Wizard1393

That makes sense. But still, making a radar fix on the targets should also work no? I don't know if that would be an acceptable approach IRL but seems like it should/would be. Anyway, yes I also feel that the drift is too much. Maybe it's not, according to real world data, but sometimes I wouldn't mind having an option like the Mirage, to disable gyro drift. Sure, it's cheating, but sometimes you just want to be unrealistically efficient for the sake of fun gameplay.

Hi all, Started flying the Viggen again after my now roughly 6 month break from it. I was trying out the Nordic Battle Campaign based on MBots DCE yesterday and was on this strike mission against an SA-6 site where the radar unit had been previously destroyed. So I loaded up with BK-90 and thought it was gonna be a sweet victory. 5 SA-6 launchers rather tightly placed in a group. So I fly the route, get to the ingress, follow procedures as I can understand, and launch. It misses with around 800-1000-m to the side. The Ternav was showing 0 error. Was flying in mountainous terrain so that helps I guess. So, with my failure I decided to set up a simple training mission. Start Kutaisi, targets middle of the abandoned airstrip outside of Kobuleti City. Loaded up with 4 BK-90 MJ-1 and headed off to the IP. I pause in steps and try to follow the manual with HUD-symbology but it's confusing. It does not seem to match up entirely what I see on the HUD and what is described in the manual. Anyway, even though unsure if I was in the right launch parameters (due to inconsistencies between manual and in sim) I manage to get the first BK-90 launched. It flies nicely over the target waypoint and a few seconds after overflying it, the submunitions destroy 2 out of 8 BTR-80:s. Detonation was spot on though. All good and dandy. But then I extend a 20km's or so and go in for a re-attack with the remaining BK-90's. The following two re-attacks misses the target waypoint by roughly 600-800m. Last time, on the ingress I notice on the HUD that the target waypoint is no longer where my targets are. I try to remedy this with a radar fix on my targets but I'm unsuccessful on getting the target waypoint close enough over my targets for the BK-90 to hit anything. The radar image (on the 15km range) and cursor is simply too inaccurate to accomplish this good enough for my last BK-90 to hit anything. During the entirety of the mission the TerNav was showing 0 deviation/error. The BK-90 is the only "stand-off-ish" area effect weapon and it would be nice if it was actually usable (reliable). Am I doing something wrong?

Tested with latest update from 2017-11-22 and this is still there. It's been like this since first release. Please fix the wheel brake axis Heatblur :)

Cleaning Day Name: Cleaning Day Author: chrisofsweden / Jinx Mission type: Singleplayer Controllable: A-10C/SU-25/SU-25T/KA-50 Quick Summary: Insurgents have taken control over Kobuleti Airbase. In 10 minutes, a Georgian armored force, callsign Rhino, located just south of Kobuleti City, is rolling north towards Kobuleti Airbase to remove the insurgents and retake the Airbase. Papa Bear (player+wingman) is assigned to provide close air support to Rhino if needed. (Papa Bear, selectable A-10C, SU-25, SU-25T, KA-50) Estimated mission time ~1h. Link/Download: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3026848/ Full brief/Discussion thread: N/A

Shoot RagnarDa a PM and see if he will enlighten you.

I have a few suggestions. The Unit* select box on the submit user file page should rather be a multiselect feature of some sort where you could tick flyable modules in the mission. File type "Single mission" should be renamed "Singleplayer mission". The user files page should really have the possibility to sort search results on number of downloads. This would make it easy to find the most popular files.

Yes. Two different issues. I get massive tree and building shadow flickering also in 2D+TrackIr, when looking around at the ground from certain altitudes (angles). Usually I can easily just go into F2 view and "find" the sweet angle that makes the shadows flicker like crazy. I don't use flat shadows.

I thought “Weapons free” is the default behavior if nothing else is specified, in an AI only group...

What about their loadout? If you give those escorts a couple of 530D's do they engage sooner?

Have you tried increasing the "Engage Dist" on the "Escort" waypoint action to like 80 or 100km? Also, the Escorts have no BVR missiles loaded, so any agressors will be able to fire BVR missiles on the tanker before the escorts can fire on the agressors.

No. I'm testing out a mission I made in the mission editor for SP. Mission settings is set to "Fog of War" in the ME. But when you select that mission from the mission list and click for mission planner, you can see all units placed, which completely takes away the element of surprise for the player.

As the title explains, the mission planner shows all enemy units when mission is designed with the Fog of War rule. Idk if this is "by design" or a bug, but it's all wrong to me. It should show nothing. Agreed?

Wow it really does look so much better. Now release it already! :) Chop chop!

Is there some one who got the F-5E to read settings from server.lua? I don't get that to work.

Just completed the campaign for the second time. This is by far the best campaign I've tried in DCS. I really like how it's balanced towards flying, knowing the systems, radios etc and is not very difficult combat wise. Right way to go I think, opens it up to people not very experienced aswell. Well done Baltic Dragon!

That would take a bit of coding to do. Smoke markers burn for 5 minutes iirc so you would have to write a function that checks if the group is still alive and then deploy another smoke marker if it is. This can be scheduled on every 5 minutes with scheduleFunction preferably at the end of the group spawn function in the mission script. TBH though, I wouldnt to it. If you're in an A-10C you would not want smoke, as it may obscure the view of targets. You still have coords you can point your spi/TGP at...

Yeah I used Bigfoots training missions as a mod as well and they were all great. Cool that they got to be part of the official module, good decision.

That's off course both understandable and acceptable. However, if possible, the code should be changed so that the very first thing that happens when you run the executable, it shows the splash screen, and then continues to load the modules... This would remove the confusion about whether you double click "connected" or not :huh:

Bumpitybump :)

DCS is not simulating the development process of any airframes. DCS is trying to simulate existing airframes flight characteristics according to known airframe / engine performance data. Sure, it's basically the same process as you are describing, but in DCS, the goal for developers is not to improve and evolve an aircrafts performance. Their goal is to get the flight model simulated as close and true to real life aircraft performance as possible. Sometimes, an adjustment to the performance data of the flight model isn't giving the expected results in all flight regimes, whether the effective result is over performing or under performing compared to expected performance. Therefore you will sometimes see the performance in any aircraft under development degraded after an update. Most times that's because the aircraft was over performing compared o real life in the previous version. But I get what you mean, it's difficult to perfect your manouvres when aircraft performance is ever changing. If you want to be less affected by things like this, avoid purchasing modules that are till in development, aka "early access" or "beta". Focus on modules that do not have an "early access" or "beta" label. They will generally not get any significant/very few adjustments to aircraft performance.

The other day I was flying some campaign missions in the SU-25T. I noticed several times that after having landed and rearmed and ennroute to target area the second time, when I press 7 for A2G mode, the heading tape in the HUD is all wrong. Going back to NAV mode it's correct, but when activating A2G-mode its botched. Anyone know if this is a bug or am I doing something wrong?

Nope. I have it too.

Since you seem to know so much about this topic, do you know if it's possible to have a user "snapviews.lua" containing only the default snapview [13] for all aircraft, omitting 1-12? Would it then read snapviewsdefault.lua values first and then just replace snapview[13] values with values from the user snapviews.lua? The reason would be to have a more "manageable" snapviews.lua Same thing with Server.lua really. Suppose I'd like to change only CameraViewAngleLimits, could I detail only that part for every aircraft and omit the rest?

Awesome thanks!

Thanks for your reply! You are right, it's not created in DCS user files directory by default. The server.lua file resides in "C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\Config\View" by default. You have to manually copy it to "..Saved Games\DCS\Config\View" However, basically only FC3 planes are defined in it. Actually, I now tried adding the M-2000C definitions from the modules install directory into the user side server.lua and it appears it worked. Max zoom out is now locked to 90 deg. Something is not right with the default snap view though. Pressing enter renders a view with 60 deg... I guess I'll have to look around where the default snap view for the M-2000C is fetched from... EDIT: Worked it out. SnapView settings were specified in the M-2000C "Views.lua". Copied "C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\Config\View\SnapViewsDefault.lua" to DCS user dir and there renamed it to"SnapViews.lua" Copied the SnapView settings from M-2000C "Views.lua" and made another section in SnapViews.lua for "M-2000C" where I pasted the settings. It now works! Yay :)