Vedexent

Thank you very much :) Yes, I guess my interest is a bit broad, quickly ballooning from the ATC (which, isn't THAT different from Civilian ATC), to the whole "how do you conduct air operations command and control?". Like I said, I certainly don't expect there's current data anywhere, but I thought it might be a remote possibility that there's some historical documentation - perhaps from WWII or Korean war. Not sure if this would have any real application in DCS however - I think that combat flight sims are a niche hobby - and those interested in that level of simulation are a niche inside combat flight sims. Still - from an intellectual curiosity aspect, it's fascinating :)

I appreciate the effort. You're right that the brevity codes are an easy search; those I'm familiar with. It's the protocols for informing and directing elements that AWACs is using that I'm interested it. What is "Magic" doing? :) I guess I'm wondering if there's documentation / training on forward air control, or even theater wide air operations control. I don't expect there's a handy modern US Military (or any modern military) manual on the topic, ready for download in PDF format :) But since there are squads/events using human ATC and AWACS, I'm wondering if they're using actual military procedures (even if they're out of date - and if so, what's their reference) - or whether they're making up what seems correct for the situation.

I was listening to some of the radio scanner recordings from just outside NNTR. I've also gotten interested in cooperative squadron missions which use human ATC/AWACS through something like LOTATC. It's clear from the recordings that there's a definite set of brevity codes and protocols used for these communications. Can anyone recommend any references for these communication protocols? Thank you,

I think Isegrim has it right - it's an issue with MP mission design. RL deployment doctrine for helos does not put them in a theater with enemy fast-movers, with no CAP. Put up a pretty typical "everyone against everyone PvP" mission on a server, and make Helos an option, and they die. Hell - A2G aircraft die as well. However, making a multi-layered, nuanced, realistic mission design takes time and effort - and does not lend it'self well to "drop in traffic". Best you're likely to see - out of a pre-planned (multi) squadron event - is an MP mission where helos are protected from fast-movers because the fast-movers aren't there.

PMDG builds exclusively for FSX and Prepar3D, so far as I know. While you could argue they've got all the requisite research and mathematical modelling done (or at least partly re-usable), it's not a "copy-and-paste" operation to bring them into DCS, any more than I can seamlessly load OSX software into Windows. PMDG would have to build a whole new version for DCS. I'm not sure there's been enough expressed interest in the DCS community to prompt PMDG to take the gamble to invest the time and resources needed to port it.

I'm curious as to what a "realistic recon" function would look like (apart from generating "gun camera" style pictures)? If you're running "fog of war", doesn't the existence of the recon plane within line-of-sight/sensor already cause the units to show up on the map? What else could be added?

while I haven't tried it, I've seen people claim that the flight controls in the 2nd "instructor" seat of the L-39C are already functional. Try it out on MP :)

I wonder if the process used to add RSBN for the MiG-21bis found here could be adapted.

Has anyone seen any published Royal Canadian Air Force, or RACF/NATO skins for this bird yet? I've seen a couple of works-in-progress, but nothing published that I've seen. Thanks,

There's a thread about it here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=149152

Have you actually tried a VR headset?

No - my solution is that you don't use the keyboard at all - which is obvious if you read the rest of the post. My point is that you can use a keyboard without seeing it, for minor things, if you really want to. If 'split second' is important, map it to the HOTAS. Aaaand ... you can't mount your keyboard in an unusable position (really? vertically?) and then claim that's evidence keyboards are unusable. That's kind of like me setting my house on fire and then claiming that houses are useless as dwellings, since they're inherently flammable and burn down :P

In multiplayer servers, if I ask for repair, it cycles through the full 3 minutes, says it's repairing, does the whole "levitating plane" bit, and then I get the notice "DCS World has stopped working". Seems to happen pretty consistently - although I don't need to repair THAT often :P

If you're a highly proficient touch typist @ 60 wpm, then you know that the F and J have raised dots on them, so you can orient your hands to the correct keys, by touch alone, in a split second, right? You're right that a keyboard is less convenient with a VR headset, but it's not useless. That said, I already don't use the keyboard with a monitor, trackir, and HOTAS. Plane controls I use HOTAS mappings for core functions, clickable cockpit switches for functions only used sporadically. FC3 aircraft are simple enough that you can map everything to HOTAS, especially if using command modes. Radio menus I handle with a custom Voice Attack profile. If I have to reach for the keyboard, it's usually to pause the game, and map an omission to the HOTAS, or fine tune VA. Personally, I don't like keyboard inputs: they're not realistic. Unless it's an Airbus A380 (and possibly other tubeliners contemporary to it), planes don't feature keyboards as primary controls. Whatever works for you, works for you - there's no "one right way" - and if you wanted to use Kinect and interpretive dance to control your plane, that's your business. But I don't think a VR headset will be a problem for the vast majority of simmers.

+1 It definitely happens for me, for Multiplayer; not sure if I've seen it happen on SP missions.

I would also very much like to be able to filter/block by username.

Or you could just "pitch you nose for the correct speed, set you throttle so the black scuffy part of the runway isn't moving up or down with regards to your dashboard" - it woks for landing a RL Cessna 172 :) Once you've set up your course correctly - HSI needle set up to runway heading, on HSI needle heading with zero deflection on the ADF as you hit the inner marker beacon - if you hold the course, and hold the rate of descent, you should be fine until touch down, but you can check peripheral vision just before flare. You're absolutely right that there's some delay in RL VSI needles - and most likely in the simulator - but if you're chasing large deviations of the VSI that close to the ground, you're in trouble and should do a go-around anyway. By the time you cross the inner beacon marker, you can/should pretty much be set up on course and rate of descent (calculated or eyeballed), and should be able to just 'ride her down'. I worked trial and error for a few hours last night. Straight and level at 200m AGL (radar alt.), 250 Kph over the outer beacon, nose up to pull airspeed back to 230Kph, while pulling throttle back slow to target -4m/s VSI, eyeball the "scuffy patch" of the runway to trim the descent rate - this all puts me over the inner beacon at ~230Kph, and ~80m AGL. You can ride that down until you see the threshold pass in peripheral vision, throttle to zero, glance at the radar altimeter to see it hit 10m AGL, gentle flare to level flight, hold until she starts to drop, pull the nose up to about 10 degrees, and wait for your rear tires to kiss the pavement :) ---- In the end, though, use whatever works for you. Any technique that gets you on the gound safely, reliably, and without damaging you or the plane (and NOT screwing up other air traffic), is a good one :)

He does 2-3 m/s decent between the outer and inner markers, but hits the inner marker around 90-100 meters - well about the 60-80 recommended, so has to crank up the sink rate to 5-6 m/s. That seems to suggest that 2-3 m/s past the outer beacon is too low to get you on the runway just past the threshold. I'm going to go try it out; I'm guessing a steady 4 past the outer marker beacon will probably do the trick. Once you get all the exact particulars - try it with zero viability (hood down?) and see how it works as an ILS approach ;)

I know the kneeboard mod that someone published has suggested decent rates, but digging into Aero's actual published manual for the L-39C, I don't see any suggested rates listed in the landing procedure diagrams. However, using the VFR technique of "set your throttle so that the point on the runway that you want to hit isn't moving up, or down, in your field of vision" results in about 4-6 m/s decent (2 or 3 marks). That'll go up or down, depending on whether you're above or below the glide path, of course, but on the proper slope seems to be around 5 m/s or a bit less. Edit: on page 2-14 of the manual found here, it does indeed state 4-5 m/s decent rate on the base leg of the pattern. Edit2: on page 2-22, in the diagram for the RSBN box landing they indicate 2-3 m/s on the final past the outer marker beacon. 200m AGL, 250 Kph over the outer beacon, 2-3 m/s sink, cross the inner beacon at 60-80m AGL @ 220Kph, touchdown @ 180kph

Very cool :) I've really enjoyed flying the EB a good deal - it's just fun - and the CC looks just as cool :) I'm not sure the state of multi-seat, or of the EFM (I'm sure it's in the forums, I just haven't been paying close attention recently) - but hey, these things will take time (look how long the MiG-21 was delayed, and it was worth it). Can't wait to see a CC and a ZA go up against each other - heck, I'll probably throw up a server just for that when it becomes possible :D

Hmm - I put a L-39 down on the Sukhumi runway (starting "hot" from the runway), went into Prepare Mission, set the NDBs and the HSI course needle, exited out, saved the mission, and then played the result. None of the settings seem to have been preserved. The manual doesn't mention any specific save step or operation other than exiting the Prepare "play through". Am I still missing something? Or does this not extend to the L-39C (yet?)? OR does this only apply to ramp cold starts (experimenting with that next). EDIT: No - doesn't seem to work for ramp start either.

Perfect. Thank you very much. Guess I should read the documentation more carefully...

Thanks :) Wouldn't this be setting globally for all my aircraft, though? If so - that's very useful in and of itself; thank you :) I'm wondering if it's possible to set the cockpit instruments specifically "one time" for the mission, in the mission file - so that anyone spawning into that mission slot is pre-setup for the mission (appropriate mission NDBs, radio preset selected for the return airfield, HSI setup on the desired ingress course, etc.).

Especially with aircraft like the F-86, MiG-21, and L-39, it would be very useful to be able to set up the instrumentation in the editor pre-flight: HSI needle setting, radio preset selection, NDB tuning, RSBN channel selection, barometric altimeter, etc. This would be especially helpful for "hot" aircraft slots which spawn mid-air; fumbling around setting everything up in flight is a pain-in-the-ejection-seat :P However, all I can see in the editor is the ability to set the radio preset frequencies. Am I missing something, can something be set by editing the raw MIZ file, or am I just out of luck? Thanks,

I'd say the L-39, right now. Full Professional Flight Model right out of the box. Full advanced systems modelling. Not horribly complicated (it's based around a trainer design, after all) Still has has a good selection of systems for learning basic flight aerobatically capable full basic weapons selection: rockets, bombs, guns, and air-to-air missiles radio navigation systems a "kind of" faked low-accuracy inertial nav system (based on the radio RSBN and some "dead reckoning") automated approach and landing systems like you'll see in the MiG-21 [*]Two versions of the aircraft with the same module: L-39C and L-39ZA [*]It's the only module (right now) where more than one player can fly in at once. [*]Logical Soviet/Czech/Eastern Bloc system and instrument design ;) The possible drawback to the L-39C is that it's a trainer or a light attack aircraft. In my opinion it's great, and a very fun airframe, which is a good stepping stone to more complex combat airframes (especially the MiG-21) - but there's a possibility that you'll eventually outgrow it, and want to do things with your aircraft that it's not capable of doing. It's unlikely that you'll eventually stand atop Virtual Red Flag as the premier virtual A2A combat pilot for the season, with an L-39ZA ;) But if If you want a great entry level "clickable cockpit" jet to learn on, on your way to more complex and capable combat airframes, I'd say it's an excellent choice.