jef32

Thanks to you, it works. I've found the mistake I've done. I've forgotten to reduce the speed the speed at 80 Km/h at the DP waypoint set to landing. I reduced it to 80 Km/h, it works better and the MI-8 doesn't take-off again. Thanks. And before I didn't see the crew disembarking. But I've seen something a little funny on my mission, I havn't seen on yours: When the crew disembarks, they're depressed to the chest in the helipad just near the MI-8 and around 120 seconds later, they're disapearring.

Thanks for your mission. I will try it immediatly and I will increase the MI-8 fuel fuel on mine, just to see...

No that doesn't work. Even if I replace the static Huey by an AI Huey , the rebellious MI-8 does as before and lands near the Huey after restarting. I join the mission file but Upuaut mod : Cargo + Helipads + external fuel-tank for the UH-1 + Hospital + Seafort + Red Sands + Racegates and Virpil mod: VPC airfield equipment are needed CAUC-UH-1H- Héliport du lac Transport.miz

Thanks for helping me. I've already tried as you say, DP point as landing and It's the same, five minutes later the MI-8 starts again. On the other side, it's a good advice to replace static Huey by an AI huey no controlled. It will prevent the rebellious MI-8 to land just beside it. Thanks !

With this kind of amazing mod, all we have to do is to be very numerous to ask 2 things to ED in the wishlist: A normal behaviour of AI planes on final approach even if planes are moving on taxiways. More parking places for heavy on McCarran airport.

It's quite strange as it hadn't any update yesterday. I've tried before answering and I havn't this problem. All airplanes or just some ? I've tried with L-39 and nothing special.

You too !

Ok I have an explanation of the mistake. In french, "can of worms" means simply a box containing worms, for fishing, as a literally translation. But I just used the google translator, and the french translation of "can of worms" as a complete expression, is "Pandora box". wink to greek antic mythology when Pandora opened the box and all disasters of the world escaped, just the hope, dressed in green stayed here. I understand now our lack of understanding.

For presence of civilians, we all have said what we're thinking. For me, it's not an issue, that's all and you're right, we can find some idiots in a community but for now, I havn't seen. For me, the debate is closed. But the worms joke, I'll try to explain how I felt what you said. You said " we should totally have worms too" And I explain how I've understood what you said, perhaps falsely: For you, the civilian request in DCS was totally superfluous and you took the worm's example to exagerate the uselessness of this request for you. That's how I understood what you've said. Maybe i'm wrong and you wanted to say anything else.

Totally agree with you ! Hope that ED will include civilians one day.

Ok. excuse me if I hadn't understood the joke. I'm french and I can't understand specifics US jokes sometimes. I see what you mean about casualties. And why not making civilians invulnerable ? As you're saying, some of us will take pleasure to kill civilians and if it's done on purpose, it's insane mostly if it's posted on youtube after. But even with no civilians in ED for now, strikes missions above cities can kill civilians even if we don't see them, they're supposed to be under the bombs. Now, I'd never played to some games but I think that players can kill civilians in GTA or other games. I don't see videos about that on youtube. On DCS we are all virtual pilots and some of us are real pilots too and as pilots, virtual or not, we have a sort of ethics. DCS is less easy to use than "call of duty" and if we use it, we have invested time ( and money) to learn how piloting each aircrafts we have bought. it's not a game for basic players or kids, so I can't believe that some of our community could do what you're afraid with youtube. Especially that in some countries like mine, this sort of behaviour can be punished by law, if videos are containing incitation to mass murder or terrorism, even with a virtual support. You surely knows and surely you're using it, the fabulous mod giving us the possibility to include heavy liners in DCS. Have you already seen on youtube, a DCS video showing a DCS player shooting down in flame an heavy liner, supposed to be full of civilians ? For me, the answer is No !

What I want to say, or what I've understood is that the request about civilian people seems to be for you and DieHard, as superfluous as if Wilsonov had request worms in DCS. We can built missions with civilian people ( transport, rescue or else ) and this request is not pointless at all. We can give life to DCS with people on civilian airports ( I think to KLAS) with luggage workers, or anywhere else like fishermen to place on the shores of the lakes.

I don't think you broke the rules but I'm a little bit edgy when I see people just thinking to their needs and having no consideration to people wanting anything different. You have always a mission editor, if you want to delete civilian people ( by admitting that they will exist one day) on missions downloaded on the user's files section.

JM1 or DieHard, if you pass your virtual life by flying at 35000ft and above mach 1, don't be mocker with people flying with helicopters on low altitude and low speed. I share absolutly Wilsonov's request and civilian people is a reasonable request for DCS. But perhaps you're thinking that worms are people that aren't thinking like you ?

Excuse me but in the real life ( I'm piloting in real life too ) aircrafts are landing even if others are moving on the taxiway. Imagine if it was the case on big airports as KLAS, KLAX, LFPG or else. The world air traffic would be drastically reduced if each liner must wait that liners on approach have landed, before moving on taxiway. No more needs of waiting points lines on the airports or airfields. And as I've already said, on some previous versions of DCS we hadn't this problem. I don't understand why ED has changed that.

Thanks for your answer but I'll try to be more explicit about what happens: I've put a FARP heliport somewhere. When the mission begins, an AI MI-8 is on approach to this heliport, with just 2% fuel. I've done a landing advanced command at the DP waypoint and I've put the landing little triangle in ME ( landing symbol) on the FARP heliport. In the mission, the MI-8 lands properly on the FARP heliport and shut the engine off. Until here all is right. But..but...exactly five minutes later the MI-8 starts its engine again, takes-off and lands immediatly after on an other part of the FARP heliport, just near an static Huey and a static fuel truck I've put here. But the stranger is even with no fuel, the engines stays ON after this second landing. I've tried to decrease more the fuel quantity but just with an liter less, the MI-8 does an emergency landing immediatly without reaching the FARP heliport. What I would wish is that after the first landing and engine off, the AI Mi-8 stays here without starting again.

Sorry MadDog but if a plane is moving on the taxiway AI planes aren't landing. As ED tester you surely have all modules. Try the attached file mission i've done. You need the civilian airplanes mod and VP crew ( Virpil) but you can easily get them. You'll see, the first AI plane will land properly but if you start your L-39 and go to the waiting point for the runway 30, You'll see the second landing AI turning around even if you aren't on the runway. If you stay on the parking, the second AI will land properly. In some previous versions we haven't this problem. i forgot: You need the mod with animals too ( goats, cows, deers, chicken ) CAUC-L39-Mineralnye.miz

Upuaut, if you read us, perhaps it's time to think about modifying your absolute amazing mod, to install it totally in c:\user\name\saved games... and after that, you willn't must to modify your mod after each DCS update. For now, your mod is working but if ED decides to lock definitivly the checksum of some .lua files, it's over.

Absolutly agree with Wilsonov

I had already spoke about this problem. Especially that it wasn't the case in far previous versions of DCS. So it's possible.

Hi Sometimes, in the ME, it could be interesting to associate a sound to an unit, as the same manner an unit can transmitt a message with a frequency and HF power, in the advanced function, a unit could do a sound with level in decibel. So, some soldiers could speaking or shouting and the level of hearing could depend from the distance between the player and the unit, and could change if the unit moves, or we could create a sound ambiance around a static unit, as campaign or town sound ambiance. Sound banks are enough on the web to catch sounds to integrate in DCS

Thanks for your answers OK now, I know that it's a bug and a known issues and that BST works on it. Quadg, on an other mission I've built and where I had an engine fire, I know why now. When I saw the external temperature just going under 0°C, I switched ON the De-Icing. Since your explanations, I've done the mission without the De-Icing and with a Vi of 60 mph max during climb and I returned safe to my base.

Thanks for explanations but it doesn't explain why the time allowed to going beyond 610°C without reaching 625°C is reduced to one or two minutes while the user's manual says 30 minutes. That could be interesting if we could have a real Huey pilot here.

OK. It's absolutly evident that without connection, MP is impossible. I'm surprised that some users are surprised by that. If the fail is an internet connection down at their home, they can't even navigate. Even more so doing multiplayer online. If ED servers are down, it's the same as soon as LAN is impossible with DCS but the offline mode would be always ON. Hope, at this time, they're not working just about the 2.5 version enhancement but on the "without during limits offline mode" too.