twistking

AI skill lever high enough? But you are right, that it could be a bug. I think search lights should eliminate the need for high skilled AI...

I've worked in media creation, so i think i have some good experience with colour calibration and i'd say that if you calibrate by eye, you can do that on whatever source you want, since your eyes will probabyl be the weakest link in the chain. Personally i'd also recommend to cross check with sources that you are very familiar with. This could be any media or program. Best to also be familiar with this source on different screens. Most importantly though is to remember that calibrating by eye is very "dangerous" for untrained eyes, because it's very hard to judge clours absolutely. If you have a modern display that was factory calibrated and is not completely bleeched out from thousands of hours of runtime, i would reccomend to simply use the pre-calibrated S-RGB-mode of the monitor and run with that for colour. Some monitors won't label their SRGB mode as such, but will call it default, neutral, custom or whatever. Check the manual or google. I have relatively cheap LG gaming monitor for DCS and while it's menus scream GAMING at you, it has a really decent SRGB mode hiding under teriible marketing-speech aimed at "gamers". I have trained eyes, but i wouldn't be able to improve on that preset mode by eye alone, so i just rolled with it. Of course gamma, brightness and black levels are a different problem, but the good news is, that it's easier to calibrate those by eye. Again, if you have a modern monitor, gamma should be fine by default, but black levels might not be. Normally this is not a big deal, because gamma/black levels are fine to be corrected by eye, the problem with DCS is that black levels are very critical, because dcs has a much wider dynamic range than typical mainstream media. It's therefore important to get black levels and gamma right. If you manage to do that you can fly both day and night missions in dcs without tuning your gamma. Oh and one last piece of warning. I said you can use internet sources for calibration. Just make sure that those images are displayed correctly. Fo example you cannot use the windows image viewer, because it applies a colour profile that you cannot see or change. Most modern internet browsers show images correctly. Firefox and chrome should be fine f.e. But i expect edge and operah to work as well. If in doubt, there are websites that let you check if your browser handles colour correctly...

what map and mission time? there is a datalink bug when local time and ZULU missmatch by date, so midnight +/- x hours. x being the time difference zulu<->local...

I haven't bought the F1 yet, but even from the promo material it seems that the cockpit textures are not perfect. I mean mostly the black plastic (?) material the cockpit walls are made from. It doesn't really look realistic. So i hope it not only gets a little bit brighter, but also gets the shader tuned to look more real. Also the bumpmap seems a little bit low resolution, but maybe the material is really that coarse in reality. In general the models looks great though, so i hope that those little problems will get improved on. I also appreciate the OP's criticism. All the feedback from the community so far has been only positive (congrats to Aerges, i guess!) that it seemed too good to be true. I've also one concern from my own and simply from watching videos about the module so it's some weird form of backseat criticism: When you tilt the mirrors sideways (not only "deactivate" but physically tilt), the mirror is not completely out of view and the shader that's on it looks really bland. On other aircrafts, the mirrors are tilted so far that they are completely out of view from normal perspective. So i hope that either the shader on the tilted mirrors could be improved, or maybe they can be made to tilt further so that they are even less visible. I bet if you apply enough force you can tilt them further in the real aircraft... at least once...

have to bump this thread once more! first generation manpads are really needed!

ok. good to know. i think it should also work with CAP: @NineLine maybe check if this is intended behaviour or simply an oversight?!

I tried to have JDAM attacking from different headings and at different angles, but inputting different parameters did not change the LAR (is it called that? i mean the max range circle on the HSI...) and also the bombs did not really fly different profiles at all. I made sure to release from high altitude well within the LAR to give them enough energy, but they just flew straight to the target. I also tested with JSOW where terminal heading would maybe have even greater utility and did not see any deviation from their default trajectory. What am i missing? Are the terminal parameters still WIP? All tested on stable branch with TOO mode.

ok. thanks for the answers! Do you have any rough ideas what to expect from the Super 530F? Since i understand that i't not "doppler-guided", will it easily get lost in ground clutter etc.? Will it be somewhat comparable to R-27R (not ER obviously)?

mhmm... according to this ... ... it should be available on open beta. are you on open beta?

then i'm out of ideas unfortunately. maybe the feature is not in yet. try again after the next update perhaps...

yes, it somehow has to do with the kind of rotational movement with the f2 orbital camera being safer for some reason. i noticed that the flyby-cam (f3 i believe?) shows some wobble/jitter... my educated guess would be, that those clouds use a different type of projection or a different target position for the projection and therefore don't align properly with the geometric world on some angles. the wobble would than be produced by the camera sweeping through angles of good and bad alignment. i also noted that the flicker and jumping sometimes is extreme when watching a video feed from a slamER cruise missile that is some distance away from your own aircraft. i would not consider this being a big issue at all, but it might be of interest to chase down the problem.

Yes, i think a mounted version would be even better. The gun should have relatively poor performance even for early cold war standards, so a mounted version would give it some more utility and from what i gathered it was (is) commonly mounted on all sorts of vehicles in reality (for the same reason probably)...

I see. Thanks for the info. So it's safe to assume that even the F1M will have a bit of hard time in BVR against the teen fighters (Sparrow only)? Do you expect the EE to have AG radar ranging then? It would need that (or laser ranging) for any assisted bombing modes, wouldn't it?

I think those would be the only relevant sovjet post-war AAA pieces still missing, now that the KS-19 made its debut.

i vaguely remember that you'd need to put the fighters on highest skill level for there to be a chance of them trying a head-on attack. also this might only work on open beta at the moment, since i think this was only added recently. maybe i'm wrong though...

what kind of RWR indication do you get from a ks-19 site on the receiving end? also how does performance of the 57 / 57-2 medium AAA change, if you put a SON-9 into the group?

I'm very excited about the F1EE and M since i think they will be "perfect" modules for dcs with complex avionics but still requiring skill and hands-on flying. I couldn't find much info on the exact capabilities of the two versions though. Could someone give me some rough idea where they would fit in the dcs food chain? The M seems to be surprisingly modern, so i expect computer and ranging radar assisted ground attack capabilities (ccip, ccrp or similar), modern RWR and a healthy amount of chaff/flares. For BVR i expect it to carry the 530D and a radar that can make good use of it, so my guess is, that it will be comparable to the Mirage 2000 and roughly comparable to Sparrow-only modern US-Teens. BFM should still be similar to older gen, so at a big disadvantage compared to 2000 and Teens, but with better Heatseekers and more flares comapred to F1CE. Do you think that's roughly accurate? For the F1EE i could not find anything at all. Will it have computer bombing modes? Will it have 530D missiles and will it's radar be good enough to use them to their max potential? Will any of the two versions have access to a laser designator (onboard or pod)?

this seems to be the issue then: reload time being too high?! it's only an educated guess, but these guns should be able to fire more or less (!) continously when enough ammo is avaialble, shouldn't they? so 7 shells on hand might be enough, but reloading after those 7 shells should be rather quick - if ammo is available...

i think in mission editor a cold start is called "start from ramp" or similar...

anyone tested the new SON-9 with the 57mm s-60 and 57-2 tracked?

To have something show up in trigger menu Task push, you first ahve to design the task with the unit. In the unit there is a tab that let's you define tasks or states that are not immediately acted on, but they will populate the trigger menu. It's recommended to give all those tasks proper name, so it's not getting consufing on mroe complex missions. I would hope that the tutorial video you mentioned also shows you how to prepare those actions. also in addition to what northstar98 said, you can set up one trigger AAA barrage, have one condition, but in the last row where you set "push task", you can quickly add push task for many different units. That's how you could set up different groups shooting at different positions on the same trigger. If you only select one group all units of this group will fire at the same point, since only one task can be active at the same time for any group afaik.

i don't know, i think 7 rounds is a reasonable amount. you would have a cache (or truck in dcs) nearby to keep the gun fed. i don't have a strong opinion about this though...

how much bigger (horizontially) is the range compared to the 57mm? is it roughly comparable to something like an sa-8 osa (only considering range)?

thanks. thing is however that i'm aware that the function has some issues (and on some maps tree removal does not work at all), however i'd like to know if it will also look the same for players in multiplayer when it works locally. for example i tested it in marianas map, where it worked 100% reliably. however how can i be sure that this will then also be the case for JIP players? i could not find any reports, where it looked differently for different players on the same mission, so i think, i'll just have to run the risk. which trigger type do you reckon will be the safest to make sure it executes on every client upon joining? will "on mission start" still run on clients that JIP later?

thanks to both of you! i think i got it now.