Kazius

Nope, but they probably meant on full release, not just early access. I'm thinking they need to finish the Carrier and A-6 so they can be part of the campaigns. So my guess is no campaign until much later.

Approach outside of its wake on the left side of the tanker. Once you are in formation, lower altitude a bit and then move into refueling position. Think of the wake like a cone coming out from behind a jet. Closer you are, the start of that cone is small. The further you are the bigger the cone is and you will hit the turbulence in a larger area. Edit: Probably not the best example and as you can see I suck at 3D stuff plus no good software to do it. But hopefully this gives an idea. Also the hoses come down below the jets wake.

Game doesn't simulate things as randomly as it is in real life. You can have Thunderstorms without waters forcing a pitching deck. You can have high headwind without a pitching deck. You can have a pitching deck without high winds. I went Salmon fishing on the West side of Vancouver Island out of Uclulet Port and it was a calm day with sun. However, there had been a storm 2 days earlier and the waters were so bad the boat I was in was pitching upwards at times 45 degrees. Wasn't fun reeling in a 28 lb Salmon when the back of the boat is in a downward motion and feels like your going to get lifted off the boat. Point is, landing a jet on a pitching deck is what is hard, not the thunderstorm part unless you have fog / cloud layer at sea level.

Grim Reapers I think was the best for the Gazelle, was awhile ago that I learned the chopper. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZuXjkFY00p1ga3UyCBbR2w/playlists?view=50&sort=dd&shelf_id=5

I found that in the manual for the chopper which is located in the DCS install directory > Mods > Aircraft > SA342 > Doc folder. Page 130. "Pilot cyclic stick auto-hover button". So something to setup in your controls. One part of DCS is similar to real life. Read the manuals and do the ground work before getting into something. It's like going from a car built pre-LED screen era and buying one that has a touch screen section for setting everything in your new car up, read the manual. You can try to figure it out on your own but usually end up missing something important or never knowing something really cool exists such as seat settings that auto adjust by which key fob you unlocked the doors.

There are other modules in DCS where developers don't have full tutorials. What most people do is find YouTube tutorials. I learned the Gazelle pretty much using a combination of the module tutorials and YouTube videos. Also I think Polychop might currently be working on updates for the module. I think many of the 3rd Party developers are working on updating modules to take advantage of deferred shading. So definitely not abandoned. #6 of first post Dark Lighting issues will probably be fixed in future updates. edit: For #5. There are lots of player made missions in the user files section of the DCS site. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/?set_filter=Filter&arrFilter_pf%5Bfiletype%5D=1&arrFilter_pf%5Bgameversion%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5Bfilelang%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5Baircraft%5D=376&arrFilter_DATE_CREATE_1_DAYS_TO_BACK=&CREATED_BY=&sort_by_order=TIMESTAMP_X_DESC edit: For reason #8 in your first post. That falls on mission designers. And unfortunately there is no sniper unit that I have seen in game. But you can create missions in the mission editor where units walk to your helo at its LZ and disappear. They are pretend on board your helo. It can be scripted in to increase the weight of the helo by the weight of the troops you have loaded. And when you land in the target LZ that you are supposed to take them to, units appear and walk to where they need to go and your helo becomes lighter (I only know how to script it, might be an option in triggers right inside the ME for doing it too though). None of the choppers actually have a graphic for troops loaded on board either. So this is all helos in DCS.

It's fine, I created a work around so Voice Attack auto selects the ATC that the radio in the plane is tuned to so that I don't need to use select options. Also just did this for the F-14B. Plus added so I can just tell AIRIO to tune radio <airport name> and he will tune both radio and select the ATC at the same time to save steps.

P-51D is the easiest. I voted this one because it is pretty stable on takeoff / landing, has good trimming abilities, and can keep up with German warbirds in dogfights. Spitfire is amazing at handling, ok trim ability but it is slow. So if you are up against most German warbirds they will pull away every time you line up a shot making all your shots long range which means leading shots so far below the nose your always guessing. Haven't tested against the new A-8, guessing though it is a better matchup. German warbirds are the better challenge handling wise. You need to be good at rudder use. Can't remember fully, but I think it was the 109 that had wheels close together which makes it a bit unstable on takeoff and landing, so learning to TO / Land the other warbirds first would be less frustrating. edit: I should have looked before posting. The original post was from 2017 lol.

I recently purchased the C-101 and noticed that even after I changed frequencies VAICOM would still request landing at Kutaisi even though I was tuned to Kobuleti and saying the wording right. Even in VAICOM it was showing up as Kobuleti, yet in game it was still requesting Kutaisi. What am I missing? It says ATC recipent does not match currently selected unit Kutaisi. Use Select command. Thought select command was F-14 AIRIO stuff. Video and image below: https://youtu.be/0sghyAbFFCw

A good mission designer can build a mission that will make doing strikes using JSOW difficult. Wars are not fought with 100% recon knowledge. There will be hidden units blue side won't know about. Many of these could be SA-10, SA-11, etc that don't activate until a unit is actually within a terminal range. To make it worse you could have them activate when red air engage in air to air defense of there airspace. Not knowing where these SAMs are located means no PB/PP strikes against them. Use other SAMs deeper into red territory which are more permanent IADS (protecting city government buildings, interior airfields, etc) to lure in blue forces as they are IADS that don't get moved and blue has likely found them with recon planes, drones, satellites, etc. After blue retreats these left over (ones that don't get destroyed by opportunity shots) mobile SAMs that were hidden might move to new hiding places to ambush again in the future. You see where this is going. Basically to make a good mission you need to think big (game of chess). I made script that turns radars of SAMs on and off using detection of other units. It was very effective and hard to defeat without ED putting in a proper jamming model. If you do this then JSOWs are no longer OP. Basically it will fall on mission designers to build something challenging yet not impossible. Also look at costs of weapons like these and build budgets. Perhaps JSOWs are not available until initial SEAD/DEAD type missions are done because you can't afford to use to many in the opening parts of war. Maybe they need to be saved for important bunkers, depots, etc deeper into enemy territory. Wiki estimates the cost of the C model at nearly $720,000. Hard to investigate how many of these were used in recent wars. But I'm thinking even the US with there massive military budget probably uses them wisely. If I didn't have university courses I would design a mission that uses a point / budget system where each side gets points to use towards there budgets. They could buy supplies using points and JSOWs would be quite costly.

Why would you copy? Just program station 8 PP1 for 1st target, program station 2 PP1 for 2nd target, station 7 PP1 for 3rd target, station 3 PP1 for 4th target. If your using racks and 8 JSOW, then program station 8 PP2 for 5th target, station 2 PP2 for 6th, etc. Then when you reach launch zone you, pickle, pickle, pickle, pickle, OSB PP2, pickle, OSB PP2, pickle, OSB PP2, pickle, OSB PP2, pickle. 8 JSOW away, go home and have a beer.

-= For PP mode =- Step 1: First Station (8?) for PP1 enter coordinates and elevation for target 1. Step 2: Press Step to go to next station Step 3: Enter coordinates for PP1 enter coordinates and elevation for target 2. ( Yes each station is separate now ). Repeat step 2 and 3 until PP1 is programmed for all 4 stations. Then repeat Step 2 and 3 for PP2 if your using double racks. Step 4: Make sure to set all stations to PP1 before launch time if you need say target 1 to be hit before target 2, etc. For launching time: Just pickle first 4 JSOWs, then when it cycles back to station 8, make sure to press OSB for PP2, then pickle, it will auto cycle again to next station so press OSB for PP2 again and pickle, repeat till all JSOWs are off the rails. Attached are images of my 8 JSOWs each with a different target. All 8 hit, 1 hit the wrong oil tank but it was either me goofing on easting coord or it was low on glide slope as the target was the tank opposite side of the center that I hit with another JSOW. Realistically though with those being oil drums 1 or 2 JSOWs would probably should have decimated all 9 oil drums. And Wags has a video on how to enter coordinates in his F-18C Mini Updates thread.

I don't like the idea of a community wanting so much communication that the developers don't have time to do development. Even if Wags or Nineline are not coders it would require them to constantly harass there coders to get updates so they can pass it on to the community. If I was a coder for ED I would probably want to find a job with another company that just lets me do my job. Point is, just let them do there job. The updates and additions will come when they come. Getting upset because it didn't get out when they hoped it would doesn't help us. This type of thing can happen with all companies, so also don't blame ED staff for giving approximate dates. So thank you to the ED team for doing what you can. I know you guys are working hard to create something special and that is what really counts.

I'm very late to this but want to say. To simulate real consequences of a plane being over G'd you'd have to make a module unusable in the game for the same duration it would take a team of mechanics to tear apart and go over the air frame / engines / electronics to make sure nothing is bent / broken / cracked. An alternative to making the G-Limit override more realistic is to not use it unless your avoiding ground collision, air to air collision. And then if you did use it and after going back to base in a multiplayer mission you log out and call it a day because your aircraft is down for inspection :) Sometimes we have to create our own realism.

I reported this initially in the F-18C Lot 20 forum when I thought it was an F-18C only issue. I later found out it happened on the M-2000C as well and asked for the post to be moved here but nobody moved it. However, they did mark the posting as [Reported]. I have also discovered it was only the center tank not getting refueled as I later had two bags on wings and noticed those were getting filled up.

So I just purchase this campaign a few days ago and experience bad fuel usage issues. Mission 1: I was flying 10,000 feet at 2600 rpm and AI report low fuel just when I turned east at Argentan. I restarted the mission and after reaching 10,000 ft I reduced to 2200 rpm and AI reported low fuel half way between Argentan and Flers. So it didn't seem to save as much as I hoped. My initial orbit at Sainte-Croix while waiting for all of the planes to take off was at 2400 rpm in a right hand 20-30 degree orbit and 100-150 feet per minute climb. When I started heading east I turned up the rpm to 2600 until I reached 10,000 feet which is where I reduced rpm to save fuel. Mission 2: I took off and similar to mission 1 I did a right hand orbit (hoping the inside for others in flight would fly slower and save fuel). Again I climbed to 8,000 feet at only 2400 rpm waiting for the time to red smoke message. Once at 8,000 feet I again reduced rpm to 2200. As soon as I went to engage the AI while doing there attacks report low fuel already. Is this normal? Is there something else I can do to save fuel better? I myself when checking the needle am at full fuel even when I tell them to RTB. edit: nevermind this post, I did some testing with fuel reporting script and I can use that to practice taking off, gaining altitude and finding ways to help the AI save fuel. I think the AI go full power if in a climb, so a slow climb for me might not help them save fuel. I will have play around and figure it out. I know from testing AI doesn't burn fuel in a straight line while in level steady flight and formation, so it is just finding a way to get to altitude fast enough so I can level off which is when they will reduce rpm. edit 2: after toying around I noticed that if you do the optimal 2650 rpm, 7lb/in^2 climb to 10,000 at whatever angle allowed me to maintain 185 mph, and then level out and reduce speed it seems to help a lot. So best to just get to altitude and level off rather than slow climb. I replayed mission 1 and managed to take out 4 supply trucks near flers and then after the attack my wingman reported low fuel so we went back to base but they ran out of fuel climbing back up to 10,000 to cross the front line, where I still had plenty to make it to the airbase. So seem they still burn crazy amounts attacking, even though it only lasted 2-3 minutes. When testing I did notice during a flight from Senaki to Tblisi once leveled I was almost even +/- 1%, when I told them to RTB and land at Tblisi they were 6-7% lower than I was even though it was even though it was a 100% straight flight without any direction turns greater than a couple % to fix heading and no altitude changing, pure 10,000 ft flight heading 98 degrees all the way there. So AI does seem to burn a tad bit more but maybe it could be down to throttle usage. I kinda used mine after trimming to get the sweet spot since rudder trimming doesn't get you perfect but a bit of throttle can make slightest of adjustments which gets you hands off.

One of the issues was TX channels were not working and you asked if I had NS430 installed and if so I had to disable it to get VAICOM to work. I don't see why you can't make VAICOM work without having to disable other modules. Anyways, you still didn't answer why there is a huge delay in comms requests. edit: I already did page 10 when I first bought VAICOM. Nothing there explains why there is a delay in comms requests.

I don't care if a person has an RTX 2080 Ti and use a 60Hz monitor and vsync. They will still 100% utilize that GPU. The game is currently ahead of hardware specifications. Top that off, for each map they add they often add more structures and possibly more detail to those structures. On top of that new aircraft coming out get increased polygon counts. DCS developers will likely be pushing the boundary of video cards on a constant basis. Your running 4k so your card has to calculate 2x as many pixels as normal 1080p. And if your not using vsync on a low hertz TV then your card is just going to produce as many frames each second as it possibly can whether or not some get skipped.

After the last few updates Vaicom sorta works but I give a command and it can take up to 15 seconds for it to do what I ask in game. For example: - I asked the AI to cover me on a dogfight. (I wait a few seconds) - I try engage bandit (and suddenly the radio requests AI to cover) - I'm satisfied he will cover and then 15 seconds later my later command finally goes through to engage and he confirms. Another example: - After the enemy was shot down I RTB. I fly over the base and tell the AI to RTB. No response. - I turn for final and suddenly the command finally goes through and the wingman is going to RTB but it takes like a minute this time. What could be causing the hugely lagged responses. I've never had VAICOM work as you have shown in videos. There always seems to be one issue or another. Either incompatible with other modules or works one day but not the next. If there is no way to get this program stable as advertised will you refund my money?

It isn't the explosion itself so much as the lack of lingering dust / smoke after. It should take minutes for dust / smoke to clear unless it is really windy. If you watch various youtube videos where ground troops are recording a strike (not sure if they are really supposed to be doing that) you will see the smoke / dust lingers for what seems like minutes. In DCS it is as if you can see clearly the target point (smoke or crater) only 5 to 10 seconds after the explosion.

More realistic explosions, both visually and effectively. I dropped 2 GBU-31's on some oil drums as seen below and you would think the explosions would rip the oil drums on each side to pieces. It is as if there is no real difference between a 500lb, 1000lb and 2000lb bomb in the game. Also the visual effects during the explosion and after seem rather dull. As seen in this youtube video, the dust thrown up in the air stays for quite some time. In game it disappears in seconds.

Ok, I was just thinking this is a good idea and seems people have been requesting it for 3 years now. This would be a great idea especially now that we have JDAMs that can use coordinate entries. I know we can make our own images and insert them into missions, but this is something that really should be implemented into the mission editor. So +1 from me.

+1

Oh I see, thanks Boomer. What I was speaking into the mic was, "Select ATC Stennis, or Select TAC Magic". I didn't know I had to leave out the ATC or TAC. Good to know. ok, so I tried saying, "Select Stennis" and nothing, I tried saying, "Select Magic" and nothing (yes my AWACs is Magic). Also, I did have Voice Attack / VAICOM crashed multiple times today when I was trying to PTT commands. Also after restarting Voice Attack after crashes it became stable but glitchy with the jester wheel briefly popping up for a split second as well as menu's popping up for split seconds. So there could be something the DCS patch broke in VAICOM

Oh I see, thanks Boomer. What I was speaking into the mic was, "Select ATC Stennis, or Select TAC Magic". I didn't know I had to leave out the ATC or TAC. Good to know.