Hog_No32

sure thing

I measured ca 140mm from the desk edge to a vertical line that touches the forward edge of the UFCs top while it being tilted 0 degrees (keyboard face is exactly perpendicular to ground surface)

Thanks, BigNewy. Appreciate your response!

Hi ED, tbh, I saw a sliver of a chance that with the 2.9 OB update we‘d get the previously announced directors on the flightdeck. Seems they were not included (…and the abscence of any videos by Wags about that new feature should have told me), I guess some more testing or refinement is needed, which I absolutely appreciate. Yet, I’d like to ask whether there is anything you can share with us regarding the progress or even better, when you envision to release it to your eager naval aviators out there Cheers, HogNo32

That pretty much sums it up correctly, I think. I know from my own clumsy mission building experience that in the Caucasus map, most airport do perfectly change the active runway (direction) to the wind as set in the ME as to always prefer a headwind component. But as western_JPN correctly stated, for some airports terrain does only allow for landing in one direction like Batumi. Same is true for takeoff as well. On the PG map, Khasab is indeed a more striking example with high terrain to the south of the N/S-oriented runway. Yes, you can do a cirling approach but that is rather challenging in the narrow valley. This all matches real-life procedures at the mentiones airports btw, so it‘s actually a good score for DCS in that regard ;-]

Eh, ok…so are you saying your monitor is capable of a 1440p resolution but you intend to run it with only 1080p regardless? Either I am getting something completely wrong here (which happens…), or that doesn‘t make any sense. A 1440p resolution obviously gives you an additional 360 pixels for rendering, one or two of these pixels might be the other aircraft you are trying to spot. With the aircraft at the same distance on a 1080p resolution, the rendering might not be able to show the small aircraft and instead interpolate and show the sky (or whatever background)… Btw, maybe you can post the .lua you are actually tyring to use and which does not work as intended.

Maybe a stupid question, but did you also update the overall resolution in the DCS settings from 3840x1080 to …x1440? My main screen (and Center viewport) is a 2560x1440 and I also have a secondary monitor (800x600) for MFD output. Works just fine. By the way, I also have had trouble spotting other aircraft visually on a 1080p screen. Going to 1440p really makes a difference, so that is good advice for sure.

Great! Thanks a lot for your response!

Hey folks, I am currently running a 2-screen setup with my main being a 31.5“ screen at 2560x1440 and one 8“ display at 800x600 for exporting the right DDI. The 8“ screen is a Lilliput UM80/C and connected via USB. The setup works just fine. My overall in-game resolution is set to 3360(2560+800)x1440 now. I am now considering to add a second 8“ Lilliput for exporting the other DDI. And here come my two questions: 1. Is a setup (in terms of lua file) like in the pic below with both 8“ screens underneath each other possible at all? Or do they have to be side by side for proper export? And 2. Provided the setup as in the pic is possible, will the impact on my rig for rendering a 3rd screens actually be negligble, given that the overall width and height would remain 3360x1440? Please forgive me for my poor drawing skills….the 8“ screens are actually meant to be top bound (y=0 for LEFT_MFD and y=601 for RIGHT_MFD). Thanks for your help in advance! Zenga monitor cfg 3 screens.pdf

There are no hydraulics. Good old electro-mechanical servo actuators are used instead. The Weapons Control Unit (WCU)-11/B consists of four independently controlled electro-mechanical servo actuators, four lithium-aluminum batteries connected in parallel, and a steel fuselage section that is bolted to the propulsion section aft skirt. Each actuator consists of a brushless DC motor ballscrew, an infinite resolution potentiometer directly coupled to the output shaft, and pulse width modulated control electronics. The output shaft is engaged directly to a squib actuated lock so that it does not interfere with the fin (control surface) installation and removal. source: TuAF http://web.deu.edu.tr/atiksu/ana44/air3.html

You are correct, Tusky. You can designate any stored waypoint in the onboard database as „A/A WP“ (i.e. bullseye), the name of that waypoint (given that the mission designer actually did assign a name to it) will not change (to „BULL“). “BULL“ is just an example. Jello loves „ROCK“. In the mission I flew last night, the mission designer labelled it „GIANT“. The name really doesn‘t matter. As long as the waypoint in question is collocated with the actual bullseye as defined in the mission editor, you‘re good.

100% what I thought! I think for (most of) us, the problem with bad muscle memory when switching between aircrafts is even exacerbated by the fact that we have to use the exact same physical controls in every aircraft. At least I do not have different sticks or throttles for different aircraft. I use my trusty TM Warthog ever since I purchased it (more than 10 years ago…) for whatever I put in the air. I can manage to switch between the A-10C and the Hornet pretty good. Those are the two aircraft I consider myself pretty proficient in. Before the Hornet came out I mainly flew the Viggen, also a beautiful aircraft. But now she is a hangar queen, just like the M2000, the Gazelle, the Harrier and the Apache. The latter two I just bought for „fun flights“ and to support Razbam and ED. Maybe one day I‘ll decide to learn the Harrier a but more in depth, but I figured early on that the Apache will be way too complicated for me and I am not the greatest helo pilot anyway. Plus the concept of simulating a two-seat aircraft as a single person is one that scares me off of these modules. No doubt the AI is great and gets even better…it‘s just not my cup of tea. I know, there is nothing you cannot learn. But my aspiration is to fly and operate an aircraft and get really good at it (muscle memory being only one of the items) so that I can succeed in stressfull combat missions. For my little brain (and admittedly with the few flight hours per month that my RL allows me to log), that means no more than 2 complex aircraft at the same time. So Hog or Hornet. Or nothing

DCS:Afghanistan …. nice!!!

same here, Blade seems to hit something with his left wing as soon as he starts taxiing on deck. I tried it 3 times and it‘s always the same. His left wing emits smoke and the LEF is missing. He taxies to the CAT nevertheless but at the end of the cat stroke (i.e. at the bow) he explodes. No wingman on that mission. I noted that the OB changelog in fact mention that ground crew was moved to prevent Blade from running over them. It seems whatever that change was it made things much worse:( I‘ll have a look at the mission in the ME tonight to see if I can find what might cause the apparent collision of Blade‘s jet upon taxi.

Thanks Bunny Clark. I'll try to engage the F-5s while on takeoff next time...that way I have a fair chance... LOL. And then I hope I can deal with what will come thereafter.

Love this campaign but I need some advice for how to get through M11. I have no problem destroying the SA-6 radar, either the HARM does the job or the CBUs. But I have big trouble fighting the enemy fighters that party seem to pop up 5nm from me out of nowhere. The main problem really is that I cannot spot the enemies visually or at least not fast enough. Even though I get a spike on my RWR (and that replicated on the JHMCS which is a huge help generally) and try to start my visual scan from there, at this point they are usually already pointing their tiny noses in my direction (the F-5 that is) and I get heaters lobbed my way. I mean, I am absolutely conscious of the fact that I am really not the greatest dogfighter, but I usually get the stuff done after a couple of tries. But I can‘t progress from M11 onwards... Any ideas?

Thanks for the update and your continued support!

Awesome, I enjoy this campaign very much! What I love the most? -the rather realistic scenario -well built missions, immersive, challenging at times but very enjoyable -good briefing material -placement of SAMs at real-world locations -continued and tireless support including updates -voiceovers ...that‘s quite the pedigree for an outstanding DCS campaign! Thanks for your great work, Bunny Clark.

Again, many thanks. You are making valid points and I‘m sure I‘d love the map. I guess at this point it is more a „when“ rather than an „if“ I will purchase it-question. Even if it won‘t run too well on my Hornet in a demanding mission, I will take out the Gazelle and just enjoy the scenery in some low level hops.This business is so small that I am usually inclined to rather purchase modules/campaigns/terrains than not, even if it may not be a piece I expect to heavily employ. As long as I see a little bit of value or frankly fun in something or my learning curves become too flat with other modules I want to support the ED and the 3rd party devs. That is, of course, as far as my financial situation allows it. Editorial note: feel free to replace ‚financial situation‘ by ‚wife‘... Happy flying Ziptie! Cheers, Hog No32

Thanks Ziptie for your extensive response. Yes, I use a 2-monitor setup with a combined resolution of 3360x1440. I am sure VR would kill my rig...:-) Re the second point, I think I could have explained this better: What I want the carrier to be is as far AWAY from the shore as possible. I think that is more realistic and I do like longer missions. From what I could guesstimate based on screenshots of the current state of the map is that its western boundary is max 80-90nm from the Israeli/Lebanese/Syrian shore. I don’t think that a carrier group would want to be so close to Indian country and potentially within range of land-based anti-ship missiles. So I am looking forward to „more water“ in the west of the map to place the carrier there Cheers

Thanks LooseSeal for that input. I am as well on the verge of buying Syria but I hestitate mostly because of performance concerns. I have a really old rig (i7 870, 2.93GHz) which has seen only little upgrades over the years (16GB DDR3-1333, SSD and a Gainward GTX 680 with 2GB). It runs ok on PG, Caucasus and NTTR with modest settings. But I fear with all the eye-candy of the Syrian map it will be underperforming significantly... 2nd point for me is I will definitely wait until the expansion with Cyprus comes out. Not because of Cyprus itself but because it will allow me to place a Supercarrier at a more reasonable (i.e. realistic) distance from the shore. Since SC came out I rarely operate my Hornet out of land bases...

Totally unrealistic! I can confirm that in the REAL ME the icon doesn‘t look that way! Huge immersion breaker, akhope we‘ll get a hotfix soon... Lol, just kidding. And absolutely no offense, Tholozor. Everybody knows you are an outstanding contributor to our community for sure. And I’ve noticed the icon issue too and do appreciate if the team will fix this eventually.

I guess the answer is: Not at all. The (night) lighting is part of the scenery and cannot be switched on or off, neither generally nor locally on any given map. It is simply „controlled“ by the time of day. I like the idea though. It would be extremely cool if the city lighting could also be linked to the damage status of nearby power stations or even powerlines! My workaround: When I go on a big night strike I always imagine it to be night 1 of the conflict, Task Force Normandy did its job and the enemy doesn‘t expect me coming. Baghdad was still fully lit when the first 2000-pounders came down in January 1991

Actually the same behavior can be observed even WHEN using TrackIR :smilewink: When I have to look at an object that is exactly on my 9 o‘clock with TrackIR, I don‘t turn my head so much that I have the 9 o‘clock position in the center of my view because my eyes will already have moved to the left edge of the screen. The center of my FOV is probably at the 10 or 10.30. The same happens when I look inside for a switch deep down in the cockpit.

Ok, looked at RedKite‘s tutorial now again (...excellent as usual) and now I see what I got wrong: I had the HMD as SOI but the cue was apparentyl uncaged already. So it is that the CUE or CURSOR is off the HMD FOV, not the ground object. My misconception was basically crosshairs equals cursor, not understanding that these are two independent things... music_whistling: