Renko

I noticed that each time you choose DIR to navigate to a wpt from your FlightPlan, it makes a new wpt named "Turn Point" before the selected wpt. The issue is that this new "Turn Point" is added into the flightplan permanently. So if i select DIR to a wpt lets say nº4, and after that i select a previous wpt on the same flightplan lets say nº2 as DIR. The flightplan lines represented on the HSD are "borked" because a TurnPoint was created when selecting nº4 but it stays on the flightplan. It doesnt delete when i choose another wpt with DIR. And you can end up with a rather convoluted flight plan, if you use that a few times. This convoluted magenta lines on a flightplan is demostrated in the attached Track. I asked a Chinook SME on ED's Discord and he confirmed this as a bug. He said: "When going direct to a way point it would snap a new line, WP4 in your example. If you cycled back to WP2, it would snap a new line from your present position to the selected WP, and add a line continuing to subsequent WPs." He didnt mentioned anything about new wpt created, so that TurnPoint added as a wpt on the flightplan seems to be incorrect behaviour. Regards Chinook_DIRmode_issue.trk

Of all the examples i gave only two of them are infantry on foot There is a lot of room for CurrentHill to add assets to what ED is planning. In fact, now that they are working together i bet is an excellent moment for him to help them on that task.

I was thinking it could be a good adition to have assets covering this aspect, for some scenarios with asymmetric wars. We have a few but i was thinking this could be the perfect oportunity to have some new ones, and/or have some of the older ones receive a facelift. Could be to name a few: - Motorbikes with armed insurgents - IEDs related: infantry hiding/planting one, Barrels and stuff use to made those, etc. - Improvised technicals (that encompasses many options, i know) - Infantry: AKs, RPGs, Recoilless rifle, etc - Encampments Assets - Cave entrances - etc Maybe even adding to the mix some civilian assets, that are in some cases similar to this ones. That way it could be hard to discern those from the armed ones, creating more variety and option to create scenarios of COIN in DCS.

With the current Chinook, the future C-130 and the future Dynamic Campaign it will be cool to have some logistics assets, or maybe update the ones we have, that could be used by the community. To made them work properly with sling load on helicopters, and/or have some too that works with the new internal cargo system. Could be things that you will find in the warehouse system and/or in the Cargo category of Static Objects. From Fuel, Munitions, Missiles, Bombs, Rockets,etc. To cargo that could became units when unload like: artillery pieces, light vehicles, squads, etc. Maybe in the future with features and modules that push and make the logistics to have impact, it will provide a more rich enviroment and give options to players and editors.

Like the tittle says, the HI set index from the RadAlt is stuck at almost 500ft. If you move the HI set knob it seems that it still moves it, but the flag from the gauge doesnt move Here is a track Chinook_RadAlt_HI set index_bug.trk

Cheers! Please have in mind that i asked for this not trivial or for stunt purposes. I mean, this is part of the normal operations of a Chinook. So i hope the team take a good look at this, please. And I understand too the complexity of it, since this is the first time for DCS having a helicopter with a gear system (including suspensions) like this one. Regards

Thanks!

Right now the only way to choose rope length is from the editor, and only the editor of the mission can change that. So to change it you need to edit the mission, which is imposible in many circumstances or very difficult. Thats why i ask to please allow the user to Choose the Rope Length from the game. Maybe using the Rearm menu or using the Radio F10 menu. I post this on the Chinook wish list for a better visibility, but it would be very useful for any module able to do sling load operations. This was requested by @Flappie two years ago, not sure what happened to that request Please take this kind of features/QoL on to consideration if you intend to build a better logistics enviroment in DCS for the users. Regards!

I was testing one thing of the DCS Chinook that i was suspicious about. The braking force of the Chinnok wheels. Because i was experiencing some slipping that i though it was extrange. When the Chinook is on the two Aft Wheels. So in the track i have the Chinook at 100%Fuel (Max weight for DCS editor), parking brake set for maximun brake force. I put around 30 TQ and almost 4in.aft on the cyclic, to move the Chinook to that two wheel position with the minimun ammount of collective. To have as much weight posible on rear wheels. And at around 15-17º pitch up it starts to slip backwards, on a runway. LCT are still on GND with WoW active, the contact with the ground is good. So one of these two, the brakes or the wheels, cannot hold in place the Chinook. I asked a Chinook pilot for his help and he confirmed this suspicions. I will quote him without naming him, just because i dont want any missinterpretation on my part: "Hmmmm, honestly that's a tough one. Irl, most of these brakes are pretty worn and may not be strong enough to hold the aircraft in place with that much aft cyclic and power in. But in DCS, just assume that the aircraft is always brand new from the factory i guess.... I've noticed on Pinnacles in DCS that the brakes often seem week, and this would confirm it. The aircraft theoretically SHOULD hold position in DCS, imo. It'd be more likely to come off the ground altogether before it would roll backwards. Not sure on that one. When I'm two wheel taxiing I'm hoping my brakes work well enough to hold her in place." I noticed looking at real footage something that maybe worth looking to see if its related. The different behaviour in the rear wheels and suspension. You can see here how the rear is much more compressed in similar conditions in the real life footage, so maybe there lays the issue in DCS. Not the force of the brakes but because the weight distrubution when the Chinook pitchs up. (Real life video >> ) I think there is enough information to at least take a look on this issue. This is important for this airframe. Regards! Chinook_Aft_Wheel_Issue.trk

Thanks for you feedback Max Anyway, for the benefit of all users here is a short track There you can see both: - No Rad Alt bug moving on the VSD - No Rad Alt green overprint showing on the VSD with the gauge And i found a new bug i think. A discrepancy of the VSD Rad Alt and the Rad Alt itself. The VSD one seem to be updating faster than the other, to the point of sometimes a difference of 10ft. During climbs and descents. Both use the same sensor for data so both should be in sync always i would guess. Hope this helps Chinook_RadAlt_bugs.trk

I think every user will benefit from this. And its related to the amount of disk space that this folder usually takes "\Saved Games\DCS\Tracks\Multiplayer", without the user being aware of it. Inside DCS OPTIONS create one or multiple of these things related to this issue: - Select a limit for the size that folder can be. So if it reaches that limit it will still create a new track but will delete the older one, or more than one if needed. - A setting to Not Record any track at all on the user side during multiplayer sesions. - A button that will delete all the files from that folder without the need to go to that in windows explorer. (Useful for non-veteran users)

With the Chinook is more vital than ever, for obvious reasons, to have help from the crew to position the helo in certain circumstances with high precision required. But without the CrewChief guidance is hard to do. Thats why we as users need to relay on external views for this, which is not great. So i was thinking "how could it be done with DCS current tools and in a plausible way". There are two things we already have: - We have the crewchief guiding us to a cargo or to an unload area already with the External Cargo Window Interface, and voice over. - We have something called "Cockpit Visual Recon Mode", that gives you a red cross in your POV to mark targets for the map. So, what if we combine those two. Modify that red cross from the Cockpit Visual Recon Mode to enable the pilot to place visually a mark point in the ground, and that point will work as anchor for the External Cargo Window Interface to guide the Chinook rear wheels there. I think it could work since we have both tools already. And it will just need that the Cockpit Visual Recon Mode could give a point reference to the External Cargo Window Interface, to work perfectly. Like the guidance the External Cargo Window Interface already gives you when you are droping a cargo in a designated area. This will be a great QoL addition for the Chinook, and necesary since the users are already relying in external views. The best part is that this feature could be used by the other logistic helos from DCS, so development time will be valuable not only for the Chinook users. Please consider this (I attached a screenshot with both interfaces just for reference)

I think that any helicopter will benefit from having this new trim mode. Polychop devs included in their Kiowa, and then in the Gazelle, a new trim option called "Fade In/Fade Out". Which works just like the Instant Trim Option we have, but instead of instantly move after hitting the Trim it has a buffer time of a fraction of a second. That gives a noticeble more smooth action for the user, instead of the jump action that Instant trim provides right now. Since its not an entirely new mode its should not take much dev time, and it will result in a great QoL improvement for the user. Easy to test for the devs. Just install the Kiowa and select the Fade In/fade Out, and see how much of a difference that it makes on the user experience. Here is the description of that mode from the manual of the Kiowa, in context with the othersnull

Like the tittle says, the radar altitude indicator for Low Alt doesnt work on the VSD. Easy to test, no need for a track. This was done from the Instant Mission of Caucasus named "Sling Load to the top of a ridge" I attach a screen capture that show the setting of the Rad Alt knobs showing the warnings, and the VSD without the warning In fact the rad alt scale gauge moves but the scale should have a green overprint that doesnt shows either, so maybe its related to that.

I support this petition I requested it too to Bignewy even before this section was open. Glad to see this request here. This will be useful not only as a great QoL for users, but for modules that cant support loading parts of a DTC. And can only load it entirely. Thank you for having this already requested to the team. I hope we can see this on the next iteration, when more partitions are available.

I think you guys should first wait to confirm the claim about the GDR having TACAN and not RSBN I mean you are snowballing this without even confirmation, just rumors

Most of the time users on SinglePlayer or Multiplayer, or even Editors, will use Symmetric Payloads. This repetitive dance mouse click & selections of same weapons for each station when those are symmetric could be avoided. Making the user experience better. My proposal is to have an option in the rearm menu to be able to have Symmetric Loadouts without the need to repeat same actions for symmetric stations. For example with the F18 on the image and the option active (by default) when the users loads an AIM-9M on the Station nº9, the UI will replicate the same weapon on the Station nº1. We have now an option to copy Fuze Setting which is great. And i think it will be a great QOL addition to have this Symmetric Loadout Option for Payloads

Yes, i was wrong. I just did more test and GPS EXTERNAL TIME REFERENCE On or Off doesnt make a difference. Sorry, i truly thought the other day that somehow it fixed the CCIP issues. My bad. BTW during this afternoon testing i found some issues with the steerpoint while testing the CCIP impacts. It was off from where it should be. Like a few meters up in some cases, and others many more. I have tracks of both of those captures, if it could be of any help let me know and i will upload them on a separate thread.

The issue Bignewy is that having the GPS EXTERNAL TIME REFERENCE in DCS OFF affects the precision of CCIP (not 100% sure about others like steerpoints,etc). I found out because the other day i was geting back on the F16 here on DCS. And I wanted to do a campaign that was unfinished. So before i went into it, i went to do a quick practice on releases and settings for the CBU87. I made a mission from scratch. Just a F16 HotAir start with those CBUs. And when i dropped aiming with the CCIP those were off. Not by 10mtrs but for much more. Enough to miss the TGT. So i tried to figure out what i was doing wrong. After a few minutes trying things i noticed that in the DataLink page the NETWORK SYNCHONIZATION STATUS was COARSE, and GPS EXTERNAL TIME REFERENCE was Off. And just after i put the GPS EXTERNAL TIME REFERENCE On, the munitions were hitting very close to the CCIP release. Thats why i reported it. I know DataLink should not afect the CCIP precision, but it looks like it does right now. Maybe a bug related to the CCIP issues. Right now i cant, but i'll check later again if the error persist or its was mistake on my part. And i'll post here this afternoon a track with it if its the former. Regards

As the tittle says the F16 in Hot Start (ground or air) spawns without the GPS Time On (Data Link DED page). Making the systems based only on INS, which affects things like for example CCIP precision. No need for track, easy to reproducenull. Just spawn hot in ground or air

Ok, i see thanks for the info about the drop down menu Still the bug stands, because the wrong behaviour is there. Easy to test with the mission i said

As the title says the AAR is broken right now because there is a problem with the Race-Track Pattern. If you open an old mission you will see that a Tank has the Race-Track Pattern active for a waypoint, under Perform Task. But if you create a new flight and go to Perform Task and Pattern, there is no option other than Orbit. There is no more a Race-Track option available. So that brokes the behaviour of AI. Easy to reproduce, no need for a track. Just go to for example the Instant Mission "F-16C - Caucasus - Air Refueling.miz", and you will see that as soon as you start the mission the Tanker will go in some wild turns, instead of doing a race-track like it did before. This broke all of DCS Refueling missions that uses that

Thank you for that detailed info about the ramp use, much appreciated! So it touches the ground when its completely shutdown. But the rest of the time, if its that open, its close but dont touch the ground. It would be great to have a behaviour of that position that changes with the suspension height. Devs have great notes thanks to you. But i would be happy if ED just fixes it to avoid the ramp move the whole Chinnok even at GW of 31800lbs like can be seeing in the video https://streamable.com/eqq5ty

I noticed that when you open the Ramp and it hits the ground (3rd press of full secuence of ramp opening) it moves the entire helicopter. I always though it was weird that the ramp hits the ground in DCS and that it moves the entire helo. It was since the launch and i just did a easy search of footage just in case before reporting it. And i noticed that the ramp dont touch the ground. For example this capture of this video shows that it doesnt touch the tarmac. In this other one you can see from diferent angles on the time mark that it doesnt either touch the ground: And here is a video of DCS with 100% Fuel: https://streamable.com/eqq5ty To be notice that this happens no matter the weight, even with 5% of fuel. And with 100% fuel the ramp sometimes hits the tarmac and sometimes it clips through. Which seem totally random, as you can see in the video. I think there is an issue with the Ramp extension in degrees that should be corrected. Even at MTOW it should not hit the ground and move the helicopter. Or the suspension is too low. (Please dont fix this by letting the ramp always clip through the ground) Easy to reproduce, no need for a track.

@Lord Vader I respectfully disagree. I mean i see this behaviour is by design, so agree its not a bug. Thats why i reported as an issue, as it makes no sense from an UI perspective. The only way to open those LOAD/UNLOAD Cargo windows is throught the Rearm&Refuel menu. So from an UI perspective if you close the parent menu it should close it. Unless of course there is a need or benefits from user perspective. Why a user will prefer to have this extra clicks to close those windows after hitting OK or Cancel, when using this UI. Or which cases are prevalent from a user perspective where it beneficial to have those open. On top of that, if you go to external view and open the Rearm&Refuel menu the mouse focus change to that UI. Stops focusing on the external view of course as it will move the view anytime you move the mouse to interact with the UI. But, as soon as you hit OK or Cancel on the Rearm&Refuel menu the focus of the mouse revert to the external view. Meanwhile you need to close one or two extra windows with the mouse with the view moving. (This happens too in F1 if you are using the mouse to move the view) I really think this from a UI perspective should be tied to the parent Rearm&Refuel menu, as it makes no sense from users perspective the current behaviour. These are just additional inessential clicks.