Kang

I myself rather wonder if it's worth it, really, without doing a bit of a revamp of how the logbooks work in the first place. Sure there isn't any harm in it, but why bother with needing the shelf space in the cloud and the administrative hassle with it, when a) you are the only one to ever look at your logbook to begin with b) it doesn't contain that much interesting information - this might be a matter of opinion but to me only the hours flown is all that relevant and that gets easily skewed by the fact that only single player missions count, and c) with it being local you can copy, backup and edit it to your heart's contend.

Alright, fair enough. Just struck me as odd when I saw it. Guess the 'original' pylon is meant for AIM-7s only then (as far as missiles are concerned).

Perhaps in this world of missile spam nobody else cares much, but: It used to be that you could select single AIM-120s on the wing pylons of the Hornet and it would be mounted to the pylon directly. In the current version, though, in the same scenario you end up with a twin rack that is just half-loaded. This begs the question: is this realistic and intended? It seems to me the pylon itself should be sufficient.

Yes, this might be a low priority thing, but on the other hand: it's also one of these things that takes very little effort really. The animation of it is already there (you can see it by F2-ing a Hornet right after mission start) and ground crew can be instructed via F8-menu to stow boarding ladders on the A-10. Can I live without it? Sure can. But I have to ask myself why ED went through the trouble of animating it when it is not intended for use.

I think the borders of the PG map there are a bit optimistic to say the least. Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait are, well, there topographically speaking, but there is literally nothing there and as far as I'm aware no plans to expand the actual map. It's more like a third of the width with a few bits of Iran extending beyond it then.

Ejected pilots walking over bridges will phase through said bridges and walk down into rivers instead. Probably not very important, but still.

Well, if you could get a certain percentage of the creators of the skins you enjoy to use a certain tag ('Realistic', 'Semi-Realistic', 'Fictional') this wouldn't be a lot of trouble.

...which is also the reason why random deviations occur and longer track files tend to be all messed up nonsense towards the end. If you intend to make movies/screenshots/whatnot from them, better split your flights in several small track files.

Coming to think of it, does anybody know why the Bort # is part of that announcement? I mean, the system has no way of relaying such information from any other craft and the way it is set up it seems a bit like announcing the number just wastes precious seconds.

Have you tried setting your plane tail # to something else in the ME? I'm fairly sure it tells you the aircraft number.

Actually it has previously been a bug that markers on the map would 'freeze in place' and just come along when panning the map; perhaps that's back a little.

Wait, blind it? I thought ye olde IR missile jammer worked by 'blinking' (or pulsing rather?) and such suggesting to a missile that it was off target while it in fact was not, thus prompting it to 'correct' away.

Thank you for the reminder, Gumbie. It's still far from working okay, or as it was, but updated sound and video drivers at least let me enter a game again; just a lot of unexpected waiting involved.

I tried that and it sadly has not produced any change.

I received an update to Windows 10 last night and while I managed to use DCS quite normally yesterday, today the luck has apparently run out. Single Player missions load alright-ish (one crashed earlier, but that might be unrelated), but the attempt of joining any multiplayer server always ends at the end of the loading screen, status saying 'Mission Load Done'. I've tried with several different servers in order to rule out mission-related issues, always the same result. Anybody else having a similar issue? Or better yet, a solution? dcs.log

I haven't tried that in a few weeks now, but have you tested this out in different missions/scenarios? I generally found that it's roughly oriented for a Vikhr shot, which from the left launcher might be what you experience. Other than that the KA-50s autopilot does correct for wind in the ground track, which in some wind- and range conditions either puts the automatic rudder to its limit or ends up pointing the nose further upwind than you would expect.

I can definitely relate! It isn't one giant glaring flaw that is hampering DCS, really, but there are plenty of small annoyances. While individually these don't really matter all that much and are easily offset by some of the things that are really great, their sheer multitude and slow progress (in many cases it feels like none) in getting to them is becoming an ever more grave problem over time. DCS is - and has always been - a bit of a scattershot in that there is not really a consistent time-frame or scenario with the modules, but the real issue that the same applies to problems and fixes really: there are some issues that keep being improved to truly staggering precision, while others are pretty much left 'as is' for years. Again, it's not a single 'game-breaking issue', but there are plenty of little things that oftentimes affect several modules or the world and thus end up appearing in almost every single mission played.

I get that animated ground crew is a bit of a touchy subject business-wise since the animated deck crew are a major selling point of the Supercarrier module. On the topic of hangar doors, I would actually prefer that to be tackled at the top. For example a ground crew comms menu option to Open/Close Doors, while of course involving the comms menu yet again, would enable a fairly dynamic operation of it. The main work would be to define the areas from which doors should be operable, or compile a proper list of the objects in question as to measure distances.

Not sure if bug or complaint to the greenskeeper...

Thankfully at this point we can already place neutral country assets in our missions, so there isn't really need for a new coalition. That could possibly be achieved by just creating a 'civilians' country and assigning it corresponding units. Those units are a different thing, of course. There is a selection of civilian vehicles in DCS already, but what is missing is one or two civilian 'infantry' models. Perhaps I envision things differently from the OP, but I believe we can all agree that there is no need to actually populate the settlements with people wandering around; this would definitely become problematic for some of the major cities around the maps available. But having the ability to put in civilians that are supposed to be part of a mission would definitely be a plus. Be it, as pointed out, that especially helicopter gunners are supposed to check targets, or design missions involving transporting civilians around (see Oilfield campaign or perhaps missions centering on evacuations and the like). In a similar vein, I'd also like to be able to place actual pilots as mission assets. The models and animations do exist after all...

Have you tried setting the 'task' to something else? It is known to filter the available types to ones suitable to that particular role - which is not always perfectly accurate either. Setting the task to 'Nothing' should give you the full list.

Probably would need more flights, maybe some F-14s launching radar decoys. If all that fails, you can add naval assets to help saturate the defences. In my opinion the reason most of us don't do a lot of anti-ship is that the Harpoon, even if it manages to get through, leaves a lot to be desired. Feels like you ding those ships' paint a bit.

Save them under a different name into your 'My Missions' folder. If you just click on 'save' it tries to overwrite the original mission which Windows generally doesn't like.

Ever since an update the initial coordinates to align the INS have had digits that don't get displayed. Instead, after entering they appear in a DCS info message in the top right. Considering how such info windows obviously don't exist in the actual Mirage 2000, is that really how it works? Do pilots (or ground crew) punch in the remaining digits blindly and just assume they are correct? Strikes me as odd that these digits are necessary but there is no way to see them.

In other words: add more appropriate templates?