Weta43

The static templates was a great addition to the Sim, as is the Select tool, but surely the select tool should have made the static templates redundant ? To select, copy and move a group of units and static objects, the ME must be capable of creating a collection of mixed objects, recording their relative positions and replicating that collection at another point on the map. Why does the ME not allow that collection to be saved as a description in the same way templates are saved ? (Or just write what you've already written to memory, to disk as a readable file...) That would allow (for instance) a BUK site complete with revetments/ sandbags etc to be saved & dropped onto any map, rather than having to have a static template for Afghanistan, another for the Caucuses etc.etc. ?

it seemed the saved state function offered the possibility of missions starting from road bases. Unfortunately if I make a simple mission with a player Su-25 & land on a road, then use the save state function, exit and load the saved mission, the aircraft won’t be on the road, it will be on a parking space at the nearest airport. Is this the intended behaviour or a bug caused by an unexpected use case ?

Ironically, I only knew about the sidebar option and didn’t know about the edit/ drop-down

That’s pretty damn cool !

You might not have seen this - the Mig-29 part starts about 9 minutes in.

This was an interesting post by overscan... MiG-29 Avionics | Page 2 | Secret Projects Forum & gives quite a different engagement regime to what we have in DCS for any N001 derivatives

I suspect when you're generating a random start time you're probably already using a randbetween(0,1) function or its equivalent anyway. If that's the case giving the user more control would require virtually no coding, just 2 input boxes and pass the variables back so the user can enter something like randbetween[(0.25,0.75) {06:00 - 18:00}] to get day, [(0.25,0.375) {06:00-09:00}] for the morning etc... If the plan is to make the QAG simple to use, set the defaults to (0.250,0.667)

Thanks, but I'd found that just before posting & it was the missing images that made me ask Thanks - a blast from the past.

Or (if I've forgotten where the trim button is) I can fly like I'm rolling a smoke while driving and clamp the stick between my legs, then lift the box up with both hands & hold it up where I can see what I need to at the same time as I manipulate the dials with both hands... You must have done that at some time in your life? Or did you roll your smokes while looking at you lap ?

LOL - you make me laugh. Yes, to see my (virtual) leg. So that while you're setting the 4 different dials and trying to read it you can still see what's going on in - & outside of - the cockpit. Have you ever used a slide-rule? They're a head down piece of equipment that you have to be careful with. Using with a mouse, rotaries or even worse key binds will be a nightmare. Either make it a moveable device (as for kneeboard or 'Garmin') or slap it mid screen but make it partially see through so you can work but not end up losing SA.

Anyone still got access to a copy of Overscan's guide to Russian radar? From memory that had a reasonable amount of info on how the GCI could direct the MiG-29 radar and give instructions on intercept speed, course, AB use etc...

For the rest of you in the ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ crowd: https://reaa.ru/threads/nakolennyi-planshet-npl-m.5387/ (it's a circular navigation slide-rule) It doesn't look like something I want to be trying to manipulate the various rings of with a mouse while trying to fly... (unless it's partially see-through)

Hi E.D. 3 months since the East came out - any news on when the North might arrive ?

Quite likely, but if you ask you might get what you want If you don't ask you won't ...

Thanks, & that's great work, but it shouldn't be something that you need to script (or as I've been doing - trigger), it should just be a simple setting in the ME. All the mechanics for under the hood already exist, they just need bringing together in the front page of the GUI.

Add a % of time engaging (& evaluation period) option in the waypoint advanced options dialogue of the ME. Ground forces in DCS always engage as if they're kamikaze forces - they charge to the next waypoint at 100 % of their intensity & advance for 100% of the time they have a waypoint to reach unless actively aiming their weapons. it's both unrealistic, and means ground forces suffer very high attrition rates on contact with the enemy, making it difficult to set up ongoing ground engagements in the ME. I've resorted to setting switched condition triggers against ground groups to turn them on and off randomly ( like every 'n' seconds reset a trigger value for each group between 1 & 100, and if it's less than some number (eg 25) turn the group on, if it's more turn it off. A 15 second evaluation (n) gets a slower rate of change, 3 seconds something a bit more frantic), while it gives a slower, more staccato pace to the ground combat, setting that up with a set of triggers for each group is time consuming. Being able to set a % time active & an evaluation rate in the advanced waypoint properties for each group would make the whole process simple and make the ground combat more customisable & realistic - and all the building blocks are already in the ME.

I think conceptually it's a good idea - & perhaps a good start at that idea (is it easing in tech developed for the campaign mode?). At the moment it's a 'simple mission generator' rather than a 'quick mission generator' as (I timed it) it took me 6:28 to make a mission with a couple of targets, some AAA & some ground troops & set a loadout, and 11:05 to replicate that in the QMG (probably 2/3 of that waiting for the mission to generate) As the OP said, one thing that seems to be missing is the ability to add 'structures' from the static objects list That said, I do like how it always throws in a large building for A2G missions so you can find the targets without a full briefing

Came to post the same suggestion - rather than 'random', randbetween(start, end) - then you don't need a time specifier, you just make the start & end the same.

Or 2160 x 3840

LOL … say only the very small percentage of DCS player who can regularly carve > 4 or 5 hours out of their lives to fly a single mission without precipitating an end to their relationship & a custody battle.

Interesting - that would explain why it's not well described in the literature. Loved or not, it's still something that was available on the 9.12 but not on the 9.12A, which makes the 9.12A 'functionally downgraded'. Seems obvious at some level - if there were no functional difference there wouldn't be any point in creating an export version and installing that to Warsaw pact aircraft rather than keeping life simple & just exporting the original radar (/IRST/IFF) Unless 'EA' is the Russian acronym for "With Soviet Version of Tesla Kill Switch"

It says in the quote I posted at least 1 way it was downgraded; it's missing a search mode that the Soviet radar had : "N-019EA is the version supplied to Warsaw Pact countries. Lacks “SP” mode."

So you're sure Wikipedia*'s wrong when it says that : "MiG-29 (Product 9.12A) 'Fulcrum-A' Export variant of the 9.12 for Warsaw Pact countries which included a downgraded RPLK-29E radar, downgraded OEPrNK-29E optoelectronic and navigation systems and older IFF transponders." That's good news *& from elsewhere: "N-019EA is the version supplied to Warsaw Pact countries. Lacks “SP” mode." ("Mode “SP” (???): Free Search Information on this mode is not available. It is believed to be a high PRF mode similar to Encounter mode, only available on Soviet standard machines, with better ECCM capabilities.")

Looks amazing - I really don't fly A2A very much anymore, but I might make an exception for this. The little "No planes were harmed in the filming of this video" disclaimer at the end of the trailer cracked me up.