Raisuli

Took 632 years to build Cologne Cathedral. Until you stand next to it it's hard to imagine how awesome it is, so I'm very glad someone stuck with it and got it finished. Some things aren't about instant gratification.

I'm forced to fly SP only and have the A-4, massun people, some Navy/NATO ground objects for atmosphere at bases, then TacView for figuring out just how bad I am. I avoid mods to the extent possible. If DCS has better object libraries I'd go down to TacView as my only mod.

I was surprised at how stiff those profiles are. Torque at the joints is the only enemy and used 1010 at the end of the side arms (and gusseted connectors) to manage that; not much load, but they keep the whole assembly rigid. The robotics frame in building 9 at JSC in Houston is pretty much room sized with an overhead crane and still made out of mostly 2040 IIRC. Extrusions are a brilliant solution to simpit frames, but expensive. The bits and pieces and connectors and plates are worse than the profiles!

For what it's worth I used 1020 for the frame on my simpit. A quick look at the specs tells me I can park both cars on the side panel supports and get less than 2mm of flex at the center because I end-posed it. Based on what I see if you're using 2020 you could park your house on that. 2060 would be enough to park an aircraft carrier. Maybe two. It's going to be a lot of money for overkill, but if that works for you then awesome! <edit> For fun I did a 350mm span fixed both ends with an evenly distributed load on 2040 horizontally. Okay, maybe a carrier was an exaggeration, but with a 100,000kg load (more than a typical house) there was about 3.5mm of deflection in the middle of the span. Two 1800kg cars parked together deflects it just over 0.15mm. The same span in 1020 will have 1.65mm of deflection under a 3,600kg load. All of this was because I got the idea from monster mounts (or whatever that is) and thought they were using far, far, (far) too much aluminum for the job, then I did the math. Pretty sure their choice was all about marketing, not engineering.

I ran into one accidentally. Heliport, tank range, urban assault ranges, pretty large training base. Park a helo at 'H FRG 51' and look around north-ish.

The deck crew used to have a little motivation, even without Vulcan. Makes me feel a lot less bad about throttling up on turns, though. Blow a few over the side and maybe the rest of them will start to move a little quicker.

They permit Navy squadrons, should have Navy ranks. Got a medal of honor for aborting a mission because I realized I hadn't set the altitude on a waypoint. Wish they generated a citation. "For showing intrepidity (they love that word) above and beyond the call of duty by being too lazy to change the WP data on the fly at great personal risk..." The purple heart was for doing touch and goes. Not an enemy unit on the map, unless you count the plane captain who probably hurled sharp vituperation at me for the damage being done to her aircraft. When I did the cold re-install all my logbook data was lost, so my new pylote got all those medals again. It's oddly disturbing to me, honestly. Don't mind the rank, they should let us flag out the medals, though. None of it really means anything anyway.

Well...until then I have a power shell script to fix all the fixes that get unfixed with updates. This was added to the list. I know there's a mod for that, but last time I looked my way was easier, at least for me

Now if we could just get that changed on the default file! Thanks for the fix!

Not sure if anyone else has had this problem, but I have 8 panels that use teensy controllers (Arduino with more pins/options) and in most cases 4ish MCP 20317 16 port I2C chips to further increase the number of digital ports (switch positions). That works great, I get tons of options, but... Once in a while Windows will re-assign the UUID to those USB devices, and that changes the role the controller plays in DCS, among other things. Generally I can figure out which panel is assigned to which UUID and by changing file names I get my mapped controls back; something like the F-18 can take over a hour to map out so this is good, but that means changing the name of up to 8 files in every aircraft that has mapped controls. That incentivizes me not to map controls in most of the every aircraft I have for DCS, leaving only the small handful I fly regularly. Seems like a waste. So, my solution was to write a Power Shell script that will take a text file and recursively go though all the aircraft in ~/config/input and change the names of all the Teensy based USB devices so all I have to do is get the input file sorted so the script knows which controller should have what name under the new UUIDs If anyone is interested I can post the script; not sure if this is a common problem or a teensy thing.

Different problem, same airbase, I am going to get serious about a chainsaw to the trees on the hill at the runway 23 approach. It's doable the way it is, but pretty tight!

Yeah, but try to destroy the train coming out of GDR.1 radar site. That thing is armored with titanium and depleted uranium and a sheet of unobtanium! This whole map sets new standards. I use the territory in phase 2/3 for practice ranges, but still can't resist using the extraordinary detail to add atmosphere. Of course if you remove the extraneous parts of the aircraft (wings and control surfaces are the biggest offenders) the view of the countryside is much nicer!

This is odd, because I had to do all the manual bindings for my (TM Cougar) MFDs when I (finally) set up the A-10 again. Try re-numbering the MFDs; mine are 4, 4, and 5. I have a 4th that's not plugged in, no idea what the numbers are. I don't even have TMs software loaded any more, so not sure how I would, or even if I could, re-renumber them out of that odd configuration. Of course now I remember just how incredibly sparse A-10 bindings are again. Of course that means @LeCuvier and I need to talk...

Originally the 'real' radar was on top of the building for that very reason! Looks...bad! Has the same problem as trying to start aircraft in a shelter; all the techs end up on the roof! There's no way I'm going to let all that modeling go to waste, though, even if it just fouls up coordination communications. Blow up the tower and Schabowski doesn't get fully briefed on the new regulations before the press conference... I'm working on alternatives; all we have is what we have, it's not up to ED to cater to every wacky idea every player comes up with.

Where the alternatives kind of fall apart for me, and I did a dry run yesterday, is more or less on top of the site, or using a TGP, you can see the actual unit and the natural inclination is to attack that and not the semi-random map building that was supposed to do the same job. Plan B I guess. Ugra did a phenomenal job on this; even gave us a building with the highbay doors open to fly through. Seemed a shame for it to all be window dressing. With the (new?) 'assign as' and trigger for map object destroyed that seemed like the perfect application. All these lovely static map buildings suddenly become dynamic mission pieces rather than just assigned targets. Besides, if that 'building' is the radar it might take more than a HARM to harm it. Buildings are generally a little tougher than that, so taking out the search radar becomes more challenging. Obviously that's a thing anyway; assigned to destroy a map object, and trigger on success or use that target as a decoy and spawn the hidden AAA site...along with a bit of randomization, because that's how I got through my first campaign mission. Enough iteration and you know where to look!

I want to make them invisible before they are blown up. Building over here, radar over there. Radar is invulnerable, but blow up the building and I don't need mist or moose; just a standard ME GROUP DEACTIVATE and it vanishes. Exactly what I want, because the map building is supposed to be the radar, not the radar unit I had to put on the map after the fact. Did that make any sense? Let's do this; if I blow up the dome on the right, the search radar circled in yellow goes away, but until then I don't want to see the search radar over there. The whole point of the nicely modeled radar sites is they're radar sites. If we need to put units on them they might as well be bare spots on the tops of mountains.

Probably a dumb question, but is there a way to make an object invisible? Not just to AI, to players, too. I've got this lovely map of Germany with all these beautifully detailed radar sites that don't have any radar built in, so I'm adding units, making them invulnerable, then setting up triggers so if the appropriate building is destroyed the radar unit is disabled. This way you destroy the beautifully detailed building and not the unit, but the units are there uglying up the radar site. They can't be destroyed by bombing them anyway (which might need some tweaking...HARMs...), but I don't want to look at them when I fly over, either.

The painted lines out of 28-31 put you on the edge rather than the center line going into 26.

Rather than a circle or point to point (racetrack) this lets you define a large squared-off oval. Length x width, direction of travel, etc. Think "tanker" and "rectangular flight path" rather than the tanker suddenly pulling 30 degrees of bank to get back the same direction it came. Length is the long side, width is the diameter of the circle it flies to get on a heading back. Ok, maybe not a five year old. I avoid those.

Paulaner (several varieties) is available where I live many thousand kilometers from Munich, even if it's stupidly expensive. Seemed appropriate for blasting over this new map! Round two on the Rhine was...practically perfect, with maybe one small blip. Berlin wasn't a problem at all, and I discovered it's impossible to take down the wall, even with 2,000 pound bombs. Did some experimenting. Makes me think that first time was spent caching map objects? Don't know enough about how that side of the game works, but my frame rates (I haven't added anything; just the plane I fly in) have been awesome other than that first attempt. Feel bad about commenting before verification!

I've watched the release video enough that I finally noticed the big container port at 1:15 isn't Hamburg, it's Mainz ...on the Rhine. Those be some big ships that far upstream! null

I've got an i9-14900K, 128G of RAM, 32G of VRAM, run DCS off a 4TB NVMe and have a separate NVMe for the OS, and I've seen huge stutters (time to consume some Pauliner doppelbok between frames) around Weisbaden/Mainz and the Rhine. Probably not the computer, but might also be settings. Kind of hard to tell, other than the FR counter was decidedly red which is CPU. Berlin in a helo was 120+ FPS everywhere but landing at an airport. Need to take a fast jet to a few more places today, and run a helo up the Rhine to land on that container ship. Not overly concerned about it. Seems lately settings (DCS/nVidia/Windows) take more time to dial in than it takes to play a game and the map is early access. Urga will get it ironed out or someone will find that setting I'm missing.

I'm guessing you never flew on a Soviet airline in the 70s and 80s, particularly any distance east of the St. Pete-Moscow corridor. Flying on a western airline, with smoke billowing through the cabin from all the chain smokers incapable of surviving an hour without polluting my air, wasn't a picnic either. The good old days weren't all that good. I seem to recall Aviaflot was one of the commuter lines, but trying to keep track of all the old Soviet airlines after the 90s, and long after I paid attention to such things, means I'm probably mistaken. Even Aeroflot wasn't a picnic; I know a guy who flew for that airline in the 80s and into the 90s before he got run off a two lane road in the middle of nowhere and invalided out. In any event no offense was intended, and if you felt that post was meant as more than humor and gentle reminiscing please accept my apologies.

Ah. That makes sense! Silly me; spent enough running the strip in Vegas; should have thought of that!