FusRoPotato

I am getting some more consistent verifications that he thinks the enemy units are floating about 200 meters above where they actually are.

I've had some situation where he will immediately see an entire group of 10, but at the same time, impossible to see when I attempted to look from another direction. There is definitely something very broken here but I am having trouble figuring out what it is. Targets can be just 500 m away in open grass field and he can't see them. After searching for a minute, he can see maybe 2 of the 10. I don't necessarily think it has anything to do with powerlines or objects because for my case, there simply wasn't any. In some cases, I tasked him to select one of the targets and lock on, but came to find he thought the target was floating above a forest 200 meters away from where it actually was. Maybe this means the actual position of the targets is being corrupted from his perspective? That might explain why he sometimes can't see anything if he thinks they are underground.

He is extremely slow to find targets with ATGM as well, close targets out in the open. Eventually, after maybe a minute, he will spot 2 of 10 targets just 200 meters away. ATGM just became useless as solo pilot.

So you maybe know 1 answer for 6 questions that weren't your questions to answer, but tried anyways? Also, you might want to double check the definition of rhetoric.

We might need some questions answered about the new VOIP system: How can we pump in audio played from external sources (not the miz file), such as AI driven voice or files? This is a feature SRS has but I don't see anything about it in recent notes. Everything is greyed out in the radio settings page. Despite the recent video about it, the settings don't make sense. What do they do, why are they there? Why are there options to add radios and what does that mean? There are virtually no tooltips or explanations for any of it, nor does it make any sense intuitively. Maybe this could be answered with properly labeled and descriptive UI, or maybe it was an inappropriate? Why are there no global settings for it? I don't want to mess with a massive list of settings for every single aircraft and every radio it has. Why hasn't anything been done about the FC3 style radio? SRS solves that problem, and this new system doesn't seem to address it at all because I can hear transmissions on all frequencies. How can I change the RADIO menu to be passive / unobtrusive, showing a transmission reception status bar of sorts, like what SRS provides, as a visual indicator for radio status? The ctrl shift tab menu is very large and obtrusive. There are still bugs existing that inhibit AI radio comms due to bugged callsign assignment in the mission editor. Why is that? It's a years old problem... I feel like an attempt was made to replace SRS and only made it 10% of the way, unless there is a lot I am unaware of?

My framerate seems to be about half. Not sure what the deal is yet.

Things I'm noticing so far: Like the new lightning weather effect, IR lasers are visible without NVGs now, but still hardly visible at all with the American NVGs and AH-64. Things that appear on map through fog of war disappear immediately after.

FSR is a wash. All aircraft within 2 miles vanish into a faint blur. Something needs to be done to make sure 3d models don't get blurred away like that, if that's even possible.

Don't perform your assumptions during takeoff. At slow speeds and slow rotation rates, your prop wash will produce more dominating moments and will mask the other effects. P-factor and Gyroscopic procession effects are better isolated in flight later on when speeds are much higher. Gyroscopic procession isolation requires high speed, high rpm, low power, and high angular rate movements in pitch or yaw. Pulling back a bit on throttle and going into a dive is a good method. P-factor isolation requires moderate speed, high power application (large difference in air speed vs prop true speed), and large alpha/beta. Reaching a moderately high speed and then pulling into a slight climb at full throttle is an ideal start to test. Manually choosing a lower RPM or higher prop pitch should usually produce a more pronounced effect. P-factor is about the difference in prop lift from one side to the other, which takes a parameter of free stream velocity projected in a direction perpendicular to the prop axis, meaning it's not just about the AoA. P-factor is very commonly misidentified as the yaw induced when punching throttle to start takeoff, but that is prop wash hitting the tail.

Requesting some basic functions to make WW2 aircraft behave more like the real thing, and in some cases, to improve controllability aspects that render parts of the sim unattractive. Tail Wheels Although a caster wheel doesn't have to have it, a caster wheel on an aircraft typically has what's called a caster angle. This caster angle ensures that when weight is applied to the wheel, the wheel attempts to reach its most recessed upward position. For most, this caster angle leans forward. For some, like the Thunderbolt, it leans back (and thus why it has shimmy and stability problems that a lock helps prevent). Bf-109 Fw-190A P-47 The Spitfire is a bit misleading because it looks like it might be mounted to a 45 degree caster axis, but it actually is not. It's much less, but still present and leans forward. The basic idea of this norm in geometric design is that when the tail wheel pivots away from its forward aligned position, the caster angle lifts the tail. Thus in reverse, gravity straightens it out. An approximation of the moment returning it might look something like M = F * sin(c) * sin(r) * d Where M is the moment around the y axis , F is the sum of force (weight + aerodynamic down/up force), c = caster angle relative to the ground, r is the rotation angle from the aligned position, and d is the offset of the tire from the caster axis. Some aircraft like the Fw190's take it even further and incorporate a return spring, where not only is there a caster angle assisting in ground stability, but also a spring that tries to push it towards center. I'd like to see caster angles modeled more cleanly in DCS. Without them, ground stability during taxi requires locking the tail. This may be more expected for a P-47, but it seems unreasonable for the rest, especially because of how much more difficult it makes ground handling. Prop + Prop-to-Tail effects I'd like to see P-factor and Gyroscopic procession implemented. It's not yet implemented on any aircraft but is a significant effect. Currently we only have torque roll and prop wash, but even those two effects have a few problems. P-factor is a moment that is applied when there is AoA or sideslip velocity and power applied. High AoA with power translates to left yaw. Right sideslip (left yaw angle) translates to negative pitch. Negative AoA translates to right yaw. Gyroscopic procession is almost the same, except instead of being based on the difference in thrust across a prop blades rotation, it is based on the RPM, rotational inertia, and pitch/yaw angular rates of the aircraft. When I pitch any aircraft up and down rapidly, or hold high angles of attack/sideslip, I experience neither of these effects. Torque Roll Some planes like the Fw190, when stuck in a vertical climb, will begin torque rolling as if the plane doesn't have wings. They will spin up like a helicopter. It's too fast. The wings should be applying some drag and dampening that prevent 4 rolls per second. Other planes, like the TF-51, don't have this (or prop wash) modeled at all. It just gets locked into position. This seems like an unfortunate mistake because it should be nearly identical to the P-51 model and it's also the introductory aircraft that people will judge the whole sim on. Prop Wash Prop wash otherwise looks really well done and I'm impressed with how it can be used to control a tail stand. There is just one minor problem with it, and it's that it doesn't deprecate in any way during a tail slide. Some might argue this isn't typically how the aircraft are flown but, that's not entirely true. It's just weird to be falling backwards at 50 kts and still have full prop wash control like a vectored thrust jet.

I have 32 fps. That's way too much. More polygons plz

It all sounds like very good guesswork to me. We had experimented in the past and found that cleaning junk immediately after sending vehicles into the cookoff state would have a high chance of causing both server and client crashes. Using an internal timer that resets on death/kill events to delay cleaning reduced crashing by quite a bit, but it was still fallible for avoiding cooked off vehicles. It would still crash after several hours on average. Now I'm wondering if it'd be worth a shot to reset the countdown on detected ground unit hits instead. If it works, I'd be more sure about it.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is related to the world.removeJunk() method crashing. When a unit's health is reduced all the way, the unit becomes nil in memory. Meanwhile, it continues to burn, only to explode much later. Once it explodes, the original model is replaced with a destroyed model and then sends a kill event. It appears cleaning the server with removeJunk() has a much higher likelihood of crashing the server when damaged nil units exist like this. The introduction of a critical damage event would be nice, but I feel like the most important thing is not making units nil before complete transition to death model after the kill event. That should solve a lot of problems preventing the community from gaining momentum with mission building. I've been able to form workarounds for tracking the complete destruction of groups, but it requires building a mirrored table of names and does nothing to help the removeJunk() or other issues

Are you still seeing this bug? I just got this module and have been running into this, especially with the m117s and after rearming. I've also been having trouble with flaps binding behavior and think there might be some kind of key or state error. I also considered whether or not hardpoints undergo structural damage by g-force or ground physics bugs, but I don't know of that was attempted to be modeled.

I'm away and might be eating a sock since I can't get in to verify right now, but IIRC, (ralt rshift K) on the keyboard showed the AI panel even though that binding is labeled gunner panel, but didn't work when using the joystick key instead. Can't find any reason for it. Both the default.lua files for keyboard and joystick have identical entries. No code mistakes that I can find so I don't understand how interference is happening.

I can verify. Binding a joystick to gunners panel does not work (Ralt Rshift K). However, binding a joystick to AI panel to a joystick does (Lshift H). The workaround is use AI panel instead apparently.

You have to make the sdef file in the same way as my example, and put it in that folder. There is an additional file stored in "DCS World OpenBeta\Doc\Sounds" that has a list of sdefs, sound files, and some examples on what possible settings you can play with.

Doesn't exist. You have to make it.

Hopefully it has some sort of briefing packet that acts like the kneeboard, but can by dynamically updated real time through lua scripting. This would be really good for multiplayer missions with dynamically changing environments.

Supposedly there is a problem with Tanker AI causing a fault when it uses an algorithm to find a base to RTB. It seems a plane has crashed into a tanker the instant before your crash. A workaround for this might be to ensure tankers have a valid place to land nearby that is not destroyed by craters n stuff. I've not tested this, just heard about it.

I respect people who flew the aircraft as well, I just don't always agree with them. They aren't sound engineers, radar engineers, flight model developers, weapons designers, or any host of other things far beyond their expertise unless they break off into that direction later on. If you want to ask whether or not someone, who's ears were probably destroyed by their job, can hear certain high-pitched things? I'd say their experience is probably not relevant regardless of what honor you want to place on it. My explanation to OP was to back the idea that this isn't really a bug. It just generally how the game's sound is designed, and they might be able to tweak it if they want to. That has nothing to do with your experience. Whether or not you want an arcade game is completely irrelevant. If you want to discuss full realism, perhaps the realistic approach is to simulate what's heard by someone who can't hear very well. They all are supposed to wear headphones around the plane for a reason.

Sure, and share with us your credentials and results from a hearing test so that I can subsequently ignore it because not everyone cares for your version of a realistic experience anyways. Well thankfully some people are given allowance to so long as it doesn't affect others.

Unfortunately, this is a problem that has existed throughout most modules in DCS. It's just how they chose to build their sound. A lot of it is based on video and sound recording by devices that don't handle loud noises very well, thus never really pick up the finer details. On top of that, they don't really use any kind of gain logic per distance and altitude, but instead try to force it by specifying the ranges you hear through min and max values. Any time a canopy or door is closed, all outside sounds are reduced in gain and range at the same time, when in reality it would probably only be gain and some filtering to a mich slighter degree. A lot of effects played in cockpit won't reach much beyond 100m except for explosions. I've done a bit of testing on this with various aircraft set to invulnerable and taking off past/through a field of enemy soldiers so I could hear their gunfire. Usually, gunfire decreases in volume to a point where it disappears once the soldier is about 100 meters away. On aircraft functions, many sounds will drop off to zero at just 10 meters, not exactly how audio works IRL. Well, a lot of people are playing this module without 'hear like in helmet', so a lot of sounds aren't intended to be realistically experienced anyways. Further, how many F-15 pilots have taken off or exercised those actuators with their helmet off and canopy closed? until someone decides to use very high-quality audio capturing equipment inside a cockpit during takeoff, I don't think anyone will have a valid point of argument on whether or not this sound can be heard. There may even be some pilots who've been in this position, but simply don't have good enough ears. If someone really wants to hear this sound because they want to, not because they should, there might be an easy way to mod the game for it. I'm assuming these are the sound files and sdefs: Aircrafts/Engines/F100-PW-229/e_F15E_cenc_close.sdef wave: Effects/Aircrafts/Engines/F100-PW-229/e_F15E_cenc_close Aircrafts/Engines/F100-PW-229/e_F15E_cenc_open.sdef wave: Effects/Aircrafts/Engines/F100-PW-229/e_F15E_cenc_open And an example sdef would probably look like user/Saved Games/DCS.openbeta/Sounds/sdef/Aircrafts/Engines/F100-PW-229/e_F15E_cenc_close.sdef wave = "Effects/Aircrafts/Engines/F100-PW-229/e_F15E_cenc_close" inner_radius = 1 outer_radius = 100 gain = 1 lowpass = 1000.0 And you'd play with those values till it sounds how you like it, but you have to exit and reload the entire game to hear the changes.

Nice work. I have a few suggestions if you'd like... Quick upload buttons for each plane using their previous config at the main menu under where the plane is selected? If you are preloading everything, that might be as easy as dragging over a few buttons and linking the function. You can change the name of the window. It's still on default Form1. I think the properties of the CS file at the bottom right lets you rename all of it but I forgot if that's how it works exactly.

I think the problem is the radar. I noticed that if I use the radar for any other mode, my bombs stop falling where expected afterwards. The manual doesn't say anything about how to get into AGR mode, but it does say how you how to get out of it though. Putting the radar into a narrow cone seems to help, but It's hard to say.