mkiii

OP: Just Edit SU25T-CPT-TEX-04.dds after extracting it from the Su-25T textures zip, edit until all lights have a radioactive neon glow, put back into zip. Fly. Either use Generic Mod Enabler or do this after every update.

In the A-10 over Georgia, I get about 16.6 feet per second, or a bit less than 11 1/2 mph or a bit less than 1000 feet per minute, which doesn't seem unreasonable for a chute that is designed to get someone down safely who may not be concious... I read that civilian Parachutes are somewhat faster at more like 19 feet per second. WWII Military chutes should be quite a bit faster, maybe nearer 20mph. I have no idea whether different aircraft in DCS model chutes differently. Feel free to sit there with a stopwatch & report back your findings ;)

Has anyone done any proper tests to see how well the modern radar guided AAA copes with WWII aircraft compared to more modern types? In some ways, since things like the Spit can jink about a lot more, then perhaps they are not so accurate as they might be? IRL, I'm guessing that they can predict something less twitchy such as an A-10 or SU-25 a lot better, but this is superhuman AI we are dealing with regardless of RADAR.

AstroEma: I bought 3 cheap glass monitor stands with adjustable legs that allow you to lower one end and raise the other, (VonHaus Large curved glass monitor screen riser from Amazon). This lets me tilt my outer screens slightly, & compensates for the fact that I have my middle screen tilted back slightly.

Using the Target SW and the type of control mentioned above should work, but you then either have to just use it for the Spit, and redo your input settings in DCS, which aren't that complex for this aircraft, then restart without it for every other aircraft, or redo them all using the script and the Combined Controller" that it creates. That is too much faffing for me though, although you can exclude everything but the stick in the script like this. The Stick will Need to be remapped in DCS and is labelled "Thrustmaster Combined", All the other controls are seen as they normally are. IF you don't have MFDs, just comment out those lines. Note the commands to pulse the keystrokes should have Right Control added. include "target.tmh" //program startup int main() { Configure(&LMFD,MODE_EXCLUDED); Configure(&RMFD,MODE_EXCLUDED); Configure(&Throttle,MODE_EXCLUDED); //Configure(&Joystick,MODE_EXCLUDED); if(Init(&EventHandle)) return 1; // declare the event handler, return on error //add initialization code here MapAxis(&Joystick, JOYX, DX_X_AXIS); MapAxis(&Joystick, JOYY, DX_Y_AXIS); MapKey(&Joystick, H1U, REXEC(0, 150, "ActKey(KEYON+PULSE+R_CTL+';');")); MapKey(&Joystick, H1D, REXEC(0, 150, "ActKey(KEYON+PULSE+R_CTL+'.');")); MapKey(&Joystick, H1L, REXEC(0, 10, "ActKey(KEYON+PULSE+R_CTL+',');")); MapKey(&Joystick, H1R, REXEC(0, 10, "ActKey(KEYON+PULSE+R_CTL+'/');")); } //event handler int EventHandle(int type, alias o, int x) { DefaultMapping(&o, x); //add event handling code here } These trim commands should not be mapped to buttons in DCS since the script is sending keystrokes directly via a virtual keyboard. Personally, I wouldn't use the one for the Elevator, since that trim is already far too slow, and would comment it out then map it as normal to the up & down hat buttons. Alternatively, since the trim directly affects the rudder position (watch it while you trim on the ground), perhaps you could try reducing the Y saturation of the rudder to lessen its influence in the first place? Also, using the mouse on the trim wheel itself gives finer control. I use my Trim Hat for elevator and rudder trim, and for me, the rudder is just right, but the elevator is way too slow. I sometimes use a second throttle (From my X52Pro) for extra axes and buttons, the rotaries on that would probably be good for trim controls, in so much as you could at least see where they are positioned at a glance (tip -use tippex to mark the centre).

At the risk of stating the obvious, I would say don't let them shoot you ;) Perhape take a sacrificial wingman to distract them while you do the shooting or vice versa. If you can find the max range afrom where they start shooting, and circle around, changing height and speed constantly, then you might survive long enough for them to run out of ammo, and press home an attack. I suppose that it depends on how many there are, and what type, and if you are trying to attack, or just avoid. The Spit isn't going to outrange them or be able to spoof their radar if they have it.

I Have a standard length WH, but find that when I need a bit finer control, adjusting my grip up the stick a couple of inches, helps, as long as I only need to press the trigger or Weapon Release button. I fire with my little and ring fingers rather than index. I do have big hands though. Generally, I found that in the Spit at least, it was the rudder that gave the most trouble, and I remember seeing a post by one of the devs that the rudder was too twitchy and that it was going to be adjusted. If it was, then perhaps not enough for me. I do think that you should be making fine adjustments to your aim by easing in a little yaw rather than with roll. I do find that the nose tends to react to the rudder a bit too much, for me, and have reduced the Y axis Saturation to 60% and Curvature to 30, with a small deadzone of 4 Seems to make thing a lot less twitchy, but still giving a good range of movement. This is with CH Pro Pedals, and my equally big feet.

I haven't tried the mission you are talking about, but I get what you mean. DCS doesn't allow the creation of lines on the map to designate FLOT & target areas like F4 BMS, or other sims like ARMA for most aircraft. KA-50 excepted. I can only suggest making good use of the Kneepad map.... If you want to go one further, then KneeboardBuilder might come in handy. For example, you could take a screenshot of your map & add an image of it with hand drawn marks to show areas of interest, FLOTS.

Reading some pilots notes from the Battle of Britain, using just .303s of course, he stated 250 yards Harmonisation distance, and that the bullets would take .28 of a second to travel that distance, and also that a fighter could travel 40 yards in that time. So, this seems to broadly agree with the numbers quoted by Jocko417. Also, I'm fairly sure that harmonisation didn't necessarily mean all guns converged on a single point, but that they were arranged to cover a strip of space. or more than one spot. This varied as the war progressed, and as guns got heavier/tactics changed (and depending on squadron tactics). Humm.... Here we go... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_harmonisation I might have known Jimmy Wales would have the answers.

I had the same problem, my wingman hurtled down the runway, and I could barely get off the ground. It turned out that DCS had changed my axis settings and duplicated my throttle AXIS on another controller, so although I was at full throttle, the other axis was interfering. Deleting the addition cured that.

I think this thread should be "Stickied". So much good info.

It's might also be worth mentioning that ATM both versions, as well as the Beta keep their own set of config files in "Saved Games" too, so you can easily test settings in one install without messing up the other(s).

The Magnification system seems to be a bit of a bone of contention atm for online players especially, considering the differences it shows between different screen resolutions, and other threads have argued the toss over this at great length. ATM I can't see anything much beyond half a mile, in the air or on the ground, even with enlargement set to max, so there is obviously still something wrong with either my setup or the enlargement system in general. Just tried the SU25T Target practice Quickstart mission and was unable to see the massed targets on the ground until I was well into launch range for a/g weapons.

No, not sanctimonious, I'll leave that to the preachers and the converted. I'm just frustrated that I can't get across the simple facts of my particular problem: I don't know where you think I was saying that I was better than ANYONE, and apologise if thats what you took it to mean. This is a forum where discussion takes place, and I'm too old to care if people get upset when I disagree. A: If I need a 140 degree FOV, (not to zoom, not for any advantage, since I'm not using it online anyway), but to just get the widescreen forward view looking close to how it does on a single screen. B: Using a slider on the throttle as zoom lever, I wand fwd to be Min FOV, Middle around 140 degrees, and back to whatever the Max FOV is set to. Currently, as I explained, to get 140 somewhere near the middle, and not have silly wide angles like 170+ at the Max end, then the Min end has to be at some not ideal fov, giving less "zoom", to keep 140 near the middle. C: The reason for keeping normal FOF near the middle of the range? The slider is more stable in the middle and at eaither end, anywhere else, and wobbles creep in. Your *only* & *need* points are exactly what I am having to do, so I can't see why you are arguing against it. I clearly don't think everyone has the same setup as myself, and If I use the defaults on ly single screen laptop then they are perfectly fine as you describe out of the box. As long as people say they are happy with the current setup here, then it seems to me to be less likely that any adjustments will make it into the GUI. Why bother adding features that no one wants after all? PS. Looking at your rig, which seem to be pretty nice, I notice that your main screen aspect ratio looks like the key to why you are more satisfied. I'm using 5760x1080 on the main screen, and I think that is where the problem arises. The sim just doesn't liike things too wide and shallow. If I could justify the expense, then clearly 5760x1280 would make life easier.

I believe that it only uses PRMG for "ILS", so normal ILS doesnt move the cross. I had a glance at the manual, but it hardly mentions the subject. AFAIK, only russian military airfields have it, and only the following, at least the last time I checked:- Mozdok, PRMG 22 Krymsk, PRMG 26 Maykop - Khanskaya, PRMG 36 Krasodor - Centre, PRMG 38 If you have the L-39, you will also be using the same system. If not, it might still be worth taking a look at Chucks excellent guide, because it has lots of info on PRMG, and related navigation issues:- https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-uSpZROuEd3aHZwV0VtalFCR1E/view

Strange. I don't use TIR per se, but do use other Headtracking device/SW and it always lets me run it post my entry to the 3d world (IR LED Hat & Opentrack or FaceTrackNoIR - using TIR output). Could you get your TIR clip to work with any of those perhaps, or does it only work with the supplied TIR SW?

How was it resolved? Maybe others have the same problem.

Interesting.Maybe they do get repaired, but in real-time? Even if they did get repaired during your session, wouldn't it have to be some magically quick time, nuch like the aircraft repairs? It's been a while since I had any involvement in the RL side of these things, but I seem to recall that it would take a repair team (in the UK at least) around 4+ hours just to fill a smallish standard crater and resurface. I have no idea what the times would be for craters made with specifically designed runway denial weapons, but it would no doubt be much longer. I suppose Russian aircraft might fare better than their Western counterparts in general, since they can cope with rougher strips.

We are indeed in a post factual society. :/

I have said it before, and I'll say it again.... Setting the curve in your profile does NOT alter your min and max FOV.. it can only move the centre point nearer to one end or the other. If the default is FOV as set by default in the lua files is not within the range you need to cater for your monitor setup, then you will not be able to get a good range without editing it. If you use a slider, you ideally want the min to equal the min fov, the middle to equal the ideal fov, and the other end to equal the maximum fov. In my case, the min is about 110 degrees, the mid is about 140 degrees, and the max is around 170 degrees. With a bit of leeway on all 3, but 140 is about right on my setup. The default min/max in the luas is usually 20 to 140 degrees, with a default fov around 80 to 90 degrees, which means that you have to fly zoomed right out the whole time if you have a wide triple screen, and all you have is a really big zoom IN on your slider, so not much point to it. I just wish those people who claim that you dont have to adjust your lua files would just do the math.

Since it's dark for half the year anyway, all Swedes can see in the dark already. In the Summer, they all have to wear really dark sunglasses. :)

This is a very long standing issue for a lot of people. Generally, it seems to work well if you have a standard single monitor setup, but can be a bit tricky to get right if you are using very wide screen, or multiple monitors. You can use the curves on your control as mentioned above, but they cannot alter the minimum or maximum FOV settings, just where the centre is. Unfortunately, on a wide screen, the FOV is usually wrong, so there is not much you can do about it imo, except edit multiple lua files and use Generic Mod Enabler to load them in after each update. Ideally, each module would have a min/max fov slider in its settings page.

Agreed. Too many hoops to jump through, and the assumption that everyone reads every post in this forum before running the game each time.

No of course, but what we are discussing is whether doing a complete fresh install of the latest version makes things run smoother, not just updating. Hence the query about the need to deactivate or not before you do it. Opinions seem to vary.

Unfortunately, it isn't easier for me, since I currently have a problem with Module manager not reading serials correctly, so it is a trust issue, and 17 modules to deal with... I was just trying to find out whether or not it is necessary to deactivate all modules before un-installing/re-installing a particular release. Bearing in mind that I have alpha and beta installed too.