Shrike88

Greetings. Noticing last night 11-15-18 That when adding trains, (loco + cars) to the mission editor as objects, Only the host can see the vehicles. All of the connected clients are unable to see the Trains. As clients you can see the smoke from damage to the Trains, however object is still invisible. Only the Host can see. See this has been posted a year ago however no comment or insight. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=195176&highlight=invisible+trains This bug is easily recreated by just hosting mission with a placed train and subsequent cars, as any client is unable to see the train. Reminds me of the bug earlier this year where certain types of the static objects placed in the mission editor only the host could see. Clients were unable to view these objects. Thanks Shrike Attached is TRK is too large to upload. EDIT: Fixed wrong weblink for other forum posts: similar topic still not addressed by ED

+1 was going to submit a report. Thanks. If bindable on Analog Axis would be nice

Sweet, look forward to your video on the AV in 2020. Lol

I wouldn't doubt it to keep with the trend. Not sure why anything would change. If judging from the last videos, will be filler or some new module. Another large portion on the Farmer and it will start pre-sale for Xmas. Then 30seconds on the Harrier and a changelog from a month ago.

Excellent thanks for sharing

LOL +1

God I hope not. If you browse around the TAC000 manual on the TPOD and all the features available, are are scratching the surface only and missing out on lots of features / menu settings and options. POD was released in December 2017. Maybe 12 months and after the Mig 19 is released will be long enough to get the remaining features. Who knows....

Get used to it. Tpod point track on cold starts used to work. Broken at the beginning of the year and still hasn't been addressed.

So from what I gather and testing is the CMBT switch / mode is not implemented correctly or not functional besides just the green light on the switch ? Tested also and no relative difference on JPT max 715 nor flashing after 2.5 minutes. Anyone else confirm this?

Thanks does this kill IC?

TOO, as well as the Markpoint / creation have both worked for sometime. Markpoint at least since June when the Waypoint creation was implemented, as with most other systems are buggy. Creation of a Markpoint for as long as I remeber was the workaround for creating when given no warpoints in the ME. As with our version also TOO functionality now is limited as the Target point system is not modeled ask we are unable to store TGT points. Assuming now TOO just works same as the Mk point until its modeled correctly. Same with Reattack as diamond and EHSD reference circle has been there. Not sure if it works correctly as per the manual.

Didn't you see what prowler stated? Harrier is going to be finished in December! Much jubilation

Greetings. Had a complete loss of electrical power on a server last night. Both engines running was able to start the APU. However was unable to Emergency extend the Landing gear. Is this implimented without electral/Hydraulic system failure. I read the NATOPS and stated that Emergency Manual Gear extension is available using APU Accumulator pressure, as well as residual HYD pressure from refueling probe emergency extension and using maneuvering to load and force the gear down. Is the HYD accumulator coded into the systems ? obvously we can start the APU, however wondering if anyone has tried this with complete ELEC systems /HYD loss airborne with two engines running. I can upload the track however not sure how to share such a large file size as I have not uploaded .trk before Thanks

yes agree Eldur, The point of the OP was to impliment something dynamically similar to the numbering system. You can see there are templates with bitmaps for the numbers 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 in them and you can enter any number on the side of your aircraft. This is in turn seen by anyone in the multiplayer server. No need for a similar livery. I was thinking in terms of having the Letters A,B,C,.......... so you could just type in the names and they show up on the aircraft similar to the numerical system.

OK well you missed my entire question. I was wondering if we are going to be able to Change the pilot names below the canopy, like we can currently change the aircrsft number in game. That is my question.

Greetings ! Thanks again for the reveal trailer guys, Question for you @Cobra847 With the advent of the F-14 and the already ingame ability to change livery and the tail numbers of the aircraft that can been seen by all in the multiplayer enviornment Have you considered the same ingame arming screen to change the Pilot names for the side of the aircraft, and that they are dynamic and can be seen in game the same as the Tail numbers ? This would be a really cool feature, probably the same principal as AC numbering. Thanks again for all your work guys ! cant wait.

Excellent thanks!

Yes a comparison however completely different. Length of time the hornet has been out vs the Harrier speaks volumes, as does the vast difference in communications and apparent attempts to fix what is not working. The DMT Axis glitch, not to mention say..... The WCP interval spacing for another easy example has not been working correctly since the beginning of this year. The Bugs radar has been already through its 4th update and still is getting attention and being perfected. Not to mention I am positive that coding the DMT binding to not stagnate on slew /Jump to VV or Interval spacing for the WCP is not even close to the amount of code needed for all of the features for the F18. The best part of all is the recent Facebook post from Zeus showing '' lots of coding being done'' and the picture is littered of everything Mig. Nothing regarding the harrier. RB has no more emotional capital in this module. The evidence is stacking up.

Not to sure. Seeming how I have 0 actual time in type. Good buddy VMFA-211 compared it to balancing a marble on the head of a needle. So who knows

Apparently it is. Kind of like timely Change-logs lol

There are still lots of basic * features that are still not added. I hope this one gets addressed.

Any chance this could be overlayed or used with the SU-25T ?

Greetings. The way I understood the use of HTS mode on the Targeting POD was it runs interdependently from the DMT and bombing system when in HTS mode, However when in TDC/DMT mode it slaves the onboard INS and ARBS/DMT to the pod. I am noticing that Now in HTS mode it still slaves the DMT around when moving the pod regardless of switching separate and not slaving. Does anyone notice this in HTS mode and I am assuming its a bug. Will report on bug forum. I believe when using HTS we should not be getting bomb fall lines and ccrp information data on the HUD, nor target waypoint information from the INS in the EHSD map. EDIT: I think this is correct reading further and speaking with a Harrier pilot. I think I am misunderstanding the system I thought there was a way to slew around and look with the TPOD without the Dual mode tracker / bombing and ins system being slaved to the TPOD. For example having a target waypoint and ABRS/DMT looking at one target A, while indipendantly moving the TPOD around without loosing DMT lock on Target A

+1

Fancy new RWR dial that is working isn't even modeled in the bindings settings under Analog Axis... Sad