S D

Looks good, only thing i would say is to maybe keep a consideration of what additional SAM units might be deployed to or activated in the area. There are currently alot of inactive/empty sites which could in theory be setup quickly. It would go along with the thinking that an escalated iranian military focus in the region would be well on the way to beefing these air defences up a bit. I only say this because generally with the exception of the s300 (which itself can be neutralized easily enough), it becomes an easy task to avoid these sites, so a few more never hurts. :)

Don't count on it... Would love to see it like everyone else, but at the moment, this long time supporter is loosing hope.

I will add my plus one to this... ED really need to start working closer with community contributors on this kind of stuff, MOOSE is currently forming the backbone of my mission making. You ignore these type of requests then community projects like this will die and so with it DCS, as it seems your more interested in shiny new money making projects instead of getting to some of the core issues that have plauged the game for so long.

^^ As above, make sure TCN & ILS are both "Boxed" on the HSI so you have the information on the HUD.

--- These are all airbases of the Persion Gulf Map: -- -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Fujairah_Intl -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Qeshm_Island -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Sir_Abu_Nuayr -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Abu_Musa_Island_Airport -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Bandar_Abbas_Intl -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Bandar_Lengeh -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Tunb_Island_AFB -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Havadarya -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Lar_Airbase -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Sirri_Island -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Tunb_Kochak -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Al_Dhafra_AB -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Dubai_Intl -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Al_Maktoum_Intl -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Khasab -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Al_Minhad_AB -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Sharjah_Intl -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Shiraz_International_Airport -- * AIRBASE.PersianGulf.Kerman_Airport

This is because the ejected pilot model is the same across all aircraft, the opfor pilots are the same, try ejecting from an iranian mig21.

Movement around the deck does indeed seem to be much better. Am still experiencing stuttered movement/shifting across the deck when changing fuel load/weapons, this becomes more pronounced with the carrier turning.

All your doing by deleting or clearing out those folders, is forcing the game to rebuild the shaders and some other stuff. Once you've done this, the game will take longer to load in, as its rebuilding. Always worth doing if there has been any updates, takes 2 seconds once in a while to clear em out. As for stuttering/ghosting when switching views and returning to the cockpit, when i have experienced this it has been solved by remove the HMD (RIFT) far enough to allow the sensor to put the HMD's screens into standby, then just put it back on again, this seems to revert me back to normal performance. Again no idea why, but it works so hey i'm not gonna go digging for more problems. Just as a note, i'm not using any of the tray tools stuff or any mods or tweaks to help performance in VR, found graphics settings i was happy with and with the above two tips have been running fine through various updates.

When is the last time you cleared your fxo and metashaders2 folders? Always worth a try, has fixed bad fps/stutters/ghosting for me in the past.

This, whenever i have had stuttering post update, deleting or clearing those two folders sorted it.

There are no scripts involved, so should be fine. Have you tried opening the mission in the editor and resaving the mission? It could be, thats its an old mission and needs to be saved on the current build.

I would also add to this the sliding effect seem more pronounced while the ship is manouvering at speed. The video above doesnt seem too bad, but i have seen much more exaggerated sliding. Although the effects are reduced from the levels we saw prior to the last couple of updates, they are still there and manouvering on the deck is still effected, for example increased levels of thrust required to "unstick" the aircraft from the deck. I have no idea the level of complexity involved in this issue so excuse me, but it seems this incremental drop in movement while great if it reaches a complete point, seems to be a way of "scripting" the behaviour of the physics between the aircraft and the deck. I guess what i'm asking is, is there going to be a point when this is not an issue at all? Or is the core engine not capable of realistic interaction.

Could you explain how you achieved this:- Version 0.3 Uploaded Added TACAN bug workaround- acts autonomously I see you have the TACAN activated in the triggered actions, how is that being triggered?

Because its easier to arrange the deck to your liking with statics? Thats not really the point. Yes i also have this, i'm not sure if they are set around Kasab or around the BLUFOR Bullseye, because by default its set there.

Welcome to the world of DCS AI pathfinding. I can only suggest if possible use another airfield. These smaller airfields on PG with the turn around runway taxi's are causing havoc.

Just use the group itself, add multiple ships to the group then change the ship type to suit, arrange the ships into a formation and off you go. Here is an example using the standard method with waypoints and a moose version. Both have their pro and cons... I would recommend the waypoint version if your doing a simple mission with a shortish run time. FLEETMOVE.miz

From my point of view i only use NP++ and then example missions and info i can find online to put code together. I didnt like the look of installing and setting up the LDT stuff and like Pikey said it might possibly of put me off had i gone down that route and had issues.

There is a way to tell, look very closely where the base of the right throttle quadrant goes into the fod brush. There is a small latch that animates up and down.

"Hidden" in the ME is exactly that, its just hidden in the editor and singleplayer pre planning. You will have to change the Mission Options/F10 View Options, to remove them from the map.

For use in the mean time, when spawning, if you get the delayed message. reselect spectators then reoccupy the slot. It should spawn in an available space.

If its correct or not is one thing, but this is certainly not true. Try a night with little or no moon trying to line up a ccip target for example.

Follow up question for anyone, does the amount of EWR units defined in the array, affect peformance in anyway? i.e is MOOSE doing more calculations if i have 8 EWR units as opposed to 2.

Thanks alot kaymelkan. Yeah i'm reading through documentation when i need something specific, then looking at the template missions for each case which i think i might need to use. Its just the putting it all together part that is catching me out.

Hi guys, i have the following for setting up a basic EWR/GCI. -- Define OPFOR EWR net -- Object var name set as prefix within editor OPFOR_EWRGroup = SET_GROUP:New() OPFOR_EWRGroup:FilterPrefixes( { "EWRIRAN" } ) OPFOR_EWRGroup:FilterStart() -- Define EWR group as monitored air space OPFOR_AirSpace = DETECTION_AREAS:New( OPFOR_EWRGroup, 60000 ) -- Init A2A controller OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher = AI_A2A_DISPATCHER:New( OPFOR_AirSpace ) -- Debug -- Enable Tac Display OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetTacticalDisplay( true ) -- Initialize the dispatcher, setting up a radius of 100km where any airborne friendly -- without an assignment within 100km radius from a detected target, will engage that target. OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetEngageRadius() -- Setup OPFOR sqn OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadron( "OPFOR_Bandar_Abbas", "Bandar Abbas Intl", { "IRANMIG21","IRANMIG29","IRANF5" }, 20 ) OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadron( "OPFOR_Tunb_Island_AFB", "Tunb Island AFB", { "IRANMIG21","IRANF5" }, 20 ) OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadron( "OPFOR_Lar_Airbase", "Lar Airbase", { "IRANMIG21","IRANMIG29","IRANF5" }, 20 ) -- Setup the Takeoff methods OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadronTakeoffFromParkingHot( "OPFOR_Bandar_Abbas" ) OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadronTakeoffFromParkingHot( "OPFOR_Tunb_Island_AFB" ) OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadronTakeoffFromParkingHot( "OPFOR_Lar_Airbase" ) -- Setup the Landing methods OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadronLandingAtEngineShutdown( "OPFOR_Bandar_Abbas" ) OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadronLandingAtEngineShutdown( "OPFOR_Tunb_Island_AFB" ) OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadronLandingAtEngineShutdown( "OPFOR_Lar_Airbase" ) -- GCI Squadron execution. OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadronGci( "OPFOR_Bandar_Abbas", 900, 1200 ) OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadronGci( "OPFOR_Tunb_Island_AFB", 900, 1200 ) OPFOR_A2A_Dispatcher:SetSquadronGci( "OPFOR_Lar_Airbase", 900, 1200 )Is it possible to add defined cap zones into this? So i could access the squadrons and ewr detection, but have seperate cap flights that spawn then patrol a defined area, then engage based on the detection zone. I'm still trying to learn MOOSE atm and am generally copy pasting code fragments and seeing what works.

Not sure how ED plan to work on this but currently, it is just four slots, if that's ai or player doesnt matter, only the four (unless i'm missing something). But also currently, players can spawn inside each other. Requiring a staggered entry into the mission, with each player clearing the spawn location. Its not a massive amount of time, but a cold start four ship is time consuming.