SloppyDog

Have you tried this?

Mk-20/CBU-99. Improved bombsight accuracy. Please note that using FMU-140 in low-altitude horizontal flight bombing runs will lead to poor accuracy - in these cases Mk 339 fuze must be used. FMU-140 should provide acceptable accuracy in dive bombing runs and, in specific conditions, in horizontal flight bombing runs (function altitude set to ca. 1/3 of release altitude and specific airspeed at release, e.g. function altitude - 3 kft, release altitude - 10 kft, TAS - 580 kts) Mk-20/CBU-99. Fixed Mk 339 fuze function delay being counted down after arming instead of after release Thanks ED for this. I am a cluster bomb fanatic. I've been testing and retesting cluster bombs in DCS, for their effects, best release and function parameters and so on. Regarding the Mk-20s and CBU-99s, my tests always showed that both bombs always worked very well with the Mk 339 fuzes. Always very effective. And, if you use the right time of function, you can get pretty good results. And if the default settings were used, the bombs were always very effective at 1,000 feet AGL in level flight. But, if using the FMU-140, the bombs were always ineffective. It didn't matter the profile. Thank you for addressing the issue and telling us how to properly set and use them in game. CBU-99 Height of Function.xlsx

This video talks abou the lights in the P-47. Regarding the instruments lights, they work as fluorescent lights. You set them to start, in order to send a high voltage pulse to the UV ligths, then you set them to the middle and or DIM position. You don't keep them at the start position, only for a couple of seconds then move the knob out of that zone. If you keep the knob on the Start position, the UV lights filaments will blow and the lights won't work anymore.

Prop planes tend to roll left while taking off. Large power engines, like those in the P-47, Spitfire, Mustang and Corsair will make the plane really roll to the left. I don't know your level of experience with flight sims, but the -47 is very different from your average Cessna. If you take a Cessna to take off, it will tend to roll left, but you compensate that with a little bit of right rudder. In trainer aircraft like a Cessna you can push full power for take off. It is docile and forgiving, it is a family car. On the other hand, think of WWII airplanes as sports cars, or even top fuel dragsters. You don't go full throttle on take off. If you do, the torque will be so high that a left roll during take off becomes irrecoverable. In the P-47, if you are "light", with only the main fuel tank full and machine guns ammunition, you do the following: 1) align with the runway 2) Prop pitch full forward 3) Press the brakes and bring manifold pressure to 30 inHg 4) Release the brakes and then slowly but surely bring the manifold to 46 inHg. That's it 5) as @kablamoman said, you accelerate in the runway and then let the plane take off by itself. No need to pull on the controls. However, be aware to input right rudder and right aileron to compensate for the torque roll. Once you get more experienced, you can try new weights and fuel combinations. A fully fueled P-47, with a central tank and two large bombs on the wings, will require 52 inHG or more to take off. But only then, since the aircraft weight will make the left roll tendency less noticeable. Otherwise, control your throttle and let the aircraft take off on its own.

The thing with DCS is that it is a Digital Cockpit Simulator. It'll give you a good experience inside the cockpit, but regarding the outside world, not so much. And that's it. ED has no focus on building a better AI, be it friendly or foe. No integrated air defense systems, no full on ATC experience. Unfortunately that real life like experience belongs to BMS. And it has been this way for the last 15 years. ED focus is on releasing module after module because that is where their expertise is at. Once I accepted this fact, I've learned to enjoy the game more for what it is, not for what I expect it to be. On the other hand, the thing that has been bothering me is the fact that lately DCS has become the "good enough" simulator. Where a module is released, and if it is good enough to fly and people have fun, ED will release it. The bare minimum today is acceptable. I remember when ED first released the A-10C, one of its main selling points, and something that ED would brag about, was that what we got on the sim corresponded to 90% of the real thing. ED cared. Cared about fidelity and details; today not so much. The Chinook was released in a pre-alpha state, with lots of basics features missing. Kola map, approved by ED, has the worst ground textures since FSX. And the Mosquito is celebrating its 4th anniversary without any further development. But hey, they are all flyable, people have fun with them, so why bother making them more detailed and faithful to the real thing. right? And don't even get me started on the whole Razbam situation. My trust is gone. Today I saw a video about the C-130 cold start procedure. All look great, but again, will it be released in an almost finished state? I don't trust it will. Latest releases have been plagued by bugs and unfinished features. In the end, I believe that who gonna save DCS is the community. If only ED would be so kind to give modders more flexibility and access to create new things, this would take DCS to new heights.

There's a lot of good info on those pages. I have tried to make a mission where you could fly as a Door Gunner while the AI automatically takes you around a circuit. But the Ai pilot instead prefers to do a NOE flight than flying at the set altitude. Meanwhile, other Huey set as transport flies at the set altitude until landing. Don't understand why this is happening. I'll investigate further. The mission I made is attached below. Huey Door Gunner Test Flight.miz

Cool tutorial! So, from what I could gather, you used the AI pilot. Did you start as door gunner and the AI did all the flight? I'll see what I can come up with.

@NineLine could you please take a look at this? Thank you.

Sorry to interrupt the PTO assets announcement party, but I have a question regarding the save mission scripting function. With the use of the "world.getPersistenceData(name)" function will it be possible to extract the state of the player aircraft from a saved mission file? From what i understood from the function description it will be possible to fly to a border of a map, save the mission, load a new mission in a nem map, recover the state of the aircraft and continue mission. If that's the case, it would be possible to make missions between adjoining maps. For mission creation, it would add a new layer of challenge and immersion. What are the parameters extracted from the persistance json? Fuel, armament, damage state?

Maybe the bomblets are not having time to arm. The canister may be opening but the bomblets are not arming in time. Depending on the altitude you are releasing the bombs, they need time to open and arm the submunitions. You cannot release the bombs from a high altitude and set the burst altitude too low, otherwise you are not giving enough time for the bomblets to arm. Refer to the following thread: Also, I attached a spreadsheet showing the calculated height above ground that the bomblets will armed. Line 36 of the spreadsheet refers to your first run. You released from 19,000 feet with a VT1 of 700 feet AGL. The problem with this setting, considering a standard ARM Delay of 1.2 seconds, is that the bomb will open 33.73 seconds after release and be armed at 34.93 seconds. It gives an altitude of -625.36 feet AGL, meaning that the bomblets will hit the ground before being armed. For the other bombing runs, with the burst setting at 2,200 feet AGL, it gives the bomblets enough time to arm, being able to arm at around 1,000 feet AGL over the target (lines 33 to 35 of the spreadsheet). However, the problem I noticed is that with CBU-99 you need to be right on the money when attacking the target. As precise as you should be using Mk-82s, for example. If you hit a little bit off, the bomblets won't have much effect, or none at all. And by releasing them from altitude, the bombs miss by a little and the bomblets cannot have an impact on target. See the attached track file. I make one run from altitude with no effect, and the another at low level, with much success. From my testing, CBU-99 and Mk20 work way better at low level, from 1,000 to max 5,000 feet over the target. CBU-99 Height of Function.xlsx F-18 - CBU 99 - FMU-140 High and Low.trk

Regarding the latest update 2.9.18.12722, I would like to confirm that the issue has been solved, as per the changelog: Fixed: CBU-99 with FMU-140 slightly short in AUTO in another pass CBU-99s are working as intended in AUTO mode. They do fall short in CCIP mode, but I understand that it was not the issue being corrected in this patch. Just for you to know. Regarding the effectiveness of the CBUs, be it Mk-20 or CBU-99...you must hit exactly over the target, almost with a Mk-82 precision. I know that in the patch is noted that ED is working on the warhead power and fragmentation effects, so I'll wait for that to be implemented. Right now, from my testing, when released at 10,000 feet, the best burst altitudes, with FMU-140, are between 2200 and 3000 feet AGL over the target. If the bombs are a bit off, they won't work. But, anyway, I can live with it, listening to pilots interviews is not always that a weapon works as intended. F-18 - CBU 99 - FMU-140 Effective.trk

In Triggers, in the Action Section, you can find a "SET INTERNAL CARGO" or "SET CARGO ON UNIT". Just create a condition to when you want the unit, in this case, the enemy AI, to add a load to it and use the action mentioned above.

It's been a very disappointing experience for me (one more to add to the DCS World disappointments). I regret buying this map, along with the Sinai. Low resolution textures, terrible loading times. Looks ok at a distance, looks really bad at low altitude. I bought it based on the Orbx name. I believe this Orbx is not the same as the one that developed for P3D.

The last update (July 1st 2025) shows that this issue has been adressed:

Take a look from this video by Reflected. The AI uses the WWII engine equivalent to "use afterburner to climb". They'll use the entire available power to climb, including War Emergency Power. You can get into the mission editor and turn off that option. See if this works.

Oh well. The LUA console is mentioned in the manual, but we don't have access to it. It's only for DCS developers. Unfortunately.

You can find the device_id, button_ID and which values they assume when clicked inside the file clickabledtata.lua. Every aircraft in DCS has this file, and normally it is inside the Cockpit folder. For the F-18 for instance is inside the DCS World>Mods>aircraft>FA-18C>Cockpit>Scripts folder.

The manual doesn't say anything about it, but I believe these are for when you have an external equipment that inserts data into the sim. Example, a GPS or data cartridge with data that was taken during a real flight. Then this data can be inserted into the sim to redo a flight in sim in order to review it for debriefing. I believe it is for the military contractors that use the military version of DCS for training purposes.

Yep. much much better for me as well. I always suffered through landings, but now it is easier, with no unpleasant surprises along the way, like a sudden loss of lift. And on speed, or slightly fast as I like, is much more controllable now, easier to maintain using trim and throttle.

As a feedback, I got say that the Phantom is much more controllable now. I've been struggling with takeoff and, particularly, landings since day one. I can not for the life of me follow Reflected's By the Book landing techniques. I always had to come slightly fast at base and then only at final I slow down to on-speed. With the new flight model, I still have to do the same, but at the final the F-4 does not suddenly lose lift as before. Now I can feel it slowly losing lift as it fly over the run way threshold. Although Jester does not compliment my landings, at least he stopped complaining.

You guys knocked it out of the park!

Nice! It's a amazing feeling of accomplishment when we get to discover the inner workings of DCS.

@Zabuzard Thank you for answer and the the tips, especially on how to use Laydown mode "blind". Regarding Dive Laydown, it was user error. I tested it on Caucasus and on Nevada and works fine, requiring a little bit of a rollercoaster maneuver to bring the aircraft at level before bombing, but it's ok. Regarding Toss Modes, I have to test it. I was testing LADD, I get a release at the top of the climb (see TacView file attached), but still, I don't get any pull up cues. I'll have to test it further, setting it up manually. This particular mode is a mix of offset and loft modes and I believe that neither mode in the bombing computer can be used with to calculate the timers needed. As a side note, one can see that the 60/70's Cold War era was pretty crazy. On one hand you have this massive carpet bombing modes, legacy of WWII, on the other hand, the most creative loft and toss modes to deliver nuclear payloads. Crazy times. And, in the mix, you have the F-4E, which truly was the F-35 of its time: lots of sensors, a advanced computer with a multitude of employment modes in a especially capable, hugely versatile airframe. Tacview-LADD Test-DCS.zip.acmi

Holding off is the best decision right now. OnRe Tech released this map, made three updates to it and since September 2024 is quiet about it and we are without any updates. Also, it is not a popular map online. For me, it was a regrettable buy.

Well, I don't know much about the Ka-50 PVI, maybe you should ask in the Ka-50 Mission Editor forum. They can help you better. Regarding indication and parameters: indications is everything that is shown to you on a screen, on a instrument, on a HUD. Parameters are related to the aircraft attitude. Meaning altitude, speed, bank angle, etc. As you said, sometimes they can be confused with each other, not exactly replaced. Let's say you want something to happen when the helicopter speed reaches 200 kph. You can make a trigger based on the real helicopter speed (parameter) or from a indication showed in a instrument or HUD (indication). The difference is in the fact that the parameter takes the real speed of the helicopter. If you have a problem with your instruments, and they show you 200 kph while the real is speed is 100 kph, you may trigger an action at the wrong moment. Indication also work to trigger actions based on a warning light inside the cockpit. Let's say you want something to happen when the oil temperature light comes on, that's an indication. Also, if you trying to trigger an action based on the PVI visor, that's an indication too. Regarding the coordinates, the first thing that comes to mind is if you are using the same coordinates system. Make sure the PVI is in Latitude/Longitude (lat/long) and you are using lat long to check the coordinates. Other reason may be the difference between the real coordinates and the Inertial Navigation System (INS) coordinates for the helicopter computer. One of the characteristics of INS systems is that they drift, they deviate from the initial position with time. And they deviate fairly quickly. To fix this problem you need to make a manual fix, and this procedure is different to each aircraft. And some aircraft in DCS does not even allow for a INS fix. The best and easiest way to avoid INS drift is to set your missions after 1996 in the Mission Editor and/or set the mission options to include the option "SATNAV available for all sides" or something like that. Doing this will allow for GPS or GLONASS to be available in the mission, and these system will automatically correct any drift that the INS has. Try doing this and then checking the computer position and the real aircraft position. Just be sure to be in the same coordinate system.