-Painter-

...die Fehlerursache fьr dieses Problem ist gefunden und wird beseitigt. Siehe engl. Forumsteil.

...I understood your last posting exactly as advise to do so! Please double-check your statements before state a menace ;)

Die Kritik durch Alexduke ist im Kern mehr als berechtigt! Wenn man einen Patch verцffentlicht, ist das Mindeste, was dazu gehцrt, anzugeben, WAS denn damit gepatcht wird. Eine lapidare Aussage, dass lediglich etwas (Unwichtiges? Wichtiges?) am Uninstaller geдndert wurde, hilft absolut nicht weiter. Genau diese Information ergдnzt um die Aussage, was genau denn der Fehler war bzw. ob man diesen Patch obligatorisch benцtigt (wovon man bei einem Patch normalerweise ja auszugehen hat, sei es fьr eine korrekte De-Installation, sei es fьr die Ausfьhrung des Programms), gehцrt zu einer Patch-Verцffentlichung dazu. Wenn diese Informationen nicht zeitgleich oder wenigstens zeitnah gegeben werden, ist das schlichtweg mangelhafter Service am Kunden und sind Unmut und Beschwerden vorhersehbar und gerechtfertigt. Gдnzlich abgeschossen wurde der Vogel nun ja auch noch dadurch, dass der "b" offenbar Fehler des "ohne Buchstaben" wieder herstellt. Zu dem glorreichen Hinweis zu diesem Fehler, dass der Patch doch problemlos funktioniere, wenn man seine Systemsprache auf russisch umstelle, sollte man sich weitere Kommentare lieber verkneifen - das Thema hatten wir schonmal beim "ohne Buchstabe"-Patch ;) (Nur der Vollstдndigkeit halber: Der Hotfix a zu b funktioniert wohl problemlos im Gegensatz zum vollstдndigen b-Patch. Wer also ein funktionierendes "b" haben mцchte, sollte sich irgendwo den "a"-Patch bzw. originдren 1.0.1 besorgen und dann den Hotfix a->b drьberorgeln. Solange man Blackshark nicht deinstallieren mцchte, braucht man den "b" nicht, sondern reicht der "a" bzw. originдre 1.0.1 -> klingt doch alles sonnenklar und logisch, oder? Es gibt also auch hier keinen Grund sich zu beschweren :megalol: ).

There is an error in the manuals (checked EN and DE): English pdf page 141 "PVTz-800 Off-Board Targeting Data Link Mode Panel": German pdf page 128 "PVTz-800 Panel fьr externe Zieldatenьbertragung via Data Link" The statement "mode allows you to send and receive information from just the flight leader" is false. In both modes, WINGM and COM, you are able to send and receive DL to/from WINGM and COM. The only difference is the "double-circle" on the ABRIS for the COM and the "single-circle" for the WINGM.

I am not worried. Thanks for your helpful post joey ;)

upps - sorry - didnt got this thread before posting in the updates-section. Feuerfalke, for me your words are not very clear. Are there substantial changes from "a"? Or is it just "renaming" of the existing patches so that all localised versions have the same name? If there are substantial changes: What in detail has been changed?

- 3 minutes for all kinds of damage - you only have to shut down (fuel cut-off, batteries) and wait 3 minutes - you do not get any notification at all but you notice the finished repairs when you look at your cockpit-switches - they are all in standard-off-position when repairs are finished (and of course the damages are not longer present)

What mesh-data do you use? What is the resolution (1m x 1m or 10m x 10m or 50m x 50 m or ...)? Would be great if it was better than it is in the standard map. And what data do you use for texturing? Real-world satellite-data? Would be great to get a photorealistic scenario. Thanks for choosing Afghanistan! I think this could be a great base for some realistic kinds of missions!

Evtl. ein anderes Problem, vielleicht aber auch дhnlich gelagert. Ich habe teilweise auch recht heftige Ruckler bei zugleich jedoch relativ ordentlicher Framerate (>22) - die Ruckler passen nicht zur Framerate. Beispiel: Dragons "The Dam" -> in der Gegend um das FARP herum ruckt es sehr heftig. Ein anderer Multiplayer bestдtigte mir das. Die Ruckler erschlieЯen sich mir nicht so ganz, da mir die Belastung am FARP nicht so fьrchterlich hoch erscheint und wie gesagt die Framerate rein zahlenmдЯig auch in Ordnung zu sein scheint.

Great work! Nevertheless I have some suggestions: 1. Checklist item "Tower" I would prefer to have on the left hand side the actual communication task and on the right hand side the required result from the communication. Because a checklist contains of the items to be checked and the results, but not of advises. The items are: Before startup checklist: startup clearance - received Before taxi checklist: taxi clearance - received Before control hover checklist: control hover clearance - received Before take-off checklist: take off clearance - received Approach checklist: ATC clearance (inbound) - received Before landing checklist: Landing clearance - received 2. Some items are double without good reason for it. You should check all items, if they are done in a previous checklist. For instance: lights. They are checked on in the pre-start check (16 & 19). So in my mind there is no reason to check them again in the pre-taxi-check (5) and pre-takeoff (3). Who should have switched them off when we checked them on before ;) ? Something else is it regarding fence-in! At this point the lights ussually go all off, so they have to be checked when fence-in. The same regardings fence-out the other way around: Beacon usually goes on at this point. In general regarding lights on/off: Beacon: - pre-start -> ON - fence-in: OFF/ fence-out: ON NAV-lights: - pre-start -> as required (only when not under combat conditions they go ON usually! If there is any danger from the enemy they will stay OFF usually!) - fence-in: OFF/ fence-out: as required Blade-Tip-lights: - pre-start -> as required (only when not under combat conditions they go ON usually! If there is any danger from the enemy they will stay OFF usually!) - fence-in: OFF/ fence-out: as required Formation-lights: - pre-start -> as required - fence-in: as required/ fence-out: as required Landing-light: - pre-takeoff -> as required (only when not under combat conditions they go ON usually! If there is any danger from the enemy they will stay OFF usually!) - fence-in: OFF/ fence-out: as required - pre-landing -> as required (only when not under combat conditions they go ON usually! If there is any danger from the enemy they will stay OFF usually!) - aft-landing: OFF 3. Taxi-Checklist Is it better to check collective full down before releasing parking brakes? I think so. So 6 and 7 should be the other way around. That it is for now from my side :) Edit: Lights completed.

V2.2 (wobei ich natьrlich auch die V2.1 installieren kцnnte)

Looks great! Have fun! Hopefully see you in the skies soon :)

Please post your DCS-Versions. Maybe there are some differences?

I am new with Freetrack. Would be great if you guys could post your Freetrack-DCS-profiles here! Thanks in advance! Edit: Anwers please here.

The better way to correct the sound-bug would be to correct the sound-bug instead of making changes regarding the door :music_whistling:

...yes. Without problems here. Thx for the great mod!

I renamed yours on my server (just added _coop_8 or _coop_4 to know how many slots are available before loading the mission - maybe you can do this with your missions that way?) and experienced no problems. Same with other missions. So I think there should be no problems after renaming as long as you do not use the new possibility to start a new mission-file from within a running mission.

Konsequenterweise sollten identische Patche identisch benannt werden ;) . Sonst führt das eben zu diesen Verwirrungen hier. Schön, dass das nun geklärt ist und damit nun wohl alle auf gleichem Stand und glücklich sind :) . Let's fly :pilotfly: :joystick:

Handelt es sich da um einen versehentlichen Schreibfehler bei der Verlinkung auf der Homepage oder ist der dt. Patch tatsächlich 1.0.1 und nicht 1.0.1a? Falls er 1.0.1 ist: Ist der Hotfix auf den dt. 1.0.1 Patch anwendbar?

Is it possible to implement this model into DCS (licenced)? If it would be - the "only" additional work to do is to make the flight model, the systems and 3D-cockpit to get an excellent helicopter for search & rescue missions.

The respawn-problem appeared in the VIP-mission at the weekend too. One Heli re-spawned out from the FARP-helipad. After several tries to rejoin it re-spawned correctly. In my mind it looks strong like a ingame-bug.

Today again problems starting the tool on two clients. Seems to be the same as described before. On one of the PCs the tool run a few days ago without problems. Will report here if we find out any further detail about the problem.

Only tested with a couple of channels in MP. When you tune a channel witch is not available in Mumble then the tool puts you in the R-800 "root". That's fine. No problems so far.

...Not really an idea why, but it is working properly now (after restart?). :thumbup: Good solution for now! :thumbup:

...deactivated.