Martyn

This may be too late to be useful for you, but perhaps is interesting for others who are considering Winwing products. I recently ordered their Orion HOTAS after years of clinging on to my Sidewinder FFB2 stick. I was charged about £90 by FedEx today for import duties (£78 import tax + £12 min. handling fee). This was on a purchase that was $500 + $69 shipping. I don't have an exact conversion rate as it was paid for using US dollars already in my PayPal account. Interestingly, FedEx have delivered 3 of 4 of the boxes this morning but kept one back pending the payment, so I have the throttle base, joystick base and grip, but no throttle handles yet! Overall, the final cost is likely close to £500 which is reasonable given the issues and concerns I've read about with the TM Warthog which is a little over £400 and has fewer switches and a gimbal that can wear out etc.

I was going to start Deployment tonight, after owning the Ka-50 for years but never putting it to much use. But after several VR-related crashes during the first few minutes I gave up as I need to sleep soon and it's a 45-min flight. Anyway, the original version of the mission gives you a hot start and the initial voiceover tells you there are three minutes before take off. The briefing text mentions the 30-min windows but I presume that's just flavour text. The updated version must have switched to a cold start without changing the timings. Doesn't really help you but it does explain why it's like it is. Glad I read your post though, as I just found the updated campaign version and guess that's going to offer a better experience than the original, if the original is broken in 2.5.6.

Hello All, I finished this campaign today and wanted to post to say how much I enjoyed it - everyone has done a fantastic job, thank you so much I particularly liked the way the campaign was closed out at the end too. I didn't run into any major problems other than a couple of minor/random trigger issues as posted in other threads, and voiceovers cutting each other off in a few places due to (unlucky) timing. In the cases where my wingman was shot down, I often found myself opening up the mission file and extracting the audio files to see what chit-chat I might have missed. The banter between the player and wingman were always interesting, informative and fun The delivery of factual information about the conflict through the conversations and mission briefings was fascinating (and saddening) too. I've been flying DCS on and off for years but the only other campaigns I have finished so far are the less combat-orientated helicopter campaigns. Despite being technically proficient in the A-10C and Ka-50 in terms of flight and the operation of weapons systems, I consider myself poor and somewhat inexperienced in an actual combat environment. So I usually find any campaign a baptism of fire where I struggle to get past the first mission (especially as I don't like to play with labels or F10 map icons). In this respect, it was nice to jump into the F-15C and fly some missions more akin to the simulators of the 90's, which were less in depth than DCS but still engrossing. I don't consider myself a great air combat pilot either, but I knew most of the BVR theory and read the F-15C manual, so the obstacles were not too great to overcome. I do enjoy focussing on one aircraft at a time and learning it well. Thanks again to all involved

Also ran into overlapping voiceover issues as mentioned in my other thread here, and in the post above that one I also mentioned the same issue with nonsensical messages about the Backfire: Furthermore, I had a similar issue in Mission 15 on first attempt (orders issued to both F-15 flights simultaneously); it was very confusing. Second & third attempt was OK, as I was perhaps faster to get off the ground and reach the AO in those flight. Still got killed all three times though

Hi @baltic_dragon, thanks for the question. I had taken a screenshot of the results page and you're right: Score = 50 Result = 85 I misremembered it, and believed the '50' was the minimum pass mark for a campaign mission, based on something I read a long time ago. My mistake, it's good that you queried it! I'm just about to fly the next one...

I flew the mission again this morning, as it's a UK holiday today. This time it ran better - almost as intended I think. I didn't do anything differently, but perhaps I was in a different position and the triggers fired differently. Attacked the 2x MiG-29s, shot down one, got into a furball with the other. Eventually it bugged out and we headed back to our anchor point. Shortly after, the call came in for the Tu-22 which we pursued to the east for a while, until it turned back (so far already better than the above runthrough) Then we had a long flight west to chase down the 3x Su-24s headed to Kutaisi. As we got with 10-20 miles, and very close to Kutaisi, the three-ship turned for home, and at that moment a voiceover came in from my wingman to say "all bandits destroyed", to which Rogue 4 replied with "good job, return to anchor point". Then I got the speech about the bandits wanting to stay out of our WEZ, and Rogue 4 asking us to continue to push these targets while over the TCT. So the voiceovers were confusing because the mission seemed to think the 3x Su-24s were both destroyed AND going home But either way, the trigger fired to signal the end of that task and the start of the next one... After the above, the call came in about the 4x Su24s approaching Rogue 4 and we headed east again, destined not to get there in time. As we closed in on this group, some of the voiceovers 'overlapped' (cut-off by a subsequent voiceover before the previous one had finished), or came in a somewhat jumbled sequence. Maybe I was unlucky with the timing and separate triggers firing near simultaneously. Didn't help that the in-game Overlord calls were coming in thick and fast, so I was mostly reading the subtitles. I didn't hear the audio with the "mother******s... they're doomed" for example - just saw it in the subtitles. The rest of the mission seemed to play out OK (instruction from Wizard to RTB, Dodge 7 scrambled) Mission complete, but only a result of '50' so not sure what counts as a full pass on that one (not that I'm concerned about score or kills; I just want a good experience). I've uploaded the track & Tacview files to the same folder linked above in case you want to analyse them Flying in VR is taking some getting used to, and I spend a lot of time fumbling around for keyboard keys I need to look at setting up VoiceAttack at last, as the overall experience is amazing.

A few months on from my last attempt, I flew this mission again tonight. I can be like that with DCS when I hit a hurdle in a campaign - it takes me a while to feel like repeating the mission again. But I've just been away from DCS a while. Still on 2.5.6 - I didn't try the OB despite the enticing clouds! This time the mission ran a little better - up to a point... The Georgian Su-25s did their attack run as soon as I neared WP2, then a pair of MiG-29s came in from the north which I downed. Then we had some jumbled up voiceovers about letting a bandit go and "too late, missiles in the air", even though we hadn't fired anything. I think this related to a nearby Tu-22, looking at the Tacview. Hopefully the DCS track will have caught that. Next up, we were directed westwards towards some Su-24s which I caught up to nearing Zugdidi. Rogue 4 said to engage as long as they were over TCT (Tbilisi Controlled Territory), but as they were running away and nearing the Abkhazian border, I elected to save my missiles since the brief implied it would be a long flight. Unsure if I needed to shoot these down to progerss the mission, I followed them for a while, then eventually instructed by wingman to attack and he hit one, but it got away (I told him to rejoin). After that, I flew back towards the Bullseye but nothing else happened. I got standard AWACS calls about aircraft in the area but no official instructions about what to do next. After a while I flew back to Kutaisi to land. Just as I was about to come over the threshold, my wingman gave a "bandit down" call (mission voiceover) then Rogue 4 asked us to return to our hold point. (Looking in Tacview, the timing coincides with the Su-24s landing at Nalchik). So I aborted the landing, and headed back to WP2 at 28,000ft. Again, nothing else happened! I flew several orbits with time acceleration as I was a little bored by this point. Using F2 view I could see three Su-24s which appeared to be near the edge of the map. It was very dark and I was in VR (with short-range terrain rendering) but I could just make out some snow-capped mountains and lots of empty/flat terrain. Using the default AWACS calls I headed over - they were in the far east of the map. Shot them down, then 4 more bombers appeared, headed directly at Rogue 4. I was very close (probably because I was not where I was meant to be - voiceovers said we'd never get there in time) so attacked those but only had one missile left. Soon after, some Flankers appeared and chased me down. (I'd taken damage from an Su24 as I was careless after running out of missiles, then the Flankers finished me off.) So not a very successful run once again. I got a result of 90 so could have continued, but as I don't consider it a completed mission I ended without continuing and will try it again at some point. I'd appreciate it if you can do a bit more bug-hunting on this one, thanks. The Tacview and DCS tracks are both here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fG4RVaPsCS66Cn9MFzvFjcvpGWU4PvLx?usp=sharing

OK, thanks for the response and looking into it. I'll be sure to save the .TRK file next time, if it happens again. It's hard to stay focussed on one campaign/aircraft when ED keep doing these free-to-play events!

Of course, here's a link to the ACMI file https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vlWaqlTV3pZtPnyszWbpQuxeT9Jqin_c/view?usp=sharing Perhaps I strayed too far from the trigger point and in orbiting the area I didn't pass into it for a while. After a short time I starting doing a rough racetrack orbit and then kept overflying WP2 (Gori) each time. If you can find something amiss, that's great; if not I'll try it again at some point in the coming days and report back. Thanks!

I just flew mission 13 for the first time. I didn't expect any instant drama due to the comments about reserving fuel, but... Seems a trigger didn't fire somewhere? Maybe I was too high or low at times, my altitude tended to drift between 26,000 and 28,000ft, as the F-15 doesn't seem to like attitude or altitude hold in a continuous gentle turn! But hasn't been an issue until now. Eventually, I flew back and landed about an hour after I took off. Still got a score of 50 but I chose not to continue as I think I missed some interesting events (even though I always enjoy non-combat missions as I don't get usually die halfway through!) I am on 2.5.6.59625. Will try again soon. I've recently starting flying some DCS missions in VR and enjoyed my first sunset and seeing the nighttime cockpit come to life, so it wasn't all bad. Thanks.

Hello. After being stuck on mission 9 a while back (no fault of the campaign, just my own ineptitude and/or bad luck), I finally picked up this campaign again to push past it. This time events went as follows: After this point, no more instructions were received and it wasn't clear what I should have done next to complete the mission? I didn't fancy backtracking to my last waypoint just to see if I needed to hit a trigger there. I landed (though I realised later that I hadn't extend all the way out to the last waypoint, south-west of the airfield) and thankfully passed the mission with a result of 60, so can go on to the next mission, but I didn't get the 'success' notification as normally happens. Unless that only triggers at a score of 100? Great campaign so far in any case, thanks!

Four-and-a-bit months on, any news on a fix for this mission, Sabre? I run stable, and while I saw the below update for this campaign in a recent Open Beta patch, I didn't see anything on this one yet. Despite my renewed enthusiasm to more deeply learn the A-10C earlier this year, I lost my momentum with this campaign issue and have long since moved on to other things. Now I'm waiting for Asobo to fix problems in MSFS instead :D It's not life or death, so you'll get no ranting or demands from me, but it is a product I paid for and it's broken, so I really hope to get a fix during this year... I would say that's being patient enough :) I bought the A-10C II so look forward to future content on that, though I won't get to fly it until it hits stable; can't be doing with the hassles of OB, nor the space require to run two installs.

I hope that was an intentional pun on 'stable'. With your username to match, it gave me a good chuckle :D Looks like a fix is on the way as confirmed here, at least: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=275727 Funny that the above new thread was tagged 'Reported' but this older thread was marked 'Already reported'. I know, I know, I'm nit-picking now when I should just be thankful that big bugs from OB are being tended to after release to Stable... :noexpression:

This is shockingly bad. After a 51GB download last night to 2.5.6 stable, I cannot continue the campaign I was flying as I can't get off the ground in one piece. My wingman always taxied behind me with his nose just inches from my tail, constantly stepping on his brakes to avoid a collision, in many previous missions in 2.5.5, but today he just crashed straight into the back of me when I held short to ask for take-off clearance. Repeated outside the campaign in the ME just to be sure it was the game at fault not something specific in the campaign. Utterly rubbish. I've been very eager for 2.5.6 to come to stable so I could see again in the cockpit at night and take a look at the Ka-50 cockpit update, but I'm not sure it was worth the wait. I'll go back to 2.5.5 until this is fixed. I guess the release of the the high-profile Supercarrier module in 2.5.6 only has led to that version being pushed out of the door before it was really ready. I'd gladly wait 6 months between stable updates if they could indeed be 'stable'. Very disappointing. I can accept minor bugs being left in for imminent fixes, but this one is pretty big for any single player folk out there.

Thanks all for the confirmation. Glad to know I'm not going mad, or misunderstanding how it was supposed to work. But now that I think about it again, should the aircraft clock update with the adjustment or only the CDU time? Perhaps that's the bug, rather than the CDU offsetting the time by the adjustment value. Many aircraft have a clock that always shows UTC time, so it just crossed my mind that it could be the reason. The A-10C manual doesn't really say much about the clock itself... (though searching for "clock" finds quite a lot of results!!!) Regardless, it's on the list so that's all that matters.

I recently spent some time going through the CDU with the manual to pick up some new skills and discover features that missed when following the main tutorials years ago, and only practising how to blow stuff up. I believe there's a bug with the LCL ADJUST (Local Time Adjust) in the NAV>TIME page. Examples: Current time = 16:40 GMT/UTC as shown on lower-right of TIME page. Also on the aircraft clock below the standby ADI. Enter Local Adjustment value of 1:00 (1 hr). The lower-right of the CDU shows 18:40 (+2 hours) while the aircraft's clock shows 17:40 (+1 hour) Enter Local Adjustment value of 2:00 (2 hr). The lower-right of the CDU shows 20:40 (+4 hours) while the aircraft's clock shows 18:40 (+2 hours) Enter Local Adjustment value of 0:30 (30 mins). The lower-right of the CDU shows 17:40 (+60 mins) while the aircraft's clock shows 17:10 (+30 mins) Enter Local Adjustment value of 0, and both clocks reset back to GMT and are correct. The CDU display always shows double the correction entered. If flipping the correction from positive to negative by pressing the LSK by the adjustment, the negative correction is also doubled. This is in 2.5.5 stable. I do not run Open Beta but didn't find a mention in the patch notes when I checked some days ago.

The time compression - if I understood you right - is a standard DCS feature across all modules as far as I know. You mean that one with LShift-Z (normal time), LCtrl-Z (accelerate time) and LAlt-Z (slow time), right? That's a good option for aircraft with autopilots, though I wonder if it would cause any glitches with AI if pushed too far. Now that I think about it, years ago (1.5 or earlier) it used to make things run very quickly if you were not careful with the use of LCtrl-Z, to the point you couldn't even hope to control your aircraft, but now it doesn't seem to go as fast - perhaps the simulation rate is effectively capped to avoid weird behaviour if pushed too far. I seldom use it, mostly during replays (when they work) or on occasional practise missions which I might run multiple times, where I want to skip to the action. But definitely a good option on some campaign missions if replaying it for the hundredth time.

Hi Sabre, Just checking in to see if there is any progress with this mission trigger issue? It seems we're some way off getting a new update for the stable branch, but I didn't see any fixes related to this campaign in the Open Beta patch notes either. I'd be happy to test out a revised practise mission if a potential fix is available. It's a shame that I've had to abandon the campaign due to this minor issue with the practise mission. I suppose attempting the mission 'blind' in the actual campaign is possible. That might not have the same glitch, but it might ruin my record/score :huh: Many thanks in advance.

This is very insightful. It's just a simple choice between fulfilling my duties as an employee, father and husband, or enjoying flight sims as I have always done. Why did I never realise it was so simple?! Can you tell my boss, wife and son, or do I have to? :megalol: Seriously, I do understand where you're coming from so forgive my flippant response, but giving up the hobby is not a sensible argument. Look, I don't enjoy 10-minute gaming experiences. I enjoy lengthy hobbies that require investment and learning. I like board games - especially long ones. I like video games - especially long and in-depth ones. I like flight sims - and doing everything properly from start to finish. But my life has changed a lot over the last 20 years so I no longer have as much time - or large chunks of it - as I used to. The Mi-8 Oilfield campaign has a mission length estimate in the briefing screen, which is brilliant. I could use it to plan when I could attempt the next mission to avoid disappointment (essential when some are 2+ hours). But when a mission goes wrong after a hour, I might still have an hour of time left. But that's not enough to replay the entire mission. So I have to park it until the next available time slot. Pretty disappointing. When I watch a film on TV or DVD and have to stop halfway through for some unexpected reason, I don't start watching the entire film again the next day. I carry on where I left off. I can do this in practically every other game or sim I own, just not DCS. The situation isn't perfect in the likes of FSX/X-Plane either, so I fly those less often than I would like to as well. Same reason. But I'm not giving up... I do pause the sim as a temporary 'save' feature sometimes, but that'll only do for short interruptions. I'm not going to leave my sim paused from one evening to the next while I go to work, letting my CPU & GPU churn away at full speed, as that's a complete waste of energy. No issues with that but that's dealing with a different kind of problem. I agree - returning to a save can be confusing. Some might use it to skip the startup sequence, but that's not really what most of the above conversation was about. The immersion comes from doing the entire thing - yes, absolutely! But when the mission triggers are glitchy, or the game crashes, or your cat/dog/goldfish/child/llama walks on your keyboard after 2 hours and causes you to eject unexpectedly, surely you can accept that a save feature could be beneficial? The simple fact is that I ALWAYS start a mission when I have time to complete it. But if I don't complete it - which can be quite common - there is usually not enough time to attempt it again; sometimes not for several days, sadly. Or, when there is enough time, I might not have enough willpower to sit through an hour of starting up and flying the same route, listening to the same story dialogue for the 'nth' time... I have no issues with the start-up, shutdown, en-route flying or 'switchology'. I enjoy it more than the combat. I would say DCS is almost a civil flight sim for me with a sprinkling of combat thrown in. But like everyone, I have limits of patience and time. Is is a pointless argument anyway if it's not coming any time soon, but the fact remains that a single-player save feature (even with some compromises such as not all states being saved exactly) would go a long way to improve the DCS experience for many. There were enough +1 comments in this thread to prove that :)

Thanks for the editing. It was a slightly jumbled up post. I should have been asleep when I wrote it, but the topic was too enticing to discuss! Fair point about logbook editing, I didn't really think of that! I came across my Mi-8 campaign screenshots earlier. Seems I recounted it slightly incorrectly. Not that it matters, but I feel the need to correct my account. I landed and rolled onto the grass, no problem. But I needed to reach the parking area to complete the mission. I was able to refuel, and later tried to restart my engines. At this point the incident happened. Whether I'd left the collective up from the desperate approach or something else happened, I'm not sure. But in reality I'd have left it to the ground crew to tow back to parking :smilewink: Yes, if you approach DCS as a simulator and training software, the unlimited/invulnerable options are ideal. I always approach simulators with a view to getting as immersed as possible, so I shy away from artificial aids as much as possible. I think I should be more flexible and use them to skill up. For my many hours logged on DCS, I've done very little air combat so don't use labels or dots, but I do think that's a wise option given the superior eyesight of the AI. I should look into it! I've just started 'The Georgian War' (F-15C campaign), as I read it was a good introductory campaign that doesn't throw you in the deep end. Good to get some combat practise in before I concentrate on learning the depths of the F/A-18C. Needless to say, 30 mins into one of the early missions I was blown out of the sky. So I have to 'look forward' to flying that all over again soon. I guess I should eschew immersion for a bit, enable labels, unlimited ammo and invulnerability, then go up against waves of fighters to learn at a faster rate, treating the sim as a sim, rather than trying to approach it like it was reality. I know all the theory, just need to get quicker at operating the radar and making decisions about my actions. Simple practise! Thanks for the well-mannered debate! Some people should push themselves to 'get gud' for the enhanced satisfaction that it brings, and I dare say that those who stick around with DCS are likely to be such people to try. I have colleagues who think DCS looks amazing but they won't try it due to the known time investment or expected complexity. Even the FC3 aircraft require some learning compared to other games. Now, to c0ff's earlier response: Thanks for the feedback. I totally understand that it was an unlikely feature to be realised for the foreseeable future, but I hope it will not be forgotten in the long run. Other sims with complex aircraft can do it. If it can be held in memory it can be written to disk (said the non-programmer). Also, I refuse to accept a 'no' from someone with Batman for their avatar!!! :D

Seems I started quite a debate! I am quite a purist, and I sometimes make my entertainment/gaming/simming time 'hard work' even to the point it can cease to be fun and becomes more like a job or chore! So I totally understand your point. I almost agree, but I think there is room for a little 'give' with DCS to help players in different life situations. As simulators have become more realistic, the ability to emulate real life in extreme detail improves, but at some point I begin to question what I'm actually playing these sims for. For [serious] fun, yes. To learn how these machines are operated in real life, yes. To pretend I'm a fighter/attack/civil pilot, which I never got to realise in real life, yes. To gain a sense of achievement for a 'job well done' when all the effort pays off, yes. But I have to keep myself in check to avoid killing all the pleasure sometimes. I don't go into depths with flight planning outside the sim, but I do try to understand my aircraft and operate it realistically. No hot starts, no auto-starts. No quitting after a "mission success" message without landing and parking properly (I wish campaign creators wouldn't allow that). No aids/labels/padlock whatsoever. I would never use a save feature as a 'cheat' to cover my own shortcomings or mistakes, unless I had reached such frustration from replaying the same mission and dealing with the same dialog/glitches/impossible odds that I would cease playing altogether. It's a sim; it's make-believe. We all have different thresholds for patience and perseverance. With the Mi-8 example, I kept an eye on the fuel but got caught out. I did all I could to minimise my usage on the way back - I knew a LOT was at stake to fail this mission. Talk about feeling nervous! I was proud to have not crashed an Mi-8 in two campaigns and did not intend to start that day! And I JUST made it back by the skin of my teeth. I survived. Didn't even break the helicopter. I felt accomplishment AND relief at the near-disaster I had just avoided. But then some weird game glitch screwed me over and ruined my entire effort. That was not directly my fault. In this case I would have gladly used a save to avoid replaying the entire mission. I had achieved my goal, but the game denied me. (Yes, I was partly responsible for getting into a situation where the game did something weird, but in reality it would never have happened - I was down and safe.) I've been gaming for years and I despise the constant auto-saving of modern games, meaning you never have to replay more than the last 10 seconds. Games have become so much 'easier' in the last 15 years, with too many aids, hints and in-game tutorials. I prefer the old school games that gave next to no hints and had no saves or limited saves. (But I also see that making games more approachable and less frustrating has opened them up to a wider audience.) Back to DCS, perhaps allowing a single save per mission could be a compromise, or one save per 30 or 60 mins. But some might like to save it every few minutes. It's their sim; let them fly it how they want. I don't judge people who use auto-start, nor fly the arcade modes (well maybe I do but I do it in secret :D). I can't judge those with busy lives who want to maximise their fun and minimise frustration. It should be up to the player to determine how 'hardcore' they want their experience to be. It's their time and their sandbox to play in. With DCS, the issues with the campaign missions can be many and varied, as mentioned above. Failed triggers, crazy AI, you name it. Often not the fault of the player. It really spoils the whole experience. I've had to give up on the A-10C BFT campaign due to a broken trigger. I can't get past one mission. It's infuriating to fly for 20 minutes to hit the same brick wall over and over. I could try going higher/lower or faster/slower to somehow fluke my way past the trigger, but I don't have the patience to keep re-flying it up to that point. To be dead set against a save system, perhaps it's also worth campaigning to have the labels removed from the game, or the unlimited fuel/weapons options removed. Using those is no worse than using a save system, surely? How about 'dead is dead' for campaigns, like an iron man mode? I love the concept, but I'm not sure I am prepared to go that hardcore! We can all agree to disagree. I'm not here to challenge anybody personally. I only want to have a friendly debate about the pros and cons, and share some ideas and anecdotes. :) Alas, I think my cup runneth over :D Thanks for reading.

Couldn't agree more! And it doesn't even have to include combat... I once flew a 2.5 hour Mi-8 mission in the Oilfield campaign, making 4 separate sling-loads with return trips between each, before returning to base. Fuel was very tight as I'd been a bit slow hooking up the loads ... ... I ran out of fuel on short final, but managed to make the runway and rolled onto the grass. As the speed reached 1-2 knots the helicopter suddenly rolled over and blew up! I never figured out why. Some minor physics glitch, controller spike? I'll never know. :cry: Going from sheer jubilation of surviving the lack of fuel to utter dismay at the prospect of having to replay what should have been a successful mission was not pleasant. It was a LONG time before I put myself through that mission again and continued the excellent campaign. I have limited time and struggle to fit in a single mission on the average evening. A save feature would be incredible, no doubt about it! The replay feature drops out of sync about 1 minute into a quick dogfight for me; it's borderline useless now.

Hi Sabre, thanks for the quick reply and the tips. I've done a repair (didn't take long, not sure how thorough that was?) and then also deleted and reinstalled the campaign files through the Module Manager. Same problem exists. This is on the practise version of the mission though. It's possible that the actual campaign mission doesn't have it, I haven't tried it yet for obvious reasons. I've attached a track showing the problem. After the climbing right turn, when being instructed to slow to 160kts, I get barked at to maintain Angels 8, even though I already am. I then get the speed to 160kts in time but it still fails. I think you can agree that my flying was accurate enough to avoid termination! :doh: Earlier, before the first left-hand 360° turn, I also notice that you get told to begin long before the speed picks up to 280kts. In fact, even in the video you shared the turn is made well below the requested speed, though it doesn't seem to matter. Most other speed conditions appear to be fairly accurate. Thanks in advance for any help. A-10C BFT05 Practise Error.zip

Hello, I'm completely stuck on this practise mission. After the initial batch of instructions along heading 040°, there is a climbing turn to 210° at 8000ft, at 280 knots. Here, I usually get sternly reminded to maintain 8000ft even when I have levelled off at 8010ft for example (29.92 altimeter). After this, I am asked to reduce speed to 160kts to try a slow speed turn. Despite cutting throttles and using full airbrakes, I get another stern reminder as I can't slow down fast enough. Once I reach a speed of 157-163kts or so and stabilise there, nothing happens for several seconds until I get "terminate, terminate, terminate" for limits on speed. I'm running 2.5.5 stable. Any ideas? The only thing I noticed is near the start of the mission when asked to slow to 160kts. I only get down to around 170-175kts before the FI says "good" and gives me the next instruction. So perhaps the measuring of slow speeds is a bit 'off'. I don't want to attempt this in the campaign until I have run the practise mission in full. Thanks.

Microsoft Sidewinder Force-Feedback 2. I use a couple of the buttons on the base as modifiers and can squeeze all the A-10C HOTAS commands on to it, with one or two exceptions.