Druid_

I'm not sure it's just arty to be honest. Any unit where you ask it to 'fire at point' and set a radius in the advanced tab does NOT do so if there are any other enemy units within LOS. It will engage those units rather than do as you told it. Easy to replicate yourself if you have a reasonable understanding of the ME.

^replied via PM

This has been asked for since the begining of BlackShark. Every single MizBuilder wants it I'm sure. As for the number of waypoints required for 4 hours, hundreds I should think but depends of course on terrain & speed. Look at time at first WP and the time at the last WP, should be 4 hrs apart but I'm sure you already knew that.

The problem with Thunderstorms & highly convective cloud is rapid updraughts & downdraughts (turbulence) combined with heavy rain, lightening & possibly Hail & at the upper levels heavy icing. Changes in lateral wind direction & speed are less significant. Tailwinds do not fool aircraft into thinking they are flying slower than they are unless of course you have blocked pitot probes The only speed indication the aircraft has then comes from its groundspeed fed from the INS/GPS.

^nice find.

Read through the last few pages in this thread and one thing that has not been mentioned much is the weather they were flying through at the time of the incident. I have flown in this area of the Atlantic for 10 years and they were flying through an area known as the ITCZ, Inter Tropical Convergenge Zone. Its a area of massive conventivity giving rise to some of the largest and highest Thunderstorms you will find anywhere. Also these TSs aren't necessarily solitary but quite often form a line Squall (I have flown 200 miles off track on one memorable occasion). So, back to the incident. They have pitot source information giving them erroneous speed instrument indications. The aircraft has overspeed/stall/overbank/overpitch protection systems all of which are now receiving incorrect information and therefore the plethora of failure messages & warnings (over 20 in total I believe). Their EICAM must have lit up like a christmas tree. Their autopilot system failed, their fly-by-wire system was in alternate law (which still has some of the aforementioned protection systems which kick in even when the autopilot is disengaged) and they are still avoiding convective cloud/TSs. What isn't known yet is whether their ADIRU (provides attitude info) failed or was giving erronious information. If this is so & at night with no discernable horizon they really were in a tight spot so to speak. If you just lose your airspeed and nothing else you can fly pitch & power settings (there is even a non-normal checklist for it in the Boeing) but if you are fighting protection systems & there is more failures on top then any crew are going to struggle. We can draw conclusions to our hearts content but until the accident report is published maybe I have given the armchair pilots a little insight into the fact that it isn't as straight forward as "they were stalling so why did he have the nose up". They had 3 pilots on board, 1 Captain & two F.O.'s. On long flights which are outside the normal crew duty hours you carry an extra (sometimes 2) pilot which allows each pilot about 3-4 hrs rest/sleep which extends their available crew duty hours. The Captain arriving in the flight deck having just woken would have been in a poor state & again without the CVR 'report we're not sure he even made it into his seat which was occupied by the relief F.O.

Almost finished my mission, Op Lagavulin, which has just this. Scenario, on call in CAP area, contactable via BlackOps, reply via F10 menu. Units on ground have ForwardAirController. Airborne assets include AWACS and a Tanker which through F10 Radio menu you can relocate to various areas on the Map. You control when tasks arrive to some degree & can ask to repeat task messages. Almost there, testing it now.

Panzertard threw some light on it in this thread http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=74916&highlight=event

Nomdeplume is correct but just in case it doesn't work, there is another workaround but involves a small amount of lua & utilising what I consider to be a bug in 1.1.0.7. I havent tried this in 0.8 so can't guarantee it will work. It utilises AI OFF on the FAC. In 0.7. he stops moving but continues to act as a FAC. At the hold waypoint, take out HOLD and instead add RUN SCRIPT. In the script box add the following code trigger.setUserFlag(999,true) In your triggers add ONCE description, FLAG 999 SET, AI OFF FacGroupName When you want him to start moving again then AI ON FacGroupName. Try it out & let me know, it worked in 1.1.0.7 & I'll be surprised if they changed it. EDIT: Just a thought but if you have 'FAC engage group' at that waypoint is it before or after the HOLD command?

Just a small piece of ME advise though Badger whilst I think of it. Although its nice from a MizBuilders point of view to have AI units doing a whole bunch of realistic activity, you have to ask yourself is it worth the effort? For instance you could launch the tornadoes, have them enter a trigger then just blow up the unit. You as a player will be none the wiser as to whether an Alarm missile took out the SAM unit or not. I'm sure your scenario was a little more complicated but you get my point? I have a mission where I started to put in a Bomber launching a cruise missile at an ammo dump you are approaching & I was having to change the bombers position as the timing wasn't quite right etc. In the end I deleted the bomber, added a radio message from the bomber e.g. "Uzi 11 missile away, 2 mins to target" & then 2 mins later used explode unit. Just as effective without the frustrating hassle. I am now tending towards building miz's in a bubble around the player. The player wont care that 4 f15s took out an attacking Mig29 60 nm from your position so why bother going to all the effort? If however there is a random outcome to engagements that will affect the whole outcome then sure go ahead. I think its called balancing. Sure would be nice to have a fully functional ME though, ... please.

yep I'm with you 100%. Since BlackShark the ME has always appeared to be a low priority. Flight Model, bombs not impacting correctly, visuals all get a lot of attention. After everyone has a certain grip on the aircraft etc they'll look towards some realistic missions to fly & they won't be able to because all of the communities missions have been nerfed by patches. Its a good job I'm not a tester. Come on guys, someone must be testing the damn ME surely? If so maybe he/they need a little help because there is still some pretty basic stuff that needs fixing or has been broken in this patch. I'd have a mission with not 1 single player aircraft in it that would test as many of the ME functions and units as possible. Us mission builders don't ask for much, just a fully functional ME where units do what they're told. That's not much to ask for surely. Oh I promise not to mention satellite view ...ooops, too late.

On lappy, so cant test. One thing that I just thought of, you have search & engage in zone for the tornadoes. Make sure the only unit in the zone is the SAM radar. All other units outside else he will try and engage any other units in the zone with guns. Burning fuel the whole time. To check Badger, run miz at 14x speed, follow TOrnadoes and see what they do. If they keep burning at low-level then maybe you have other threats they are picking up or they are trying to finish off the other SAM units. Once he drops his external tanks he RTBs.

Yep, ok get rid of the first SEAD -a -x and on the second one have it start on condition of flag 1. OR have it start after reaching orbit waypoint, up to you. Beware though, he will not go to orbit if there is other SEAD targets out there. ARTY. I see, I increased your radius on the target & it had no effect. Looks like they nerfed Arty I'm afraid, post it up as a bug as they are definately NOT doing what you are asking them to do in this mission. I even added a few more arty units to check and they all did the same thing. This is going to mean an ammendment to my latest miz too. Arrrggghhh. Possible solution, place a bunch of units in town and set them as invincible, maybe that will get them to start firing at town instead?

Only took a very quick look at your mission but quite possibly this is the problem. I see you have 1. SEAD -a -x but disabled a. Either delete this option completely or see further At WP 3 you have orbit but its set to RACE-TRACK which means they will orbit from WP3 to WP4. WP4 is the landing WP over the airfield. Either put another WP in between WP3 & 4 with the length of your RACE-TRACK or change it to CIRCLE at WP3. Also at WP3 you have a SEAD task. You could could just place a start condition on the original SEAD -a -x using flag 1. Delete the other SEAD task. If one of the Tornadoes expends it armament (all ALARMS) then both aircraft will RTB. IF its a fuel problems (burners in will certainly do that) then place a tanker somewhere down there. They should go to it automatically without any coding from you. By the way the orbit speed is groundspeed, so 270 kts at 20,000 ft is about 170 kts indicated, bit slow for a laden Tornado, make it 340 kts. EDIT: The above stands but after a closer look (run through at 14x speed) the main problem is that the Tornadoes can only use the ALARM on the radar, you have flag 1 set on the launcher unit as well. The other unit is the launcher which they engage with guns (and not very well unfortunately) all the time they are doing gun runs in burner. They eventually drop their tanks & RTB as out of fuel. You only need to set the flag based on the radar unit, the launcher is useless without the radar. By the way once they are inbound to target the AI takes over & they fly whatever speed they want, they were def supersonic after the IP with burners in. Maybe have them take-off with 20% (or less, play with it) fuel and have a tanker at 20,000ft on the same route to fill em to full before they reach the IP (realistic too). EDIT: The arty worked fine for me. They took a while before they started firing (8 mins+ I think) but they did fire on the targets on the hill. I was in a bit of a rush so I will take a closer look in a few days as AFK til then. D_ p.s. don't give up just yet, but I agree it can be pretty frustrating at times. Its taken me over 6 weeks to put a miz together & I'm still at it, I think its the learning experience as much as the end result that keeps me going sometimes.

At the moment I see no reason for the new EVENT option list other than for you to add it to make your description a little more logical to read. i.e. Makes reading your code a little easier

First click on the waypoint at which you would like the group/unit to hold at. Then in the advanced tab select PERFORM TASK then HOLD. You now have 2 options. 1) In the STOP condition (of PERFORM TASK-HOLD) tick IS USER and select a flag number (e.g. 1 this means he will Stop Holding when flag 1 is true) then in your triggers list add ONCE , GROUP DEAD targetgroupname SET FLAG 1 . OR 2) In your Triggers List Add ONCE , GROUP DEAD targetgroupname, RESUME humveegroupname Option 2 is obviously the easiest but you option 1 is more flexible if you want to add other conditions or you if you have several groups holding on the target destroyed condition.

African or European?

Yep, that should do you nicely. Especially when you overclock that i5-2500K.

Been doing some research on upgrading and discovered a suprising issue with some of the new Z68 chipset motherboards. They do not include a VGA output for utilising the onboard graphics of the 2500 & 2600 intel cpu's. For instance the flagship Gigabyte UD7 Z68 m'board costing a wopping $360 doesn't! One m'board that does is ASROCKs Z68 EXtreme4 which costs around $220 and my initial thoughts are that this is an excellent m'board. My only concern is the pci-e allowable configs of 16/NC/4 or 8/8/4. Might not cut it in SLi with forthcoming GPUs. If you're only planning on ever using 1 VGA card though, this M'board gets my vote for now.

Use a good thermal paste. There are several makes and some perform better than others, cash spent on a good paste is money well spent imho. I use artic silver but OCZ has this one which looks good. Silver based compounds perform best. regarding filters, not especially necessary if you don't mind giving the insides of your PC a blow out once or twice a year (depends how dusty the area around your PC is and how long you use your PC for). Filters will always restrict airflow so I don't use them. BTW the HAF932 looks like a great case. If you spend wisely on a good case it will last you for many upgrading years.

Ivy Bridge delayed 'til next year :( see here

Absolutely agree, in fact my motherboard when released had some issues with one of the Marvel raid controllers which provided very poor results. I switched to the other controller and all was well. Also not mentioned is format block size which can also affect performance. Also how you partition your hard drives, set up Windows Swap files & a few other tweaks will also affect your RAID performance. RAID ing and getting the best performance out of you system can be a lengthy process but one which when done properly can yield good worthwhile results. Polecat, my experiences with RAIDing are obviously very different to yours. Maybe post up your specs & someone here can help. Pyro, what onboard controllers do you have? I would at the very least try them out before spending money on a dedicated card. Tbh I doubt the performance gains will be worth the money of a dedicated RAID card.

I really couldn't agree more, there is no good time to jump on the technology bandwagon. I only upgrade when the $/performance increase is worth it. At the moment upgrading my OC i7-920 to Sandy Bridge with Ivy bridge not far away does not make sense. Besides my 'hidden from wife' penny (or Dirham where I live atm) upgrade Jar is only half full. As for utilising the onboard graphics of Sandy Bridge, personally I would give it a go if my monitor setup could utilise it. After all it will cost you nothing to try out. If it doesn't work or CPU temps are too high then go out & buy another VGA card.

If you have the time and don't mind a little challenge then try building your own watercooling set up. I've done a couple now and I've enjoyed the experience. Although I did it to overclock my main reason was because I hated having a vacuum cleaner wirrring next to me. My current set up has the Double Radiator & fans external to the case with a couple of quiet large CFM fans. Can hardly hear it. When I upgrade my graphics card I'll WC that & it will be almost silent (peace at last, until the kids come home that is). As far as the H50,H70 goes, a great easy WC solution but there are plenty of MOds out there for this kit also, just depends if you want to get into modding (its not as hard as you think & there's mountains of advice online in overclocking forums). Whatever road you choose, I'm sure you'll be happy with the i7-2500k/2600k.

Now your talking! The wait is killing me, I haven't built a new system for over a year :(. Maybe by then I can also snap up a couple of 120GB Vertex3s to RAID at a decent price :).