DaleHawerchuk

That is what I thought thanks

I have started playing with AI wingman on my practice runs, just to make it a bit more dynamic. Most things work right but I cannot manage to make my AI wingman attack a ground target. I tried designating a target on my LANTIRN and then calling my wingman to engage my target, but nothing happens, what am I missing?

@BIGNEWY Is this bug acknowledged/being worked on by ED? Just asking.

Thanks, you're right I didn't know about this general AI bigs sub. Anyway this bug wasn't acknowledged on the post you referred but it is more or less what I am experiencing. I just want to be sure ED knows about it cause it can be game breaking when a mission depends on AWACS input...

I don't know if this has been previously reported, but I couldn't find anything. After asking on r/Hoggit I learned I am not the only one that has experienced it. I just noticed it because I was more into ME but apparently been a problem since 2.9.6. Basically what happens is that an AI aircraft will reach a weird stalling-like state during a climb, where its speed and altitude are stuck, with high AOA jitters. For me this behaviour is worst with the E2, GS gets locked around 195 kts GS, usually happens around ang 20.7. As I said at this point the E2 gets stuck there @ GS 195 and stops climbing, while still following its route. Have seen similar weird behaviors from other aircraft, but they seemed to recover after a while unlike the E2. Here's what I tried so far to corner the issue: Change my WPs GS for the E2, from 200 kts all the wayto the maximum of 330, doesn't affect the behavior. Change my WPs distances and tried to "smooth" the climb to get allow a slower climb, doesn't change anything. Made the E2 start at final altitude & speed. No problem then to make it to other WPs and orbit, because there wasn't any climbing involved. All testing was done in Caucasus with E2 launching from CVN72. No mods used only custom liveries. Playing on the Hornet/SC modules. I'm out for the week, if this has not been previously reported and a track is required, I will provide one at the end of the week. Thanks

I've found a workaround to use with my buddies and it works very well. Additionally to the Voicechat channels, we use Discord Voice Channels (MIDS A & MIDS B). On DCS Voicechat we use COM1 for Mission (Strike/Marshal/Tankers/ATC) and COM2 for our flight tactical. We are then separated by sections on our Discord MIDS (with open mic). The trick is to bind Push to mute keybinds in Discord on the same buttons you are using in DCS as PTTs. This allows you to talk on DCS radios without having your wingman hear you in double, because as you are using DCS radios you are muting yourself in Discord. We don't have the need yet but I've seen you can also bind Discord channels switch, so you even do something similar to use 2 MIDS channels.

Oh man, that's definitely a love/hate relationship! Thanks though

VFA-193 are a bunch of friends that started playing together a few months ago. We are just getting into more "serious" stuff mission-wise, and I had a blast taking screenshots of our last flights. All aircraft liveries are custom made. I am currently working on a DCS campaign for the Hornet and if I ever get to finish it, these liveries are to be featured in it. They are depicting fictional squadrons, but I tried to keep the liveries and the whole airwing structure as "realistic" as possible, similar to what Kevin Miller / Baltic Dragon did with Raven One. Featured in the pictures: VF-77 Warmongers VFA-193 Gators VS-39 Mosquitoes* Feel free if you have any comments about the pictures/liveries, enjoy! *Special thanks to @Tomcatter87 for those, I started off from his S-3B skinpack to do my own.

Simple question, is it possible for aircraft within the same carrier event to have the same flight numbers, but with different callsigns? For example, could an event include Rampage 11, 12, 13, 14 and Texaco 11, 12? In other words, is the callsign considered sufficient to differentiate aircraft with the same flight numbers? I'm working on realistic campaign scenarios. When you start building strike packages including tankers and EW, you kind of go through them quite fast. I'm also assuming that as some USN aircraft are using the octal system, flight numbers can only use numbers from 1 to 7? Any light from someone with irl experience would be awesome. Thanks

I finally had a second shot at it, no problem this time, so seems like it was just the AI that went crazy the first time.

Thanks for the heads up!

Thanks for the feedback. And yes I know DCS AI can be janky I edit as well, not blaming you. So you are saying I should stay on Arrow 1's left side? like in close formation going up? This part confused me as I wasn't sure if I needed to stay with him (going up) or straight ahead (level). I went slightly up and not quite as close to Arrow 1 the 1st time, maybe that was the problem. I'll try again tomorrow and send you the track if it happens again.

I'm not sure if I encountered a bug or not but at the end of the formation flying in M02, 2 Arrows collided together during the break. I don't think it was caused by me as if I understood correctly, Ford & Matrix are supposed to continue straight away and climb, which is what I was doing. Did anybody else experienced this? No mods installed except Vaicom but it is only installed, I am not using it for now. I only tried it once for now. Anyway, not posting this to bring down the campaign, just to help Badger out. M01 went smoothly. I'm very much looking forward to finish the rest of the campaign. I learned flying the Hornet with Badger's campaigns. https://imgur.com/a/kiF6dRo

I did not! I'll check it out thanks

I am in the process of making a campaign, and needed some way to plan for my fuel in my missions. I am working on a fuel calculator/planner, but I needed some data first. Thought I could share the data I collected so far, pretty interesting stuff for a big Hornet nerd like me. Overall comparison, all the rest of the data in the PDF. I will share the calculator once I'm done and I had the chance to test it a bit. Hornet Fuel Data.pdf

Was waiting to see for Kola and Afghanistan before really getting into it, but as far as I'm concerned: Mixed reviews from Kola regarding performance and finition level discouraged me. It will get better in the future but until it is I cannot commit all the efforts a campaign requires based on hope. Afghanistan is landlocked, a campaign there would mean no carrier ops. Carrier ops are one the main reasons I decided to focus on the Hornet, and I think it is the case for a lot of people out there. With that said, a campaign involving a land-based Marines squadron would be nice indeed, but as Kola, just too early access at this point for me.

Thanks for the feedback! The coop aspect is definitely something lacking right now. Though I'm not sure if it would even be possible to release a full proprietary MP campaign through ED because of the way MP servers work. I understand mission creators for not going that route though. It is definitely a bigger challenge to keep everything under control (for a scripted scenario), and it also limits the functions available in the editor, as some are SP only.

I am starting to create a new campaign for the Hornet, here is how I would describe it: Set in Caucasus, summer of 2003. Definitely more on the realistic/milsim side. Baltic Dragon campaigns are basically my golden standard, with some things I would do differently. "Alternate history" where things did not happened that way but could have based on the geopolitical situation at the time. Inspired by lot of research to reflect tactics, squadrons and procedures as realistically as possible with the information available to a military aviation enthousiast. My goal is to eventually propose a 12 to 15 missions with a full storyline, briefings and kneeboards. I'm building missions as SP but with some possibilities in their structure for 2-4 players MP coop. Depending on the quality of the final product I would maybe try to submit to ED as 3rd party, or eventually release for free. Now having tested some ideas already and gone through the whole process for few "test missions" that includes realistic scenario, briefing and voiceovers, I know there is a huge amount of work/time involved in such a campaign. So I am wondering if people in the Hornet community (that like this kind of campaign) would actually play a campaign set in Caucasus. I know it is not the most popular map, my reasoning behind choosing Caucasus as theather: Great potential scenario-wise for an "alternate history" with all that has been happening in the region in the 2000s. Already a lot of campaigns set in Persian Gulf and Syria. I find the flying in Caucasus more interesting because you get mountains, valleys and the sea. In the end I'm doing it just because I enjoy telling stories and playing those with my buddies, but I was still wondering if there would be any interest from the community. Any thoughts?

That's what I thought. I know, they need to step up their game.

I am trying to put together a complex MP mission involving AAR. I play with a group of various level DCS players and I would like to include a "skip refuel" option similar to what some campaigns include. Is it even possible? Here is what I tried: Set Command task in one of the client A/C for unlimited fuel, conditional to Flag 1 being ON Add a radio item in F10 menu, "Skip Refuel" w/ a link to Flag 1. Am I doing something wrong? Any better idea if even possible?

I found the issue. It looks like I just had too many USB devices connected (not controllers per se, just devices in general). My simpit is next to my workstation, so I have almost everything in double, keyboards, mice, plenty of wireless dongles, etc. With the added hubs from the simpit, I assume it was too much to handle. I removed what I was not really using, and can now connect all my Winwing and Virpil devices without a problem every time. Rebooted several times, all devices now keep the same ID. Thanks Speed for that JoyID app, that turned out to be quite useful. If this can help somebody with a similar issue in the future. Thanks for the suggestions guys really appreciated.

Yeah I did yesterday but I am now re-updating/re-setting all my devices. I think I may have done the initial setup through hubs yesterday, which they recommend against. Will check if that solves the issue.

I think it is because I have daisy chained it with my button panel, thinking it would save me one device. I am now doing tests back in its standalone connection (as it was initially) to see if something changes.

This is so weird... I disconnected all Virpil devices, I connect the pedals, move it to ID#10, then as soon as I connect the stick rudder disappears and everything changes order.

You are right, there is definitely something wrong my devices ID... It seems I cannot have my stick base and my rudder pedals connected at the same time. I'm not sure what to do at this point honestly. I tried the JoyID but it just seems to show me to problem, not sure to understand how I can use the software to solve it..