Jascha

Here is something that bothers me. According to the manual the launch authorization light should be orange. But in-game this light looks red. Exactly the same as disengage light. Proof: If I recall correctly, the launch authorization light was once indeed orange (many versions ago). Why has this been changed? Or is this a bug? Or maybe the manual is outdated and both lights are red IRL? PS. Bonus question - is this a Su-25A or just Su-25? Can't really find if "A" is the correct description but some people use it (maybe just to make sure that it won't be confused with the "T" variant?).

I use 100% RPM only during takeoff and combat. For cruise - usually 90%, but I turn it up a notch, thanks.

Sorry for double post, but I made a short video demonstrating the issue: It seems that it's completely random. No idea to tell if the CCRP will work or bombs will be wasted. Trk file: Su-25 CCRP fail.trk

Does it happen only after you use rearm & refuel? Could you check the A-10A CAS instant action for Caucasus Map? Does this problem occurs there as well?

I just checked A-10A CAS instant action for NTTR - 5 different A2G weapon types, no problem cycling between them all. BTW You can set ripple quantity and ripple interval for Su-25 too.

Sadly, this bug is still present. There is no way to tell if pressing and holding the trigger will initiate CCRP mode or drop bombs right away (completely off target). It should be simple - if there is no drop authorization (red light) or CCRP mode initiated, bombs cannot be dropped.

nullnull Sorry, I forgot to mention that my issue with the salvo command in Su-25 is related to the unguided rockets. No matter what is selected on the WSCP it always fires them in 1 pair (outer pairs first, then inner pairs). Only if the "salvo" key command is used you can fire from all pylons at once, but there is no indication if this option is currently active or not. If the left switch is in the "ЗАЛП" position it does not affect the unguided rockets deployment (I think it's related to bombs only). Personally I think the should be controlled by the right switch (ПО 2 = pair, ПО 4 = two pairs, ВСЕ = all stations / salvo ). No idea how this works IRL though. Weirdly, the WCSP is not covered by the Su-25 manual EN (at least in my version), but there is a section on it in Su-25T manual EN (attached below).

I was wondering the same and wanted to ask here but I've found this topic (sadly still unanswered). Does anyone know if it's possible to check in the cockpit if the salvo mode is currently selected? Regarding the LA override, if I recall correctly, using it resulted in the in-range light (the right one on the HUD) to be visible again. But that does not seems to be the case now.

I use Joy2Key. It provides a quick setup for toggle switches (I can bind specific toggle switch to release and press of a key) and much more. However, I don't understand why ED cannot add such simple yet important option to their input setup ("toggle switch" - that will make it respond both on pressing and releasing of the key), without us having to use 3rd party software or getting PhD in .lua editing. Make it happen ED, please.

Since we can use GBU-12's with JTAC on F-5E, I think it's a reasonable request that such option will also be provided for A-10A users. Unless not, because it's FC3.

Ok, the theory that TPOD could predict the moving target location during the off-limit time is interesting, but for me rather unlikely. Does TPOD even has information on targets heading and speed? Because you don't get this kind of data on the FLIR feed afaik (like in case of the A/G radar). This! I have not thought of that while making this thread, but yeah it makes sense. I mean... it doesn't make sense. Regarding problems with losing track when changing FOV, here are videos I recorded: ATFLIR: Losing track when changing from NAR to WFOV. Note: Also - changing zoom within NAR does not affect tracking. LITENING - losing track when changing FLIR view from NAR to WIDE. It doesn't occur always like in case of ATFLIR. ATFLIR for static targets. Firs target in scene track - no problem with changing the FOV. Second one - static - in point track, the same problem occurs.

No. This happens when I create fast training missions where I start already in the air.

I tried using MAVF only with A/G radar in GMT mode and it worked nicely. Cage/uncage works perfectly in this case. The seeker locks on the radar tracked target (when in range of course). Still it's not possible to slew the MAVF seeker in this situation as well. But for moving targets using MAVF with radar in GMT mode may be a better solution.

Hi I'm currently learning to use A/G TPOD(s) and I have 2 questions regarding point track mode on moving targets. This applies to both - LITENING and ATFLIR. 1) Increasing FOV in point track mode causes it to lose track of the moving target. This is very annoying because I often use maximum zoom when searching for target at greater distances and later I'm unable to switch to wide FOV to get a better view when close or above the target. It loses track so any laser guided ordnance will miss if already in the air. Am I doing something wrong / is it a bug / or it works as it should? 2) Ironically, exceeding the TPOD gimbal limits does not cause to lose track of the moving target in point track mode. When I turn around and the target is visible on DDI again, it's still being tracked. Is this realistic?

Hi. I tried designating locations with HMD and despite looking at the ground when using TDC depress often my marked point seems to be floating in the air. Moreover, sometimes location of the point designated with HMD changes (without touching TDC). Does someone have similar experience?

The overall idea that you use a TPOD to designate a target and then can automatically snap Maverick seeker to it is good. Unfortunately in my case Mav seeker does not always lock to the target tracked by TPOD or looses the track (moving targets). Pressing cage/uncage button should fix it, but from my experience when I cage/uncage the seeker it usually locks to the position where the target was when I (point) marked it with TPOD (even if it's still being tracked with it). I don't know if I'm doing something wrong or this doesn't work as it should yet. But I agree that it would be handy to be able to make some tweaks and adjustments with Maverick seeker after it slews to TPOD tracking target. Of course if in RL such option is possible.

I encounter the same problem from time to time. Usually switching the TACAN mode selector or DF/TCN mode selector will fix this. Other similar issue like this is when I select TACAN channel the HSI doesn't react at all. Flipping the above mentioned selectors, initiates the correct HSI display. I'm nut sure if this is a bug or a feature. ;) By the way - what is the distance for the TACAN navigation to work? In this module that is. I have problems to get direction to TACAN station if the distance is greater than 50 - 60 nm. The HSI direction pointer is just spinning around. AFAIK in RL the working distance should be something like 200 nm. Any ideas?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znnavxFReJs Sorry for OT, but it's "ein Hammer". :megalol:

Another option - you go to the copy shop. 400+ pages should get you a nice discount. Although now the question is - does it make sense to print out the manual that is sort of "incomplete". That was a really smart move ED... ;)

Will the extended version be available in PDF format as well? :huh: I hope so...

I'm surprised, because if I recall it correctly, Ka-50's were doing great in this combat environment and the results were highly satisfying. PS. Thanks for the interesting reading Esac.

Since when there is such a restriction on RS? I'm stunned. :huh:

Mate, read this: http://hubpages.com/hub/Most_Difficult_Languages_-_Polish I don't think this program will be so effective for us (with repeating the translation for example). Our grammar is seriously f****** up. :D But I'll give it a try.

AFAIK - Spetznaz is not a group. The term is used to describe (Russian) Special Forces. So Vympel, Alpha and other units can be considered as Spetsnaz (or a part of it). Correct me if I'm wrong. But the photo fits good to this topic, even so. ;)

The manual is translated by hand so far. Although only few guys are working already (since most of us will be translating from English). Thanks for the link. :) I'll check it out.