punk

The most disturbing factor was the discovery of the two-crew fighter philosophy. It's hard to feel what's going on in the backseat. Experiment was needed to comprehend the effects of the commands to Jester. Discovery? Isn't that the point of a two seat aircraft? You did not know it had two crew to start with? I highly doubt that. I didn't feel that Jester is incompetent, I was quite impressed of the AI, but I hate his personality. Fair, personal opinion. The exterior was ahead of its time whereas the interior was already outdated in terms of ergonomics. While the contemporary F-15 is still modernized today I think it was obvious the F-14 was about to die during the 2000's anyway despite the overall performances. So I think playing the F-14A in 1970's-early 1980's would give me less anachronistic discomfort. (all-gray Bs are ugly anyway) Ergonomics? Really? Pshaw, you are trying to blow smoke up peoples rear ends with this one. "... think it was obvious the F-14 was about to die during the 2000's anyway despite the overall performances." Your opinion again, though a fail as it has nothing to do with the facts of why the Tomcat was taken out of service and is irrelevant. "all-gray Bs are ugly anyway" Fair point, but a personal opinion and again, is irrelevant. Squadrons could have up to 2 aircraft done in high vis and even the old gray and whites were used in some squadrons, at times, late into its life. There is a paint kit. I only scratched the surface of the radar. I can't say how awesome it was. But look at all those non-functional buttons and knobs in the RIO's cockpit… Fair, but so are many if not most/all of the modules to one degree or another. I'm perfectly OK with analog controls but that plane feels a way lot heavier than anything else including Su-27. Have to re-learn how to dogfight. Flight model is very good. So? Means you need to learn to dog fight period is what it sounds like to me. The current state of carrier operations is completely killing the immersion Do not know what it has to do with immersion. If you can do without the things that go on around all aircraft, airfields, towns, etc. and lack of other realism ... you should be able to deal with ED's issue. Wingman AI is totally useless, I confirm the issues already posted in the bug section Again, ED's issue. It's getting boring very fast if played in the front seat all the time Okay, you don't like it. It's the most difficult aircraft to refuel mainly due to that enormous front canopy frame blocking the view. I'm all OK to accept the original flaws but sometimes the frustration that comes out is just unacceptable. Move around the frame? I don't know. The HUD sucks. I knew that before and I thought that was a cool aspect of the simulation, but really, it sucks. I turned it off during non-combat situations. Not the primary flight instrument. If you need the crutch, can not fault you on this one. Sorry, snarky, I know. Pilot stick blocking the view of the bottom screen. I would love to hear that it's a modelisation error from HB It has been. I fear that it needs to be played with friends online to better enjoy it. My schedules and patience barely allow it. Has nothing to do with module, only yourself. The official manual: 250MB of indigestible pile of text Aren't all? What disturbs me the most about this self sanctimonious post is the arrogance to add a poll to your personal opinion like it matters or something. We all have opinions and they all stink... I am sure every other module you meticulously critic (not troll) in their forums have or will tailor their birds just to suit you. I apologize to everyone and even the OP, but every lame post of his/hers has just gotten on my last nerve. This is my opinion and critic; as well as my problem, of this critic. I am going to look for that ignore button I have heard about before, but have not had to think about using before and prevent myself from a ban I hope.

:thumbup: Thanks again. Salute. :punk: ps. Hmm, I seem to still be missing something. None of the changes have added any extra choices. I have to assume I am editing the wrong file: F:\DCS World OpenBeta\Mods\aircraft\C-101\Input\C-101EB\joystick\default.lua. Example of change in case my head is up my posterior again: --Generator added code 032620 {down = device_commands.Button_10, cockpit_device_id = 2, value_down = -1.0, name = _('Generator - RESET'), category = _('Main instrument panel')}, {down = device_commands.Button_10,cockpit_device_id = 2, value_down = 0.0, name = _('Generator - OFF'), category = {_('Main instrument panel')}}, {down = device_commands.Button_10,cockpit_device_id = 2, value_down = 1.0, name = _('Generator - ON'), category = {_('Main instrument panel')}}, {down = device_commands.Button_10, up = device_commands.Button_10, cockpit_device_id = 2,value_down = -1.0, value_up = 0.0, name = _('Generator - 2-Pos RESET/OFF'), category = _('Main instrument panel')}, {down = device_commands.Button_10, up = device_commands.Button_10, cockpit_device_id = 2,value_down = 1.0, value_up = 0.0, name = _('Generator - 2-Pos ON/OFF'), category = _('Main instrument panel')},

Thanks for your help, Sir. Yes, your suspicion is correct. Will this work for ON/OFF/ON switches as well or will it be a different animal? There are many of these types of switches as well of coarse. Again, thanks for your help. Salute :punk: ps. I was just looking this over as I started editing the lua and is it correct that value_down and value_up will use the same value? "value_down = 1.0, value_up = 1.0," I thought your tutorial said to use the second value of the original, ie. 0.0 for value_up in this case... that must be where I was misunderstanding things the most.

Okay, I have confused myself even more trying to lay this out so I am probably way off here. 1st example is from f>ob<mods>ac>c101>input>c101eb>joystick>default.lua Extract for battery switch: --Batteries {down = device_commands.Button_1,cockpit_device_id = 2, value_down = 1.0, name = _('Battery master switch - ON'),category = {_('Main instrument panel')}}, {down = device_commands.Button_1,cockpit_device_id = 2, value_down = 0.0, name = _('Battery master switch - OFF'), category = {_('Main instrument panel')}}, But when I go to c>game>saved games>ob>config>input>c101>Throttle - HOTAS Warthog {06B75280-1861-11e5-8002-444553540000}.diff I get this... Extract for battery switch: ["name"] = "Battery master switch - ON", }, ["d3003pnilu3003cd2vd1vpnilvu0"] = { ["added"] = { [1] = { ["key"] = "JOY_BTN31", When I tried defining an up state for the switch in the default.lua, DCS inputs were all messed up. Was I even in the ball park or am I simply misunderstanding the files I am to look up and how to insert the up command? If you need the entire default.lua or another let me know and I will attach it. Thanks, Salute

Hi, I used to be able to find my way through some code, but getting old and feeling stupid. I can not make sense of this stuff anymore and can not figure out which files to use with C-101 to even try these fixes. Everything I have tried has broke DCS inputs in one way or another. Can you help an old fart out? I have tried adding the up settings for the off positions for 2 and 3 way toggles, but am either misunderstanding the how or where... Thanks, Salute

Seems to be a disconnect between the development team as Ironmike addressed this earlier as a known, low priority, future to-do-list project. See post before yours for link. :punk:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=233889

https://www.cfinotebook.net/notebook/rules-and-regulations/aircraft-lighting This is for civilian operations. Military operations are a different matter and are exempted given the situation and service SOP.

5 degrees per NATOPS. :thumbup: Salute, :punk:

Anytime Baby! :thumbup: Salute, :punk:

Honestly dude, what do you care? You like Hornets... pshaw :disgust::disgust::disgust::disgust: Salute, :punk:

Slow AC swept wings back to try and make opponent misread energy level only. Usually only worked once, if at all, from what I have read.

Try RSMapper instead.

Hello, my name is Punk and I am an addict. I have been collecting and gathering bits and pieces for over 10 years to build a home flight simulator. I have finally begun to test things in application vs. theory. This brings me to my question of you various fellows with a similar disease for your opinion of what works best for you when trying to make that physical connection between switches and in-game actions. I have created two test panels, one using a Bodnar BBI-32 Button Box Interface and the other using a Desktopaviator MODEL 2120 Pulse Generator, both are identified in Windows and DCS. I began with toggles of varying quality, but even brand new mil-spec switches seemed to be bad connections since once swapped out the issues cleared up in 1 or 2 cases, but not in others, regardless of quality. I had a lot of issues when I attempted to bind these directly in the game's settings with some switches working, but most not. I have been checking connections and polarity layout between working and non-working switches. I next used bindings in RSMapper. While it seems to work much better, there are a few non-responding switch actions on both boards. Better, but overall similar issues. Recently I added some cheap push buttons I picked up and some work well, some work now and then, and a couple do not show up at all in Win/DCS and one bounces between two different inputs at the same time. One even causes the button and POV input page to freak out in RSMapper. I have not used Arduinos before so no DCS-Bios. I have an Uno from years back I have yet to try out and a couple Nano V3.0 Mini USB ATmega328 CH340Gs in the mail. So, in each of your own opinions, are the board issues normal and to be worked around or might the DCS-Bios method improve these issues? I was hoping to avoid learning the Arduino route until I began to focus on the lighting and gauges, etc... Thank you for your time. Salute, Punk

This guy might make you something closer to what you might be looking for: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=221046&highlight=Modular+throttle+Warbird

left hand side

"Cost" was the excuse, not the reason. Salute,

These were all tested on the Tomcat, but not implemented due to cost of upgrades at the time. It wasn't the Navy, it was Dick Cheney who hated Grumman, who finished the bird off. Politics and Cash were the death of the mighty Cat. :disgust:

Thanks Belle, I think I figured out the problem. I was using an old version. Once I downloaded the latest version it seems to be working with some small hiccups that is probably the module or ED related. Thanks again.

Pardon my stupidity, but I can not figure out how to get DCS to recognize this program. Is there something that needs to be imported or do I need to clear all bindings in game or something? Salute,

I have yet to get RsMapper to work. If anyone can explain this stuff as simply as possible, it is always appreciated by those underachievers like myself. May I ask why not simply describe what you are recommending to him and how to use it? Not everyone speaks electrons, some are severely dense when it comes to such things... Salute

They should be momentary Jay El or Korry type switches which make the intended electrical action with corresponding change in lighting as far as I know. I know the Korry lights I have do make a soft mechanical click when depressed. But i am not a specialist so take my opinion with a grain of salt. Salute,

These always seem to work for a cheap set up: Salute, Punk

As the person who commissioned them to make it more than a few moons ago, I can tell you only that I paid a little less, but no matter what price is charged, it falls apart a whole lot quicker than you would think unless they are using more durable materials than mine was made from. I personally was not happy with the entire experience with them, but it may have been this that bled through. Anyway, I never even got off the ground with it, and it sits in a box waiting for me to take it apart and put it back together with stronger makings. Who knows when or if that will ever happen? I can only speak of my experience with them, I liked the guy, but they kept wanting to make shortcuts around key "F-14 Throttle" identifiers which defeated the purpose of having one made. I have no idea of the quality of their other items, they look much sturdier in any case, but I did not want a civilian throttle in a puddy-tat.

I will try different methods myself as I close in on that portion of my build. Either way you go, I can not see how any of them are "cheating." In the real world, lifting the switch cover usually does not trigger an action, though there are exceptions of course, but it is a safety measure not to move the switch by accident. So how is it a cheat at all to have to add a step which is not really missing? You are just telling the computer the action is taking place. Salute, Punk