Home Fries

I feel the pain in this. Since I do a TARGET profile for each module I have, I too need to go through the tutorials to determine how best to map things for the Cougar and Warthog. It is an iterative process, and requires patience that may cause some newcomers to give up prematurely. We don't need to be saying "good riddance to lazy people," but rather they need to be hooked so that they will then pursue all that DCS has to offer. While there is already a default lua file for controllers that are not specifically recognized, adding a few more lua files for controllers like the Xbox or PS4 controller (which also apply to the Xbox/PS4 HOTAS systems like the TM T-Flight) or the Logitech Wingman 3D would be a nice touch for newcomers who will need to dip their toes into the proverbial water. Solutions on the controller page such as a GUI button that provides a bitmap of the controller with button assignments, or links to YouTube videos showing the default layout for certain controllers would help to get people engaged, and I don't think either option would require extraordinary effort (the videos could even be community based). The important thing would be to have this within the GUI. That said, I don't believe a complete redesign of the control interface is warranted. The spreadsheet layout is flexible and logical (once you realize that each column is an independent lua file), and I wouldn't trade it for anything. What is warranted is a way to hook newcomers and reduce the intimidation factor so that they can at least see what the default controls mean, then customize later should they decide to stick with it. My hope is that ED will tweak the controller interface with MAC, then retrofit DCS with similar features later. So long as the spreadsheet remains an option, I am OK with this. EDIT: one thing that could be done right now is adding certain buttons to a category called -IMPORTANT BINDINGS (with the hypen to make sure that the category shows at the top). I realize that many modules have a HOTAS or Joystick/Throttle category, but that's only obvious to people who have been playing DCS for a while.

I just uploaded a quick update for people who were having trouble loading the MiG-21. Just run the CTS Updater to get the latest fix.

I just took exactly the same screenshot as I just encountered the same thing (Tomcat spawning in on yellow gear). It is mission 5: OCA West. DCS version 2.5.6.52437. This happened on initial load and a second load. Restarting the mission caused CTD.

I found I need to set a KBPress value of at least 50 in TARGET to get DCS to consistently recognize the keystroke. In some aircraft (like the hornet), some keystrokes may need to go up to 80-100ms.

Version 2.5.62 is available for DCS 2.5.6.52437

There is now. I set all polls to Instant Results.

All, 2.47 Hotfix 3 is now up. It incorporates changes from last week's and today's patch.

Worked like a charm! Thanks! :thumbup:

Ok, I'll look into it. Can you tell me your hardware and send me your dcs_world.tmc file? EDIT: NVM, I was able to duplicate this with the Mi-8 and Huey. It's likely an error trap for other modules that forces you into the same seat you selected. You'll need to use the hat switch to select stations (not the keyboard) to keep the profile synched with the game. TBH, I don't remember putting this error trap in, but it was probably for the Tomcat.

Someone else recommended the Mirage 2000 and I would second that recommendation for the following reasons: Clickable cockpit but most switches are "set and forget" so you don't need to keep your head down. Fly by wire shallows the learning curve. The autopilot is probably the best in the game, and will let you do just about anything while you're playing with switches. Outstanding HUD helps you with AOA, throttle settings, and approach. 4th gen technology, but simple system implementation (again, shallows the learning curve). Good combination of digital and steam gauges, and the analog HSI helps for learning navigation principles. The training missions and first part of the campaign are geared toward learning the aircraft. Easily one of the best campaigns in DCS. It may only be Fox-1 capable and carry 4 missiles and limited A/G stores, but it's fun to fly and you can learn the fundamentals before getting in deep with more capable (and therefore more complex) aircraft.

This is by design. The Mi-8 doesn't use progressive trim, so the hat switch cycles between stations (and does padlock while shifted). Trim is on H4. See the section on TARGET Central Position Trimmer Mode in the User Reference to see how trim is implemented on the helicopters.

Here's $.02 from someone who has been flight simming since 1982, went through both US Navy and Air Force flight training curricula, and still fights the steep learning curve while trying to get people into DCS: The OP makes a lot of excellent points. One can argue that study sims require study and that realism shouldn't be compromised to lower the entry bar. These are also valid points, yet straw-man arguments as the OP never suggested this compromise. The OP said that he thinks that the training should be more accessible, logical, and yes, even providing a quicker sense of accomplishment. This is all reasonable to engage people and keep them engaged. The study will come after the hook, as people whose interest is maintained will put in the effort, and people who cannot stay interested would go elsewhere anyway. Training curricula in sims have always been difficult, and the most effective training has been on older sims where the systems were abstracted and flight models less complex. The last really good, approachable in-game training I can recall is Rod Machado's flight school in MSFS9. Just about everything else has been too superficial, too inflexible, or too difficult for a newbie to approach. Honestly, I think the Falcon 4.0 training missions (where you had to open the book and read the steps) were some of the best, not because you needed the book open, but because once you had the steps down you could just run the mission and practice practice practice without having to go through any voiceovers again. That said, I was a winged NFO when Falcon 4 came out and I never went through the cold start because the instructions were unclear and it was difficult to find just the right place to click to advance the sequence. Now I'll touch on the differences between US Navy and US Air Force training, as this is germane to the subject. While both services require a lot of study and self-motivation to make it through, the Air Force walks you through, nurtures you, and builds you up to the check ride so the check ride is easier than the training flights leading up to it. If you mess up in the simulator, the instructor can reset to a point just prior to your mistake and you can learn from it in real-time. You are expected to study hard, and when you are tested you are expected to know the material as if it is second nature. The Navy, on the other hand, throws you the books, gives you a couple weeks of ground school, then expects you to study and be ready for your flight. The book provides the minimum, and you are expected to find information through any means possible (e.g. "gouge" from more senior students). There are a series of simulator hops to make sure you are safe in the cockpit before flying (and another set of sims during instrument phase). Otherwise, every brief is a pop quiz, every flight is essentially a check ride, and what you read in the book is a basis for what the instructor teaches in the air, albeit usually under a manufactured stress environment. This process is designed more to weed people out, and the shock between studying the procedures in the manual and actually executing them in the air for the first time can be very unsettling. So what we have in DCS is more akin to Navy training than Air Force. You're given the book, an unforgiving environment, a few training missions (fewer if the module is EA), and you're expected to find "gouge" on Youtube, Chucks Guides, or other people who are more experienced with DCS. Simply put, what the OP is asking for is something more akin to Air Force training, where you have a schedule, building blocks with expectations, and a progression that will take you from basic airmanship to system competence (mastery comes much later). I agree with the OP: I would love to see a natural progression where mistakes are expected and the consequences are not as punitive. Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't give Baltic Dragon some serious credit for his training missions. The AV-8B missions are all outstanding, and they are the closest thing I've seen to the FS9 lessons I alluded to earlier. You can go through the full walkthrough and still choose abbreviated missions that train the same things (allowing you to practice without the voice overs), or allow you to practice the same things in more challenging environments. Additionally, the Mirage 2000C campaign that provides familiarity training in the first missions is a brilliant step that helps people swim in the pool starting in the shallow end. Baltic Dragon's example should influence a template to ease the learning curve to newbies.

My AIRIO profile only has the three extensions that are in my profile already. I re-imported it as a separate profile just to be sure.

I have AIRIO and I'm able to successfully tune radio, TACAN, and Link with the F-14. However, I cannot get Jester to set map markers to waypoints without using the options wheel. Looking at my profile, I have the three extension packs for Link, Radio and TACAN, but I appear to be missing the "Map Marker [1..10] to [Waypoint 1...]" extension. This is my version of VAICOM Pro and AIRIO: The NS430 is disabled. I have already tried re-importing the AIRIO VAP file from the VAICOMPRO folder with no success. Any ideas? Also, what exactly is the issue with VAICOM and the NS430 as indicated on the support page?

Great guide. Thank you for sharing. :thumbup:

All, 2.47 Hotfix 2 is now up. Hotfix 2 fixes the mapping issues with the F/A-18C FLIR/Laser key macros and removes the TEMPO command from ROSB20 if you have 3 or more MFDs installed. This allows for smoother zoom control with the FLIR if it is put on the RMFD (nothing I can do about the LMFD because LOSB20 Long is global for the kneeboard functions).

There's only so much I can put on the HOTAS. The whole idea of the MFDs was so I wouldn't have to shoehorn functionality on the HOTAS. I'd just go with "auto" settings in IL-2.

I'll have separate EXEs and installers for different versions, so not to worry. They'll still coexist. The only downside will be needing to change scripts to go between DCS and other sims.

Not too late; I just posted these the other day!

All, Please provide your inputs for how I should proceed with developing CTS 3.0. The link is also available in my signature.

With the TARGET stack limits reached in Configurator for TARGET Script (CTS) 2.47, I will be starting work on CTS 3.0, which will be rebuilt from the ground up to maximize code efficiency, allowing for more room for expansion. This means that I will need to remove little-used or unused functionality as well as build it from the ground up with more commonality between the Cougar and Warthog. I'm looking for your input for how I should proceed. Below are a series of surveys regarding your Thrustmaster hardware, CTS functionality, and requested features. I'm looking for which configurations to support (e.g. Warthog with Cougar, X/Y differential braking, etc.). This is your opportunity to make sure your hardware configuration is supported, as well as which features should be kept or discarded. Please take the surveys below that apply to you (e.g. Warthog, Cougar or both, MFDs, etc.). I apologize for the number of surveys, but Survey Monkey limits me to 10 questions per survey without paying for premium features. Hardware Surveys General Hardware Survey HOTAS Cougar Hardware Survey HOTAS Warthog Hardware Survey Cougar + Warthog Hardware Survey Cougar MFD Survey Feature Surveys Communications Functionality Survey Miscellaneous Features Survey Applications Support Survey These surveys apply only to DCS; non-DCS games will be migrated to a separate profile in future releases. Please participate, as the survey responses will help determine how I approach CTS 3.0 development.

I'm pretty sure they're on the MFDs. :cry:

I just confirmed that the engine management is there, but they did change the files this latest patch. They appear to have gotten rid of contact fuse settings, dive system, gun 5, and VR Zoom as well as added the varied zoom levels. I'll have to figure something out for the zoom. I'm open to any suggestions.

Hi Luke, Everytime there's an IL-2 update, I compare the new current.map and current.actions files with the versions included in CTS to see if there's any change. If there is no change, I go ahead with what is already there. I didn't see any change in 4.007, but apparently my plan isn't foolproof. EDIT: NVM, I just realized that I was in fact updated to 4.006c and not 4.007. I thought the listed keystrokes were already mapped, but I will double check. As for additional functionality, I won't be able to do that right now. As things stand with CTS, I'm right at the stack limit that TARGET can handle. If I add one line, I need to delete another. My plan is to separate IL-2 and Elite from the DCS profile, then make any updates. I don't have a timeline on this, except I hope to have something by the end of August.

It is not possible to use TARGET alongside default controller mappings. When you run TARGET, it creates a single virtual controller that encompasses your Thrustmaster controllers (e.g. Warthog stick and throttle). Even if you see both controllers (i.e. the Warthog and the TM virtual controller), this is a bug with the Microsoft Windows store and you shouldn't rely on this functionality. Bottom line: use one or the other in the same game. Give the Mirage profile a look; it got a lot of love recently!