Raisuli
-
Posts
1298 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Raisuli
-
-
1 hour ago, buceador said:
While I agree with the Forrestal comment completely I would also welcome a populated deck as a choice. As I am not a developer I can say with impunity that it shouldn't be too difficult to have a standard populated or unpopulated carrier of choice
Not the worst idea in the world, but it really doesn't take long to learn how to place an item on the carrier, link it, then copy/paste and change as needed. Then whatever it is you're doing isn't blocked by that random static object in the way. No development skills needed, just some well targeted point and click.
2 hours ago, Northstar98 said:I infinitely prefer adding stuff to an empty deck than having enforced statics that you most likely won't be able to do anything about (such as the case with HB's Forrestal), almost always forcing you to have 1 configuration. Especially so when they take up parking slots for useable aircraft (which is already small)
This. Though I have to admit I'd really like to have models for some of those static items that already populate airfields because I like to set those up as well. That and when I put a person on a hanger I mean for the person to be IN the hanger with the aircraft they've already fixed. Still remember aircraft parked on top of shelters...now I still have to move the aircraft out if I want to pretend someone (probably Navy because the air force doesn't have ground crews...no wonder they struggle) works on it.
-
3
-
-
17 minutes ago, toan said:
Hi, thanks for your help. I use a low-end tower PC, and unfortunately it has only 2 internal drive slots. one for the SSD and one for a 'standard' drive. Your mirroring option seems very good, and I'll work on this. Many thanks again !
Don't believe it. You could replace the 'standard' drive with an SSD. I've done that (or had it done by the guys) a few hundred times. I still have a drive cloner for things like that, and we have three more at work.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, toan said:
Ok, thanks, I'm not a hardware expert at all. And thanks for the idea of mirroring the existing SSD onto a larger one. I didn't even think about that. I don't know how to do that, in fact, any help is appreciated.
There's a (free for your purpose) tool called Macrium Reflect that will handle the mirroring, and even has instructions to get that done. If you can hook the new drive up via USB that will work, I think. Once that's done it's time to get out the number two Phillips and crack open cases.
But it might be worth cracking the case early in the process. You might have more drive bays than you realize in there, and with a little wire and a few screws may be able to just add another drive. Depending on the computer the wires might already be there. Then again if you're using one of the mini desktops...maybe not. Not enough data to get specific here. For all I know you're using a laptop and all of this changes.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, toan said:
Hi, the only reason is that my SSD drive doesn't have enough free space to accomodate a new terrain, and my PC has only one internal SSD drive slot. Sigh.
SSD drive slot? Any drive slot is SSD if you put an SSD rather than a spinny disk in it. The bus really doesn't care if the data comes from a chip or off a flying head. The choke point with an external drive is the data path, which is why it's not recommended.
I have to ask if there's a reason not to mirror your existing drive onto a larger SSD and replace it wholesale if space is really a concern? Yes, you need to grow the volume once it's replaced, but the system will never know you changed the hardware (and I did exactly this a few months ago).
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, NineLine said:
This thread is about what is in the patch, not a discussion of what you were hoping to see. As with all bug patches, we put in what we have. If we don't have something it doesn't go in. Sorry.
Drat. I was hoping $myPetIssue was already fixed and ready to go, but you held it back for the sub-patch after enough people slipped a bit of cat nip to You Know Who...
Awesome effort; thanks for all the hard work! Everything moving in the right direction at the speed of software; that makes this a good day!
-
1
-
-
I made a mission last night that uses a static carrier (as in not moving static) standing in for FCLP. No wind, no nothing so the approach is a little skewed. Got an (OK) Wire 3[BC] during testing after the first touch and go. Need to start calling the ball even if I don't do the approach comms, but more than a little surprised that I got a grade, and it was not a "GTF off my boat", which is what I normally get on a moving carrier.
-
24 minutes ago, modsat said:
Thanks man. It's great. Just did a few laps, and I find it very helpfull when I place myself just on top of the gates. Then they don't obstruct my HUD but provide constant reference points for how much I'm of course. Type your PayPal (here or in DM) and I will happily throw you a token of appreciation
No worries, glad it helps. After two or three laps I was doing pretty good, and got the thing down fairly smoothly once I started to take the low road. Not sure why the marker beacon was going off, but that's a problem for later.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, modsat said:
I have not yet looked into the mission editor. I used to make missions and mods for Arma2 and DCS mission editing sounds and looks a lot like the good old Arma days. Great community, lots of creativity and lots of frustrations
. I setup one mission myself. Tried to spawn smoke on top of a building, realized that I apparently needed a whole script package to make that easy, and decided to hold back on mission editing until I can actually fly the jet 
All I want is an oval in the sky. But I totally understand if you aint got the energy or time. I have a ton of stuff going on becides flying. You can't be everywhere at once. If you get the time, you get the time. I appreciate your efforts either way.
I should charge by the gate. See if this works for you. Don't get lost in those green interchanges, though...
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, modsat said:
Raisuli these are great. The F16 stuff is gold - at least to me. I have not setup my HOTAS for the F18 since getting my new setup, but look forward to trying the carrier break. I have already spent several hours in this mission. The gates really help visualize the pattern and imprint the correct sight picture. I love it. Thanks for your effort.
I have no idea how hard it is to setup those gates, so just throwing this out there. One thing I would really appreciate, is if you would make a pattern just like your landing gates, but instead of making a touch and go the pattern just loops in the air (so no approach and departure but just two legs). It could start in the air in the pattern.
I was all primed to make these 'real' missions, then I realized how hard ED makes real missions. I suppose I could just give instructions and let people flounder, but I have to load DCS_BIOS to figure out what the cockpit parameters are? All these lovely mission editing tools that we can't really use? Even if you figure one air fame out consistency doesn't exist...and based on anecdotal comments from the poor guys who do this for real the next update breaks something anyway. Then they wonder why the learning curve content doesn't exist.
If we had the tools it would already be done.
In any event, if all you want is an oval over the field that's pretty easy. I was going to tackle an F-16 ILS approach at some point, but I'm also doing operations manuals and then life and some other hobbies get in the way and all that...be prepared for divergent paths. They're easy once you realize what's going on.
-
1
-
-
If the parking spot you put them on doesn't have the right settings the ME will find a spot...somewhere. It's a lot more common to run into that with large aircraft than something as small as a fighter, but I suspect the same rules apply. On the other hand that generally happens in the ME and not just when the mission runs, so this might be something else.
As Diego999 said if you don't want them to actually do anything, and that includes dying, make them static. If you want to blow them up make them uncontrolled AI. The damage models are different, or at least that's been my experience.
-
37 minutes ago, Elphaba said:
This might interest you:
Now why didn't I think of that? This will solve the symptom, if not the problem, and that's enough for now. Thanks!!
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Nevyn said:
Can't you use flags for that? So basically make a trig zone where unit spawns, unit in zone, flag on, flag true = helper gates on - Other helper gates off or whatever. To lazy to test myself, and I don't use the helper gates so I am not sure how they work.
I haven't been able to find a helper gate off or this wouldn't come up. Wouldn't even need flags!
-
4 hours ago, NIGHTHAWK1 said:
To Raisuli: Nice training miz. I think these are great. Really want to be greater would be to add notes or what ever to say when to drop gears, when to deploy flaps, what speed to be at, etc.
To be a real mission I need to add a bunch of stuff...like actual instructions. Haven't decided if there's enough need for that yet; if I'm only doing them for myself I already know
<edit> Yeah, okay, got the script roughed out, now I need to take a training mission apart to see how all that works. I've been flying the carrier pattern all morning and I suck a lot less; remains to be seen how much that will translate to the carrier. Of course all this is off-topic for the F-16; should do some more work on that as well, but I did forget to turn my F-16 autopilot switches off before doing the chase mission, and that always makes flying interesting... <edit>
-
3 hours ago, modsat said:
That is great. I'm away from home today, but I look forward to trying it out when I get home tomorrow.
How do I find the download?
Bit of feature creep...
Took the A-4 out of this version; not everyone has it. Only the F-18 for the carrier break because you'll hurt that dainty undercarriage in an F-16. Don't switch slots; there's no way to turn gates off once they're on, so you'll end up with serious confusion. Quit out and restart if you want to change planes (unless going from pattern work to chase work, where the gates are no factor, or vice versa the first time. You'll get it)
For the carrier there's one set of gates for the initial break that descend into the gates for the touch and go. It's only mildly confusing. There are three close together on the runway; the first is the ramp, the second is the three wire, the third is the end of the deck. Fly through the first and third, touch down in front of the second. You'll want to be at mil power before the wheels stop smoking.
There's also a couple 'chase planes'. B1B (everyone has it) flies around for 40 minutes; the chase planes are there to practice formations. Take off close, keep up, try to maintain a stable position. There are no cues the lead Bone is going to turn other than the lead Bone turning. A bit like A2AR, where the tanker pilots maneuver around just to be spiteful. Just remember if you have wake turbulence set up that bomber will flip you like a cheap burger, especially if you're in close and slow...like formation landings.
And watch your fuel. I didn't give you any extra...
-
1
-
-
Doing really basic flight instruction missions, and I don't really want a separate mission for every aircraft so I overlap them. I can turn helper gates on for the selected unit, but then if I switch slots to try the same 'lesson' in a different aircraft I get overlapping gates.
It'd be really nice to turn gates on for the active group and turn the gates off for the inactive groups.
-
23 minutes ago, modsat said:
I would love to try a carrier simulator version of it. I have no idea how to set these things up by myself yet, but if you setup something similar for basic maneuvering, I would love to fly it. Fx take off from the same runway, but instead of going into the landing pattern you go up and fly just level turns - or really any maneuver worth practising would be great. It would help if the mission briefing gave some numbers to shoot for (fx specifying that the turn should be executed at 2G and 300 knts or something like that). I'm of course not expecting you to make me tutorials on demand here, just throwing the idea out there
I just finished the carrier version. Holy crap I suck! Start 3 nm away and to starboard of the airfield for the overhead break, roll into downwind, roll into the groove, bolter pattern and original approach are on the same downwind, but vertically offset slightly at first which is a little confusing if you don't know what or why. Three gates very close together on the runway...you better be flying through the first, your wheels should hit at the second, and you better fly through the third...makes it pretty clear how short those distances are!
I need to tweak a few things and some instructions might help. Also added an F-18 and F-5 to the basic mission I already uploaded and that needs to be tested, but this is turning out better than I hoped.
-
1
-
-
Oh. You mean like I used the delete key to get rid of a waypoint I didn't need (twice) and blew up twenty or thirty minutes of fiddling to get my gates perfect both times? The good news is I'm a certified former sailor and am allowed to use language like that, but 'undo' would have been good for my blood pressure, not to mention my self image.
-
3
-
-
4 hours ago, modsat said:
If you make that mission, I'll fly it
Remember when I said I work on consistency? There's nothing like a bunch of green gates to tell you how inconsistent you are. Leave your gear down or blast off and enter this from an overhead break, which ever you prefer.
Tested this in an F-5E and an F-16C, but no promises. Downwind is 1.2nmi from baseline, which oddly enough is what you shoot for in an F-18 to land on a carrier, and ~1500' AGL.
Currently set for an F-16 (but you can edit the mission to make it anything you want), Caucuses because everyone has that, Maykop because it's flat, left because...well, partly because I fly the F-18 a lot, partly because I used to use the road as a reference, partly just because.
I will almost certainly make a carrier simulator version of this, but need to do the math to figure out the proper grove length for a stationary runway and the altitudes come down quite a bit.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, modsat said:
let's say we are doing a 30 degree level turn and my nose starts dropping. Is the best way to correct that to pull back on the stick og to increase power - or both?
If you make that mission, I'll fly it
Depends. Is your nose dropping because your speed is too low? Bank angle too high? Trim set wrong? Nothing about this is an isolated system. I typically bring -16s around the base leg to final too fast to make nose control easier, then back off to landing speed on final. Is that 'right'? No idea. Works for me, though, especially since the boards are already out. I have never been ordered to the ops shed or given a number to call on landing, even after flying down the Las Vegas strip at mach 1.3.
I'm not practicing for a job with the air national guard, so until I get better information or more skill I stick to 'works for me'. You don't even want to know what the LSOs have to say about my chronic overshoots, but I generally end up on the boat.
-
13 minutes ago, modsat said:
Personally I do not find the basics boring. I have a blast just flying the plane around. I would just like to feel less lost when maneuvering. I don't feel like I'm actually practising, because I'm either not sure what I'm supposed to achieve or how I'm supposed to achieve it. Any material (mission, guides or whatever) that makes it more clear how to best fly the jet would be very velcome.
So, if you really want to improve do patterns in your F-16 (I used Incirlik for this). Take off, leave your wheels down, turn over <that> building. Maintain 1500 feet AGL (set your TACAN, course, and altimeter before takeoff). Fly 1500' reciprocal until you get to <that> TV tower. If there's nothing there put a static object on the ground where you want to make your base turn. Turn final <there>. Lots of stuff on the ground to use as references; streets, fields, buildings, whatever you put there yourself as cues.
Maintain level turns and constant altitude. Use the same climb and descent rates.
BUT...only do one thing at a time. Today I focus on turning at specific points and don't loose sleep if I wobble a little. Once I can nail those turn points, then I think about altitude control, then I worry about speed control. You get the idea.
I've spent hours doing touch and goes. Remember in (non-Navy) aircraft the secret to landing is not to land.
Once your good at it switch direction. If you've done left patterns switch to right.
I should make a mission for this. Gates are a crutch, but they'll at least get you going the right direction.
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, SMH said:
Incorrect. At a certain altitude, the partial pressure is such that even on 100% O2, you simply do not breathe in enough oxygen molecules for your body chemistry to work. This is why U-2 and SR-71 crews wear spacesuits.
If I recall correctly 4 PSI at 100% O2 is enough partial pressure to get the job done. Those 'space suits' run just that; at much more than 4 movement becomes too difficult. <edit> Worth noting at sea level the PP of O2 is about 3 PSI; they add one because suits are hard work... </edit>
If you want hypoxia set up an axis on the F/A-18 OBOGS, set it to maximum (I tested a 1-1024 and validated it was at 1024) and you'll die on the ground. Wags said this is working as expected, which does explain why the Navy is chronically short on pilots.
-
Oh, man.
I'm not a pilot, so I have no basis for understanding pilot stuff. I've flown sims for about forty three years, though, and always sucked at them. Landing was just a case of flying at the ground until I was low enough for the wheels to touch.
In the last year or so I finally learned how to fly...by flying a sim that cannot be named. Made a huge difference in how I fly DCS, though, because they do teach the basics there, as 'boring' as those basics are. Came back to DCS and suddenly I can fly an F-5E, with no auto anything, straight and level. Level break turns. Landings like I actually know what I'm doing. Well, except in an F-18 where you're supposed to fly at the ground until the wheels are close enough to touch...
And when flying doesn't take as much of your concentrations it's pretty amazing what you can find out there where the warheads meet the foreheads
Want to do something similar here and actually have the start of a mission to teach departure procedures (not that I actually follow any most of the time), but not sure how much time I want to invest or how much time people want to spend on the 'boring' basics.
-
2
-
-
11 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:
No news for linux currently, that may change in the future.
Regarding the Windows 10 security subscription announcement, why not just upgrade to windows 11?
thank you
It's an upgrade?
In any event, Linux isn't a thing until they switch to Vulkan. Probably no point even bothering to wish at this point.
-
2
-
-
On 3/31/2024 at 3:18 PM, Haz0052 said:
I have recently been wondering if I should get the Razbam AV-8b or F-15E or maybe the F16C. I have been unable to decide, so could anyone give some suggestions and explain why? I would also be interested if anyone could expand on my current understanding of real life uses of the aircraft my current understanding is:
Harrier - CAS and air interdiction.
Strike Eagle - Strike missions (like the Tornado), offensive counter air
F16C - SEAD/DEAD, perhaps air to air (but I assume F15s, f22s would perform the majority when conditions allow)
I should probably also mention that I have a t.16000m, so keybinds might also be a factor. I would probably be inclined to choose the Harrier (it can do naval ops, hover, take off from FARPS, can perform naval ops, can be used in a wide variety of air-ground roles, and is unique), but it lacks a radar, and can’t perform BVR. The f15e can actually self-escort itself, however, is quite a bit more complicated to me (main reason), and lacks link 16 which leads to bad SA (according to others) especially when the radar gets really cluttered. I also don't really like how the radar is displayed (too many green lines. It seems difficult to find targets when they are also a green icon, judging by other videos, compared to say an f16 which has a nice clear display that also isn't monochrome), but the f15e has a TFR radar, can perform BVR well etc. (I like using etc.). The f16…I don’t know. I seem to have lost quite a bit of my enthusiasm for some reason. It would still be something I would be interested in though.
I have all three; if I needed to pick one it would be the F-16 every day of the week and three times on the weekends.
- Does everything you might feel like doing, including carting 10 CBU-97s with a CL tank and 4 AMRAAMS for some precision area effect fun on the ground and still some left over for pesky aircraft. The only thing it lacks are harpoons and SLAMs; given what it has that's not a bad trade, though. The air to ground flexibility is really impressive.
- Excellent HOTAS design if you have equipment that can match the switches
- Freaking rocket if it's light; the thing is a jet engine with fuel tanks and just enough room for one small person
- Lands on carriers if you don't mind repairing and taking off a little light. Oh, and the scorn of the purists out there. I've been scorned by professionals, so I don't really notice that.
AV-8B: The A-10 can carry four of these fully loaded on wing pylons and get them there faster, which should embarrass any Harrier fan. It's a very niche aircraft, but vertical take off is cool. Just remember it only takes off vertically if it's light, as in if the pilot weighs more than fifteen pounds or you load actual fuel on board it's not 'light' anymore.
F-15: Bomb truck, great radar, used to be an awesome air superiority fighter until they replaced 800 pounds of fuel with self-loading baggage and slapped eight B-17s worth of bombs on it. Kidding aside it's a cool aircraft, but not up to F-16 standards.
Bear in mind none of these are going to win the war solo, so it's just which corner you want to get into. F-16 will get your there first and look way sexier doing it than either of the alternatives you mentioned. Apart from which you can spend the next couple years mastering it...
-
1
Wire wont disengage from hook
in DCS: Supercarrier
Posted
I've seen it. Usually happens on a hard landing; next time I'll try to get a track.