virgo47

When I adjust the altimeter, this happens: Track file attacked. i16-funny-altimeter.trk

Yeah, that ED involvement is mysterious to me as well. And I trialled MiG-21 as well and saw its bugs first-hand. I bought some modules from 3rd party devs (not counting Belsimtek), but I don't plan to buy anything from Mag3 at this support level. But ED's modules also have some ridiculously old bugs in modules like L-39 or UH-1H. Some of them more annoying than others, but for whatever (priority/money) reasons they don't care about seemingly trivial things such as random selection of UH-1H radio knobs turning the other way on mouse wheel either. Reported, ignored. So it's not only 3rd party devs.

I can only recommend Quaggle's Command Injector again. Highly recommended. It's not only MiG-21 and mouse, many other planes miss some bindings or offer only toggle instead of separate bindings, or bindings are not available for keyboard or mouse. This helps with most of them: Yes, it is annoying that we have to solve this instead of just playing the game, but there is a way.

If this waits on ED, it's not really good. I wish there was more passion in this game to fix stuff than to just release new stuff - and eventually end up in sad state as the stuff before. Something in the attitude must seriously change or in 10 years we will just have more and more buggy modules. But none will be "broken" by DCS self-imposed standards. But I've heard that the product still works when it comes to the silent majority - and there is hardly any alternative - so I don't think ED feels any pressure to fix more bugs in older modules. I'm not sure about responsibilities in this case, but I'm talking about DCS in general and ED as the one setting the standards. I trialled the CE2 - and for the price and fun I'd bought it, were there not those ugly flying numbers (and missing numbers on the displays).

Thanks for the release, it looks good here. In UH-1H there is just one inverted knob that should not be, but just fix it in your sources for now, no need to re-release - this is the correct form: VHFCOMM_VOL|vhfcomm_vol|VHF Volume Control (step size less than 8192 may not work)|6|8192|=ctr(65535)|0 If I find anything else, I'll let you know.

Update patch is new (at least for me), but I believe it's a very good thing to do. Relatively low risk as it will likely fix more than break. No sarcasm there, I realize the risk in any patch, but mildly breaking one campaign (and only in likely patched mission anyway), is virtually no risk at all. I always believed campaign fixes should have been done like this. Great idea, kudos!

Hi @xoomigo, my original idea was to have both in that PP file like this: ALT_MSL_FT|alt_msl_ft|Altitude MSL (ft)|0|0|=int(65535)|0 ALT_MSL_FT|alt_msl_m|Altitude MSL (m)|0|0|=int(65535)*(0.3048)|0 The reason is I also didn't want to have just meters, I wanted both. It didn't work for meters - the value appeared in the plugin and I could place it somewhere or print it, but it stayed 0. Before your latest patch the rest of the values worked fine (heading, speed, feet altitude). After the patch it doesn't work if I have this partially "duplicate" line - all values are returned as 0/unchanged, although the verbose debug shows the games sends them in. That said - I believe we can ignore this issue because the latest TP 4.3 released recently added https://www.touch-portal.com/docs/index.php#advanced-calculations and this got me thinking... and eventually I realized I can do this (even in previous TP, silly me) with something like this: This makes it pretty easy, there is no need for TP event that needs to be imported separately, it all nicely clicks together and works fine. So, sorry for bothering you with this, I guess it's not important and it can be done in TP just fine.

Works great, I can now select all the operations! Thanks for the fix.

OK, I can only accept your assurance, it is strange and intriguing that JF-17 is designed in this manner different from virtually all other planes (as far as I know, as I'm no mechanical/hydraulics engineer). Do you know what's behind this? Or is it the other way around, that parking brake is roughly the same pressure as for any similar jet, but full brake action is considerably weaker in comparison? BTW: Excuse my curiosity, but that's why I play DSC.

After a long break (after the three-part STECS review) I finally kicked myself to another one, and to be done with VKB reviews, this is the newest one: This time it's a one-parter. Until I upgrade there'll be no more VKB reviews. Enjoy.

I see it in the Take Off procedures, 2.3.1, you're right about that. Does this mean that the full brake pedal action is lower than the parking brake? Or is there no direct relation between the pressure indication and the breaking power?

Ah, sorry, yes, I mentioned that, now I see it buried in the middle of the text. Yeah, that was just a minor nuisance (annoying and should be mentioned in the instructions, of course).

Does that help with radar and its tracks? I don't have the plane on trial anymore so I can't test it, but I don't know how this is related, I didn't mention any flight control problems, only radar behavior vs instructions discrepancy.

I fully agree. I know my flying is not great either, but this leader occasionally acts like he's flying a Red Bull show. It's annoying to fly half an hour and then get into VRS just trying to slow down behind that guy. But I need flying practice, so I take it as some kind of atonement to get better.

I asked about it on TP discord, and it seems to be type-related. But I don't know what data types TP recognizes internally. Somehow it worked previously, but now the RPM (and other gauges information) is not considered "worthy" of additional comparison operators. Reiner's answer suggests that it is likely a plugin issue.

I tried AutoPilot, Occupy seats 1/2 and eventually also Request Aircraft Control - when desperate. Perhaps the last one messed with it up irreversibly, I don't know. At any time after the message I expected to see the white indicators in my controls indicator, but I never saw them appearing.

I've just played this mission the first time, not knowing exactly what to do, I first took the wounded straight across the ridge - this definitely cost me some fuel. I was considering refuelling at the outpost, having the fuel pointer just around 4 and then told myself: "What the heck, at worst I'll play it again." I landed with the needle one small tick above 0 (=0.2). So yeah, it can be tight, but it seems possible. New FM here. I had a much bigger problem with the copilot telling me he'd fly while I could set the ADF, but he never really took over and the Autopilot keybind didn't do anything, whether I was in position 1 or 2. This puzzled me quite a lot, but I managed it somehow.

Hi @xoomigo. I've played with the patched COINS and UH-1H much more recently - and also nearly finished my page for it. As typical for me, it's much more crowded. The teaser is here: Here is the suggested inverted counters: ADF_GAIN|adf_gain|ADF Gain|6|3200|=ictr(65535)|100 INT_VOL|int_vol|Intercom Volume|6|3200|=ictr(65535)|100 UHF_VOL|uhf_vol|UHF Volume Control|6|3200|=ictr(65535)|100 VHFFM_VOL|vhffm_vol|VHF FM Volume Control|6|3200|=ictr(65535)|100 THROTTLE|throttle|Throttle Axis|6|3200|=ictr(65535)|100 THROTTLE2|throttle2|Copilot Throttle Axis|6|3200|=ictr(65535)|100 # And also one default switch position: UHF_SQUELCH_SW|uhf_squelch_sw|UHF Squelch Switch|4|0|OffOn|ON I went through many other ctr options, e.g. ADF_TUNE or ALT_ADJ_PLT, but all these sliders only increase the value, whether I slide up or down. The result in the cockpit always goes up, so the rest of the Huey ctr is mostly useless in TouchPortal - at least with sliders. But I also found some problems. Previously, in TP 3.x, I modeled ENG RPM and similar stuff with coloured values - this was based on "greater than" check. When I add vanilla IF into Touch Portal, I can use any of the following operators: But when I select the value from COINS, it only allows this: Is this TP 4.x related bug, or is there some other change (I noticed these are pct, not sure if they were always, or it was int before - really don't know if that would even help). This obviously breaks the panel - although, strangely, it works for old buttons - somehow they preserve the right condition, even though they don't offer it anymore. Lastly, I made some naive experiments. I've noticed in the readme that there is a support for some calculations, even since 2022-10: "Added transform character "*" and "/" in "int" value ..." So I tried this (in CommonData.pp ALT_MSL_FT|alt_msl_m|Altitude MSL (m)|0|0|=int(65535)*(0.3048)|0 The idea is - take ALT_MSL_FT from BIOS - this one now appears on two lines, one fo them original - the other my calculation. I can even find the value in the plugin, so I put it into the panel "display" near the top left corner. But it only shows 0. It does not calculate. Is it possible to do it this way? This would be great as I could remove "event" I used for L-39 panel to get the metric altitude instead of ft. I'm attaching the panel (including all the values) if you want to try it. dcs-uh1h-page-wip.tpz2

This one is notorious since some update. Some things were moved to UI Layer (which was a good unifying change). Some were left in other layers. I just fixed it on my end and moved on. I always treat the UI Layer as the highest priority.

Is there no tooltip on it? I've seen these in a couple of situations: Binding uses a modifier that was not configured - this is likely not your case. When this happens the offending binding is not even shown, so it can appear on an empty cell as well. Conflicting binding. This happens to me when I import a diff file (Input config) that does not remove the default binding for the plane and uses the same binding for something else as well. If it is in the same config, just try to press that combo repeatedly (click on the table first to focus on it) - it should cycle through all the bindings for the same combo. Conflicting binding with another layer, e.g. UI Layer. Obviously, different aircraft configs don't conflict with each other, but some config layers are used at the same time (plane + UI Layer, not sure about others). Strange cases. Sometimes I see it, restarting the game helps, or saving/loading the input config, etc. This can be caused by loading a diff file for another config (by accident or with a good reason) or when the changes in the system/aircraft defaults binding suddenly (e.g. after the DCS update) collide with your existing stuff in Config/Input.

I believe that realism and monitor (or VR displays, or whatever) don't work together well if you don't do something special about the visibility. People could see things further and smaller than what current monitors can provide, and some kind of smudge or something should be visible if it could have been visible in real, even if the 3D engine would not be able to provide it. Current dots are terrible because I see things better far off than when they get closer and the dot disappears. But something should be there, otherwise we would not see things that can be seen in real. It will never be 100% realistic anyway, if nothing else simply because of FOV vs monitor and many other reasons. And it will never work the same (and as well) for all users with various devices. But current solution doesn't seem to cover the mid-range very well and overblows the far end. And, what's even worse, does not seem to work in a comparable fashion across various devices - too far from it. This makes the whole discussion even harder.

I half agree and half not here. I agree that lever bound to axis is fine as long as the axis is reliable (no jitter), or you play around the problems as you did. I personally use thumbwheel on the STECS, which is not super ergonomics, but good enough for the throttle in UH-1H - and I use it just for fun when I want to practice governor failure - when four axis to control is not enough and you want the fifth . But I'm a newbie with Gazelle, I don't even see a governor switch there, so for me any precise control of this lever is not necessary - keys are enough. I use that feature that syncs the axis to cockpit controls and if I left the axis for fuel flow in the wrong position for Gazelle (e.g. playing a different plane before), I'd immediately found out, I'd need to fix the physical position of the axis - and annoyingly, restart the mission, because of the Starter switch not being ON. So, yes, it works with axis, and if your axis is reliable, it works well - but with cockpit sync you need to double-check your axes (or at least this axis) before starting/unpausing the mission. That said, is it really practical and/or necessary to have it on HOTAS axis? Do you use fuel flow for something in other situations than startup and shutdown? (Of course, it is still a valid personal preference. Whatever works for whoever.)

I also discovered the problem with a tiny movement of the fuel flow lever back shutting down the helo without any way to fix it. If the starter switch is ON (which, as previously mentioned, is NOT by default when hot starting), no problem, the RPM goes up again. But, strangely, if it's not ON, and it starts to shut down because of the tiniest fuel flow lever movement - putting starter ON at this moment does not help. This is quite frustrating and confusing really. I had the lever on HOTAS axis, but (again, as mentioned in this thread) this is obviously a wrong decision for this helo.

In an unexpected twist of events, I discovered a similar problem with UH-1H: So, perhaps, this is not Gazelle specific, but something generic with DCS FM radios - or something both modules share at least?

Recently I noticed a funny behavior of an FM radio in Gazelle (don't let the preview fool you, it's not about Mission Editor): I was quite surprised to discover - totally randomly really - very similar behavior in UH-1H, which let me think it's perhaps not module-specific. What I see in both cases is "two-stage behavior": the transmission stays noisy, whatever I do... and then, after something changes... the transmission is quiet, but I can bring it back noisy - and then make it clean! The set of switches is different in both helos, but the behavior doesn't seem to make any sense at all. Let's see the video: Notice how just changing the frequency makes the radio NOT working - but it's recoverable through the "noisy" squelch position - and suddenly, one can only have clean sound as well. Any meddling with the frequency selector "breaks" it again until you recover it with the procedure again. I don't think any radio works like that - especially considering, that at first I merely tuned 47Mhz and it started receiving something (although with noise). The trackfile and mission are attached. uh1h-funny-fm.trk uh1h-fm-radio-problems.miz