Oscar

The "Combat Mission Ready" (CMR) Training Sylibus for A-10 Pilots contains training regiments, requirements and qualification testing criteria for Toss System Delivery as a part of the Primary Weapons Delivery Qualification for Unguided Munitions Events. Toss (Dive or Level) System Delivery. Event category in which an aircraft system is used for target designation followed by a diving or level Continuously Computed Release Point (CCRP) weapon release. Specific events and criteria are as follows: LAT (Low Altitude Toss) Mission: Release altitude is below 10,000 feet AGL. Minimum recovery is safe escape for the ordnance being simulated/delivered. Hit Criteria: 175 feet (53 meters). MAT (Medium Altitude Toss) Mission: Release altitude is 10,000 feet AGL or higher. Minimum recovery is safe escape for the ordnance being simulated/delivered. Hit Criteria: 300 feet (91 meters).

Youtube....an authority....LOL! Always, always consult the TO's! Yes, the TO clearly defines the left engine being started first and the reasons why. You should find the TO for the A-10A in this thread http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=56080. Its close enough for you to get he idea for the A-10C as the startup procedures are identical except for several cockpit/instrument changes.

Ninefinger, you might want to browse this thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=51362 Looks like its what you're after........

Nah, don't "sell you wife'...... You'll make more money renting her.....

Yes, I was thinking of a sequence of zones and trigger events for deploying troops and cargo to forward areas...., or simulating evac/pickups. I'm assuming likewise would be said for all the helo's beyond their inherent combat capabilities. I'll play with concept in FC2.......

So, how will we use it in-game? Does it have a lift/transport capability?

...bet you a beer you will...

Yep.... Poacher, I've read thru all you've stated and understand what you (and over half this community) want - and I couldn't agree with you more, but, I don't know of a single "simulation" out there that currently provides you what you've discribed here - outside of an "organized" online environment; and that includes the much touted F4, which as a pre-defined database of possible actors and presents the illusion of a 'dynamic' campaign. Of course, until we get our greasy hands on DCS:WH, we really don't know what we will be able to do concerning mission building - but we can speculate.

If Flim creates the CDU in Helios, why would you need a (external) keyboard/keypad? I would think it would be keyed to send alpha/numerics via the touchscreen to the game just like the in-game CDU - or (as yet to be determined) via the MFD.

Could you post the mission file?

Great video! Answered a lot of my initial questions. Looking forward to more. I could definitely be persuaded to pick up your frame, seat and software as I do both F4 and soon DCS:WH - I'm just a short distance away, and this setup would be a good replacement for my current haphazard/kludgy setup! Will be watching for more videos. Postscript: Can panel/gauge designs be exchanged amoung Helios users?

No, that's not what I was saying. I'm saying that because it appears - from the information we've received so far - that there are so many differencies between FC2 and DCS:WH, it "may" be easier just to rebuild them. I would only have 2-3 A-10 missions that I 'might' want to consider bringing over. From my perspective it will be easier to just recreate them and take advantage of 'all' the new features. You may spend those months going back and editing your 'converted' missions anyway. Its going to take a few months for 'someone' to go through the fustration of creating and testing the conversion tool. By that time, I will have already rebuilt my missions and I won't need it. But hey, that's just my opinion.

I would think, given all the "new" functionality of the ME that this would be a daunting task.... Even after you converted it, you'd still need to edit the mission in the ME to incorporate features not available in FC2. Steer points are going to be suspect and probably need adjusting, then you're going to want to take advantage of new functionality in the ground AI units and comunications (JTAC) functions, and triggers, etc, etc. I think its a possible thing to do, but, I don't see a lot of return on the effort to make such a conversion tool. After all, once you've you converted your 5-10 missions, (don't see this being used for campaigns...) what are you going to do with the tool then? Sounds like a lot of hairy knuckle-dragging work to me for very little return.

Food for thought...... Officials release A-10C accident report Air Combat Command Public Affairs 9/2/2010 - LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE, Va. -- Human factor error caused an A-10C aircraft to depart the runway during an aborted takeoff May 10 at Moody Air Force Base, Ga., according to an Air Combat Command Accident Investigation Board report released Sept. 2. The aircraft was assigned to the 75th Fighter Squadron from the 23rd Wing at Moody AFB. The pilot sustained minor injuries after ejecting when the aircraft left the runway. The aircraft continued traveling over uneven grassland until the nose gear collapsed. The right main landing gear and aircraft nose became lodged into the ground causing a catastrophic fuselage failure. The aircraft was engulfed in fire due to a ruptured forward main fuel tank and was subsequently destroyed. According to the report, the cause of the mishap was specifically attributed to the pilot's initial decision not to abort the takeoff. Then, once the decision to abort was made, the pilot applied an inappropriate braking procedure based on his perception of being at a lower airspeed. Additionally, pitot-static system blockage, task misprioritization, distraction and procedural error were all substantially contributing factors to the mishap. The loss associated with the mishap is valued at $17,306,077, including $52,095 in environmental cleanup on Moody AFB. [Courtesy Warthog News]

AI

So, what you're saying is we need BOTH a campaign state and a mission state? If thats the case, wouldn't we also need negative values [ie: -25] for missions that could affect changes to both mission and campaign states in addition to just positive values? I mean, there are plenty of real world examples of a mission accomplished, but the overall objective is not always satisfied. Wouldn't negative point values and both a campaign and missionstate provided the options needed?

[Assumptions On] I take it that the aircraft parked on the apron are static are are not placed in relation to the taxi lines - eye candy. Given the aircraft proportions and the taxi lines, it appears that the lines should be place further apart or there should be less of them. Also, as someone else mentioned, the taxi lines appear to be about 10x scale (but then proper taxi lines on the parking aprons have always been a problem). I hope the spawn points for aircraft correlate to the taxi lines.... [Assumptions Off] Other than that, I love the new base - absolutely! Taxi and runway markers are looking superb. Of course, all these graphic additions to the airfield beg the question: do we, or will we, get to have Clearance Delivery, Ground Control, Tower, and ATC communications in different channels and will there be a competent conversational exchange [hand-offs] between the aircraft and these actors - an expanded tower communications ["\"-"F6"] structure maybe? Can we pre-program UHF/VHF radio channels specific to the map we are flying?

You might want to clarify that so that Mower (or anybody else who reads this) doesn't get the impression that the fault lies with BSVP.

This should solve the monitor problems - LOL! http://gearpatrol.com/blog/2010/08/17/ostendotech-crvd-43-curved-display/ Wish I had the change for it!

Not withstanding data ownership issues and those that would 'monitize' the process (anything can be negotiated), I couldn't help but recognize the potential technology being presented and passing it along. To have the capability to do collaborative mission planning, with drawning tools, through a web-based interface prior to mission execution, even on a small scale, would be worth the price of admission. Just my humble opinion.

I just attended an IT Conference and had the chance to discuss, 'off-hand', Google Earth with one of their Geospatial Engineers. The bottom line was that Google would love the opportunity to create an API for the DCS products. Gave them the links to DCS. The API could easily provide a web-based or client/server whiteboarding capability for mission planning in a cooperative environment as well as build a mission shell/template (*.miz) based on the collaborative planning session. That just floored me!! And if that wasn't enough, I was shown a fully integrated 3D Google Earth implementation of Nellis AFB that included all the FAA air routes, VFR/IFR, air field restricted areas, ILS, charting data, arrival and depature routes, MOA's, etc, etc, for that entire area!!! It was unbelievable!!! and they can do it for any segment of airspace. Think of it TacView on super-steriods! Wags, you need to contact these folks.

You might want to view these as well..........especially the Black Shark Notes 1 - 5. http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=wagmatt#g/u

HA!.... with today's economics, anything is possible......... expensive, but possible.

Welcome addition to the AI aircraft pool and long overdue for the Georgian Theater.

This looks great! I can see though, that I would have to add a 6 inch high platform base to this unit as I would plan to power the main panels from an HP Proliant DL380 w/ VMware 4.0. This unit would be placed under the center section flooring. It should provide enough computing power for all the heavy-lifting. As for the canopy hoop - probably won't implement that. With a 6" base under the unit, it may be possible to make the left panel and console a 'car door' swing-away assembly, hinged at the front, for clean entry and exit.