lmp

I'm pretty sure you can't do that at the moment in DCS though. I may be wrong, but I would at least check before I started messing with my pedals ;).

What I said is based on several MiG-29 flight manuals as well as statements from a MiG-29 pilot. You can of course physically carry such a load out, but you won't be able to use it. Besides, what's the point besides "looking cool" for a photo shoot?

To the best of my knowledge, this wouldn't be technically possible on the 9.12. The weapons computer doesn't support different missile types on the middle and outer stations. Which means the 2*R-60, 2*R-73, 2*R-27R default air to air layout in the game is also impossible.

First an explanation how (I believe) it works. You may already know all this, but just so we're on the same page. In the real deal there are switches on the pedals. When the switch is pressed (feet are on the pedals), the yaw autopilot disengages. When the switch is released (feet off the pedals), the yaw autopilot is reengaged and will try to maintain the new heading. In the game there are no switches (since none of the commercial controllers have them anyway). Instead, when the controller Z-axis is at exactly 50%, it is considered as "switches released", otherwise they are "pressed". Note that a 50% Z-axis doesn't necessarily mean the in-game pedals are centered, as they can be trimmed (either by you if you use the "pedal trim" option, or by the autopilot!). This creates several problems. If you have the "pedal trim" option disabled, the yaw channel will not work very well. Firstly because you rarely fly with the in-game pedals exactly centered. So once you're established in your cruise and would like the autopilot to take over, you have to center the pedals introducing a slip and then let the yaw channel fight that slip. Not good. Secondly, as I mentioned the yaw autopilot will trim your pedals once it reaches the limit of it's range. And with "pedal trim" disabled, you have no good way to get rid of that trim! I think even the trimmer reset button will not clear that. Besides that, I found that when reengaging the yaw channel can sometimes revert to the old heading, instead of maintaining the new one. Let's say I'm heading north on autopilot and I make a 90 degrees turn to the left and release my Z-axis. The yaw channel instead of maintaining the new heading of 270, pulls me all the way to the right to get back to 000. I don't know how to reliably trigger this behavior but it made me weary of keeping the yaw channel on when maneuvering. So with all that in mind, I use the yaw channel only for cruising straight. I have the "pedal trim" option turned on. When I have a long, straight leg to travel, I will turn my aircraft to the required heading, trim it for cruise, release all controls. Then I will turn on the yaw channel (and maybe the alt channel too) and use it to prevent drift and make minute adjustments to the heading. Once I need to maneuver, I will turn the yaw and alt channels off with their buttons. However, most of the time I will just hand fly the helicopter to wherever I need to be with only the pitch/roll channel engaged.

Interesting! I assume they are related designs, since they look so similar? what are the differences?

IMHO the F-5 is probably the best plane to learn manual bombing. It has a decent bomb load and the stability augmentation makes it easy to roll out on target and take a good aim. The one thing it's missing is better bombing tables (but that's common to most DCS aircraft, I think only the Mi-8 has decent tables). I found bombing in the L-39 and MiG-15 to be significantly harder.

Ok, this peaked my interest enough to do some tests. Here's the code I used: #include <Joystick.h> Joystick_ Joystick; void setup() { Joystick.begin(); } void loop() { Joystick.setButton(0, 1); delay(10); Joystick.setButton(0, 0); delay(1000); } This simulates a 10 millisecond long click of a button every 1 second. I settled for this to prevent any possible button/encoder bouncing from interfering with the test results and to generally keep it as simple as possible. I bound the button to the NS430 small right rotary (the one responsible for changing pages in a group), experimented with the button press duration and found that at 10ms I can get it to switch pages accurately most of the time, but sometimes it skips one page. At 5ms, it also switches pages accurately, but sometimes a click doesn't register. So the ideal duration is somewhere between 5 and 10ms I guess? And of course different rotaries in game have different sweet spots. The F-5E course knob was fine with a 20ms button press... bottom line is, we really need encoder friendly bindings for this to work well.

I ran into the NS430 issues as well and was contemplating approaching the problem from the other end. I don't know how you made your Arduino box, but if you use the joystick library to convert it into a Game Controller, you can make the button presses as short as you want. You control how you translate the physical button/encoder input to game controller button output after all. Maybe this way you can get around the DCS limitations? I never got around to doing that, but I'm thinking of making an encoder box (mostly for CRS/HDG knobs and radios) and if I do, I'll let you know. Ideally, DCS should offer a "one button click translates to one encoder click in the game" mapping. This way we wouldn't have this problem to begin with. But such is life.

It's simplicity does make it versatile. However, it's NOT used in the MiG-15/L-39. These two use different versions of the ASP-3 sight, which is a more advanced gyro gunsight.

Let's have the option to turn them off. When I found out I could do that in the Viper I was sooo glad.

The back cockpit has the more advanced ASP-17V sight, while the front cockpit has the PKV sight (and the Raduga-Sh). Wags' video "Hind over Lakatia" shows both cockpits clearly, albeit with the sights turned off. Other versions of the Hind will have different sights (in case you're looking up information about the real thing, keep in mind which version is being discussed). I believe the D model has a PKV in the back and of course the turreted versions have a specialized sight for the gun.

The F-16C has toggles in the Special options to disable the static reflections on the MFD and canopy. I think it's a great idea and the MiG-15bis should have this option as well.

You can now place TACAN stations in the editor, but we're still waiting for RSBN.

What about all the possible Israel Vs Syria or Turkey Vs Syria scenarios? Should we use Russian skins for those too? Syrian skins are absolutely essential for this map.

It just occurred to me this moving map will make for an awesome home cockpit project :joystick:

It would also be great if we could add custom maps for specific missions. I bet campaign makers would love it.

Primarily, it doesn't reinforce the idea of the new map being anything more than a new backdrop for the same old USA Vs Russia fantasy. The area the map covers has seen a lot of conflict in recent times and the SyAAF has been an active participant.

I can understand why they did TACAN first. Many more aircraft in the sim can use it. No complaints there from me. I just hope extending this feature to support RSBN is something we could have in the not too distant future. And yeah, I'd love it if the MiG-21 could use standard beacons instead of its proprietary system.

Very much so! In fact I believe we have only two SyAAF skins at the moment, both for the MiG-21. That's not enough for the main country on the map.

Hi, We now have the ability to place TACAN stations anywhere on the map. It would rock if we could do the same for RSBN. I understand it would only benefit the 7 people on the planet who still fly the L-39, but since we just got the Syria map where this aircraft was extensively used... Pretty please?

That didn't change anything.

Did a repair, it didn't change anything. It also happens with other planes, not just the JF-17. dcs.log-20200323-125339.zip

I am not running any mods at all. The mission was a single player JF-17 and nothing else at all. Can't make it any more simple than that. I'm only running the "stock" Windows firewall. The game ran fine a few days ago. Installing the latest patch broke it.

It seems every single update ED releases these days results in a game breaking crash. I had to reinstall the entire game several times this year because nothing else would work. Today I tried to play, downloaded the latest patch and bam - another crash. Log in the description. Crash happens when I try to run a mission from the ME. log.zip

Sorry, that was a typo - it's a GTX 950