Jump to content

ItsCrisp

Members
  • Posts

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. VR (Left Eye Only) Landing/Taxi Light Detached From Plane [All Planes] While in VR, rolling your head side to side (shoulder to shoulder) causes the landing/taxi lights to move separate from the airplane. I've tested this in Mig-21. Mig-15. A-10C, Mig-29G, and all have the same problem. I'm running an HTC Vive. NOTE: The right eye is normal (moving head does not move taxi light) Video: EDIT: This bug seems to affect ALL spotlights, including all aircraft as well as ground-vehicle borne spotlights.
  2. I'd like to add to this, as I posted the last bug report for taxi collisions. I did ten tests, and these are my findings: TASK: Launch into an airfield orbit: 1. 4 SU-25's (on runway for takeoff) 2. 4 Su-27's (from parking space) 3. 3 MiG-29A's (from ramp start) 4. A-50 Awacs NOTE: TEST 1 SETUP (DEFAULT/CONTROL TEST) WORKS IN DCS WORLD 1.2 --- TEST 1: Normal launch from Maykop airfield. Su-27's are closest to runway, followed by A-50, then MiG-29's: - RESULT: MiG-29A #2 becomes 'hung' on taxiway at corner and refuses to move, holding up Mig-29A #3 & A-50. - NOTES: 1. Traffic is bunched up and stop-and-go. 2. Despite A-50 being closer to runway than MiG-29's, the 29's move in front of the A-50 to takeoff first. (ATC decision or bug?) --- TEST 2: Maykop launch, MiG-29's moved to parking spaces FURTHER from runway: - RESULT: ALL AIRCRAFT TAKEOFF. - NOTES: 1. A-50 taxi's to takeoff before MiG-29A's as it is closer and enters taxiway first. 2. Traffic still becomes bunched and stop-and-go near the final turn to the runway. 3. Aircraft do not seem to care in this instance. --- TEST 3: Maykop launch, MiG-29's moved to parking spaces CLOSER to runway: - RESULT: COMPLETE MESS! - NOTES: UNUSUAL ORDER! 1. The A-50 starts to move first, followed by the Su-27's, which fall into line behind it. 2. MiG-29A #1 manages to get started up and enters the taxiway abruptly, nearly cutting off the A-50 in the process. 3. A-50 goes 'braindead' while 29 #1 continues to taxi. 4. 29 #2 abruptly attempts to enter taxiway as SU-27 #1 is taxiing past. 5. 29 #2 collides with 27 #1. No fire or ejection. 6. A-50 eventually starts moving again to takeoff. 7. 29 #3 is parked closer to the runway than #2. Despite its path being unobstructed, it refuses to taxi to takeoff because #2 has skewered the SU-27 --- TEST 4: SAME AS TEST 3 but MiG-29's are changed to SU-27's in new parking order. - RESULT: SAME AS #3 with the exception of the skewered aircraft causing an explosion due to the SU-27's extra length. - NOTES: Same unusual 'rush' to get to the runway as test #3. TRACK 4 --- TEST 5: SAME AS TEST 4 but new Su-27 3-ship (former Mig-29's) initual state changed to takeoff from parking spot (rather than ramp startup). New group ordered logically (1 closest to runway, 2 in the middle, 3 furthest of 3ship). - RESULT: ALL AIRCRAFT TAKEOFF. - NOTES: All aircraft fall into line orderly. Traffic is stop-and-go. A-50 waits to go last. --- TEST 6: SAME AS TEST 5 but new Su-27 3ship numbers 2 and 3 are swapped. (1 is closest to runway, 2 is furthest of group from runway, 3 is in the middle. - RESULT: ALL AIRCRAFT TAKEOFF. - NOTES: 1. The middle aircraft (#3) waits for #2 to pass before following behind. 2. The A-50 waits for the 4-ship of Su-27's to pass before falling into line behind them, despite being closer to the runway than all four. 3. Traffic once again is stop-and-go. --- TEST 7: Su-27 4-ship initial state changed to Ramp Start. - RESULT: NONE OF THE PARKED AIRCRAFT TAKEOFF. 2 FATALITIES. - NOTES: 1. A-50 moves first (state is takeoff from park, NOT ramp start). 2. Mig-29A # 1 follows behind (OTHERS DO NOT). 3. Su-27 #'s 1 and 2 start up and collide with each other head-on while coming out into the taxiway. After this, everybody behind them freezes. 4. #3 and #4 do not move out of their spaces, nor Mig-29A's #2 and #3. TRACK 7 --- TEST 8: ALL parked aircraft set to Ramp Start - RESULT: ONLY 3 AIRCRAFT TAKEOFF (2 Su-27's, A-50). - NOTES: 1. Unusual order: Su-27 #1, Su-27 #2 (No collision), A-50, Mig-29 #1, Mig-29 #2, Su-27 #4. 2. A-50 waits almost 45 seconds to move again after Su-27 #2 pulls out. 3. Su-27 # 3 and Mig-29 # 3 remain parked 4. MIG-29 # 1 STOPS MOVING AFTER IT HAS TO STOP FOR A-50 AND HOLDS 4 OTHER AIRCRAFT BEHIND IT INDEFINITELY. --- TEST 9: ALL parked aircraft set to Ramp Start, A-50 parking spot swapped with Su-27 #4 (Now lot 54 instead of 54). Entire SU-27 4-ship is now in the closest lots to the runway, followed by the A-50, followed by 3-ship Mig-29's. - RESULT: ONLY 3 AIRCRAFT TAKEOFF: 2 Su-27's (1 & 2) and A-50. - NOTES: 1. All lead aircraft move first (su-27 #1 and A-50 at the same time followed by Mig-29 #1) 2. A-50 (2nd in line behind Su-27 #1 stops for Su-27 #2 and gives the right of way. 3. A-50 waits 3 minutes before taxiing again. 4. Su-27 #4 pulls in behind Mig-29 #2 (Su-27 #3 is still parked) 5. Mig-29 #1 refuses to move after coming to a stop behind A-50, halting all other aircraft indefinitely. TRACK 9 --- TEST 10: Moving all units to Krymsk airfield and not altering listed parking spots or start conditions from original: - RESULT: ALL AIRCRAFT TAKEOFF. - NOTES: Traffic is smooth and spaced far apart. No plane has to stop its taxi due to an obstruction in front. --- // CONCLUSIONS: 1. There is something wrong with the ATC logic for aircraft taking off from ramp/cold starts. ATC doesn't seem to know how to handle aircraft that aren't already running. This may be due to the timing of taxi permissions given by ATC with regards to the aircraft's startup. In some cases, it seems that ATC gives the aircraft permission to taxi as soon as the aircraft is fully started up, regardless of traffic (See test 7) 2. There may be something wrong with ATC logic for taxiing groups of aircraft out of order (Either within a group or different aircraft groups mixed together). However, this may be confounded by the ramp start issue. 3. Stop-and-go traffic seems inconsequential. 4. When all aircraft are set to takeoff from parking rather than ramp start, there are no collisions or hang-up's regardless of order or location. 5. The only way to avoid a collisions with aircraft taking off from Ramp Start is to move them far enough away from other aircraft that they have no ATC hold or traffic conflicts. Computer specs
  3. Can confirm, takeoff and landing is reversed (040 for arrivals and departures) at Anapa instead of 220. Uncertain if this is the case at other airfields. I know Maykop and Sochi are still correct (for me).
  4. Hello, With this most recent update, changes to the AI behavior have caused collisions on the taxiway between AI pilots. This is a repeatable problem. Description: Playing MiG-15 module. MiG-15 was not started up, nor was ATC contacted in any way. AI only acts according to mission instruction & ATC commands. While holding short for takeoff, an AI controlled Su-27 is rear-ended by another AI Su-27 because it either does not stop in time, or thought its 'collision bubble' was much further away/smaller than it actually was. Another Su-27 collides with the first pair, followed by 2 MiG-29's, which do not make contact with the Su's, but this may be due to the 29's smaller size (57ft vs. 72ft long). The AWACS behind them holds short at a safe distance. Image Track System Info Additional remarks: Before this update, the Su's would take off as intended, however, the 2nd of a group of 3 MiG-29's (3 ship after the Su's takeoff) would refuse to take off after the lead Mig-29 took off, and would hold short on the taxiway, blocking the path for the other MiG-29 and the AWACS. Those MiG's now seem to continue down the taxiway as intended, but stop too close to other aircraft.
  5. Seriously, is there any documentation on what exactly these changes were and how to use the ARK-5 as it's currently implemented?
  6. Thanks for the replies, guys. Looking forward to the update, whenever that may be.
  7. Hey guys, So I've found myself doing a lot of night flying in the Hawk thanks to SFC Tako's campaign, and it's sort of forced me to acknowledge that I'm having a really difficult time reading the center column gauges, specifically the ones with the 'glow' backlighting (see below). I'm wondering if the 'washed out' appearance of the gauges is true to real aircraft. I've seen old hardware that has similar backlighting which creates that (unintentionally) hazy look, but I would have thought that higher-contrast readouts would have been installed, especially when other gauges such as the DGI and even the hydro and trim readouts on the side column are VERY high contrast. Right now I'm running the center console brightness at about half and squinting, because any higher and the white backlighting washes out the white numbers and makes it strenuous to read.
  8. The column wasn't that hard to find in reality, especially with the flares flying around under the clouds, my only issue was with the prompt which basically read "Find the forested ridgeline just beyond the Fallen Madonna and dive in", and because I was approaching from the south-ish from the base, I assumed it was on the far side (northish) of the mountain from me. I missed the earlier prompt that stated that the column was X distance South East (I think it said) from whatever. Also, the frame rate drop might have been due to my super far view distance setting. I can crank it back and retry to see if it changes anything. Next few missions-
  9. Just finished the first mission and had a blast! It was just hard enough, in my opinion. Everything was very straight forward for the most part. The only trouble I had at first was locating the column of vehicles in the mountains, but obviously the inclement weather was making it difficult to begin with. Having to dive into the clouds, not knowing if a ridge was going to pop up right in front of you was a real butt-clencher. The very limited armament of the Hawk as it stands right now is a little frustrating, but you did a good job working with what you were given. Also, when the Huey's started firing at the ground troops near the coastline, my game dropped down to about 5 frames a second. I doubt there's a fix for that kind of thing, but that was the only issue I had during the entire 45 minutes it took to finish. Looking forward to trying the next mission once I have some time.
  10. Unfortunate but understandable. Keep at it, fellas.
  11. I'd just like to quickly add that attempting to jettison the 'phantom' bombs does not release them, but does create a tremendous racket that doesn't stop until you land and remove or reset the weapons pylons.
  12. Good to know. And I can't wait to see the other functions implemented! Edit: I'm actually curious to know how the implementation of the radio system works. I assume that you have to coordinate the aircraft's systems with DCS's pre-existing radio communication framework, correct?
  13. Wow! This is some news!
  14. Will the Steam store receive the EFM upgrade for purchase when it is released? If not, because I have the SFM module on steam, will I be ineligible for the $10 upgrade from the VEAO store? Will it be compatible? Will I have to buy the entire module again? Edit: Never mind, just saw the other thread from 2014 (assuming those conditions still apply, but then, a lot of people seem to be getting angry after making assumptions, so). Upgrade should be available for those who purchased on steam, at the time of the EFM's release. Sounds good to me.
×
×
  • Create New...