MrDieing

https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=769 Above is the correct forum for the Raven One campaign. Bigger chance Baltic Dragon sees it. I dont think what you are reporting is a bug in the campaign. Might be due to difficulty settings/wake turbulence or something being forced in the campaign. A video might help to clarify what is going on with your problem.

Looks like we are pretty far along, fingers crossed for a Christmas present this year :) Updated the main post aswell.

Are you ok dude?

Range is not just 'how close can I get before I have to turn back', its also loiter time. Without A/A refueling and a full load the current generation aircraft just do not compare to what the F-14 had which I believe what Victory205 is referring to.

I have no idea what you are smoking but I'll have some.

That looks really nice, well done! Which is why it is a good thing that community members spend their time and rescources on it, so ED does not have to. Maybe throw the guy a few coins and make an option in the Settings for classic or modern UI :)

I am just thinking out loud here, nothing is sure, especially in DCS. You should be able to load each mission individually in the Mission Editor and replace the old A-10C with the A-10C II and play without problems. Emphasis on should. It is possible that 3rd Party Campaign Devs release an update to their campaigns (I imagine for free) so that you can play with the new A-10C. I wouldnt expect them to update their campaings in a way that it makes full use of the new features (incorpate them in voice-overs, objectives, briefings etc.) but atleast you will be able to use them in those campaigns if they do it.

I think a lot of people will not appreciate such a system based on random possibility. You cant really plan around a mission if its based on random numbers. Imagine a virtual squadron taking 2 hours to prepare a mission only for it to fail because the numbers did not go their way whilest on the other hand some random kid on an airquake server might be able to defeat an entire SAM site because he was lucky. And I can already see the 'bug reports' coming about the Hornet radar 'not working', 'not locking', or 'randomly loosing lock' :lol:

If you actually knew a thing or two about the things you are talking about you will find that it makes perfect sense :doh:

Well this thread got hijacked pretty quickly :huh: I expect PC to have a very clear picture of what systems and/or weapons were operationally implemented and used due to the motivated SME group they have working with them. As such I dont think there will be a lot, if any, hypothetical or only tested systems/weapons. Some features like SatCom and BFT would probably not have much use in DCS, so I could live without those.

I do not want to sound rude, but have you even tried before asking? There is an option that says 'Buy as gift' next to Check-out when you go to your Shopping Cart. That is sure as hell the first place I would look for such thing :)

Contrary to what most people believe, a radar is not a magical item that detects anything that is in its field of view. There might be other reasons your radar is not picking up a target but usually the operator plays a large part in when the radar sees what it does. Learn which mode and what parameters are best for each situation and you will find that the radar, for some magical reason, will suddenly detect much more targets.

I always grin when I see these type of comments. Its like you guys are threatening ED that if they do not do as you say, they will go out of business or something. You guys go ahead and not buy anything and miss out on all the great DCS has to offer. You will not be missed.

No

As I understood it you can designate a target from the MAP mode. Wags also shows this in the video. Ofcourse its only a general area you can designate, for example a city, mountain ridge or river bedding, which I believe Eldur was referring to. The later modes GMTI and GMTT will provide actual targets with high intensity radar returns on the radar scope.

Sure, why not? But then again, I'd take any 3rd/4th Gen Soviet/Russian aircraft :P

Later for Early Access they plan to include the emergency barrier that can be raised for incoming emergency aircraft. Wether or not this will include related communications remains to be seen or confirmed later on by ED.

Its also not a bug or a problem, just something to improve in your opinion. Wrong subsection.

Is this in the current build? Have not come across this yet, but then again, I also have not checked my external (or the 'GoPro' view) with the SC during launch for that matter. Either way, if this is the current build, its not synced for MP and client side only, have seen my lead launch multiple times without seeing these animations.

Nice rant. Provide some more info, maybe logs, specs, DxDiag and what not and report it properly on the forums instead of this spitting. That way you might actually contribute something.

I indeed assumed that because you did not prove otherwise. I do not want to make you to prove such thing, its just something I noticed and thought was odd and wanted to get out there.

While this discussion is pretty much done and over with, I just want to add that Im really surprised by the initial reaction of some people. While in the end the OP turned out to be sort of correct (We do indeed have a Spanish Litening rather then what the video shows (or claims) to be a US pod) the first reaction people have, to a random dude on the internet showing a random video and a few screenshots is; Good research! Without doing atleast some form of fact checking and/or research themselves. No discredit to the OP, but he admitted he threw it together in 30 minutes based of 1 or 2 videos. Personally I do not feel that classifies as good research, while in the end there turned out to be a form of truth in there. The reason Im saying a form is because we still cant (and probably never will) tell what exactly is the correct Litening symbology for 'our' Hornet. I can imagine (and this is just imagination here, as the word implies) that there is a lot of differences between years, Blocks, software updates to the Pod and/or the aircraft, operators (including USMC/USN differences) and what not. There is no way if you count in all those things that one or two videos on YouTube which claim to be from a certain time frame then automatically count as the truth for our Hornet. Just my two cents.

Double check that the frequency for the carrier is set to 127.500 in the Mission Editor. This is what caught me the first time. Note that it only works on this frequency. Changing the frequency to something else then that in the ME does not work.

Mine works now, I suppose a little patience is in order.