monkie

I had to re-learn about this fix due to reinstalling DCS on a new computer. The problem I find for me is trying to remember the hundreds of tweaks and "fixes" to reinstate every time and I'm not exactly getting any younger, sigh. A US Army Huey in "Helo Drab" that isn't exactly drab is kind of a let down. Thanks again to the modders who fixed this.

Tell me about it, still one of the most frustrating issues with running DCS, yet it seems few people mention it so I'm guessing it's just a small group of us.

I searched around and didn't find this suggestion so I hope I'm not duplicating: I find myself sitting in the RIO seat using the LANTIRN in SP mode quite a bit, and I find it actually a nice challenge to get ICEMAN to set up on an attack run. The one thing I find annoying is the "SET HEADING RELATIVE" command menu layout. Would it be possible to realign it so that "Hold current" is at the twelve o'clock and the turn left/right 5 degrees would be at the 11 and 1 o'clock positions? This seems intuitive vs the mad scramble we have now, simply look to the direction you want to turn and increase the relative distance the more you want to turn. Also, I know it's not "realistic" but could we have a cheat button that allows the RIO to release the GBU's from the back seat? It just seems silly to have to jump into the pilot seat for 5 seconds to press a button and then jump back. And no I don't want to use the mod that allows the pilot to do everything from up front, I like the RIO position and don't get to use it enough in SP as it is.

I've never had a problem with ole ICEMAN, he has always leveled the aircraft pretty well. I guess I never handed it over to him in some silly untrimmed out of whack state, he doesn't get paid enough to care at that point he says.

So it's possible that it's a map issue because I haven't had any luck using the JDAM's on NTTR?

This is an issue for the F-18, AV-8B and also the F-14, NTTR map. Late activation, start on the runway, ALT-J to take over and they sink into runway and explode. Any hope for a fix? reported almost a year ago.

THANK YOU FOR THIS FIX! I can't tell you how frustrated I was after taking a few months off from DCS only to come back and see not only had they changed the LUA structure (minor but annoying and time consuming to fix) but for some reason my US ARMY Helo Drab schemes were nowhere near drab. I am sure this has something to do with them working with the new engine and fiddling here and there but man the Huey skins went from drab to looking like some kind of plastic, gel, hideous material that isn't seen in the real world. I'm thankful we have members on here that don't mind digging through the code to find fixes and share them with the community. It might seem like small potatoes but if the aircraft textures are off it really can ruin things.

Wow, nothing upsets people more than putting hundreds of hours into skins only to have them corrupted due to them being "cleaned up" for whatever reason. I've got about 100 personal huey skins that I've made, think of how much fun it is for me to go through and re-edit the LUA files, might as well get paid because that is work and not why I enjoy DCS. Really, if they are about to make changes like these it should at least be communicated with the community first so we have a bit of a clue instead of being left to figure it out ourselves. Now that I have made my opinion clear, why exactly are my skins shiny? I mainly do US Army Huey schemes and they are meant to be FLAT, I mean NO SHINE AT ALL. My uh1_spec.dds is set to be as flat as can be but I'm still seeing unrealistc shine in the sim. Since I only come back to DCS once in a long while to pull my hair out and it's hard to remember what is broken or not broken am I correct in thinking that with the new engine there is almost no way of getting a completely flat finish on the aircraft now? UPDATE: The fix for the unrealistic body shine can be found in the thread "Body texture too shiny" in this section, thanks for that fix gentlemen.

He knows what I was asking for, and I'm not here to start a war, it's my opinion that the old helmet looked great and I even complimented it in another thread. They can do whatever they want, skin it however, my opinion is just that and it means nothing but it's still frustrating to have one of the things I liked the most about this plane changed. For anybody else that might decide to work with them in the future, here they are so as to not waste your time. {"pilot_AV8B_helmet", 0 ,"Pilot_AV8B_hgu68",false}; {"pilot_AV8B_body", 0 ,"pilot_AV8B",false};

You assumed that I didn't search, well I did and there is nothing in that thread that explains the LUA entries specifically for these texture files. Pilot_AV8B_hgu68 pilot_AV8B_gear

This has happened to the F-86, the Huey and now the harrier, the LUA changes and it completely screws up the older skins. That isn't the problem so much as nobody explains the changes in the LUA and how to fix them. If you change the LUA at least put out a description of the new changes so us skinners can have an easier time fixing what we already put hours of effort into.

Would it be possible to show ALL LUA files that pertain to the new pilot model and helmet? I'm trying desperately to change the helmet back to look like the old HGU and I'm getting a black stripe on the top.

Nothing wrong with the old one, did we really need a new one? And the older helmet looked better IMHO. Sorry I put a lot of time into tweaking the textures on the old helmet and it really rubs me the wrong way that it was decided that this was worth the effort and time to make changes to. Very frustrating to many every time we come back to an update after a few months we have to spend hours trying to sort through new textures to fix what the fixes un-fixed. Yes I know it's alpha, or beta or whatever, but that doesn't mean anything anymore, nothing is ever finished and everything is a pre-release forever. I'll go away now.

kool

Everyone gets an opinion, here is mine. I'm surprised when I heard that the F-16 was next because honestly it's already done to death in another similar sim we all know, and it's been on the market for years. I think the most interesting aspect of DCS is that it tackles aircraft that are not that mainstream. I would never have thought I would be interested in the KA-50 or the Mirage 2000 but after rolling the dice on them they are my favorite aircraft. Even the Mi-8 I find to be such a departure than anything else I've ever simmed in my life that I am glad they developed it with such care and detail. I purchased the F-18, even against my best judgement and honestly I'm underwhelmed. It's not that it isn't a nice capable aircraft but rather I've seen it, in previous sims, over and over. not that it isn't better, more detailed etc but it's vanilla, press a few buttons and you lock something, press button fire, pull 9g's, hit afterburner etc etc. I can't help but think the F-16 is the same, because it is. Maybe I'm old school, but after you've played sim after sim with a HUD and MFD's you get kinda burned out on all the tech and appreciate how much work crews had to do with older aircraft to get things done. I guess that is why I'd prefer to see the F-4 vs another electric jet with computer screens all over the place doing the same thing I have already been doing for years. Maybe the next module can be a drone and you just stay on the F10 map screen and point and click where you want it to go and fight. Old man opinion over.

Maybe this is related but I've noticed that in RWS mode I won't show a contact the if I change it to one of the short range lock modes it instantly locks up a target. I haven't put it through a thourough test but the targets should be within normal RWS limits (co altitude, within 5 miles) and no primary contact shows up. I would think RWS would show something, but perhaps that isn't correct.

Revisiting this question, are mark points only supposed to be for overfly or is this a place holder for a more sophisticated mark point system? IE, can the real harrier place mark points at DMT or TPOD locked positions and altitudes?

Should it be possible to edit the mark point altitude? Overly target and then lower altitude down to ground level so when DESG the mark point it will look at the target area. I don't seem to have any luck with editing the altitude but maybe i'm doing something wrong.

For me it seemed the Mark point was the position of the aircraft at the time of pressing the Mk button. The problem I had was with the altitude, I wasn't able to edit it afterwards. I wanted to overfly a column of tanks and then edit the waypoint down in altitude so that the DMT would point at the ground targets but was unable to change the altitude of that Mark point.

After OB Hotfix 6 I'm getting RWR audio but it seems as if it's kinda clipped and not consistent, I think it's still WIP.

Basically you would just continue the camo on the underside surfaces since it "wraps around" and also replace the tan with the grey. The large "stars and bars" insignia would be made subdued and small and the white tail code would be made black, also the USAF would be removed. Obviously it would be a fictitious skin and 102/106's never wore it but I do think it might make for a pretty mean looking Mirage. That is pretty much it, thanks for considering the repaint.

TJTAS, I love your SEA skin, well done and thanks for painting it. Ever considered doing a Euro One type paint scheme? You are already most of the way there, just replace the tan with grey and cover the bottom as well.

It was the Easy Comms option that was causing the issue, once selected off I was able to contact the JTAC.

Are you using "Easy Comms" option? I was unable to contact JTAC until I un selected Easy Comms in the main gameplay options menu.

Ok I tried that, AM, 264, 265, 269 I tried from Cold Dark and also Airborne set ups, I set the freq's manually with the dial on the UHF and also let them auto-tune through the easy radio option and nothing is working. I also noticed that the radios are auto-tuning on both the UHF and the V/UHF radios to the freq's so it's trying both radios. Frustrating because other aircraft work fine, the problem is limited to the M2000 right now for me. From reading some bug reports about the radio easy comms option seems to be a problem. I'll do some more testing and see if easy comms is causing the issue.