CallsignFrosty

It's a huge shame, the last mini update was in Oct 2024.

I'm not sure if the answer has been posted somewhere but I have been playing around with trying these scripting functions on static object warehouses. They have all the functionality but as FunkyFranky says, they don't seem to count as an airbase... Does anyone know the process? Thanks

Hi Guys, Great module, currently my favourite - together with the AH64D. How is progress coming along with the integration of the Sniper advanced targeting pod? Look forward to seeing what the future holds for this excellent module. Thanks and fly safe!

Hot

Guy with a GS as a profile pic calling others boomers. Adventure Dad!

Came here to report this. Thanks for the report Holbeach - crazy how it came back after all these years lol!

Happening to me too. Pilot's view of TADS is stuck on first lima firing position.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

From what you've written, I'll agree with you there. If there is a civvie inside a 10 meter by 10 meter square, I don't think anyone should be firing ANYTHING in that grid lol. I mean, 10 meters is just five people laid head to toe, it's not a large area.

So it's more that the two systems aren't linked and can't directly transfer data, only through the pilot/CPG using a point as acquisition? So targets saved into the FCR database of 16(?) targets (data targets also use FCR memory) and TSD points are saved in a separate 256 point system. Think I'm getting it...

I'm not sure why people are saying that a 10m x 10m resolution grid isn't a high enough resolution for a 114L to be able to find a tank, bearing in mind that is the resolution of data provided by the TADs laser in the first place and that works just fine. Anyone able to expand upon this thinking?

Came here to report this too. Amazingly it's been like this since release. There is no way to designate using the A/G radar as it isn't actually producing a 'map' it's still a 'real time' reference, you get a different designation point than the one you click on the radar image. I'm also pretty certain that EXP3 is just a zoomed in view of EXP2 - it should be SAR mode but there isn't any additional processing going on.

I live for the overclockers haribo surprise

This is still an issue. Anyone? I'm also not convinced there is any difference in rendering between EXP2 and EXP3 modes (DBS vs SAR), although that might be for a different thread.

Hi guys, Seems to be the same crash here. Please see my attached log file - lots of DX11BACKEND. 12700k, 32GB DDR5, 3080Ti - drivers all up to date. It happened on the way back to the ship after a long MP mission with 4 of us. Big bummer actually as it was a rad mission! Thanks for any pointers - although it may just be an Open Beta sort of thing. Cheers. edit: running latest windows 11 version dcs.log

Very cool and very based. As a fan of tiny combat short shorts, I would of course pre-order.

Very good post there ChickenSim, I agree wholeheartedly. This should be my favourite module as it is one of my favourite aircraft - but until there is an actual simulation of the DMT and ARBS system, it will be considered unfinished in my mind. Promises on the actual store page are not completed - the ARBS simulation is non-existant and instead relies on Flaming Cliffs style magical ground lock.

I disconnected FFB gear and trim is now working as normal. Thanks for the help guys - weird that this bug still exists though.

Thanks for the reply, I have a G29 plugged in so I will unplug this and try it out.

The trim used to work for me but since the last beta update (or two) I haven't been able to use elevator or aileron trim. The trim controls (hotas) are able to move the correct cockpit controls and the trim control surfaces on the external visibly move but they have absolutely zero affect on flight regime. Both elevator and aileron trim are broken but the rudder trim seems to work. I have tried uninstalling and reinstalling the module but the problem persists. I have seen another thread on the topic but everyone jumped on the OP and the thread doesn't seem to exist now. Please don't let this thread go the same way, I am very aware of the way trim influences the behavior of an aircraft so the issue isn't lack of understanding there. :joystick: Cheers in advance for any help.

Thank god! SOROS 1-1 reporting for duty!

Precisely.

Damn, that bold text really showed me. The change has already taken place. It has delayed features and updates for the F/A-18C - which is the entire premise of this discussion. It has happened and that's why we are having this chat. Maybe stick to Netflix and stay in your lane.

If you can't see that resources were diverted in order to make more money as opposed to supported and fulfilling a previous obligation then I can't help you. I don't hate money, far from it - pre-purchases are an investment in ED. Investments rely a lot on previous experience and confidence in the company to reach it's goals in a reasonable fashion, reputation matters and all I can see is a damaged reputation around ED's recent business practices. I think that if we compared the pre-purchase numbers for the recent F-16C and the F/A-18C in their first week, we would see much smaller numbers for the F-16C even though it has the same appeal (or even higher) than the F/A-18C. A lot of people are waiting for improvements before investing more money and their criticism should be valued. Fanboy-ism can only last so long. Off topic but sort of related - I do however applaud ED's upcoming KA50 and A10C improvements and although the hypocrisy with the new systems on the KA50 compared to the decisions made about systems on the F16C is hilarious, I will pay for the effort they have made. Again, this is about dealing with existing customers with whom they already have an obligation BEFORE trying to sell and support a new product to new customers.

*Hand Rubbing Intensifies*