Jump to content

kingsnake11

Members
  • Posts

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    prepar3d
    Falcon4.0 bms
    DCS 2.5
    il-2
    mig alley
  • Location
    vancouver, B.C. Canada
  • Interests
    aviation
  • Occupation
    retired

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thank you for the explanation and sorry that it took so long to respond. I'll play with it some.
  2. I did try it with the Hammer-1 group instead of the Bandit-1 group...same issue. Thanks for the link...I'll look at that.
  3. Update. Thank you Darkwood for the help...however, I think that there is something wrong with the msgBRA, either a bug, or in the description. I did get what I wanted to work, but in another way. Adapting what you supplied, I coded this: local mytunits = mist.makeUnitTable({'[g]Bandit-1','[g]Hammer-1'}, 'static')-- org mist.msgBRA({ units = mytunits, ref = 'Igor', metric= false, text="BRA ", displayTime = 30, msgFor = {units={'Snake'}} }) This worked and gave me a BRA...but it was the average info for the two units, not the BRA from Snake to Igor. The correct answer is 343 for 142 at 58748 but what I get is 170 for 70 at 29374. Which of course is the correct answer divided by the number of groups (2). So I tried a variant, but removing the Hammer-1 group. local mytunits = mist.makeUnitTable({'[g]Bandit-1'}, 'static') mist.msgBRA({ units = mytunits, ref = 'Igor', metric= false, text="BRA ", displayTime = 30, msgFor = {units={'Snake'}} }) This gave me the correct bearing of 343 and the correct altitude of 58748, but the distance was calculated as 0 rather than the 142. The method I used to get the correct bearing was using the getBRstring and messageAdd, triggered by a zone. Here is the code: local string Che = mist.getBRString({ units = {"Igor"}, ref = trigger.misc.getZone('test1').point, alt = true, metric = false }) do local msg = {} msg.text = "Bandit Position is "..Che msg.displayTime = 25 msg.msgFor = {units={'Snake'}} mist.message.add(msg) end This gave me the correct BRA from the trigger test1 as Hammer-1 (Snake) entered the zone. I have no idea how to fix the msgBRA function or if indeed it is meant to give the average position...which seems a bit useless.
  4. Thank you. I will try it but you're solution makes sense. I guess you have to let it know the units before calling them. Thank you again.
  5. Hi. I was wondering if some of you folks more familiar with MIST than me can point out what I am doing wrong. I've been pretty good at getting a lot fo the MIST functions working but for some reason I can't get msgBRA to work. It probably is something simple. What I have is two groups, named Bandit-1 with one unit, Igor, and a second group Hammer-1, with one unit named Snake. What I want to do is generate a message regarding Bandit-1. The code I have tried is: mist.msgBRA({ units = ('Bandit-1'), ref = {units = {"Igor"}}, metric= false, text="BRA ", displayTime = 10, msgFor = {units = "Snake"}, }) Thanks in advance.
  6. Same with the jsow A's... covered infantry and sam's with little to no effect. SA-2's on launchers are very soft skinned targets and should have been knocked out. IIRC in real life, the mk 20's were used to kill AAA crews and take out sam's on launchers... but did little to no damage on armor or the AAA guns themselves. Glad to see that ED is looking into the damage issues as it's been a topic of (sometime heated) discussion in my group.
  7. I will have a look. I fly VR and the push to talk for voiceattack is connected to that button. I'll review the keybindings. Thanks again.
  8. thanks for the quick reply...but as I said, it was Horrido that I was having the problem in. No menu is popping up even though it should with the \ key. I have it bound to a hotas control....works everywhere else... but nothing comes up in Horrido so no way of giving commands. Thanks.
  9. What command/keyboard binding is used for the built in radio? I've had issues too. Sorry to sound so dumb about it, but I too have seen the wingmen simply fly in formation and not react to commands. No problems in the wolfpack campaign. Could it be a 2.7 thing?
  10. There may be a problem here because we only know that certain types of missiles and rockets seem to be easily intercepted. My view is that the SAM systems in DCS are probably a little too effective in shooting down incoming AGM's. I've even seen them shoot down an AMMRAM which I don't think is very likely. Shooting down a scud or a med/high altitude cruise missile is also quite possible to intercept but they don't seem to have much of a shot at low altitude fast AGM. Some recent real world examples...the Iranian/Houthi strike in Saudi Arabia with low level cruise missiles that the patriot and hawk batteries were effectively not capable of dealing with. The result of which was a visit from USAF generals and technical people to assess what went wrong. The Israeli strikes into Syria where although the Syrians claim to have shot down incoming missiles, enough get through to hit their targets effectively. What we don't know and are not yet in DCS, are if what the sams are hitting aren't Tilads or some other type of decoy that beg the sam to hit them. Early examples of these were modeled in the old Jane's F-18 sim and could be really effective. I can't believe any force would go into a sam heavy environment without these. And there is that famous Israeli strike video of sams being shot multiple times from the most sophisticated Russian point defense sam system (SA-22 I believe) at an incoming AGM and missing and then seeing it being taken out by another AGM. Result was a visit by top Russian generals with a herd of technical staff to figure out what went wrong.
  11. Probably because in real life you don't hang around and press the f6 button to see if it hits. You would only know if the SA shows the radar off...and even then you wouldn't necessarily know if it was hit, or the operator turned it off because they knew they were/or would likely being/be targeted. You might be able to get an educated guess by correlating the TTT and when the radar went off...but if you're busy flying out of a dangerous situation...you probably have other priorities.
  12. Just because you may have a lot of excess power, doesn't mean that you can use it simply to see how fast you're going without consequences. All aircraft have redline markings on the VI. It's 800Iknts for the 16 in DCS and it was the same for the CF-104G. You could go faster at really low level in the 104 but you would start having structural heat problems and likely cause yourself real problems. Unlike the F-16, the 104 wasn't thrust limited at high mach. At M1.2 and high altitude you could really feel the acceleration when you pushed into full AB. Even in a clean f-16 in DCS, I can barely get it past the Mach at very low altitudes. The other limiting factor at high speed in real life is that you would run out of fuel real quick. Doing some ballpark math with an example; While a mig 29 could possibly get to 800 Iknots at 300 feet AGL he wouldn't be able to sustain it for long. He would be burning around 90 lbs of fuel for each nautical mile of performance(45lbs per engine)... with an internal load ( tanks would just add a lot of drag and weight so that the max speed couldn't be reached) of around 8000 lbs or so of gas, that would translate to a distance of 90 NM before running out of gas.. at 800knts it would take you 90/800 x 60 or roughly 7 minutes to run out of gas at that speed.... so just because it says you can do it on the Airspeed Indicator, doesn't mean you can actually do it in real life without dire consequences. When they talk about max airspeed for any aircraft..wow it can do mach 2.2!... what's left out is that it may do that only at altitude and they always leave out how long. You can achieve max speed in a dive and then zoom or stay low...but the realities of fuel burn are still there. As an aside, if you ever thought of owning your own Mig-29, it would cost you probably $2K in fuel at todays prices for each showy full afterburner takeoff.
  13. All depends on loadout and altitude.
  14. ordered too. just too nice a map and historic theatre not to order. Looking forward to flying over the friendly Syrian skies....
  15. Certain specific displays and numbers can and are often be classified for either tactical or strategic reasons. For example, there are a lot of video's released by various militaries where specific mfd info has been blocked out. Not surprised as someone has decided that the recorded information may allow a hostile intel service to figure some stuff out. The only thing in the old jet I flew that was absolutely verboten to photo, talk about, even admit it was there, was the nuclear consent panel.... for obvious reasons. I think the ED folks have done a good job at producing models from the publicly available info from NATOPS and other like sources that are public. I know that there are addenda to all NATOPS that are classified but they are usually for specific weapons limitations and constraints, or for specific capabilities for certain weapons that are not advertised or publicly known. I do know that even the old aim-7 and aim-54 have modes that are not modeled in the sim and likely won't be as they are still classified. The west is more open with it's info and that is why will will not likely see a true high fidelity model of any of the later migs or su's as even basic info on things like the 29 performance are still deemed state secrets and would likely cause ED to have problems even though the west has had a bunch of them to play with and that info is available. It's more than just having the info, there are real world constraints that we often don't think about, especially here in the west were we are used to living in a much more open society with ready access to information. The bottom line is that ED have done a reasonable job on the most of the flight models even though they are not perfect, they are close enough to the published envelopes in most cases. If you want more realism, just add the essence of kerosene, vomit, and rubber to your computer area :-) g's, well that is another matter.
×
×
  • Create New...