Yeti42

OK, I've managed to reproduce similar behavior as the original issue but not exactly the same. You'll see in the track file I'm doing lots of approaches with different parameters and some missed approaches, the last one in the track file is a touch and go which demonstrates the behavior. I don't select gear up and give mill power without touching the stick. As expected I pitch high but I'm unable to recover even with full stick down and trim, selecting gear up seems to re-instate full pitch authority. EDIT: attached the tacview file from the original occurrence, this is all I have from the first time it happened but it demonstrates the issue well, note I was applying full nose down at the end when the roller-coaster was occurring F18_AOA.miz.trk Tacview-20240223-120901-DCS-IA-FA18C-Syria-Free Flight.zip.acmi

Yep, I'll work on reproducing it and remembering to save the track file

I'm not raising a bug yet, I just want to know if anyone else is experiencing unexpected behavior: My first flight using the new flight model was an instant action flight on the Syria map, I flew around for 10 minutes or so testing the AOA capabilities and then decided to dump all stores and do some touch-and-go's at Incirlik. To cut a long story short, the landing was fine as was on AOA during finals and touchdown, the problems started when I selected 1/2 flap, military power and rotated after touchdown. The jet adopted an increasingly nose-high attitude which I was unable to counter with full forward stick and manual nose-down trim. The result was inevitable and the jet departed. Has anyone else seen behavior similar to this? I've been unable to reproduce the behavior in the 2 short flights since and the track file has been overwritten.

So regarding the Deployment Campaign conversion to BS3.. I'm working on the final mission (Mission 12), unfortunately this will require an almost complete re-write! The problem is the mission is based around intercepting a convoy and attacking a rebel base, the newer Caucasus map is now populated by a lot more trees and the convoy route is now completely off-road, coupled with the new weather and enhanced rain effects you can't see s***t and even if you could the enemy is completely obscured by trees! Remove scenery trigger doesn't appear to work for large areas anymore so I need to re-think the whole mission's location and alter the associated triggers. At LEAST a weeks work sorry for the delay

I've nearly finished converting the "Deployment" campaign to BS3. I think it's one of the oldest campaigns so there was quite a lot of work involved and I had to fly through every mission multiple times to fix them. Apart from simply changing the model to BS3 in the ME, I also checked the weapons load-outs, the correct helmet-mounted device (defaulted to NVG normally) Set INU to no alignment needed, removed trees from areas with targets where there were no trees originally, changed some AI load-outs for SEAD where the AI was useless, plus a few more tweaks which make the missions slightly more achievable. I also cut some of the longer mission routes which involved flying for ages and then not having enough fuel. Will upload in hopefully a few days from now. Edit: Finished! Attached zip file, search for user pyates2104 Deployment Campaign for Black Shark 3 (digitalcombatsimulator.com) BS3_Deployment.zip

I'm guessing you mean in-game and not in the mission editor... So the quick answer to this is no not really. The weather and date/time is stored in the mission *.miz file so the only way would be to unpack the mission file after start, edit the values in the lua somehow, save it and then reload the mission, defeats the point somewhat and is ugly.....

I would use the HaptiConnect software from Buttkicker which now works with DCS. The recommended way to use this software is NOT to use the headset splitter and connect the amp directly to your Buttkicker. Normal in-game sounds should then continue to your speakers/headset as normal, the telemetry from DCS aircraft drives the Buttkicker not the sound coming from the game.

Having worked on INS equipped aircraft with no GPS in the past, I can confirm that ground crew would typically align the INS and switch to Nav before the aircrew arrived.

This is a solution to a problem I was having with my Winwing MFCD's but it applies to all multi-display setups, thought it may be useful for anyone else having similar problems: The issue was Windows sometimes displayed the main game window or other app windows on one of my small usb displays which I use in DCS for MFCD's. The was a pain as it was difficult to get the window out of the display without unplugging it. 1. Microsoft has a small console utility called "PnPUtil" It's already installed on windows (10 and 11). The utility basically allows you to select devices and enable and disable them on the console by using the device id or instance id, the same as you would using the device manager UI, and a whole lot more. 2. Simply create a batch file to enable and disable the unwanted displays when you are not using DCS. You can then either create another batch file to enable them or just use that in a custom DCS start bat, simples, solves all my problems. Note that the batch file needs to run as admin or it won't work, simply create a shortcut for it and select run as admin in the properties. You can also use a similar script for disabling any device for driver updates, particularly useful for WinWing device updates. Full info on the util syntax can be found here PnPUtil Examples - Windows drivers | Microsoft Learn Example, you need to enter the ID of your display as found in the device manager obviously: Disables displays Echo yadyayada pnputil /disable-device "USB\VID_045E&PID_00DB\6&870CE29&0&1" pnputil /disable-device "USB\VID_045E&PID_00DB\6&870CE29&0&2" pnputil /disable-device "USB\VID_045E&PID_00DB\6&870CE29&0&3" Exit Enables displays Echo yadyayada pnputil /enable-device "USB\VID_045E&PID_00DB\6&870CE29&0&1" pnputil /enable-device "USB\VID_045E&PID_00DB\6&870CE29&0&2" pnputil /enable-device "USB\VID_045E&PID_00DB\6&870CE29&0&3" Exit

That did it, needed to be in Nav mode, cheers Not very helpful... Obviously did the above with TFR mode, autopilot and couple switch. razo+r read my post properly and gave the solution.

I can't find any specifics in any forum on this subject. I'm aware the TFR can autopilot couple and this works great in heading mode but I can't find much info on route coupled mode. Is this implemented in the Autopilot system yet?

I want all the modules that I've bought to be out of early access and beta...

Don't forget DLSS is going to be supported in an upcoming release and is exclusive to NVidia. Personally, I'd stick with NVidia in part due to this even though their price point is higher...

I've noticed this, it does feel over twitchy at times. I think it's a little better after the last patch... On what others are saying about over G which is not really connected to your comment on handling... I was an aircraft engineer for twelve years on fast jets so do have some idea about what I'm talking about... The maximum G restrictions on most aircraft are there to prolong their service life, that's not to say they won't suffer a catastrophic failure if pushed well past this maximum G setting, it depends on how fair past and for how long. Basically, the max G settings are set low to increase airframe life. The problem we have in DCS is that there is no such thing as airframe life, you could model it I suppose but people would just get a new jet every time so they could get the best performance. The only way to model aircraft G performance is to stick to the max G settings which are set for peacetime operations or to allow some degree of latitude with instant non sustained G, as with the F14.

Cat's don't like you spawning on them, just saying....

The F15E is still missing a lot of functionality and still needs tweaking in certain areas, right now the F16 wins hands down even in the A2G role due to a full weapons suite, almost fully functional radar and better situational awareness capabilities due to data link. Not really a fair comparison at the moment, let's see how the F15E evolves.

Thrustmaster tpr rudder pedals, excellent quality and feel like the real thing

BTW, it also does it if you select Waypoint designate

This issue still hasn't been fixed. Remove objects type trees has been broken for quite some time (Years) It looks like it happened after trees became collidable. Remove ALL objects in zone works for everything as far as can see including trees, just removing trees has no effect.

Here you go, another track file, you'll notice it suddenly jumps to WP5, EDIT: also please note you need to be in DT (Desired Track mode) to reliably reproduce the problem. I've also reviewed the x and y coordinate information in the track/mission file and these appear to be correct. Something weird is going on based on how near a WP is to the currently tracked WP and the next waypoint in the sequence, If I move the waypoints further away from each other, the problem does not occur. KA-50_III_CAU_IA_route_close_wp3-5.miz.trk

It doesn't really work like that, functionality is released incrementally in EA beta.

It's not really an actual date I'm after, which quarter would help, the threads in the forum are informative but they're not a roadmap. To be honest, DCS's dev schedule appears a little ad hoc from the outside, flexibility is great but you do need targets and a roadmap for functionality, especially as there are so many products on early access.

Hi all, One of the challenges I have and I'm sure many people will echo in DCS is placing objects correctly in the mission editor. Yes, you can now see the objects correctly sized in the mission editor but that doesn't help that much when you need to take into account the topology of the terrain. Altitude and satellite view help but it would be really useful to be able to move objects around to edit them in a fully 3d rendered scene. The number of times I've had to start the game to view how an object such as a radar is sitting and then edit it again in the mission editor, pretty much every time really..

The one type of question I see asked most in these forums is "When will <insert functionality here> be implemented? It would be good to have official roadmaps for modules that give at least an idea of when something will be implemented, if at all. I suspect this would negate the need for a lot of questions and wasted time in discussions. I work in the software industry so do realize how much of a challenge having a roadmap can be, priorities change but it's always useful to have a target for something and a way of prioritizing dev workload. Roadmaps shouldn't be static documents and can change over time, it would give the community a better idea of what to expect and when (give or take 2 weeks... ) - Discuss

It could be related but I suspect it has something to do with the WP switch logic used in the code, you may also notice that you cannot manually switch back to the correct waypoint after the incorrectly sequenced one has been loaded in the PVI-800, all other waypoints can be selected.