Druid_

The AI collision detection is something that has been worked on and improved. It will hopefully make the next patch.

My best advice for now is wait for the patch. A lot of bugs with JTAC have been fixed. I can't promise that all are fixed but it is something I have been working on with the dev responsible. So all I can say for now is have a little patience and hopefully your particular problem will be resolved. Just one more thing with regards to JTAC, sometimes the mission builder does not implement the JTAC correctly so it is not necessarily a bug from the client. There are a number of threads related to JTAC implementation which explain in detail the correct methodology. If you are having any problems with version 1.2.1 then please post a trk file and I will take a look at it and try to resolve/fix the issue.

Unfortunately your understanding of the way these graphs are used is wrong. The temp is ISA deviation from standard. The empty weight of the A10 is 29000 so allowing say 1000 lbs of fuel and a drag index of 8 at ISA standard will give a cruise ceiling of 33,500 ft

If you lose both engines the first thing you do is Jettison all of your stores. So best glide would be roughly the same with only fuel load making a small difference. Vr, V2 would be useful though. For me though a simple single page graph is easier than plugging numbers into an app (& quicker I should think). Good luck with it though.

If I remember correctly there is an option to check if the value of a flag is > x so use, once -> flag 'number' greater than 22 -> action.

Although in the article I posted, the fob runway length was 260m, it was due to a shortage of matting. It was intended to be 400m long which makes a lot more sense for a heavily laden Harrier of that era. Maybe an Av-8B with more powerful engines might cope with 260m but you'd better get your approach right or you'd end up off the end much like Wg Cdr Peter Squire did (didn't hurt his career though).

Some info on Harrier fob's here http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2012/04/harrier-forward-operating-base-falkland-islands/ A bit old but some measurements & pictures might give you some ideas.

Known issue and fixed in testers build.

I hope your bed isn't up 1 floor and directly above your study desk. Might ruin a nights sleep .... permanently!

In DCSW 1.2.0, if the JTAC has reached its last waypoint (and this includes a static unit as it is already at its last waypoint, i.e. WP 0) it will stop executing any enroute tasks. A way around this is to place a HOLD action at WP 0 then add another waypoint a small distance away. He won't go there as he is held at WP 0 but at least he will still execute any FAC actions you set at WP 0. (This problem has been changed in the testers build and will hopefully make the next patch).

Ok sorry for taking so long to get back. I do think that its a bug. Your mission should work. I set him to move and he started working and again stopped working when he stopped. I'll look at it some more and see if I can narrow down the problem before I report it.

I have a ASUS P8Z77-V DELUXE (excellent mobo by the way) set up with a homemade watercooling setup. The motherboard is adequately cooled by the case fans i.e. air drawn in through the front of the PC and expelled out the back. I have no additional chipset fans and never have in my last 2 watercooled setups and never had any temp problems. Regarding which mobo to go for I think ASUS have reallly gone for it on the z77 chipset, as to which one to go for depends on your setup. Check Here for a useful table showing differences between the better ASUS mobo's. Good luck with the build.

Can't download and check yr miz at the moment but a few ideas. 1. Use fac-engage group and tick the visible box. Or 2. Set the fac-assign group in the triggered actions and then use the trigger action AI TASK>FAC Assign group to enable it as required. Fac-assign and fac-engage GP with visible ticked should know about enemy group regardless of wether or not they have line of sight LOS. I quite often prefer a predator drone since LOS isn't a problem. To check if ground units have Los you have to zoom in on them and look around. You'd be surprised how undulating the terrain can be when you get down to ground level.

I think you'd be surprised what the modding community could come up with given the chance. After all you don't have to install the Mod if you don't like it. Don't think Airfield ATC affect all aspects of the sim but I do agree that it shouldn't take too much to improve it, even slightly. You could probably do something along these lines yourself with triggers at the moment but yeh, that would be a nice feature.

My point was that, what exactly do you model to be accurate? I was providing an alternative view to accurate comms. I've flown out of USAF, RAF, German and civilian international airfields where full ATC comms are very different at each. Construct a war scenario mission and what comms do we go for then to remain realistic? All of them? It's a minefield and whatever ED does it will please some and not others. Maybe a solution would be to open up this particular area to modders.

I think it's just a question of resources. I guess they have to prioritise and ATC isn't the big deal to some that it is to others. There are much bigger issues that I would rather them work on. Who knows maybe they will improve ATC at some point. I'd like the option to turn off ATC and have the option to use triggers in the mission to simulate ATC. That would be an easy fix but obviously mean a little more work for miz builders.

Poor examples Eddie. You can't compare Libya and Afghanistan with a NATO Russian conflict over Georgia. In Libya they had air superiority and no threats anywhere near their operating bases. Afghanistan bases do have EMCOM procedures when mortar threat levels are high, but in general there is little need since its generally known what they are armed with. In IRAQ we had air superiority and our bases were well away from the front line and the only threat was Scuds. Given the amount of traffic it was deemed safer to have standard comms. However, the tankers who were much closer to the enemy were operating without comms and at night (it got pretty scary at times too). If you have a conflict with two opposing sides fairly equally matched in fairly close proximity then comms are going to be at a minimum. In the RAF we practiced these procedures regularly. You don't announce when you are launching or recovering. Why give the enemy free SA? Even in a 2/4 ship at low-level we used wing rocks, hand signals between aircraft rather use the radios to communicate. Using the radios was a last resort if any other methods failed or weren't able to convey the message.

Of course you are describing peace time comms. In a war situation it's very much different, shouldn't we be modelling that correctly instead? Because if we do then there will be a lot less communication going on. In short, comms to ATC are kept to an absolute minimum, pre-arranged SOPs will be in force (and will vary depending on the situation/threats). This extends to tanker ops also. For instance war time air refuelling procedures are accomplished with no communication between tanker and receiver at all. If I want to blah blah with ATC continuously then I'll fly FSX. In DCS however, & for reality I wish I had the option to turn off comms in a bunch of my missions. EMCOM 0 !

Not necessarily so. In fact I am definately more inclined to believe ground unit AI behaviour and weapons are responsible for game crashes rather than trigger logic. If you are having problems with a .miz then please post it up along with your crash file. You never know you might have something we are yet to detect.

Difficult problem you have here and since I have never experienced this in all the years I have of Misssion Editor use I am inclined to think its a PC issue rather than a software issue. The only things I can think of is to Try turning off the sound in the options menu, make sure you have the latest sound card drivers. make sure there is no conflict between motherboard on-board sound and pc sound card if that's your pc config. Other than that all I can suggest is to try a re-install. Sorry if that doesn't help, pc issues are a pain and in my experience so many things can cause problems , such is the case of pc architecture!

JTAC will not transmit targets to you automatically. In that I mean that you must check-in with him first on whatever frequency you have allocated to him. You can set a trigger and do action message "targets available, contact JTAC axe,an on 35.0 am" though. Setting up a drone is easier since the frequency is already displayed so you don't have to set an advanced waypoint option 'set frquency' or callsign for that matter. The rest is the same as for a ground FAC.

Hack starts from the moment you hit the button. If you take 30 seconds to enter 1000 (10 mins) and then Enter it will display 9.30. This is the correct use. In reality you may have a flight of 3, one calls Hack at which time you all press the HACK button. How long each pilot takes to type out the time and press Enter is not a factor and when they do each pilot will have exactly the same time displayed.

If the enemy has unopposed ground units at your airfield then its lost. The enemy has control over it until such time you can destroy the enemy ground units at that airfield and either land at it or have your ground units capture it. From a Mission editor perspective I would have clients then spawn at an airfield further away from the 'front line' and certainly not at that airbase again. Spawning clients is something being looked at and has been mentioned by various testers. At the moment the problem is that even un-activated clients are shown in the join screen which makes it a little messy and confusing. So in short. Mission builders should check the occupier of an airfield. Spawn relevant units/clients there. Once airfield is taken by the enemy they should then spawn units at the next closest allied airfield and so on. Finally when all of a sides airfields in the mission scenario are taken then its 'Mission Over ... Red/Blue side wins".

You could do it by setting low cloud with a thickness of 1000ft, fog and low visibility. take-off at a high altitude airbase which would be above the cloud layer and land at the lower altitude airbase that is right in the middle of your set weather.

Just a small correction, a lomcevak is done with full RIGHT rudder, left aileron and stick full forward. never heard of gyroscopic forces on a prop shift being a limitation for this manoeuvre. It's a pro spin manoeuvre (depending on aircraft type) much like a flick roll and g forces are usually more limiting especially as the manoeuvre induces negative g initially before gyroscopic forces become more prevalent, which is why the manoeuvre is initiate at slow to medium speeds I doubt a light P51 would have too much trouble coping with this manoeuvre although the wing isn't suited to it. Semi-Aerobatic Aircraft with much lower g limits than the P51 have done lomcevaks, the main problem is that they lack the power to sustain them and as a result it's weak and not pretty. They don't disintegrate as a result of gyroscopic forces.