atsmith6

Hi I think I am doing something silly that's not working with my kneeboard in the A-10C. If I place my .png files in C:\Users\<<username>>\Saved Games\DCS\Kneeboard Then they show up in the game no problem. But if I place them in C:\Users\<<username>>\Saved Games\DCS\Kneeboard\A-10C Then they don't show. Am I missing something? Sorry for the silly question but I can't find a similar issue in the forums so I'm assuming it's just me. Any help would be greatly appreciated! A

Another one to try and analyse in tacview. Looking forward to it. Thanks for taking the time to reply. Much appreciated :thumbup:

Fantastic information Chrinik. Very much appreciated. You've definitely given me something to go practice and get used to. Looking forward to it now :) Have a great day mate.

Interesting. I appear to have had that backward.

Hence the question. I'm totally new to this jet and it's weapons so have very little good quality information and zero experience. So - if you'll forgive the ignorance - what is the effective launch range of the R-27R if the intent is a kill shot then? Or put another way, how close do I dare come and still expect to be able to defend? Seems like I had that completely backwards then. To start with I intend to start with 2 x r-27r + 2 x r-60 loadouts and progress to r-73s. When the RWR gets the ability to detect IR guided launches (I think that's rumoured for the next patch, or one that just passed, not certain) then I'll move up to more dangerous load-outs. Though the time that takes me may just be longer than it takes the M2K to get out of alpha. :lol: Thanks Chrinik for taking the time to respond. Much appreciated

Right, so started getting back into learning the M2K now it's a bit more fleshed out. This got me thinking, given it's an A-A fighter released in 1982, same year as the Mig-29A which carries the R-27R (in operation since 1983), how does the Mirage intercept of it's peers work? Assuming a two ship squad, both aircraft can see each other on radar, their cold war theatre would have meant they probably had adequate GCI/AWACs or equivalent in their likely conflict zones to be able to answer the friend or foe question even before being vectored in. So this leaves me with a scenario I can't solve. 2 x Mig-29A with 2xR-27R ranged to 50NM. Lets assume a 25-20NM shoot with the intention to either kill or force the enemy onto the defensive. 2 x Mirage with 2xS530D which has an absolute maximum range of about 19NM if wikipedia is to be believed, but to be effective needs to be somewhat closer (I think in the sim range equates to about 13NM for an effective shot?) How does one manage this fight? I doubt the Mirage would have been incapable of the medium altitude BVR fight given it's chronology, and it's primary adversary must have been the Soviet fighters including both older jets like the Mig-21 and newer ones like the Mig-29. Given the F-15 was introduced in 1976, I must also assume that the designers would have been anticipating heavy fighters like the SU-27 which does indeed come around in 1985. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Kind Regards

Fine tuning the trim in the F-5E is very very similar to the F-86F and Mig-15, though the severity of the control surface effects is different for obvious reasons: 1. Get your plane as level as you can at the airspeed you want. You will find that you are either slightly ascending or descending at your best attainable trim using the trim HAT on the stick 2. If you're ascending, reduce engine power slightly to trim the nose down with power, and if descending increase engine power slightly to trim the nose up. Something to note: The plane will oscillate about the final trim position as it finds it's centre. This oscillation isn't unrealistic in real aircraft and happens because when you increase the power the aircraft will first accelerate past the trimmed for speed as it's relatively nose low. This will raise the nose and as there is excess airspeed it goes up past its resting point. Then, being too high the nose falls down again and the cycle repeats. With more experience you can learn to dampen the effect with the stick very quickly. Also with this flight model you lose a lot of speed in turns so note your airspeed and RPM before starting a turn. After the turn increase RPM by about 5% to get the speed back, then when the airspeed is exactly where it was before the turn, put the RPM exactly where it was before the turn and you will be trimmed and balanced. Alternatively maintain speed with more power in the turn. The main thing is to return to your exact numbers and then you won't have any trim issues.

Just in case it helps: I have both the DK2 and the CV1 In the DK2 it's as described above, everything seems noticeably smaller. But in the CV1 the scale feels 1:1.

zerO_crash, you have just made me very happy and the F-5 a day one purchase! Thank you :)

Hi Quick question before I purchase. Have they done the flight manual yet? Not the quick start guide but the proper manual. I only ask as, while Belsimtek are by far my favourite aircraft developer for DCS (love you guys!) I really don't want to be caught with a plane but without it's manual for absolute ages and ages again (not holding a grudge, really, ok maybe a little bit). Based on my experience with the other aircraft I just know I'm going to love it, but only when I have it plus it's literature. Until then I'd rather save myself and my obsessive compulsive nature some frustration by waiting if it's not there yet. Many thanks in advance if you can take a moment to answer this.

The original view issue is solved in 1.5.4 beta where additional rotation was applied to the oculus ingame view. However this has exposed another related detail of the way the view works that I am struggling a little to articulate.

That is an unpward translation which isn't the issue here at all. The issue is one of relative rotation about the pitch axis. If the model angles down on it's landing gear versus it attitude in 3D studio max, then for someone using a rift, the world rotates (not translates) up. Put another way everything becomes "uphill" in the direction of the aircraft.

Just checked and that does indeed seem to be the case. This change is MOST welcome. Problem is that the views feel like they need adjusting now and are not consistent between aircraft. Here are a few scenarios: First: checking the hardware. In the Oculus "Lounge" the virtual world is level with the real world (I use my window sill as reference as it's directly to my left and level - yes I checked with a spirit level too!). Cool, so not hardware. The view in the hangar for me seems level with reality too. If I climb into the Mirage then the horizon and my window sill are still mostly lined up. If I climb into the Mi-8 then the world is tilted downward slightly, so if I look left the ground is sloping slightly down from behind me to in front of me. If I climb into the F-86 then the world is tilted upward slightly, so if I look left the ground is sloping slightly upward from behind me to in front of me. Here's what I think is happening: 1) The views are zero'ed as of 1.5.4 2) The views are zero'ed relative to the aircraft's object space coordinates (i.e. level relative to how the aircraft model is aligned in 3D studio max. 3) When the helicopter is on the runway, the Mi-8 is physically tilted back somewhat from the coordinates it was modelled in. So when on the ground the world tilts downward. 4) When the F-86F is on the runway it is tilted down somewhat from the coordinates it was modelled in. So when on the ground the world tilts upward toward the player. Not certain what the correct "fix" would be but the fact that the world tilts relative to the aircraft's on-the-ground attitude relative to that in which it was modelled is a little disconcerting to me. Ideally adding a camera view control for tilting along the aircraft's pitch axis would allow pilots to set it according to their preference rather than one method or another being the only option, or more accurately, there being no option. Kind Regards :)

The reason the head positions are wrong is because they're all adjusted to have you looking at the cockpit in a pleasing manner to someone at ED. The startup positions for the ED planes can be found here: C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\Config\View\SnapViewsDefault.lua The start positions for the views for third party AC are in their own folder, for example for the Mirage try C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\Mods\aircraft\M-2000C\Views.lua Important, take a copy of these files before editing them! Inside, find the default views (labeled with a comment "--default view" and change the values to ones that suit you. The biggest culprit is the setting vAngle which has you looking down by some angle even if you're physically looking straight ahead. I set this to 0.000000 and everything comes right for me for most AC. I personally hope they make 0.0000 the default when wearing a VR headset soon because otherwise the world is physically tilted toward you which just isn't right and confuses my inner ear. Oh, and note your new settings somewhere. They will get overwritten every time there is an update.

Good to know that I have discovered a real bug then :)

Hi SkateZilla First my sincere apologies. Just realised (as an immediate result of your question) that I completely mis-described the problem due to a momentary confusion between labels and tooltips. Let me try again: Open Beta 1.5.4 When I launch with VR (Oculus Rift), with show tooltips checked in the main options, the tooltips always appear under the cursor regardless of the setting in the Set Mission Options pane in the mission editor. If I turn show tooltips off in the main options then the tooltips do not show in the cockpit. To reproduce: 1. In the main options check the Tooltips option. 2. In a mission, under Set Mission Options, Check the left box for Tooltips and uncheck the right box for tooltips. 3. Launch the mission and notice that the mouse cursor (or laser pointer, it doesn't matter) will bring up the tooltip window. I checked this in the Mirage 2000 and the Mi-8.

Open Beta 1.5.4 When I launch with VR (Oculus Rift), the labels appear under the cursor no matter what the labels setting is either in the options or in the mission options. The keyboard shortcut to toggle labels on and off has no effect. Many thanks EDIT: This is a completely incorrect description of the problem due to a momentary brain-fart. Please read my second post below for the real description of the bug.

R-25 is a replacement for the original R-13 engine used in the Mig-21. The R-95 and later R-195 engines of the SU-25 are, according to the internet, variants of the R-13. So yes, the SU-25 does indeed use two Mig-21 engines. See http://www.leteckemotory.cz/motory/r-95/

Chuck, you are a legend. Your documents are always my first port of call when learning an aircraft. Indeed if I know you have a guide coming out for an aircraft I intend to buy then I'll often wait for the guide before buying it. Thank you very very much indeed sir!

Thank you DerekSpeare. I will try this. I thought I had but am obviously mistaken. Answer is much appreciated :thumbup: EDIT: I just tried it out and it works perfectly. Open DCS in Rift mode, go to full screen with the keyboard shortcut (think it was Alt-Enter) and now clicking all over the cockpit works perfectly. Ramp starting the Mi-8 at Creech, doing a few performance maneouvres near the ground, then flying VFR to nellis along the road to come in for a gentle controlled touchdown, what can I say. It's so close to real that it was literally one of the best flying experiences I've had. Full stop. The Oculus just takes DCS to the next level...

Christmas has just come early. Thank you Wags, you have officially made my day, month, and year! You have no idea how much I'm loving the work you guys are doing with the Rift. Please convey my thanks to all the developers :)

I suspect that these are just "phase one" laser pointer issues and it's probably out in it's current state to gauge whether the laser pointer idea is feasible and give it some road testing. I for one absolutely love it. I find it easy to look at and manipulate controls in front of me. because the Rift head movement is natural I find non of the difficulty holding a steady position that I find with TrackIR. The need for the ability to offset the pointer with the mouse - or by some other means - is however immediately evident as I simply can't contort my head enough without serious physical injury to reach things at the rear ends of the side panels. I don't even want to think about things like rear panels. Perhaps they will reintroduce the ability for a mouse offset, or add a slew exaggeration to the pointer when your head turns more than X degrees? Who knows, but I do love the core idea and for the switches I could look directly at and click without clicking the desktop it worked really well given that I have no hands in the virtual world.

One of the problems with binding a native mouse click to the HOTAS is that when using the rift, moving the rift also moves the mouse pointer in Windows. Now if you turn your head too much (e.g. to click buttons on a side panel), then the system mouse is now out of the little desktop DCS viewport. So while the laser pointer is pointing at a switch, pressing the mouse button actually "clicks" on the desktop. This causes DCS to no longer be the foreground application and notably, the switch is never activated. So using a direct-x button binding instead to mean "activate/toggle" button under laser pointer would remove this problem.

Bearfoot, you CTLD tutorial is just fantastic! Much appreciated mate. I've been scripting shy for ages but I think I will give it a go now :)

Cibit thank you! You video showed me a small mistake I was making which prevented it from working in DCS 1.5 or 2.0. I now have it working perfectly in DCS 1.5. Tried exactly the same thing in DCS 2.0.2 and the menu item never appearsto load the troops meaning I can't load em up. So it seems that troop transport is indeed broken in DCS 2.0.2, though possibly due to issues with the comms menus. Again, very much appreciated indeed!