shagrat

MMA is the correct term. The FCR is one part of the Mast Mounted Assembly, the other is the RFI and the mast mount, of course.

This has been happening since early on, but I couldn't find a bug report through the search so it might have been missed. When you start the APU on the AH-64D in Multiplayer the other(!) players only ever here the startup whine in a loop instead of the "normal" sequence of start sound, constant purring and shutdown sound. It's not game breaking for sure, but annoying and as the Apache seems to get closer to completion you may want to have a look... erhm, ear.

I should bring this up in the industry I work in. To make sure nobody is re-selling our products we could go the license approach... Sounds like a brilliant business idea for anything from toasters, fridge, heating to cars, toilets etc. "To flush please ensure your loo has Internet connection" of course this is necessary for your own benefit, as it's required to optimize water usage in the flushing process... No, he had to have a very good reason, that could stand a trial. If you did not violate the terms of use, he wouldn't really have a leg to stand on and may even have to compensate your business for damages, caused by his actions...

...and it is associated with two conflicts that saw 80% of the modern modules in action for BluFor AND RedFor. Besides the OEF part as a modern conflict is widely publicized and documented, and Vietnam is what we do the last 50 years in dozens and dozens of games. The A-10C, the AH-64D, AV-8B Harrier, F-15E, F-16C, F/A-18C, F-14B, upcoming OH-58D and CH-47, even the Mirage 2000 (little artistic liberty) took part in the sorties over Afghanistan... add the diverse landscape with challenging mountain ranges, I am stoked to get my hands on that map. There's always hope, but I guess there's a lot of work to be done with all the new technology available now. I would start my personal hype train, when we see more regular screen shots and occurrences of the map in Wags' videos...

Same problem here. And intentional or not, it should be working on both displays, as in most aircraft adjusting the map backlight against the symbology, is crucial to optimize readability. The CP/G TDU is affected as well. If this is indeed intentional, please consider to make this an option (screen export - fixed brightness vs. adjustable brightness).

I mean if I've built the mission and briefed specific rules of engagement, you would have lost the mission, get requested to RTB and missed out on the remaining action...

So you think we should "ask" to add villages, roads, lakes, dams and forests, as well?! I mean they did those AND the railways on all other maps, but just to be sure?

More important, what I would love to create in missions is the "civilian life" in an insurgency scenario, where the bad guys can't be just eliminated by saturating a whole village with bombs and rockets and deliberately deciding on weapon employment and parameters, or even waiting for the target to clear a populated area, is part of the mission.

Valid approach to a computer game and a round of air quake, but there is a considerable part of the community that does mission planning and really consider things like playtime versus weight and maneuverability or maximum weapons load at temperature/altitude. Especially if you fly the Harrier or helicopters...

On top we have rules-of-engagements in all modern scenarios, where asymmetrical warfare was the norm. So to actually simulate(!) any post 90ies conflict, we need civilian/neutral non-combatants to simulate the challenge for the pilots to do proper identification, weigh weapon effects and radius against the risk of collateral damage. Currently it is mostly "if it moves, shoot it", which doesn't do the challenge and complexity justice.

Calculating fuel needed for a mission with pen, paper and a CR-3 in lbs and pulling the slider in the rearm/refuel menu to the amount of lbs jetfuel required instead of fiddling around with the slider guessing what xx% in the fuel tanks will show on the fuel gauge.

Google DCS MOOSE and look at the Range Class. https://flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS_DEVELOP/Documentation/Functional.Range.html Here is an example mission on the Marianas map, with modern units, but the strafe targets, bomb circle etc. work with any DCS setting.

By default the WinWing MIP display screens are pretty dim. Though there are no brightness/contrast controls, there is a neat little freeware tool called "ScreenBright" that uses a specific protocol (DDC/CI Display Data Channel/Command Interface) to set graphics settings to these kind of displays. Simply download the tool (comes in a Zip-file) extract the ScreenBright exe and start it (no installer, just a graphical tool to command the settings). All your monitors are presented as tabs. Note the Values on the info bar at the bottom, before changing settings with the sliders and if you are happy, save them. Try not to save too often, from what I could research these settings are usually saved in an EEPROM which will wear down if written excessively. Though this should not be an issue, as you want to adjust the brightness and contrast only once. I've set mine to Brightness 88.9 and Contrast 50.0.

Like an Intel briefing where the spooks tell you where to expect possible enemy and you enter those positions to the things on the MDC, so they show as a control measure on the TSD. CMs are a briefed static view of the suspected situation on the battlefield, not a real time satellite surveillance.

Der Web-Editor ist aktuell noch closed Beta, du kannst aber seit ein paar Tagen eine "7-Tage Beta"-Testversion die man "kostenlos" unterstützen kann. Geplant ist der Web-Editor als freies Community Projekt und soll dann demnächst frei verfügbar sein... Im Prinzip haben die Unterstützer halt bereits Zugriff auf die Alpha und Beta Version. So stellen sie sicher, daß die Leute auch Feedback geben und aktiv mittesten. Bin mal gespannt, der Web Editor sollte eigentlich bald für die Öffentlichkeit vefügbar sein.

Stimmt! Mit ẞ also "Heißt Flagge!". Keine Ahnung ob ich was verwurschtelt hab oder das Handy "korrigiert" hat. Da es ein Kommando im Formaldienst ist, geht "Hisst Flagge!" übrigens nicht, auch wenn man die Flagge daraufhin hisst.

Ich meinte schon im normalen Gespräch, nicht Formaldienst... Und ja, absolut korrekt, es heißt "Heisst Flagge!" und "Holt nieder Flagge!". Aber "Los Leute, absitzen! Zügig!" oder "Gib mal die Mumpeln rüber!" ist eher alltäglicher Sprachgebrauch. Was bei der Übersetzung in der GUI etwas anders ist, als bei Sätzen in Schriftstücken, etc. ist der Platz der zur Verfügung steht und die Tatsache, daß mit .PO files gearbeitet wird. Deutsche Bandwurmbegriffe in den Platz zu quetschen, der im englischen Original gut passt, ist manchmal nicht so einfach und erfordert Kompromisse. Ein Begriff in einem PO kann auch keine zwei verschiedenen Bedeutungen haben...

Da wäre ich mir nicht so sicher... Ich kann eher vom Gegenteil berichten.

Sprachausgabe ist garantiert noch von der A-10C damals, als Raku die vertont hat. Wenn sich das TACAN hinterher geändert hat, passt das Audio nicht mehr. Die Timings sind in der Tat durch die unterschiedlichen Längen, aber ich hatte die Trigger dafür mal angepasst, vor Ewigkeiten. Kann gerade nicht selber testen, aber normalerweise sollten die Texte/Audios wenn man nicht Leertaste drückt, oder Joystick-Trigger, durchlaufen. Die alten Trainings haben noch zeitgesteuerte Trigger, was nicht immer mit den langen deutschen Audios passt. Wenn ich die Tage Zeit finde, schaue ich mal, ob das einfach zu fixen ist.

I step out. The Early Warning Radar sites (TF Normandy example) were not only unaware, they were basically incapable of defending themselves against an attack. The Air Defenses of that site were not SAMs... they were AAA with no radar and some APCs etc. Comparing apples and oranges doesn't make sense. As I said we can do as we please in DCS, but just because it can be (easily) done in DCS doesn't make it viable in the real world and thus if one wants a modicum of realistic tasking, it is a good idea to look at the real world.

If possible evade and go around. If your target is that specific column, request support by SEAD aircraft. If neither is possible make a decision based on the briefing and contingency planning. If the fate of the world depends on you killing that one tank in that column, sacrifice yourself for glory! If it's just a normal task to delay enemy advances to prepare for an assault etc. Save the multi-million dollar asset and two highly skilled pilots to fight another day and get the hell outta there.

The important difference between an EW-Radar and a SAM battery would be the fact, that one of them shoots actual missiles at aircraft, the other doesn't... A small but significant difference, at least in my book.

Thank you, that's what I am trying to get across for quite a while.

It is how DCS keybinds work. The actual real life switch has 3 positions (ON-OFF-STOW) available as 3 separate keybinds. In addition DCS provides two alternative keybinds to move the switch up or down (searchlight switch UP and searchlight switch DOWN) to the next position. Basically you safe one physical button on your HOTAS using only two physical buttons to move the switch up and down.

There's a basic role and mission set defined for the Army Air helicopter organization. It is defined in FM 3-04.111 and FM 3-04.112 (unrestricted). SEAD/DEAD is not a mission profile for an AttackHelicopterBrigade. Should an AH team encountering a sneaky SAM battery defend itself and may attack the threat in self defense if opportune? Definitely yes. Should an AH team evade and sneak around known enemy air defense to reach a battle position from which it can attack the target(s)? Definitely yes. Should an AH team actively seek out enemy air defenses and SAMs? No! Not unless a dire situation calls for a strike on such a target that cannot be done by any other assets, with less risk. One sentence in the Field Manual that for me was key to understand, why in DCS it often feels wrong when we roam around to find "worthy prey". (...)"An ATKHB never fights alone. Attacks are coordinated with other maneuver, combat support, CSS, and joint forces to form a combined arms team. This team surprises and overwhelms the enemy at the point of attack. Attacks may be conducted out of physical contact with other friendly forces but synchronized with their scheme of maneuver, or they may be in direct contact with friendly forces."(...) Again, this is my take on it. I am sure as with all good plans, in real life they don't last very long if the <profanity> hits the fan, but at least the design consideration for a realistic mission should try to reflect the basic role and doctrine for an aircraft, not that a "special situation" can't call for a creative solution... I mean, they even used Apaches to evacuate downed pilots, in some case, though the AH mission profile isn't exactly CSAR either.