Redglyph

I actually meant the control for this goggle, indicated as "12" on the same page. Perhaps I just missed it but when I tried a mission I couldn't find it anywhere. No, the Viggen isn't easy, probably mainly because it's not alike any other module we had. It's always interesting to see new patterns :) I'm just factual in my descriptions/reports, but I do enjoy this beast.

You're apparently the only one with that opinion. No need to cover the forums with your dislike simply because you won't take advice from other people (I'm referring to your difficulty to perform specific missions your way). If you see a bug, the easiest is to post it in the relevant forum, just give enough info on your system and how to reproduce the problem, otherwise nobody can help. It's not the first time helicopters AI - or AI in general, have issues. DCS is an ever-moving platform and it regularly breaks all the campaigns, not just this one. Especially with OB. As for the grammatical errors, I've seen a couple but nothing out of the ordinary and certainly not that dramatic, why don't you simply point them out to help improve? By the way, it's spelled "grammatical", not "grmmatical". Just take a positive approach, man, being angry all the time won't help you in the long run.

I suppose a part of the answer is here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2646394&postcount=1

Mh, that's true about the "missing" mod, I'm not sure why I didn't get this one in my downloaded files the first time, please disregard what I said. Perhaps it's possible to get the IAS from the "cockpit argument". For example, the MiG-21 can be checked with a "COCKPIT ARGUMENT IN RANGE(100, min, max, "")", where min or max are between 0 and 1, and 100 is the value for the IAS indicator. I don't know the value for the Flanker. Usually it's in the mainpanel_init.lua, or in another script of the module, but there is very little for this FC3 jet, probably because it's simplified.

You also need this mod, which makes it quite a lot of mods... https://virpil.com/en/news/58-vpc-airfield-equipment-dlya-dcs-world Great idea to have included the procedures! Just a few typos with the units: "1000 mts AGL & 700 KM/h max" -> I suppose it's "1000 m" (metres, the standard unit), and "700 km/h" (lower-case for k and m) ;) Well, I need to review how the waypoints are navigated with the Fulcrum, I missed some of them by way too much. Keeping the circuit altitude isn't easy on this airplane either! :D

And it also leaves an opportunity to train and compare with Tomcats in the same area, hopefully soon :D Thanks a lot for the missions, Rudel! :)

I'm not entirely sure about the lack of practical examples, but here are the tiny bits that may be confusing and could be improved (it's all subjective of course): I would merge the Weapons Overview with the Weapons Employment chapters, so the user doesn't have to jump to different parts of the manual. Especially since there are other unrelated chapters in-between. I understand one part is presentation, and the other about procedures, but still, it's interesting to know the procedure and the range, or the intended use for a missile. The difference between the weapon variants could be explained: RB-75/RB-75B/RB-75T, or RB-24/RB-24J, and so on. There are weapons "for AI", too(?). Some sections are perhaps a bit succint, like the RB-24, or the KB and ECM pods (though those last two are presented two times in two different chapters...). Some parts are (I suppose) WIP, or forgotten, like for instance with the RB75: the manual mentions an "EP 13" vertical left panel. Perhaps I missed the way to equip the plane with it, but it is not there when I mount those weapons. If there is a procedure to do that, a link to it could be made near the checklist or in the overview. The bookmarks don't always jump to the correct page of the item. What is nice: the consistency of information and presentation across the different weapons, including a little checklist for employment. As a reference, this makes it easy to quickly find the information (except the chapter division mentioned earlier).

Thanks a lot! :)

Here was the initial plan: It was already planned to have the K-4 and the Normandy map, in a 1944 environment, so perhaps at the time of the kickstarter they thought 1944 = Normandy, latest 109 = K-4 (even though it was very late in '44), then simply stuck with it?

That's interesting, thanks for posting those! Perhaps I was too low? It was another cargo, further near the trees and it's really happening at once, perhaps it's the difference. It's not progressive so there is no way to escape that problem once it occurs, 4 or 5 m away I'm fine with probably 30-50 FPS, and over the cargo the rendering suddenly freezes (audio remains fine). Anyway, I see other similar reports so I know I'm not the only one. If the author cannot adapt the missions (and I don't blame him, I know that's hard work to maintain a campaign), I'll just wait for DCS to optimize the engine a little bit, it's obviously very much WIP at the moment.

And near the cargos I was talking about, no framerate drop?

I'm really looking forward to the next videos on the MiG-19! I'm wondering which other companions would be best suited in the DCS world. Is that an opportunity to open 2nd generation jet modules?

I don't have any problem with grass - I doubt that a collision with grass leaves could be harmful ;) EDIT: oh, right. I have no framerate drop anywhere else with grass, shadows and so on. Only near this particular spot. When the helicopter is too close to trees it freezes DCS, and there is no option to remove the closest trees. So as I see it, I may as well give up on your campaign until DCS is optimized for that special type of flight. Users who have the latest high-end CPUs and graphics card may be able to play it though. Thanks for your help!

Which modules? They all respect the standard given above by a tester, except the modules of Heatblur and M3L (the knobs turn the other way I think). And except the A-10C which is completely inconsistent in most switches, probably due to the time it was built. Please, this thread is to report a bug in the cockpit, not to start a debate. Feel free to create your own thread if you wish to do so.

?? I have no idea what you mean. I think you didn't understand the problem. If you want an easy fix, there is a function that allows to suppress the trees within a trigger zone, but the best would probably not to force the helicopter near trees and other collidables (besides, it's not realistic).

It is like that, did you look at the post I just pointed? You or I don't decide the standard here, it's ED ;) It is more important to have a consistent scheme than one that depends on whether a function "activates" or not a system, it'd be too confusing. => The switches you mentioned are fine, but the ones reported in the first post and a little above are still to be fixed.

That's pretty understandable :D I almost had the same problem for a few switches, but common sense quickly came back, since the switches in most other modules are consistent (except Heatblur and M3L who prefer to do differently than the standard and are even more confusing). In the worst case, there could be a flag in the A-10C "Special" settings to keep backward compatibility, it's just a condition in the lua script.

Those are correct, why do you say they act wrong? The standard is already in place (4th post), the only drawback is that for 2-way switches there is no check when the switch is already in the final position, it just toggles no matter what. LMB is actually down, and RMB up.

The problem occurs when the distance is very close, so I'm not sure how it would help...

DCS 2.5.3.24984 (OB) In Rotation mission, some cargos in the first camp are too close to the trees which makes DCS freeze. I have 10-20 secondes between each frame (so about 0.1 - 0.05 FPS), as a result the helicopter crashes. This makes the rest of the campaign impossible for me, and I don't think my hardware is bad. It was already at the limit with the previous mission (Emergency), coming back from the crash site in the fog forces the pilot to be close to the trees which makes DCS crawls. Since 2.5, DCS doesn't manage the performance adequately when close to ground and trees, this problem should be taken into account when designing missions, unfortunately. Those trees aren't very pretty anyway ;)

Yep, I assumed so when it worked after a complete shut-down. Some aircraft can be rearmed and refuelled "hot", but I suppose it's a bit dangerous for some others. I didn't get any reply nor any fuel on my first requests when I hadn't shut it down, I even tried other spots of the airbase. I'm pretty sure I also tried after shutting down the first time, and didn't get any reply either, but maybe there were remaining "no-go" switches and/or the battery. After restarting the whole mission, I had this "Unable to comply" message but got the fuel. I think that indeed it considers both requests even if the user doesn't request any rearming. Perhaps something went wrong in the first attempts, perhaps contacting ground in a no-go situation blocks any further request. Strange. Anyway, thanks for the replies :)

OK, apparently one has to completely shut down (tried that though) and disregard the "unable to comply" answer from ground, they still refuel no matter what they say.

Hi! I'm trying this mission, after a long pause in the campaign. I'm using DCS OB (2.5.3.24984) I can't seem to get any fuel from Maykop-Khanskaya airbase. - take-off from the subbase - switch com to 125.0 MHz - contact tower and indicate inbound (approach instruction received) - contact tower and ask permission to land (authorization received) - land - contact ground (either auto or radio) => no reply - open window (used to be necessary in some modules) - contact ground (either auto or radio) => no reply ... how do we do to request refuelling?

Loved the video on the MiG-19! My concern though is: what will be the impact of the new module on the progression of the M-2000C and the Harrier? Probably a bit premature? ;) We don't even have a start-up procedure for the Harrier, so I would guess that a module which is not even in early access is far from there.

Confirmed in DCS 2.5.3.24984