Retnek

14 month ... maybe. As a rude work-around it's not completely wrong to set up a blue SA-5-site and limit it's range accordingly. @Pikey two rich but somewhat strangely organised sources for the Eastern German air-defence sites: https://peters-ada.de/nva.htm https://www.nva-futt.de/

The F-5E for the AI seems to have much larger dimensions (her aura, naturally) - please check the track. Parked near a taxiway the F-5E blocks a Tornado. Park a F-14 at that position and the Tornado passes without a problem. Awake from "uncontrolled" the blocking F-5E moves, opening the taxiway for the Tornado. The same F-5E feels blocked by the F-16 parked in another slot near the taxiway. That very F-16 was passed by the Tornado moments before. Looks like the dimensions the F-5E uses and presents for path-tracking are quite a bit too large. (btw: the airfield- and taxiway-logic of the Kallax-airfield seems to be bugged, too. But one by one.) F5E-too-large.trk

Kann mich CarloVecchi nur anschliessen. Die VSN F-4 hat alles: nicht so kompliziert und nicht so teuer. Verglichen zur Heatblur-F-4 fliegt sie sich durchaus wie eine F-4. (Bei Gelegenheit die F-104G aus dem Hause VSN anschauen, auf jeden Fall die Zeit wert.)

There's a problem setting the "set M1 code" and "set M3 code" counters via the keyboard. Clicking them up and down via the mouse is fine and need 8 clicks for each passage. Setting a key-combo "rshift + rwin + x" for the action "IFF Mode 3 Code Digit 1 - [Next]" f.e. results in a wrong stepping - it's just 7 klicks from "zero" to "zero" again. It's ok for "... [CCW]" and "...[CW]", but via keyboard the "...[Next]"-actions miss one step for the the two M1- and four M3-mode-dialers.

Looks like a misunderstanding ... I read "promises" not in a sense of "legal obligation" describing a case of "consumer protection". It's a weaker expression and more demanding at the same time. A niche-product like DCS needs a solid long-term business model - that very much depends on the trust of the customers ED will fulfil promises. Selling a product in "Early Access" firmly includes the promise I can use it with reference to reality and history - one fine day! For me that day generally is late after a year, maybe two with good reasons. I feel no need to accuse ED in a legal case because of a broken promise. Without satisfied promises my trust simply will vanish. Together with my will to learn new modules, try new maps, fly new campaigns. It's not about money or some legal stuff. It's about the will to invest my precious spare-time to master a complex simulation. Years of waiting for unfinished features and no fixes for obvious bugs in the core-module etc. - that's broken promises to me. I'd gladly spend some money to help out of the vicious circle of pumping out unfinished Early Access modules to acquire some cash. ED, please offer some "core customers programs" like - a solid reorganisation of all the dropping ordnance in DCS including fuses, a proper documentation and access for developers and modders - same for guided AA-missiles, AG-missiles etc pp - an ATC where C is not for "confusion" - some progress in ECM including features given in the "Electronic War Jamming Script V2.0", f.e. - a reliable concept how to model piston-engines I'm not into the details and there's no need to. ED, please offer some programs as given above. Name some features of a long-lasting shortage in the core module to be enhanced or even solved by that program. And name a price, finally. Feel free to offer it as a monthly subscription for a fixed period, a 20 €-invest or simply ask for donations. I won't care if you accomplish the promise with your own staff, third-party-developers or by contracting a crew of talented customers from the forums. Deliver the promised features just in time. And there will be plenty of trust.

You're right, it might be intended as an act of anticipation by Jester. I would feel an urgent need to eject him after: Driver, I heard you, but first you have to order me "switch frequency mode back to preset"! Tthat's a question of "service-design" for Heatblur. If Jester strictly has to follow orders a reply "can't do" would be nice in case of "choose UHF channel 1". As it is implemented for some other situations. I'd prefer a more cooperative buddy. I'm fine with "Likewise entering a manual frequency might include him going to Manual." As long as he still switches to manual when ordered, too. Our use-case is to dial in an extra frequency at Jesters place during pre-flight preparations. Quick and easy to use in-flight with two clicks - 1) "switch radio control to Jester" and 2) "Jester, switch to manual mode". Anyhow - thx for checking!

Please set (key-combo just examples most probably not use) a) Jester Command: UHF Radio > Freqency Mode > Preset (keyboard=) RShift + RWin + M b) Jester Command: UHF Radio > Channel > Comm > 1 (keyboard=) RCtrl + RWin + 1 c) Jester Command: UHF Radio > Freqency Mode > Manual (keyboard=) RCtrl + RWin + M Do all klicks below from pilots seat with "Toogle Radio Command" = green light off = radio settings under WSO-control klick a) radio at WSO-place is set to "Freqency Mode = Preset" = OK klick c) radio at WSO-place is NOT set to "Freqency Mode = Manual" = BUG klick b) if radio at WSO-place was set to "Freqency Mode = Manual" it will be set into "Freqency Mode = Preset" and "Channel =1". So that overrides the "Manual"-position of the switch and chooses "Preset". But switch at WSO should remain "Manual" until Pilot sets it to "Preset" first = BUG

Thanks for pointing on those mods. I know & use them, but both are a stop-gap solutions 1) it's a mod of core-files and will fail at servers with strict script-enforcement. Not a big problem right now, but ... A modification by the gamma-table alone gets rid of that GREEN. I gladly pay that price on Normandy 2, but it still results in a somewhat strange colour composition. Anyhow, it's my day-by-day option and I'm glad we have it. 2) Barteks Vivid Normandy changed the gamma and according to that a lot of textures. Sadly a core-mod, too, with a much more convincing result imho. Sadly modified textures are excluded on many / most servers. So only single-player only for this mod at the moment. First choice when playing solo-campaigns. But only thanks to fine add-ons by Morpheus Bartek's mod remained usable after the last map-update. Now another change is coming up - good news and very welcome. Now again Bartek and / or Morpheus have to cure that GREEN ... I prefer a permanent solution by Ugra. Looking at that GREEN while developing must hurt them, too.

Thanks for the update, really! But could you please use the chance to naturalise that striking GREEN of the Normandy-map? This flashy 150%-spring neon-green imho kills immersion.

Thanks for the TER-racks and the weapons to realize cold-war Luftwaffe-sorties. Could you please enhance the "F-4F-options" with the SAMP-250KG-high-drag-bombs? Looking for sources (or traces) of the Luftwaffe's-use of Matra-250-kg-bombs one regularly stumbles over the retarded model. From the mid-1970s on Fiat-G91 or F-104G until recent Tornado-sorties. Corresponding threads in scale-model-builders forums, former Luftwaffe-groud-crew reporting and so on - it's the retarded model of the Matra-250-kg-bomb. That model fits best to the BL755, too - specially developed to be dropped as low as possible. (Yes, those balloon-retarded Mk-82 might fit to the job, too. Somehow ... but it's not the same! Not really ... if there's a little time, please)

Here's a small group of haters blowing up up their personal disfavour about a 3D-models presentation. Over month now there's nothing new- just the repetitive pointing on unbelievable disappointing cosmetics. Others told them they're fine with that level of aesthetics. Positions exchanged about a topic of minor importance. Polychop took notice of the displeasure, they will react according to their priorities. That's it, usually. But some guys here feel the need to cultivate an obsession. Seen them starting a comparable flame-war against EA because of the outdated and dishonourable impression of the Huey? THE iconic helo-warbird - it's graphics are imperfect, too! How they endure the worst offence against quality-standards in simulator-business ever? This thread just feeds some trolls who campaign against Polychop over many weeks now.

Nothing new since 5th of June and still on his crusade for the cosmetics, really? At least he made some friends on that journey, too. If the notorious moaners here spent the same time flying the Kiowa than whining in the forums they'll be well below 50 Cent per hour of flight-time. Extremely low operational costs for such an incredibly complex module, right? Polychop, even the most pig-headed critics from time to time point on errors worth your time. Try to see it that way, please. "Son, what's wrong with your present? You got the model-railway you asked for - a platinum-beginners set! Big locomotive, 20 waggons, 30 m of tracks, 10 switches and a dozen buildings - so what?" - "The locomotive is blue, NOT RED!"

Gunny - tanks ahead! Confirmed, Frau Oberleutnant! Six missiles - six kills, right? Absolutely, Frau Oberleutnant! Less then six kills ... means I catch up by foot, Frau Oberleutnant! Good Gunny! (she comes across a bit strict, but brought me home any time) Very well done - never without her, I promise!

"deceiving" because of 3D-cosmetics and textures? Your "critics" lack arguments. Polychop, just go on, please. If the functions and procedures of the Kiowa have been completed, polished and updated twice, you might consider some face-lifting, too.

LOS of sight was given, went in from 20 km out until the downed pilots popped the smoke. No joy with NDB. Interestingly Ciribob in his CSAR-script excluded the fixed freq. (Just pointing on it, I'm a lua-moron) https://github.com/ciribob/DCS-CSAR/blob/master/CSAR.lua (line 1950 ff) Maybe worth another thread, just a draft: why not using SAR-radio analogue to smoke or flares? That's how it worked in real, too. Most of the non-satellite SAR-radios used high VHF (243 Mhz). In contrast to the MF-beacons we use in the CSAR-script now a freq. of 243 Mhz really depends on LOS. Beacon-mode usually was switched on by downed pilots after voice-contact. Just for the final approach of the SAR-aircraft. (for radios see https://www.greenradio.de/sar.htm) So it might be worth to re-design and simplify the CSAR-script for the aspect of radio-handling? Just one freq., it's beacon-mode activated after radio-contact (via F10?) by SAR-aircraft nearby (20 nm or so)? A few years ago I've done some test-missions with the UH-1 and the Mi-8. Both were able to come along with 4 active beacons sending nearby simultaneously. Usually the nearest source was strongest and displayed on the instrument. Would need some further testing now, true. But on the long run it might make life easier. Homing on a VHF-frequency at 243 MHz would limit the CSAR-helos to UH-1 and Mi-8 (Hind maybe?). And it might "spam" all the aircraft-radios listing to that emergency-freq. by default, too. Would be easy to avoid that kind of trouble choosing 222 MHz or even a frequency in the range of the MF-NDB, 666 kHz f.e. 24.06.11 add-on: thx @cfrag for some interesting hours with radio-stuff! 243 MHz is no way to go, no range limitation, would spam radios all over the map. Using the NDB-range offers more chances for mission building - checking Caucasus-map 666 kHz has fixed NDBs nearby. But 777 kHz has no neighbours for +/- 35 kHz. With the Mosquito one needs at least 20 kHz spacing for the radio to separate two NDB somewhat solid. That should do.