that should just work. But thanks for mentioning it. I just copied the file from \games\dcs-openbeta\Mods\aircraft\Flaming Cliffs\Missions\Training\MiG29S - 8 - KMGU-2 CBU Dispenser.miz (installation directory) to my Saved Games DCS.openbeta\Missions\, opened it in the Mission Editor, saved it - and it started to work without even going to the zip.

The mission cannot be started as it requires WWII Armour and Technics? This must be some kind of misunderstanding, or leftover accident in the mission file. I don't remember doing this before, so I'm not sure if it's a regression or what. But I'd like to start it without WWII module.

The training mission description shows CCRP: But the mission itself is all about CCIP, e.g.: This should be easy to fix in the mission description.

They recently (not sure when, some time between 2.7 and 2.8) changed the mission... slightly for the better. The first group is now 5xM113 instead of a single quite difficult and fire returning vehicle (in addition to a lot of side-wind)... and the second group are 3 HEMTT which are easier to dispatch with the pods. (Green smoke is missing though, but not a problem.) I'd say this is better than before... wasn't there one Abrams in the old days? Definitely something crazy for the pods. M113 are still tough targets for the pods though. BTW: Perhaps I'm stupidly hard-headed or what... but I'd say this is the most played mission for me. I don't recommend that to anyone.

There is also one important distinction between 4x and BSE (which is actually VSE or "vsjo"). BSE still works only for 4 pods, but it also zeroes any gunpod elevation. This is mentioned in the training mission for pods - but it does not explicitly mention that "all" is not gunpods+internal gun. BTW: I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, I tried many times, but the results are often anything but "a rain of 23mm rounds can be quite deadly". Pods seem to be extremely weak against anything except unarmoured targets. There is no comparison to the internal gun which is many times stronger.

Hi guys! Modifiers seem to be dead-easy, but there is a bit of depth in them, especially when used for axes. And they can be renamed, which is super cool for a couple of situations. So here is my take on the topic:

Yup, modifiers are plane-specific, you can have the same button as a modifier in one plane and not in another. You can even have two different physical buttons as the same modifier (when you specify its name) in two different modules. When you define the modifier there is a warning that the button is used, but you can go on - which is actually good. You'll just see all the wrong bindings with red exclamation marks. I've just created a video about modifiers, btw... there are some interesting applications, especially with axes and when you play with the logical names of the modifiers:

Do you use that modifier as "modifier" or is it a "switch"? I've never had such an issue with a modifier, but I can imagine it with the "switch" (which I totally ignored until today).

I totally missed this thread but not the issue itself. I didn't know it was a new problem because I had wrong default fov in some planes long before this, so I didn't bother. After some experiments I too discovered that there is a workaround. After using any snapview the zoom normal works again! So now I just calmly press snapview 5 and zoom normal - which I have next to each other - and go on. But it is an embarassing bug indeed. BTW I use 2560x1440p common resolution.

I don't know how it is modelled in the game, but compared to the picture the braking effect really looks much weaker. For Su-25(T) there is also no wheel brake axis, so we can't squeeze it fast, it takes more than 1s to even get to the full pressure. (At least from the cockpit instruments, which - strangely - are not even consistent in Su-25T and Su-25. It looks like Su-25T has the hydro and brake pressure swapped, but I'm only guessing that the red area is for the hydraulic pressure gauge and not for the brake gauge.) Is there any public info about the brake deceleration of Su-25/T available? With just a rough measurement, it takes over 9s to stop Su-25 from 50 km/h, which is terrible, but how real it is I have no idea.

I guess encoders on Orion work on the same principle - did you compare how quickly you can set the course knob with the encoder compared to a button inc/dec press? For me the upgrade from TWCS is incredible. TWCS main throttle pot needed to be sprayed regularly and still started to produce noise after a few days. The TDC ministick had totally noisy Y axis (going down on its own), etc. The long-term STECS quality is to be seen, of course, but I believe in VKB and the much higher price tag. Technically, I have 5 good axes on STECS (2-throttles, thumb wheel, x/y thumbstick), while TWCS had 5 as well (-one throttle axis, but +1 paddle axis), so if I don't count the dual throttle (which is excellent) I actually lost one great spring axis I used as zoom and with a modifier as a brake. But I don't regret it, because I have a lot of new buttons - and I use modifier+ministick as a brake. So yeah, compared to Orion, you will miss many more axes. And if you compare it with something like Eagle grips, there is no comparison in this department. Going from Orion, it's probably not such a significant upgrade and it is much more questionable. Even if the throttle and detent system is of better quality - which I can't compare, but the detent system is indeed genius.

During this training mission, I was previously informed I could use Num+ keys OR the throttle axis to increase the throttle. I hardly know where the keys for the throttle actually are - I'm always using the axis. And then I get to the RWY centerline and I'm informed about the RPM 70% test. I check everything and lower the RPM and... nothing happens. If I press Num- at this moment, nothing happens either, I have to get the RPM a bit higher, then press Num- for the mission to progress. The event should not be bound to using the keys only, especially after I had the freedom of choice previously (which was the right thing, of course).

I understand your point and it occurred to me as well - but I disagree. In many training missions it works as it should - if you should lift the gear, it works whether I use the flip switch or a button. The fact that the voiceover only mentions the basic option is fine. Of course it cannot reflect custom bindings either. That's also fine. But when I use Gear Up instead of Gear Up/Down and it doesn't progress... that's strange. Also - you may start with Su-25T when you already have a HOTAS and your preferred bindings. This applies to any plane, I hardly ever use Gear Up/Down shortcut anymore and often manage to rebind many keys to my "standard" even before I start the training mission. That said - if it's officially closed as "not a bug", I'll accept it, even when I don't agree with it. I just felt like reporting it.

I haven't really tried that, but I have it rebound already anyway - so I may not want to press it. But I bound the action to some obscure key which worked and went on. So I guess it's more about the action, not the key in this case. But that still doesn't fix the mission properly.

Yes, unless you choose a different directory for the save - which is possible. It is just the default offered directory. Just try it yourself: And then you see: This is otherwise not used by DCS at all. The configs managed by the game are all under Config/Input folder: This also includes your modifier setup for the plane, which is not otherwise savable. So, manually, you "back up" to InputUserProfiles, but it is all under Saved Games/<dcs-folder>, and you may wish to back it up somewhere else.

In the first Su-25T training mission when I take off and use Landing Gear Up binding (e.g. on HOTAS) Matt gets stuck on the instruction that I need to press G. I don't mind the specificity of the message, but I used Landing Gear Up action instead of Landing Gear Up/Down - which I had to rebind again to let Matt go on with his instructions. I believe this should be some easy fix in the mission, to check for the state of the gear instead of the binding - no need to redo any voiceover.

On L-39 there is a twist on the throttle grip that controls "target distance" for the sight. I use the ring-finger encoder configured as axis for that. I still have to make like 4 moves to go all the distance (and it is still not fluent, of course) - but for that it's usable. I don't need it that fast nor that precise. Although on TWCS you could have that. So I live with that. I'll also try it for radar elevation in more modern planes, I guess it will be acceptable. The encoder under the ring finger is also easy to mess with, so I'd not risk binding it to anything I can't change accidentally. Target distance or slight change in radar elevation is not a problem, so I guess it will work for that. BTW: If you want to use the encoder for anything axis-like, you better configure it as axis, because using an encoder for increase/decrease actions is even slower than using a key/button you can press and hold.

Yup, I know about that one. But the axis has big steps for each click. There is nothing in between. It's not a deal-breaker, but it's annoying. Encoder is very poor substitute for an axis. I didn't know how poor, but it was worse than I expected. For some axes (where not enough resolution or fluency is OK) it's usable, but for many it is a big compromise. In the end I decided to control my zoom with buttons - I use MB2 hat forward/backwards + press for zoom reset. I wish I could do it with an axis, but I'm over it at this moment. I still miss at least some axes for other things (L-39 can use more axes, so can warbirds), but I already understand I can't expect this from the throttle. Otherwise the throttle is very good.

I have Gladiator joystick and use the encoder as an encoder. Is your zoom fluent as a real axis? How do you do it? Mine encoder 'axis' has distinct steps. I don't want that.