Pally

Refueller: "Hold still,will you?" AWACS: "It tickles!!"

Idea is quite simple. Using our existing weapons cart within DCS, but remake it such that it is a ground unit so weapons can be loaded within the mission editor armament screen. A new weapons cart 3D model may be doable also? While for static units, players can use the <ARG> line in the weapons cart description.lua to reflect which weapon they want to show. That addition should be for both Red and Blue side to be fair, and in the end will add additional cool immersive effects to the already awesome DCS. What do you think?

Hi all: Hope this is best sub-forum for this issue. As titled, the AI task "Follow" only allow said command to be done once. That is after the AI completed one follow command, it no longer accepts another follow command be it is placed within the regular waypoint via task command or via AI Task Push by means of trigger. I haven't encounter this issue before the latest patch. In fact, the first "Follow" command issue I discovered was that when it is placed within a waypoint and the "Formation" command is placed before the "Follow", then the AI will ignore the follow command entirely. Once I placed the formation command behind the follow, then it worked again as expected. I haven't tried putting other arbitrary commands to see would it cause the same thing. Currently I can't get the AI to do the follow command more then once (discovered after far too many retries and rechecked all mission parameters). I tried even assigned the AI to follow another group but to no avail. The trigger was a simple one: if certain flag is true from anothe action performed (downed an invading group of fighters), then AI Task Push "Follow" where group B follow (re-join after detached from) group A. Nopes, th y no longer will do that latter rejoin by means of the Follow command. I haven't changed a thing after updated to latest patch. I even removed all the mods (some weapon mods, and light mods) after patch to be certain. I am considering to roll back to the previous one until I can find a fix or a workaround. The only way to get the AI to over come the AI Task Push issue is to set the task to AI Set Task, but doing so defeat the purpose of ever wanting the AI to do anything else after completing the said AI Set Task command (which they just land after group A lands instead of continuing on towards their own waypoint... etc.) Not sure if anyone have encounter this so far. May be it's me, may be it's something changed from later on ch? Thanks in advance! 04/08 update: I had to revert back to 2.9.6818 for the AI Follow command to work without the above issue. Bummer.

Thank you for this mod. Not sure is it placebo or not, but the lights do show from further out then before. I like it. Thanks!

Well, I have yet to trial-drop any of my own (inspired from DSPlayer) modded JDAM series as a player-controlled F-14B, but I recall no problems with AI employing them once speed is above 500 and at ~25K for the kinetic reach. Infact, I had so much fun with it, that I modded also the JSOW and GBU-39 (SDB I) also for AI launches. Loving it. I will upload the GBU-31(V2B) & (V4B) /38/32 variants pics by Sunday. I can hardly wait for the (U) for the F-14B. It's what we love.

Dearest ED staff: For the terrain graphic designers, programmers, and project managers who worked on the Nevada Training and Testing Range, you all are awesome! I found myself traveling to Vegas recently, and before my flight made the left hand turn final approach to the now Harry Reid International Airport, formerly named McCarran before 2021, I found myself busy looking out the left cabin window for Nellis AFB. High above, I noticed the two all too familiar mountain ranges and the lake shared-border by Nevada and Arizona within the NTTR. For the longest, I have used the Nellis AFB within the NTTR for funsies missions. Little had I thought the terrains where I have seen so many times in-game would help me find landmarks in real-life. I didn't get to visit Nellis AFB, yet, may be sometime in future. :) What is even more amazing is the terrain palettes of mountain ranges, the contrast and lights, especially during dusk casting those nice shadows over the mountain top. Mesmerizing! Computer graphics have came a long way (being an 80s kid me), but this DCS World NTTR is something else of a beauty after I have seen the real Nevada/Vegas landscape (The Luxor is there in map, too, good job!) Thanks, and cheers!

Hi Zabuzard: Thanks for your reply. Glad to help, actually. So, I went back into game, and checked as you suggested will a player-controlled F-14B will change anything. I loaded up pylon 1B with Mk.82AIR and 8B with Mk.82SE; I made certain to select them all to be in USN color in fuze option panel. The results were still the same; notably, that the Mk.82AIR would not even show the change within ME. Weird? Additional screenshots attached below: Pic 1a: Pylon 1B w/ Mk.82AIR even when selected in USN, but it will show no changes within ME armament screen as it remained in USAF olive drab color. Pic 1b: In-game external view, pilot as player-controlled. Pylon 1B w/ Mk.82AIR will not show the chosen USN color option in neither ME nor in-game. Pic 2a: Pylon 8B, but now with Mk.82SE (SnakeEye) selected again in USN color option. It does shows in ME, but later in-game it will result in USAF olive drab again. Pic 2b: External view showing Pylon 8B with Mk.82SE showing in-game olive drab color vs USN color option selected within ME. Pic 3a: Lastly, the Mk.82AIR will not even show the selected USN option even within ME armament screen for pylon 3. Unlike the Mk.82 SnakeEye which showed correctly. Pic 3b: For comparison, Pylon 6 loaded with Mk.82SE in USN option displayed without issues in ME. Pic 3b: Pylon 3 and 6: Pylon 3 w/ supposedly Mk.82AIR in USN option loaded, but would only show olive drab, whereas the nearby pylon 6 w/ Mk.82SE is congruent with the USN option in ME. : At this time I found that pylon 1B and 8B are most troublesome. Same for the Mk.82AIR where it will remain as olive drab in ME just as in-game no matter where I stick it. Well, that's all Zabuzard. Thanks and hopefully can help us on this. Love the F-14 as always Thanks! P.S: Sorry... I took the liberty to take some nice screenshots, too. Nevada sun and F-14.

F-14B+ "Old Dog New Tricks Edition" [WIP]

Hello Heatblur and everyone. I noticed something odd regarding the new bomb color graphics not showing in-game for pylon 1B and 8B; however, they do show within Mission Editor armament screen. I have attached three screenshots to better illustrate. Note that pylon 3, 4, 5, and 6 are showing everything correctly both in armament screen also in-game (not shown in attached screenshots). The screenshots showing a Mk.83 and x 2 Mk.82SE loaded on respective pylons within ME, but once I actually start the mission under an AI controlled the said ordinances will default back to their olive drab (USAF) color. Am I missing something or did something wrong? Does anyone notice this anomaly? Pic 1: Mk.82SE on pylon 1B showing only olive drab despite being selected as USN greyish concrete color within ME Fuze option panel. Same anomaly can be seen for Mk.83 on pylon 8B. Pic 2: For pylon 1B, the Mk.82SE is clearly selected within fuze option panel to show USN color within the ME armament screen. Pic 3: Meanwhile, a Mk.83 on pylon 8B is also selected with USN color within same screen. Does any of your Tomcats showing such a disparity between ME vs in-game for bomb color? Thanks in advance in helping.

I just checked that after the latest patch the issue is resolved. The AI JF-17 will use BRM rockets again. Thanks to Eagle Dynamics, and Deka Ironworks.

Thanks for relying. Turns out the issue is may be DCS itself re MT build. It crashes less now. Waiting for more patches to come.

Absolute beast of an adjustable table. Hane crank for height change. Goes well with steam gauges and dials, if you know what I mean. Husky Adjustable Table. &nbsp;Varying length from 46 to 72 inches w/ wheels or can be left out. I absolutely loved mine. Sturdy built, in fact, overbuild to last literally forever.

Just saw Open Beta update log that acknowledged the above discrepancy. Meanwhile, I will substitute the JF-17 with something else. Thanks Deka Ironworks and ED.

Yup, I had to surrender to using only unguided (UG_BRM 90mm). They were horribly inaccurate and AI had a nasty habit of climbing just high enough into the sweet engagement zone of SAM and AAA. Hope this will get a looked at and get a fix.

I think it was 4 meg followed by another 4 meg much later in high school junior year. That was ancient history, and had my memory got fussy about that detail. No excuse for forgetting that first computer where I had a 90/10 percent time split with my old man. Now, a 4090... man, I can't even. I'm holding on to my EVGA 2080 Ti from eBay back in 2019 in my 9700K. Happy with that choice, and can't--nor want to--keep up with the new tech every two years in the GPU domain. There must be a limit with these hobbies or else it can get out of hands quick.