fargo007

Current behavior creates a Control measure in the Apache TSD, and a point in the KA-50 ABRIS for every unit, and static on the map, even if late activated. This fills up the available entries with eight pages of garbage and prevents new points from being entered unless others are first deleted. Either make Hidden on MFD/Hidden on Planner default to checked, or offer a global override setting that permits all to be hidden on MFD and Planner. Mission designers would never want every static and every unit from every coalition populated into the aircraft's systems this way. The default behavior should follow what people are doing nearly 100% of the time, and right now that is reversed.

Right now, the default behavior is that every unit and static on the map gets represented as a control point in the AH-64D or as a point in the Ka-50's ABRIS. Statics, Units, and even late-activated units. From any coalition. Since it's obvious that almost no mission designer would ever intend every single asset to be treated this way, has anyone requested yet to: 1- Add a checkbox/feature be added to the ME that would check these options at large for all assets. 2 - Alternatively, pre-check "Hidden on MFD" and "Hidden on Planner" such that they are hidden by default. I've searched around and haven't seen this as a request yet, but this would be huge. I know it affects the Black Shark as well as the Apache, and likely others too.

What Coalition? It needs to be in the blue coalition.

Yep, they don't fire and are not indicated on the F10 map on Caucasus. They are not floating though. Bizarre.... @currenthill dcs.log sent in pm, thank you!

Can someone else check please? I've reinstalled it and same behavior.

Hope this helps with testing but I tried out the RBS 58 guy, and they are neither showing up on the F10 map nor firing. Sometimes going "airborne."

I actually prefer a separate structure, as I can pick and choose which ones our squadron wants to have.

Very much looking forward to this. They are looking awesome.

2022-10-03 18:19:29.235 ERROR NET: Failed to decode network.vault: either hardware ID or OS username are different. Saved login data will be reset. We get this error on our Azure hosted dedicated server whenever the server is started and used. It's only fired up for missions and testing, so it's not kept running all the time. The effect is that saved username/password and auto-login do not work, and a manual login must be conducted each time. Just wondering if anyone has found a way around it. Thanks y'all!

Will do. It doesn't seem to be reproducing since the last update anyhow.

This seems repeatable. Second occurrence in a row, and doesn't happen with default IFF settings. Track: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pE0PYq6h8TkuA_TFq2ecxkHPZrPCPk8x/view?usp=sharing

Squadrons that are driven by the sort of realistic SOP's and milsim environments you are looking for are going to be overwhelmingly organized as IRL squardons would. So your top three choices there are going to put you into three different squadrons (Air Force, Navy, Army). And you will be expected to "pick a horse and ride it." Even in a carrier wing based squadron, flying the F/A-18 today, and the tomcat tomorrow in missions is not going to be a thing you can do at the level of organization, and with the more serious approach you are asking about. You may be better off just picking a single airframe, committing to it, and letting that guide your choices of squadrons.

Yes, that's interesting, thank you!

Maybe I'm an outlier here but I prefer the pop up. Easier to see, doesn't replace anything else, and can be used in both pilot/operator roles.

By way of solving the problem, the way I would like to see this work is on an aircraft, or even mission level would be very simple: Have a check box (empty by default) that says "Auto Populate threat rings and Control Measures?" If checked, it occurs. If unchecked, it does not.

Wasn't there some kind of REDFOR squadron around that flew MiG-21's?

I'm seeing a couple times where Petrovich successfully engages a target (free fire mode) and then when a second target is found and selected, he says that he's engaging but never actually fires. Manually giving him fire auth and/or cycling hold/free has no effect. Anyone else encountering that?

I agree, the hard banking while the doors are open and the system is on is what apparently caused it.

Hmm... Not my experience at all. I would say it's actually one of the most forgiving helicopters in DCS. You probably need to work on setting up some curves/saturations/etc.

I'm curious to know if there are any Mi-24 specific squadrons out there. If anyone is aware of one, LMK. /Fargo

This could be accurate to a certain extent. Alliances can and do change over time. Iran for instance has/had F-14's, AH-1 Cobras, Phantoms, F5's, Huey, Chinook, CH-53, etc. http://www.combataircraft.com/en/Military-Aircraft/Iran/ And there is no shortage of Western countries operating Eastern bloc aircraft either.

When a person argues against something that wasn't actually asserted instead of what was, that is called a 'straw man' fallacy.

What part of "not for sale unless the US Government says we can" isn't making sense for you? You don't get the flight manual until they say. I know math is hard, but making a few thousand by licensing the aircraft to a software company isn't an ROI if you're losing the sale of a single airframe, or having the biggest contract of your life (the US Government is one the customer everyone dreams of) stalled. I didn't say "In active service." I said "in active US service." I hope that clears up the mess your straw man made. LOL - This isn't Harry Potter. There are no such things as 'Ministries' involved. Boeing, Lockheed and Bell don't 'think about' something like this as much as they get authorization. Starting with the release of the flight manual. The US Government determines who these companies can sell their aircraft to, and who they can't. To suggest that they play no practical role in who these companies provide detailed technical information to is asinine. They've also determined you can see the AH-1W manual. Which is why I said this would be the latest model we'd get. They haven't said if or when you can have the AH-1Z flight manual. It happens to be in active US service and doesn't appear to be retiring anytime soon. It's funny how it works out that you just don't see the FM until that happens.

Try and set their alert state to green.

You're right, those are the ultimate criteria. But an aircraft manufacturer who is actively selling a military aircraft to the biggest and wealthiest customer in the world will be highly unlikely to agree to anything that pisses that customer off, or in the slightest way jeopardize the billions that are flowing in from them. Especially with no expectation of financial gain.