Supernova-III

ok, unlabeled Just wanted to emphasize that the bugtracker is proper place for this post.

I have created a post on the bug tracker, it should be obvious. You must be 100% sure before saying someone is wrong:

duplicate of

duplicate of

In Su-25, salvo mode should not only work for bombs, but for unguided rockets as well.

Su-25 must have axes for wheel brakes, similarly to Su-27

Similarly to Su-27, it must have wheel brakes on the rudder pedals.

In Su-25 salvo must work for unguided rockets, but in DCS it doesn't work su-25-s-8-salvo-bug.trk su-25-s-24-salvo-bug.trk su-25-s-25-salvo-bug.trk

... makes sense!

After switching INS alignment to IFA (when the alignment process is finished), information about alignment usually disappears from AMPCD. But sometimes it doesn't, and even more, it starts counting seconds. In my case it occasionally happens in the mission I've created recently, but not every time... The date in the mission is set to Jun 2020. trk attached. Please help me, it annoys me from time to time in different missions. IFA-fail.trk

yeah, anyway I don't feel like I'm caused this error somehow. I don't do anything special in DCS.

@BIGNEWYthanks for the tips!

this is what I usually do On the other side, my question was a bit rhetorical. I just wanted to say, that the ATC we have today is mostly useless

it's not the case for the hornet, to the best of my knowledge. Some planes have that due to bob weights in the control system (like F-4, F-14, A-10), some planes don't. F-18 doesn't have it.

ATC (руководитель полетов) really needs improvement. What is "отход по схеме на 300"? What should I do when ATC tells me that?

done. It happened yesterday. At the and of the log file it's clear that the shutdown takes more than 30 seconds, but it was not the worst scenario...

Do you have Su-30 mod by Codename Flanker by any chance? It cripples the sound of some airplanes in the game.

I can't believe the program needs THAT HUGE amount of time for cleanup. This is the only reason why I assumed it depends on availability of some server, to send something before exit. And if the server is unavailable, it keeps waiting, waiting, waiting... It just makes more sense (but not much). Dear ED, please do something to this problem. It's not funny.

Sometimes it takes too much time for the game to exit, I see just black screen. Today I realized that it happened at the same time when the DCS site is unresponsive. Then I killed the process with the task manager and started the launcher. The launcher didn't authorize me. Looks like auth server went down together with the site. Looks like the game depends on the auth server availability even on exit. Is this the case? upd: attached dcs.log and dxdiag dcs.log DxDiag.txt

Thank you! Meanwhile, I'd like to mention how ED starts their weekly newsletter, announce, whatever: The question is simple: do you see the word "community" here? I think, this should answer all our questions to ED, to DCS, and everything related. And I'm still suffering from ED ignoring Su-25 (my fav aircraft) I always thought you guys (who loves F-16/18) get the best of DCS, but it's not that simple even here.

Currently, AI planes perform dive only by "pushing the stick forward", directly getting the nose down. In most situations this is fine and I don't care how AI performs diving. Except situations when I fly as a wingman with AI. In reality when performing dive attack, you initiate the dive in some specific way and most of the time this is not the way the AI does. Another scenario is aerobatics. One more is just flying according to the flight path, sometimes it's appropriate to execute dive by creating some roll (for example, low altitude training) I believe, that the dive is a very special maneuver and it should be configurable for AI. As I said, it's specifically critical thing when you fly as a wingman with AI. We have several places where this can be made configurable: Aerobatics task Combat tasks: bombing, strafing, all kinds of attack tasks Separate option in "Set option" menu Possible configuration parameters: "Initiate with" -- maneuver that is used to enter a dive Roll-in (roll angle between ~30 and 180, not including 180) g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load Half of a split-S g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load Half of a split-S + half of a barrel roll g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load "Recover" -- how AI should recover from dive Climb angle g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load Forced turn Attitude: level, climb, dive g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load sector angle Having that, flying as a wingman with AI will be definitely more enjoyable.

This is what I know: Stick Top left button - countermeasures Top center - trim Top right - disable laser finder/designator (signed is "Нуль АСП") Bottom left - steering the laser-guided weapon Not sure about that red switch Two triggers, for different weapons Throttle The top switch is for enabling laser designation system Two round buttons for radio The very bottom control is for deploying the airbrake

Yeah, I'm aware of their position and I'm basically hopelessly trying to win something. This is my fav aircraft. What else can I do? Maybe build my own sim with Su-25, but you know... There are little to no options, so I'm trying to push my position. I'm fine if ED are not gonna make FF module because of possible conflict with RF. But what I don't understand, is how is that freaking possible to ignore obviously obvious flaws in the existing module, and why they don't have any plans to fix this. Why no plans?

There's a lot can be done just based on public sources, mainly books about Su-25. For example: 1. Wheel brake axes 2. Navigation system: manual control over steerpoints for every programmed airfield 3. Weapon control: set the amount of unguided rockets to fire, at least It doesn't require to get access to secret documents.

There are many other (former) operators of Su-25, Czechia for example. Many people mentioned this, but developers tend to not respond to this. Could you please clarify what do you mean by "still very protected by the Russian government"? Why this makes ED avoiding Su-25?