sthompson

I'm up to mission 7, and love the immersion, but I'm not sure I've hit anything yet with my own guns or bombs except the bomber in Mission 6. Clearly I need practice. But it's pretty frustrating to fly all the way to Evreux and then get knocked out of the sky before I've even fired my first shot. I'm wondering if there are some practice missions that give a sense of the action over Normandy without making you start in England? I really don't have time to run the mission twice in one evening because of the long flight over the Channel . Also, I've noticed a few bizarre things with the AI and weather. I've already reported the weather in the DCS bugs\objects forum, but I don't know where the AI issues should be reported. Here are some things I experienced. 1) On Mission 7 some of the AI lag way behind the group and are not really part of the action when the furball starts. 2) On Misssion 7 when I have the enemy in sight, and even after the furball has begun, when I give the "engage bandits" command to my flight I get "negative" for answers. Slackers! 3) I've noticed that "dead" AI are sometimes found flying around in very wide circles, inverted, with the prop freewheeling at maybe 15 rpm, trailing fuel and oil, at about 110 knots, and not losing or gaining altitude. I've sometimes accelerated time to watch this and they do it until the sun goes down. I noticed this after getting shot down myself in missions 5 and 7. 4) On mission 6 when you turn to 180 degrees the raindrops pass you from behind, and when you turn to 270 they pass you from right to left. That shouldn't be happening. Once in the air the rain should always appear to be coming from your reciprocal heading since you are moving with the wind. 5) On mission 6, even though the wind is strong from direction 350 the ATC tells you to land on runway 05, i.e. with a nasty cross-wind, instead of runway 35, which is perfectly aligned!

The other day I flew Mission 6 of the P-51 campaign Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney (by Reflected Simulations). In this mission there is a strong wind from direction 350, heavy rain and a low cloud ceiling. After takeoff you are supposed to fly south at 180, that is, almost dead downwind. When I did this, flying downwind at about 300 knots IAS, the raindrops were passing me. How can that be? When I turned to direction 270 (so that the wind was coming from my right) the rain was blowing from right to left past my canopy. These would be correct if I were stationary on the ground, but wrong for an airborne plane where the raindrops should be approaching me from my reciprocal heading. That is, they should always appear to be coming from straight ahead if I'm flying straight and level, independent of the wind speed.

VAICOM needs certain DCS files to be patched in order to work properly. However whenever you repair or update DCS those patches disappear because the installer thinks they are corrupted. Then VAICOM needs to run its startup code to re-patch the files. But even after that happens DCS doesn't load the re-patched files until you restart DCS. So after every DCS or VAICOM update you need to close both programs, then restart VAICOM, then restart DCS, to get things working again. And if you are having trouble do a DCS repair prior to the above. Even all of that may not help if the DCS update has updated the files that VAICOM patches so that the patches no longer work. In those cases Hollywood might need to update VAICOM before things work smoothly again.

How about some variant on this one for the Mosquito? https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/world-war-iis-strangest-bombing-mission-180974470/

I don't fly the Viper so can't test whether I have the same experience. But you could have a corrupted VAICOM database. It happens occasionally for reasons I do not understand. The solution is to load a clean copy using the reset page. That will wipe out any aliases you have added, however. BTW, you may get a better response if you post in the VAICOM PRO forum here: https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/329-vaicom/

Your first question confuses me. Why are you making a marking moms call on VAICOM if you have human ATC? As far as I know, having other players on the same frequency hear the AI replies to your communications is a DCS feature not related to VAICOM. Furthermore, it's realistic since in RL everyone on the same frequency hears the AI broadcasts regardless of who initiated the communication. Perhaps you meant to ask how to arrange for human players on SRS to not hear your VAICOM commands. That's what your second question is about. On that question, you are correct about how it works, and personally I find the approach using "switch" to be very awkward. So I leave SRS integration turned off in VAICOM. Instead I use a method that requires 4 buttons for three radios. (Or five buttons if you also want TX5 for intercom.) I bind TX1-TX3 in VAICOM per usual. I then bind the same buttons to SRS radios 1-3 but leave the SRS option where a radio selection acts as PTT turned off in SRS. I bind the fourth button as PTT in SRS. Thus if I push any one of the first 3 buttons I can give a command to VAICOM on one of the radios, and simultaneously select the same radio in SRS. But nothing gets broadcast on SRS until I push the fourth (PTT) button. If you are switching radios frequently in SRS it might not be very convenient, and it's not realistic for modules that have multiple PTT buttons for each of their radios. But this has been working well for me. BTW, I do this and all other comms functions using one hat switch on the throttle and a shift button. My bindings: Forward, down, and aft are for SRS radios 1-3 and VAICOM TX1-TX3. Up is for VAICOM TX5 (which let's me talk to Jester or ground crew) and also selects SRS Intercom (which I've never used). Shift-Forward is for VAICOM TX6. Shift-UP is SRS PTT. Shift-Down, is SRS overlay toggle. Shift-Aft toggles the DCS communications menu in case I'm having problems with VAICOM or can't remember the command.

@Mace246, no you do not need the stable version. To be clear, did you do all of the above (1) after repairing DCS and (2) before restarting DCS? If not, I suggest you try that. Also, the log file says it did not update your export.lua file. Try backing that file up, then deleting the original, then restarting VA, then restarting DCS. If you have further follow up you might switch to a different thread in the VAICOM forum. This one is impossibly long and covers too many disparate topics to be an efficient source of information.

Recently downloaded v1.1 from the VARS site and installed it. It shows up in DCS and I can start the training mission. However (1) pushing spacebar at the end of the first training voiceover does nothing and I can't advance, (2) I can't see anything in the cockpit. It's as if I'm looking at the exterior skin from the inside. Any thoughts? I did install it in the usual saved games location.

My sense is that the microphone itself is very important. Volume probably is not the issue, and if you turn up the gain too much it can actually create distortion. I find that I can give many VAICOM commands almost at a whisper and they will be recognized if the room is quiet. Other commands (e.g. "tune") I have no luck with at all, even after extensive training. There was a world of difference for me when I switched from using my webcam microphone to a fairly decent Logitech headset microphone. If you read about best microphones for speech recognition they emphasize you should use a USB microphone, or a setup where the analog to digital conversion is done by a separate box outside the computer. The issue is that the computer enclosure itself is electrically "noisy" and can add a lot of noise to the signal that the software sees but you don't hear, so it's best to do the A-D conversion outside of that environment.

You obviously haven't been following the thread very closely if you think that everyone commenting is asking for AI to fly the plane into the basket. Lots of us are asking for learning aids, not auto-refuel. Perhaps we should start a separate thread.

Actually TACAN tune is a keyword. (It is in the command phrase list of the Keyword editor.) Radio tune is not. I don't understand why they aren't both keywords since they both invoke the plugin. @Hornblower, perhaps you could show us exactly what your edited commands look like. I'm not sure how you make VA recognize zero for oh, for example.

Just setting the frequency isn't good enough when there are multiple recipients on the same frequency, which is often the case with a carrier group. In that case you have to "select" the recipient. Naming the recipient in your "inbound" call should be good enough if you are using Instant Select. Otherwise you need to give a select command first.

That all looks good. Suggest you contact Hollywood through official support channels.

Very cool Rel4y. I've noticed that my CH Fighterstick does not return to center uniformly in the pitch axis, and ends up in a different place when I release from pushing forward vs pulling back. I suspect that wear is the culprit. Are you aware of anything that might help with this situation? A while back some pictures were posted of a CAD drawing of a replacement gimbal for the CH fighterstick, but I dont know if that is a project underway. Relatedly, I'm thinking of ordering the 12 bit upgrade. I gather I would have to stop using CH Control Manager, and I would miss the programing features, so I'm not certain I want to go that route. Do I understand that correctly? And would I have to replace the three sensors in the FS to install the mainboard upgrade? Do you have any idea when you will have more sensors available? Last question: Is there any replacement available for the CH Pro Throttle ministick? Centering on mine is very bad and always has been. And the press function really can't be done without moving the axes at the same time I've found.

Are you running VoiceAttack with Administrative privileges? It can't update the AIRIO plugin properly without privileges in the VAICOM subdirectories of VoiceAttack. So, assuming VoiceAttack is installed in the default location, you have to run with admin privileges or else change the folder permissions to permit ordinary users to modify the files.

I don't know what might cause this. I experienced it once myself recently, but shutting down and restarting VA solved the problem. My suggestion: With VA and DCS not running, download and install the latest AIRIO extension manually. Then restart VA and DCS, in that order.

What a productive comment. Insulting people always is a good way to make your case.

The top 3 I looked at were Growling Sidewinder, Hoggit PGAW, and Through-the-Inferno 107th Socal, so all combat servers. I happened to write those down. I forget what the fourth was, but it was also a combat server. And since when do only combat servers count? Aerobatics Online or the Hoggit training server often have more people online than any of the others. There is a spectrum out there, and it is largely what keeps ED in business. I'll bet that the hard core combat pilots (meaning people who fly mostly on locked combat servers) account for far less than half their revenue. And I realize that I would have more choices if I could do AAR. But, as I said previously, even though I want to learn, the existing methods/tools for learning AAR are not working for me even after devoting significant time. Happy they worked for you. I apparently need something different, because none of the online advice has worked for me, and I have put in the effort. I'd love to see a learning server catering to learning AAR -- one that goes beyond just putting some tankers in the air. Perhaps you can point one out.

You don't know that. I just looked at the top 4 MP servers by player count tonight (each currently has more than 30 players connected) nd they all allow some form of game aids and I'm not even counting perfect weather. These include radio assist, unrestricted Sat Nav, mini HUD, external views, labels, padlock, not enforcing integrity check, and no wake turbulence in various combinations. You must have quite a crystal ball to know how MP servers would respond to availability of an AAR assist OPTION. That said I agree that some servers (and perhaps most) might choose to not use the OPTION. That's what it means for it to be OPTIONAL. But I'll bet that some would, most likely those that are less hard core or that cater to learning. On servers that permitted the OPTION, no player would be forced to use it. No one is asking that it be made mandatory, and for missions where it would interfere with the objectives of the MP server I would have no problem if they didn't use it. I've said my piece on this and will move on. I'm disappointed to see how many seem to think that because they don't need it or wouldn't use it that no one else could possibly have a legitimate need or use. That's really the gist of most of the contrary arguments in this thread.

Those two campaigns avoid the issue rather than "taking care of" it, and the fact that they felt compelled to do so shows that it really is a problem. (Their approach won't work for multiplayer in any event.) As for the rest of your post, you seem to miss that many of the people asking for some help HAVE spent a lot of time trying to learn it, DO want to learn, but have not been successful. It's really arrogant to argue that other people shouldn't have something just because you and others don't need it.

Well said. I think I will start a wishlist item asking them to stop working on the Viper so that they can focus on my pet wishes. If you don't like the Viper as is, just don't use it. Problem solved.

No one is asking for anything remotely close to that. All I want is an option for better visual cues about where the "thing" is that I need to hit, with mission planners having the ability to choose whether to permit that option or not just as they do for other options such as wake turbulence. All it would require is limiting the basket's movement a bit and perhaps enlarge a bit the region where it snaps to the probe to make the hookup a bit more forgiving. I doubt if that requires more than a tweak to parameters already in the tanker code with no changes at all to the flyable modules. And to those who say I am ignoring the complexity and resources needed to implement something I say you don't know that is true any more than I do. Only the developers can answer that question, and it isn't the purpose of a wish list to set priorities for their efforts based on the unknown to us difficulty of implementation. I realize that the OP asked for an "auto" mode option. That's not what I want, but apparently some think that it's not OK to contemplate any changes at all that would give struggling customers some help. There have been reasonable arguments for something less extreme as an OPTION. Perhaps we could focus the discussion on what would best help people overcome their limitations without going all the way to making it a pushbutton process. Advice to "practice more" doesn't cut it for many of us. Think about this: The most common advice given for how to successfully AAR in DCS is to ignore the basket and fly the picture. Is that really how the military trains? I doubt it. Is it realistic to have the basket and hose slice through your aircraft when you miss with no damage? Obviously not. And I'd be very surprised if the military would let people who can't do AAR continue to fly. Perhaps we should ban people from certain aircraft if they can't demonstrate realistic proficiency within XX hours? Or a permanent ban from flying DCS if you crash and die. That would be realistic. I just don't buy the argument that it's realistic now. I suspect it is harder than in RL in some respects and easier in others.

So you think that flying a long mission with a fixed load of 10% or 50% or 100% fuel is the same experience (apart from the actual AAR) as doing AAR (with assistance or not) and then having to worry about your weight and fuel consumption? Obviously not. Unlimited fuel totally changes the mission. Furthermore, it would have to be permitted in the mission design. That pretty much rules out most MP play as well as any mission where you do not want to peek at the mission details in the editor before flying. As for being inconsistent with the "study sim" mentality, I get that. But consider that right now mission designers can already choose to allow or not allow game modes, radio assists, tooltips, crash recovery, easy comms, padlock, unlimited fuel, unlimited weapons, immortality, unrestricted sat nav, labels, choice of avionics language, external views, various unrealistic F10 views, no wake turbulence, no birds, perfect weather, and no random failures. So there are already lots of options for permitting or not various levels of realism depending on who you are trying to please in your mission design. Adding AAR assist to that list is unlikely to change the overall experience in any big way and just might reduce frustration for some of us. I personally have been flying ED products since the Flanker 1.0 days, have purchased all of the modules (except the JF-17), almost all of the DLC campaigns, and all of the maps. So I'm pretty much the ideal ED customer from a revenue standpoint. I fly for many hours each week, and try to work in some serious AAR practice (i.e. 3-4 hours) every few weeks. I've studied all the manuals, watched all of the AAR videos, and try to fly as realistically as I can. I have decent CH HOTAS that works fine for everything I do except AAR. But I have never caught the basket even once. It's a major source of frustration. My failures are not due to insufficient "study." Perhaps my HOTAS or computer isn't good enough or perhaps I'm not good enough despite practice. I'm not going to invest additional $1,000s in hardware to find out. BTW, good luck getting developers to start putting warnings on their campaigns that say "this is very hard and you might fail." That's not going to happen even if it should.

Unlimited fuel totally changes the experience since you then carry it around for the entire mission. It's not a close substitute. Plus not an option for missions you can't edit.

I disagree. It seems that of those who voted more people want ED to put their development resources elsewhere. That's not the same thing as "not wanting this option." If ED thinks that a poll on the forum is a good way of analyzing user wants and needs then they need to sign up for a remedial class in how to do a marketing survey. People who happen to read that thread are not a representative sample of users and the poll is of questionable value. Personally, my inability to do AAR after more than 100 hours of trying with not one single successful hookup is a major factor keeping me from enjoying DCS more. And yes, I've watched all of the videos and have HOTAS that works just fine for everything else.