PickleMonster

Hmmmm, not sure it's fair to charge for an app which borrows heavily on the original DCS Export scripts whilst preventing thier use. You should at least update the store with this information.

Any chance that MFD export will be in the KW module as standard? I keep having to update my Gazelle's LUA files after each update to export the RWR and TV.

Kiowa pilots CasmoTV and Barundus discussing the DCS OH-58D and the general history of the real world OH-58. Over an hour long and very information dense. I'm really loving the format of these videos.

CTylers Streamdeck plugin thread here is: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=269642 And the direct link to his github is: https://github.com/charlestytler/streamdeck-dcs-interface It uses the same exportscripts that you improved on for your own export scripts.

This is an amazing app. The only issue, and it's not the app itself, is that I use ctylers streamdeck plugin and ikarus which both rely on DCS ExportScripts which you've based your own export scripts on. Unfortunately I can only get one or the other to export at the same time (it'll export to the one that's later in the export.lua file). Any idea's on how to get both export scripts to work at the same time? Or if it's even possible to get ctylers plugin to pull data from your own export script?

As Pochi alluded to. The 476th NTTR training template is a bit of a chugger in general. It needs trimming down to what you really need.

Ravenzino. It's absolutely nothing to do with ED and your analogy is terrible. To fit it into your framework, it's like your smoke detector going off when it detects pollen in the air. That's on the smoke detector manufacturer, not your florist.

"Escalation of force" doesn't exist in DCS though. And DCS doesn't really support FPS style weapons employment either. Have you tried door gunnery? it's pretty unintuitive. Polychop could certainly have a crack at implementing this, but due to the limitations of DCS, it would look janky. And that's development hours that could be going elsewhere. Even if it was implemented, how many of us would use it beyond a couple of test runs?

It was DCS that got fixed. I'm seeing vast improvements to lighting in several aircraft. It stands out most for light sources like warning lamps and I spotted it on the Hornets gear handle first.

I've been mulling over why DCS is limited to circle trigger zones and how they could add a lot more information to players if they were enhanced. Make Trigger zones full polygons. Allow the mission creator to map out a city or country as a trigger zone. Add lua flags for the zones which allows them to be visible to players. Allow mission editors to change the colour, fill (solid, striped etc...), border, opacity, and a title for the area. Allow all this to be changed via script. You've now given mission editors a massive new tool to show mission progression. Map out air corridors and no-fly zones. Show where your AWACS and Tankers are active. Make F10 look like a proper mission briefing map. Go one step further. We already export flightplans to kneeboard, allow it to be exported to the kneeboard. Another thing we could improve is markers. At the moment it's a red circle with some text if you click on it. Allow mission makers to choose an icon and colour. Instead of swapping between just the icon and the full text, add a third option for a title. Make's things a lot more readable. This would make things so much better from a players perspective. Mission editors would be able to give meaningful information to players instead of a handful of red circles which could be anything. Players now also have a much better tool for sharing intelligence in MP. Even better, allow players to "pin" a marker. Make pin's visible to the scripting system, pinned missions denote who's picked up a mission anyone? The notes attached to a marker are changable from the scripting engine? Add pinned players to the bottom of it. Export pinned markers to the kneeboard.

Oh give it a rest.

We'll be having people quit from DCS when it's released and it's not as feature complete as per their expectations too. Sorta like a Shroedingers Module, where's it's released too soon and too late.

It's actually in IF/ELSE statement in the monitor profile LUA file. I've found it at https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/1411604/ In Home Fries monitor export examples it checks which aircraft you're in. It adjusts the layout of the LEFT_MFD and RIGHT_MFD's so they don't end up squashed into a square setup common with all the other aircrafts MFD layouts.

EDIT: Ignore this... It's started working all of a sudden :| I've been tinkering with a multi-monitor with MFD export setup and run across an issue with designating with the HMS. I have the game on one monitor and my MFD exports on another. When designating with the HMS it doesn't point the shkval at the designated point, instead it points to somewhere below my nose. Feels like HMS designation takes it's reference from the overall screen resolution rather than the viewports.

I recently started tinkering with Multi-Monitor setups and noticed that the usual ABRIS/Shkval stuff just isn't working anymore. They are working for Left_MFCD and Right_MFCD though. I suspect they're just not exporting under those identifiers anymore. I suppose you can dig out the lua's for those devices and change the export name. But it looks like the better way of doing it adding an if/else block to set MFD dimensions by airframe type. Someone has done this for DCS on these forums with some example code, however I'm struggling to find it again.

Your nozzles are not at 0.

If it's the MiG-21 exporting erroneous engine data, wouldn't that make it a MiG-21 module issue?

Also possible that your bud's not in afterburner as well. There's a detent that needs mapping.

On the TV. When the missile is within launch limits there's a small rectangle launch que that appears in in the right (can't remember if top quarter or bottom quarter) side of the screen. To get that missile queue, the aircraft needs to be pointing within a couple of degrees of the target in the horizontal plane. The numbers above the crosshairs tell you how far off the TV sensor is pointing off each side of the the airframe. Chucks guide on the SA342 go further into details as to how to get that lock. https://www.mudspike.com/chucks-guides-dcs/ Edit: Specifically page 77 of chucks guide tells you the shoot que you're looking for and specifically what the numbers above the crosshairs mean.

Has there been any mention of any AI aircraft being shipped with the new carriers? Feels kinda naked without an EA-6B to round out the ships air arm. Maybe a spruced up seahawk too.

*Facepalm* yup that did it. I'm certain I tried that when I originally posted, however the issue no longer appears to be there.

I've gone back with the intention of creating a track, but it appears to be functioning fine for my own missions. It actually appears to occur in the mission "Weapons Qualification - AGM-88C". Following normal procedures as per Zipties: Master Arm On (already is). A2G mode. Open Stores and select HARM then TOO mode. Choose a radar victim using the RAID/FLIR FOV button. Press Cage/Uncage button - Nothing happens.

I've just picked this up today and not gotten into it just yet. But a quick read through the documentation shows that FLEX is the name of one of the air corridors. You can find the relevent information on Page 21 of the RF IFG NTTR.pdf document found in "Your DCS Install Folder\Mods\campaigns\FA-18C Aggressors BFM Campaign\Doc"

When entering a mission where the Hornet is hot started it is impossible to handoff targeting to the HARM in TOO mode. Works fine when starting cold.

Oh lawd yes. A good portion of the airframes are improvised field capable. Better FARP's with additional placeable flavour assets are direly needed. I appreciate there are some great mods out there that bring this functionality. But mods have too many issues to be viable.