RPY Variable

I bought the crew pack for the same reason as you, to fly with my brother. And It worked as expected. Lots of fun. :joystick:

Thanks for the reply. I know abbot the DCS multiplayer limitation regarding changing seats, I just wanted to know If there was some hope of being implemented in the future, now that there is a mi-24 being developed that will also need this feature. 5) and 6), I understand. 1) Thanks for taking it into consideration. This will resolve what I consider is the main single pilot flying limitation, and it also does comply with your design philosophy.

1- I'm not trying to pull any argument. You pulled one that you couldn't sustain. 2- Yes, DCS core limitation. It is strange that you are so encouraged on this matter but you don't even know why jumping to the RIO's seat is not implemented on multiplayer. That limitation is one of the main reasons of this request.

Even if Jester was perfect.

1. Yes, the same SIM that still has flaming cliffs simplified aircraft. 2. You are telling me that it is okay to jump between seats in middle air on SP but it is unrealistic to flip a switch from the front on MP. Even if we had the RIO's cockpit on a second monitor, like with HELIOS. That doesn't make sense at all. There is an ED limitation regarding MP, this would solve some part of that problem.

There is something that is needed to be done with the radar elevation angle. TWS AUTO won't fix this problem. Jester just leaves it on the middle, and ar 40K or 30K feet we are losing half of the radar's search volume. I bet that nobody uses the elevation selection via "LOW-MIDDLE", "MIDDLE", etc... the "middle-low" is about -16° which is way too much, it is looking only 20nm from 40K feet!. One solution would be having a -3.1° elevation and name it "Own altitude and down" which means that no matter the TID's range, the radar will search from our own altitude and down. We will use it while flying high and searching for bandits down on the mountains. Then +3.1° named "Own altitude and Up", which is the same but inverted, our own altitude and above us, and we would use this while flying low. This would give us the ability of scanning with all the radar search area potential. Then maybe 6°, 9° -6, -9°.. but with the +-3.1° is a whole other story. Another solution would be to give us the radar elevation and azimuth from the font cockpit and stop with this problem once and for all. Let's be honest, coding human intelligence is not possible yet, and there is not much sense of being able to tell him via awkward modes instead of just binding the axis. For the ones that say "you need a RIO"... I bought two F-14, one for me and the other for my pilot, but he is not always available. I never imagen that there would be such a vendetta against managing the whole aircraft like in any other sim. This only adds more limitations to the aircraft. For the ones that think that it is not "real"... less real is to be on an F-14 and not being able to at least configure a propper search area like in any other aircraft with radar. On STT mode, make Jester IFF immediately, tell us the result. Sometimes he doesn't IFF at all or he takes to much time. When on TWS mode and there are two known bandits, make him always select the nearest one, so we have the radar display information of the nearest threat. He tends to select the furthest one. EDIT: Please give us the option of +-40 azimuth scan on TWS. Please get Jester to start the alignment process when ground air and power is on. Or at least when engine one is on. Why does he need both engines on to start the alignment? Make Jester start the startup procedure even if the pilot doesn't arm the ejection seat. Please make an option to shut down the Jeste ejecting by his own means. It adds nothing to the simulation and it is very frustrating. Even if he doesn't eject, because he is making comment and threatening to eject. Make Jester set the starting airport as homebase if there is no preplan waypoints. Off-topic: any news on GBU-24 or being able to jump to the RIO's seat on multiplayer yet? Edit: This is a -3º and -9º example (TWS with 4 bars which is a 6.3º cone, distance and altitude are at scale). The ideal thing would be -3º, -6º, -9º, or -3º, -8º, -13º (this last one overlaps the cones). It would use the same options as today, but with a different elevation angle, if you decide to implement it should be an easy fix.

I'm 100% in favour of controlling the Lantirn from the front. Jestes has limited abilities to manage the radar, I don't imagine him doing a great job with the pod. I don't see the problem of being able to control al the positions of the aircraft like in any other sim. What is the problem of me doing some of the RIO's work, I don't get it.

Apparently we were both in beta because if not we wouldn't we able to play in the same servers. We both make fresh installs of the Open Beta and now it is working. :beer: Thanks!

Yes!!! my pilot is running DCS World Open Beta and I am running DCS World. I am persuading him to install the same version :chair:. We are going to try that and then let you know our results.

Still no luck. I want to make clear that this was after the latest update, before that it worked perfectly. We both try" DCS_updater.exe cleanup", we also try different servers, erasing the "user/saved games" folder but find the same result We always play online with two computers that are on the same local network (same house). Maybe it is related to that and that is why nobody else (at least that I know of) is having that bug.

My pilot and I updated yesterday and when I try to star the alignment process, the alignment progress bar never appeared, also when I insert my initial position coordinates and click enter, they appear for one-tenth of a second and then get back to 00 00 00, same with the initial altitude input. Then I (and my pilot) hear jester clocking switches. My pilot has a black HSD and no artificial horizon. We finally decided to let the pilot spawn an F-14 let jester do the startup and then I jumped in. But we had another problem. Couldn't fire missiles, couldn't jettison stores, and here is a screenshot of the radar screen from the RIO and pilot at the same time that show lots of discrepancies.

All resolved

This is absolutely fantastic, it looks amazing!. It would be great if we could control the RIO cockpit on the second monitor in multiplayer.

Great news but... "While we understand that some of you have become reliant on this modification; we are sticking to our design principles of handling all RIO functionality through JESTER or through multicrew." It would be fair if you do this after making it possible to change from pilot to RIO in multiplayer. The other thing that concerns me because it has not been mention, which is a very important, if not the most important bug right now is the phoenix making 90 degree turns and back to 0 and 90 again, kind oscillation when engaging in active mode after a TWS plus 30miles launch. This makes long shots almost impossible. The missile loses all the energy in less than 2 seconds. I doubt that a missile design for long-range has so poor energy management. Please fix that. Another thing that is an ED bug, but they don't care much (maybe you could put a little more pressure on them) is the GBU-24 that doesn't work (at least since the F-14 launch). This would be the most lethal weapon of the F-14 if it worked, because of its 14 miles standoff range. Love the aircraft. Cheers.

I wanted to address two things regarding the GBU-24. 1) It still bugged since I discover it was bugged 2 months ago, it may be bugged a long time before that. The bomb drops and doesn't follow the laser beam, it also doesn't appear on the F10 map as the other weapons do (It may have something to do with the problem). 2) In DSC the bomb drops and doesn't do a ballistic trajectory like the other GBU which is alright, but the flight path angle is still steeper than it should. From what I could find, the bomb should give have a glide ratio of 5:1, which should give you a distance of 18nm from 20.000 feet, but like it is now it won't give you even 10nm. Here is a video showing the almost horizontal path that the bomb follows when it is released. It seems that when the bomb find the laser beam is when it starts making a direct path (steeper angle) to the target, before that it just follows its best glide ratio. This is the most capable ground weapon for the F-14 and it would be great if DCS could address this, it would make the aircraft so much fun to fly. PD: Heatblur is already aware of this but they can't do nothing, it is an ED issue.

That is bad bad news for me :(. Being able to manage some system from the front cockpit is one of the best ways to deal with the limitations of a virtual RIO. When I modify the keybindings I manage to do things like being able to control the radar azimuth/elevation axis from the front cockpit, aim the LANTIRN, or start lasing as soon as releasing a GBU. With the keybinding mod, I manage to do things almost as if I had a human RIO, still not the same but way better than Jester (for this particular things at least). I don't imagine how I would be able to tell Jester to lase a bridge or a command center and if so, doing it in an agile way. Jester is fine on a lot of aspects, and you made a great work with the implementation of the Jester menu, entering waypoints, etc, but things like aiming the LANTIRN or radar azimuth/elevation are things that you need to be able to manage from the front cockpit when no human RIO is available, especially in multiplayer where I can't even sit on the rear cockpit. What is the essential difference between hitting a button on my keyboard to tell Jester hit a button on the rear cockpit than hitting that button directly myself? Logically there is none. Asking Jester things like to set the radar elevation to 45° via the Jester menu is impractical. One solution (sort of, because I would not have the sensitivity of an axis) may be to add the keybinding to ask jester for certain things, but again, if we are going to that, why not just manage it myself directly from the front cockpit. In my opinion, I should have the possibility to hit all the buttons of the rear cockpit from the front and have Jester as an extra aid. Maybe, when having a human RIO that capability gest disabled. Some people with just use Jester, others may do a mix of both. For me, if this is unavailable, this will make the Tomcat useless in MP when no RIO available. I may sound harsh, but I am trying to be constructive here.

Example: After I ingress the coordinates for waypoint 1. If I want to set it to steer point, it only works if I ask Jester to select any other waypoint and then I ask him to set a waypoint 1. Then it works as it is supposed to. I always need to ask him to select a waypoint and then the waypoint I want to go. After I do that they all work perfectly. Congratulation for the aircraft.

Same here. It´s been two month now with the same problem.

Same here, exactly as described above.

They can´t be called holidays without DCS :sad_2:

1.5 is a fresh install from yesterday and 2.2 problem began after I updated.

Same here, no servers in any of the two versions.

Walt Disney way is the best way...

DCS vs FC clickable cockpit and start up procedure are not the only differences between both. It seems to me that you’ve never enter combat forgetting to warmup the radar, or drop bombs forgetting to activate the fuse or tactical drop switch, or making some error and misalign the INS, or enter a dogfight forgetting to switch off the gun master arm, or loosing lock just about to launch a missile, etc etc etc etc to infinity. Other thing to take into account is the attitude which one enters to a fight when you had enter 3 command in the keyboard to start up the plane is totally different from having to do a SIMULATED startup procedure, which includes for example in the mirage, 7 minutes aligning and entering self-coordinates. Believe me, a DCS startup makes you take care of yourself a little more. It makes you less reckless. "If the F-15 and Flanker were full fidelity then MiG-21s, Mirages et al would be facing a much tougher prospect, as it is now they're getting an easy ride" How come?! So adding more variables to a module actually makes it easier or deadlier??? Excellent reasoning qualities there.

Lame is to label them in the simulation category.