Art-J

That depends on a mod, but any good quality mod, especially the one that MUST be placed in Saved Games to work at all, usually comes with installing instructions posted in its dedicated thread on the ED forum, or in its description in User Files section of ED site where you got it from (or Discord, Github etc.), or at least should have some readme file. That will tell you where it needs to go (and thus you will know how to set up OvGME for it). ED generally recommends putting any custom content in Saved Games to keep the root "clean", but it's not always needed (and in some rare cases, like Nin's MiG-21 sound mod, half of it needs to go into Saved Games, while the rest goes into root). I, like Rudel, have my mods scattered in both locations, managed by two profiles in OvGME.

A track would help, but first and foremost I'd start with posting this problem in campaign section of the forum, 'cause it's got nothing to do with hardware controllers issues. Reflected will see the thread and advise over there, but unlikely over here, unless by accident. Here's the link: https://forum.dcs.world/forum/623-fw-190-a-8-horrido-campaign/ P.S. - Although it looks like an AI related bug at first glance, it's always good idea to disable custom mods (if you use any) and try again.

I agree some extra visual or audible feedback, even if exaggerated, would come in handy. I don't expect it to ever come, though. If such thing hasn't been implemented in early stage of module's post-release period, it won't be implemented later. I suppose the only workaround for player who doesn't want to "cheat" by flying with info-bar always on, is to do some test-flying with it temporarily on and memorizing how much one can pull to avoid going above 5 G. With a bit of experience one does actually develop a feel of angular speed of the aircraft in DCS just by watching how fast the scenery moves around.

Don't fly it as a fighter then, at least not in traditional sense. Remember the plane was designed as a fast bomber at first, as an answer to Air Ministry specification for a fast bomber indeed. Granted, after the prototypes flew, in 1940 the Ministry opted for putting a radar on it and convertng it into a more multirole plane, but the airframe with its bomber-like structural design limits was already there. Sources posted by robi-Wan on page 1 and 2 of this thread... https://forum.dcs.world/topic/279674-expected-mossie-performance-vs-current-plane-set/ ... seem to indicate a 6 G limit, also with counterweight added in pitch control system to keep pilots from going above 3-3.5 G too eagerly. So that't about it. Moreover, keep in mind how accumulated structural damage works in DCS in general - you can go a little beyond limit a couple of times, but each time lowers the limit by a few of tenths of G so that eventually, the last pull can take the wings off noticeably below "fresh" limit of a new airplane you had at the beginning on the mission. All and all, much smoother maneuvering is required, although I agree it's quite difficult to figure out if you're smooth enough with such sensitive elevators and lack of G-meter in this bird.

^ I think he's asking why the trim gauge doesn't react to cockpit light then, like other instruments which were painted with fluorescent paint for that reason. @SlippaWe know that complete cockpit retexturing of the Spit is in the works. I suppose they won't bother with fixing the old textures when these are soon going into a bin anyway. However, if the problem persists in the new pit, you're free to unleash the report bumping fury .

Good catch! It only confirms that more things got messed up when multicrew got implemented and AI now does things which it shouldn't do (and overrides game special options) when player is switching between seats. I already started one related bug thread in "Controls" section. Looks like there's need for another one, unless Flappie reports this one first.

Roger that. Never used Quaggle's injector so can't advise about that one, but it's clear now what you meant. Well, you might PM Quaggles, but I'd still say making a backup of the whole Saved Games/DCS folder (minus fxo, metashaders and similar junk) is the way to go.

1) There are two Spitfires in the game, clipped and non-clipped one. The game sees them as separate units (even though they're functionally the same), hence two folders in Config/Input. ED somehow managed to get around this in newer P-47 module, but older Spit is still programmed this wacky way; 2) Repair command only affects core game folder and it doesn't do anything in Saved Games folder, so don't bother with repairing. That also means, however, that there was something messed up in these Spit controls profiles of yours. You said in the other thread that you imported them to other planes for further tweaking (bad idea in the first place). Well - there you have it - you just imported the same error to remaining planes. Now we have to figure out what the error is and where in diff.lua files it's hidden. Personally, I'd rather start with clean sheet and redo the controls. It would certainly take less time to do it than this whole troubleshooting process. 3) Do you still use Game FM or switched to simulation FM in the end? Were the Spit control profiles you used as a basis for remaining planes originally made for game FM or sim one? I don't even know if it's possible to import game FM profile to sim FM profile, but I suspect it could cause unforseen issues.

Right-click moves the lever right (and cycles through all positions), left-click moves the lever left (and cycles through all positions). So next time, just right-click once at startup and you're good.

If it moved, there was some input . It goes back to gun position when you press radar target selector button (red one under thumb on stick handle, search in A4 sight section of controls list), so you must've pressed that one in your tests. Double check your bindings, 'cause that's not the button you're supposed to hold during bomb run.

Contrary to your yet another rant on the very same subject (samo old, same old in the next thread, broken record at this point), each OB release nowadays is polished enough and works good enough for most players - otherwise they would indeed not use it and stay with Stable instead. Even "shiny new toys" factor would not be enough to draw people to OB if OB was THAT buggy. But the fact is - it just isn't. And a couple of extra bugs each OB patch always brings (noone denies that), is offset by more fixes of old bugs. That's why I stick to it at least. I pretty much don't buy new modules nowadays, but fixes and new core features are always welcomed. At the same time it's been years since I last encountered an OB bug which forced me to revert to previous version number or return to Stable (I recall it was inop airplane trimmers in one of 2.1-2.2 patch releases). If you're stumbling upon so many issues in current OB as you claim, well, either you're just extremely unlucky, or bent on exaggerating / noth telling the truth. I think I know which is more probable. Why ED keep the Stable goin' then? I don't know, BN basically hints they want to keep it just in case. If such business model works for them for the time being, then it works for them. They won't change it because someone's grumpy about it. Be happy that you've got enough SSD space to have both versions on your PC. I used to do that in old days as well until Stable slowly fell into disuse. Having that flexibily was good though. Keeping separate folders in Saved Games is also a good idea I'd say.

Oh, hell no for the navigator 3D model from my perspective! Il-2GB already shows why it's a terrible idea - not only he's just as functionally not-there in that other sim, but also blocks a lot of view from 3 to 6 o'clock. In DCS we can at least look around easier and spot incoming fighters quicker. An optional pilot's and navigator's body, however, for those who don't mind being handicapped? Sure, why not. As long as it remains optional. Somewhat functional AI crew member on the other hand, I'm all for it. But let's be honest, in typical SP or MP missions without any flightplan or waypoints whatsoever there's really not much to do for the navigator. Reflected's workaround in V-for-Victory only works so well because of how tightly scripted his campaigns are. Petro and George at least have weapon systems to manage, so they are much more needed in their respective aircraft. I'd hazard a guess that's why there's more ED development going towards them instead of Mossie, at least for now.

Yes they are present in latest OB, I've been using only that version for years now. Should be in yours too, so the puzzle remains unsolved. But, if Stable works for you, so be it. One thing to keep an eye on. Training missions for both Fw-190s have, for some twisted reason, takeoff assist forced ON, overriding player's game settings. I don't remember if 109 missions share the same flaw, so be careful.

I'm out of ideas. If Caucasus map is installed correctly and if all mission files and single lessons.lua file are there in each respective aircraft folder (Mods/aircraft/[...]/Missions/Training) then they should show up in the Training Menu in the game, period. This is the only location where they should be by default. As a workaround, sure you can copy and paste them to your Saved Games/DCS.OpenBeta/Missions folder, then launch them "manually" one by one, as if they were your ordinary custom missions. They should load and play allright I guess, just outside of Training Menu.

Just start any stock mission, hit F11 key to switch to free camera and hit it enough times to teleport to one of new airfields near Paris or London. Paris-Orly for example. Then "fly" around with that camera and see if ground and building textures are in high resolution (especially noticeable on buildings) - you probably already know how they should look like from all promo vids and pics. If they're high-res indeed - your Normandy 2 map activated correctly. If they're low-res - you've still got Normandy "1.5".

I recall it was related to setting specific mission options in the editor and restarting the game afterwards, but I don't remember the details. Take a look here for hints:

There seems to be a new bug / issue related to anti-torque pedals, probably related to the latest multicrew implementation (?) Up till recently, when "pedal trimmer" special option was turned OFF (as a compromise for those of us who didn't want the trim to affect pedals), the virtual pedals position always matched the physical ones, no matter if player flew the mission from the pilot's seat all the time, or switched to engineer or gunner positions during flight temporarily. New incorrect behaviour is as follows (steps to reproduce the issue): a) Fly the helicopter from either pilot's seat, you may trim the cyclic as required, pedals remain non-trimmable with aformetioned special option being OFF; b) Switch to any non-pilot position (engineer or gunner) and wait a few seconds. While you do so, AI pilot takes over flying the helicopter, adjusting or trimming collective, cyclic and pedals as it sees fit to maintain level, coordinated flight. c) Switch back to either pilot's seat. You will notice, that while you're geting full control of cyclic and collective back, the pedals, which were trimmed left or right by AI, stay trimmed that way. You can move them of course, but they stay off-center and not aligned with your physical pedals. I've shown it in a replay track below. The only way to re-center and realign them again is to use trimmer reset button, also affecting cyclic, which is obviously not desirable. That's not how they behaved between module release up till recently and it makes "Pedals Trimmer" special option half broken. "Half" broken in a sense, that it remains OFF as long as you fly from pilot's seat only, but anytime AI pilot takes over, it overrides that option and the game works as if the option was ON. Mind you, it happens only during flight. Switching to engineer's seat while stationary on the ground (for startup or shutdown sequence) doesn't trigger the problem. My special settings and replay track (recorded in stock Caucasus Freeflight mission) are attached below. Game version is the latest OpenBeta 2.8.8.43704. Cheers. Mi-8_trim_test.trk

Whoa, so it's indeed possible to have an "empty" DCS without Caucasus in it. They must've introduced such option sometime after Marianas were released. I forgot that free TF Mustang also had its own training missions. OK, install Caucasus then and let's see if they start showing up in game now.

^ I suspect that was the case. But if there are ways to get around 2FA without a phone number and with a payment which is still a fraction of DCS module cost, will this solution really work in the long run? I guess we'll all see, devs included.

It's been years since I last did full reinstall, but I think fresh Saved Games/DCS is being created not during DCS installation process, but later, when the game is launched for the very first time. I wonder if virtual folder moving with symlinks and all plays a role here. I know some people do it successfully (Rudel indeed knows a lot about it), but I never did it myself, so won't even try to advise. I would, however, avoid installing DCS (or any game for that matter) anywhere in standard Program Files folder. I've been told Windows nowadays is allegedly not as psychotic and anal about files and folders access rights in that location as it used to be back in XP and early 10 era... but I remain sceptical . Just to be on the safe side, I prefer to create my own games folder as far from Program Files as possible.

^ Hear hear! Slippa, are you sure there are no Saved Games leftovers on the C drive? We ask, because DCS by default attempts to create its Users/[Windows User Name]/Saved Games/DCS.OpenBeta folder on a C drive rather than any other one. So It's a bit puzzling why yours ended up on a D drive in the first place. Were you experimenting with moving it between partitions and using symbolic links? In either case, we feel your pain, but after renaming any DCS folder from any Saved Games location anywhere on your PC, for the love of God please stop right there and DON'T, I REPEAT DON'T PASTE ANY F@#$%ING SAVED GAMES BACKUPS back in . No hard feelings mate, we just try to make you stop reusing corrupted folder and wondering why the hell things don't work. Just launch clean, vanilla DCS (with Caucasus and maybe only Mosquito or Apache installed), with clean, vanilla Saved Games/DCS.OpenBeta (should be easy to confirm, with nothing configured whatsoever, including gfx and audio) and tell us if training missions are there. That's all what we're asking for as a starting point. EDIT: I think I've read one can install clean DCS without Caucasus map nowadays and add it later (or skip it) in Module Manager. @MAXsenna, do you know if it's true? Maybe that's part of the problem - no map - no training missions visible. But then again, Slippa sees Mosquito rocket training mission and IIRC that one uses Caucasus map...

^ Ha! The Spit situation is actually a bit closer to Fw-190, 'cause at least both Spits have their own slightly different FMs, so the wing difference is not only cosmetic :). At the same time both Ponies share the same FM and so do all 3 Jugs it seems (unless that dorsal fin effect is there, but so negligible that it's just difficult to notice). When the new damage model for warbirds was being developed... and delayed... and delayed... and delayed, and at one point one of community managers spilled the beans by noting that devs involved in the process had to be moved temporarily to... Yak-52 project, it kind of confirmed for me that there is no "ED WWII Team" per se. Or it might exist on paper, but does other guys' laundry as well whenever need arises (which I understand, coming from small aviation company where critical mulit-talented team members usually did anything but what they were officially hired for). Oh well, it is what it is. I wouldn't count on 3rd parties to help us, as majority of projects announced during last months are jet-planes-oriented. But, after listening to the latest podcast with Wags, maybe there will be a little bit of a shift of resources and effort towards WWII again from ED themselves. We can only wait and see.

I can only confirm these findings, also based on test with cold start training mission, my own cold start mission and Instant free flight mission on Caucasus. Module manual says the Altitude channel requires pitch&roll channel to be ON and altitude to be above 50 m. Didn't help in my post-cold-start tests, unfortunately. Worked perfectly in hot-start tests, though. I guess one might try to investigate carefully which exact switches all around the cockpit are ON when hot-start mission begins, compare it to cold start procedure by manual and see what the difference is (if any). I admit I don't fly the Hip often enough to be bothered to do it, but something seems to be amiss with the Alt channel operation indeed.

Do you use game flight mode? It's known to be somewhat bugged in Mosquito and to prevent picking up speed on takeoffs.

As I and Max pointed before, don't bother with reinstall if you still have that old, messy Saved Games folder affecting your game, 'cause it's clear by now that repair doesn't work (ergo: the culprit is indeed hidden somewhere in the Saved Games, which should contain no training related files whatsoever). Once again, get rid of old Saved Games/DCS first (even temporarily, by renaming), launch the game, let it rebuild "clean" Saved Games and check if the missing missions showed up. No point in wasting your time otherwise.