Flagrum

That's probably because those tutorials are about the A-10C and with FC3 you got the A-10A. The A-10A is the older version (in reality) of the aircraft and the A-10C got some serious upgrades. And in DCS, the other difference is that the A-10A, as FC3 aircraft, does not provide a clickable cockpit and the systems are not modelled as deeply as in the DCS A-10C module.

Throttle ("Differential engines control handle" in the manual): the two small levers with the yellow handle. Controls the engine's power output. Collective: the large handle with the switches-box at the end. Controls "collectively" the angle of attack of all blades. Controls the lift that the rotor produces; makes the helo go up and down. Cyclic: the stick between your knees. Sets the angle of attack of the blades only at a specific position during their rotation ("as it cycles around"). Tilts the direction of the lift the rotor produces; makes the helo bank to the sides or pitch it's nose up and down. edit: As mentioned before, the engine output is normally managed by the helo itself, no need to adjust it manually (except for very special cases). To maneuver the helo, you only use Cyclic, Collective and the Anti Torque pedals ("rudder pedals").

:doh:

This is not exactly true. The "Reputation Power" does not translate directly to those reputation points. It is some sort of factor < 1.0 (Lol, otherwise I would run around in deep red now - after Wags blessed me with his attention once, back in 2016. ;-)

Das ist aber nicht die Schuld des Radios, sondern generell in DCS so. Wenn du mit Einheiten per Funk interagieren willst, muss in DCS eine entsprechende Logik ("AI") implementiert sein. Irgendwo muss ja programmiert sein, wie die Einheit auf welche bestimmten Funksprüchen von dir reagieren und /oder antworten soll. Für Flieger gibt es da die Wingman-AI. Aber schon für Flieger außerhalb deiner Rotte sind die Möglicheiten sehr beschränkt: du kannst sie nicht anfunken, nur hören, wenn sie ihre Wegpunkte abfliegen ... Dann gibt es bei den Bodeneinheiten den JTAC - mit einer recht komplexen Interaktion. Den ATC ist ein mittelding - sitzt auf dem Boden, spricht aber mit Fliegern ... Aber das wars dann auch, was DCS "out of the box" hier anbietet. Alles, was darüber hinausgehen soll, muss der Mission-Designer selber bauen, z.B. mit Triggern, die auf deine "Funksprüche" reagieren (in Anführungszeichen gesetzt, weil für diesen Mechanismus eigentlich nichtmal ein funktionierendes Radio notwendig wäre, iirc). Das R-828 oder der Ka-50 an sich können da nicht viel für ... ;-)

I started started that thread in the SA342 forum regarding the wire cutters. :-) Conclusion was, you have to hit the wires so that the cable cutter can cut the cable. Otherwise the cable cuts you ... (i.e. yes, wires are modelled and wire cutters as well). Even fixed wing aircraft are affected - but they usually win against the wires (at least my experience). But you can notice a slight shudder in, for example, the A-10. In faster jets might not be noticeable at all, though.

From a technical standpoint, I find this mod very impressive. Amazing what can be done in terms of modding - given one has enough patience to dive that deep into the LUA and file structure of a module. I actually find some features quite nice and handy ... but, while not being a "rivet counter" at all, I too find this a bit ... well, too much. Too much phantasy, so to say. But that is only my personal opinion - if anyone likes it and wants to use it - sure, why not? :-)

Hab's gerade mal getestet: - JTAC Mod - das wesentliche hier ist eigentlich nur das Bereitstellen des JTAC Comm. Menüpunktes. "Quick&Dirty"-Lösung: - R828 trennt sauber die Kanäle, bzw. Frequenzen. S. angehängte Testmission. Darin sind 2 Bodeneinheiten, eine sendet auf Kanal 7 (40 MHz) ein Testsignal, die andere auf Kanal 6 (32 MHz) und ist der JTac. Beachte: FM Radio ist Line-of-sight und die Reichweite eher beschränkt. D.h. gleich etwas höher gehen und gen Westen fliegen. Darauf achten, den Tune Knopf lange genug gedrückt zu halten, bis das Radio sich optimal eingepegelt hat (je schlechter der Empfang, desto länger dauert es bis die Tune-Lampe wieder ausgeht!). r828 test.miz

Das R-828 ist wie im Handbuch beschrieben simuliert - zumindest war es so, als ich das letzte Mal damit experimentiert habe (ist aber auch ein paar Monate her). Die Frequenzen der Kanäle kann man seit einiger Zeit in eigentlich allen Modulen und speziell auch im Ka-50 direkt im Mission Editor vorbelegen. Der einzige Fallstrick (der mir gerade einfällt) ist, dass das R-828 tatsächlich nur zur Kommunikation mit Bodeneinheiten genutzt werden kann (was aber auch im Manual angedeutet wird, iirc). Das ist aber ein generelles DCS Problem: für Bodeneinheiten weiß die AI nichts mit Funk anzufangen und AI Flieger höhren nur ihre Hauptfrequenz ab und du kannst so also nicht z.B. deinen Wingman auf 50 Mhz erreichen. Aber zum Empfangen von Bodeneinheiten - im Loop oder nicht - oder ähnlichem funktioniert es eigentlich. edit: JTac mit dem R-828 müsste aber eigentlich gehen. (Wenn man denn das JTac Mod installiert)

"You" as in "the original author of the posting" or as in "everyone"?

This must be your lucky day then! :smilewink:

Unlikely.

I've set up a ground unit with Callsign, Frequency and Start Transmission in the ME. Then I copied that unit and changed all three actions: different call sign, different frequency, different sound file and different message text. After saving the mission, the first unit "inherited" the message text from the second one (the copy) and both texts are the same. Also the ME seems to think that the mission has changed (which it has, due to that bug) and warns that stuff will be lost if I don't save the mission when hitting the fly mission button. edit: current 1.5.5 release version

It actually does work in the Huey - you can listen to both, the selected freq. and guard freq. simutaneously. It does not work in the A-10C nor the Ka-50, though. Haven't tested the other aircraft, yet.

The lossy compression aspect is not so important - the comparisation in general is not too bad: the amount of data would be way too much if each frame of a video would be stored as a complete bitmap. Therefore every x frames a full bitmap is stored and the frames in-between are derived from that key frame using only the changes since that frame. The same is probably true for .TRK files: if each "tick" in the simulation would be stored as a complete image of all objects populating the map, the amount of storage and bandwidth would probably way too much to handle (without stuttering, etc.). Therefore in TRK files also only information relevant for getting from "frame n" to "frame n+1" are stored. Storing "key frames" or sync points within the TRK every x frames/"ticks" - sounds like a good idea to me, but I have no clue if it is really done that way.

To me it seems that option 2 is the most logical and usefull one - it keeps the pilot in full control of what is happening. From operational point of view: you turn the knob from VEI (not emitting) to [] (still not emitting, if you don't want to) to PCM (emitting) Also according to the latest manual, to me it seems as if the BR and V lights are mixed up: Imo: as long, as the Jammer is powered up, BR should be lit - similar to all the other lights. DA switch set to M -> DA light is lit, etc. therefore: BR switch is set to M -> BR light is lit. And the V light then would notify the pilot about the current state of the Jammer: emitting or not emitting. (Personally I would prefer a lit lamp if emitting and if not emitting, the light should be off. But I understand that "V" probably stands for "veille"/standby and thus the logic is inversed?)

If that is the case, then this is "just" a bug (_the_ bug?) of the replay mechanism. ... i.e. the butterfly effect. :-)

Randomness ... if using the same seed, the "random" numbers would be the same. But I can imagine, that some modules use their own random number generators for certain things. Like some shaking in certain flight regimes. And those random numbers are outside of the scope of the Track file and the replay function. And according to the butterfly effect, small changes can have huge impacts elsewhere. Like, you fly and your aircraft stalls a little, vibrates for a second. This changes the attitude of it for a very small amount. And starting from there, one hour later, you may end in completely different areas of the map ... if that one second shake was random and differet each time the track is played.

Somewhere in the code for the dynamic weather generator there must be a random number generator be used - or how could the weather be different each time? So if we use the exact same input parameters to that weather generator every time, we will get the same weather every time. The thing is just, that some of the input parameters are, well, randomized in the mission editor when you click "generate". But that is just an user interface thing. If those input parameters would be written to the .TRK file and read back from there, the dynamic weather should be the same each time the track is re-played.

My bet would be on those unused TAKT memory adresses. POKE 53280,1 ... anyone? Grewing up with a C64 I bet it will feel like being catapulted back in time once get my sticky fingers on that CK37! :-D

*screams internally*

You don't need to "save" and "load" your settings. When you are done configuring your settings, just click "Ok" and DCS will automatically save everything (in the folder majapahit mentioned). And when you start DCS the next time, it will also automatically load everything back.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=168803 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=177962

German Wikipedia states that they weight about 6 metric tons each. Not sure if lighter or heavier variants exists, but at least that weight roughly matches the weight in the mission editor. Crates and barels ... who knows what they really contain and what they weight - so it makes sense to have those weights adjustable. But a tetrapod is a tetrapod - and it weights what it weights, I'd say. :-) Maybe we will get a helo in the future that is capable of hauling them? Hrm ... :-)

Again, it is not working. And additionally: why? Why should 2 sources be necessary if TAS alone already provides all data that it needed?