Bahger

A little ME quirk: You need to set the start time of your trigger-spawned unit to 23 hours ahead of mission start time for the logic to work. So, if your mission start is set to 12:00:00, set the spawning unit's start time to 11:00:01. Now it will work.

I got this from Genbrien on the SimHQ forums. Treat with caution as I see no "official" posting of it here yet. Preliminary 1.1.0.8 Change Log ! SUBJECT TO CHANGE ! FEATURES Audio • Added new surround sound system. Working in any Windows supported configurations, from 2 up to 8 channels: 2.1, quadraphonic, 5.0, 5.1, 7.1, etc. User Interface • Added the Briefing panel in the flight - [LALT-B] • Added the Debriefing panel in the flight - [RSHIFT - ‘] • Aerial refueling now tracked in log book. • AIM-9 loadout listed twice corrected. Units • New E-2D “Hawkeye” AWACS. • Corrected L-39 landing/taxi lights. • Fixed CH-53E textures. • UAZ LOD model fixed. • Su-33 floating on carrier deck fixed. Effects • New dynamically self-shadowing cockpit with option to turn off and on in Options screen. • Improved cloud density. • HDR overcast blur adjusted to be less noticeable. • HUD preventing shadows in field of view fixed. • Lightning color fixed. • Fixed glowing dust clouds behind ground units. • Fixed blue flare. • Fixed disappearing cloud shadows. • KC-135 navigation light bloom adjusted. Artificial Intelligence • Reduced delay in JTAC messages. • JTAC Abort messaging adjusted. • JTAC releasing player before all targets destroyed fixed. • Predator taxi problems corrected. • Wingmen Engagement logic improved when threats are in target area. • Corrected remaining gun ammo report to JTAC. • JTAC "use cannon" message fixed. Weapons • Corrected inaccurate AGM-154 JSOW. Track Replay • Improved track replay accuracy. Multiplayer • Multiplayer performance degradation due to an anomaly large SADL message traffic was fixed. • Muliplayer users spawning at same location fixed. • Multiplayer timeout / server timeout fixed. Avionics / Cockpit • Fixed – M274 rockets on LAU68 launcher appear as M257 in DSMS. • Sidewinder jettison capability was removed. • HUD will not revert to NAV when Master Arm is cycled in Air-to-Air mode. • DTSAS status message on HUD and CDU was reworked. OFF MAP capability was restored – digital map is available in radius of 450 kilometers around operating area. • Numerous HUD symbology fixes in HARS mode. • Fixes to GCAS caution light – it will be lit now if EGI is not providing attitude information. • Fixed GCAS training auto-scroll function. • Fixed ILS audio control. • Fixed AC Generator caution lights logic. • More accurate signal light test indications. • Momentary AC electrical power loss (causing CICU restart) was removed when engines generators turned on. • Altimeter PNEU fixed. Additionally now ELEC/PNEU switch has 3 positions with spring loaded center position. It should be held in desired position (ELEC or PNEU) for 1 second to switch altimeter mode of operation. • Cold start IFFCC elevation correctly set to DTS and not HOT on ramp start. • Emergency hand brake implemented. • Maverick power management by location fixed. • ILS working with no power fixed. • RWR symbol placement adjusted. • ILS and Marker beacons fixed. • Laser guided bombs guiding with no designation fixed. • Tor, 2S6, and Osa search radar RWR indications fixed. • Fire detect bleed air leak test button light fixed. • System Status page 1760 station indications corrected. • EGI is no longer selected automatically on NMSP on ramp start. In all cases the EGI should be selected manually now. • Fourth depress of UFC ALT ALERT button will exit altitude alert edit mode. • Most of the UFC SEL rocker functions were made UFC mode independent. • DTSAS PGCAS function was implemented – now GCAS will better predict collision in mountainous area with DTSAS turned ON and operating. • GCAS and weapon events counters were implemented on CDU LASTE page. • Fixed missing audio during RWR test. • CDU DIVERT page was fixed – some airfields were missing. • “Slave all to SPI” function for Maverick now works only if missile is RDY on DSMS page, and Maverick video is up on any of MFCDs. • Airfield name on CDU FLDINFO page has correct maximum length now. • TAD hook is cleared now if it was a SADL symbol and SADL was switched off. • AI radar detection range by RWR was adjusted. • Maverick stations selection logic in DSMS was fixed. • ILS frequency selector now works in 0.05 MHz increments instead of 0.01 MHz. • TAD symbols hooking and display priorities were updated. • HUD SPI symbology display conditions adjusted. • Maverick impact point accuracy in Forced Correlate mode was improved. • An option to turn on/off closest friendlies symbols was added on TGP CTRL page. • T-handle lights now working correctly. • Corrected cockpit tool tips. • Reduced probabilities for cockpit random failures. Random failure for gun and CICU was added. • Jerky Flight Path Angle indication on HUD during taxi was fixed. Minor logic adjustments were made to TVV symbol.

Thanks, Dragon, as ever, these files are very well made and it's good of you to share them. What is the .lma3 file in the upload package, please?

In the default TAD screen, north is indicated by a small triangular caret on one of the range circles. Otherwise, as Zamboni says, use EXP1 and 2, they are very useful for maneuvering the map away from your own a/c position when needed.

Glad you enjoyed the .miz, Derelor, and thank you for posting. Funny you mention the "cheating" at Angels 20 because Ice on SimHQ posted there yesterday that he found the mission too easy, as you are able to plink the SA-19s from altitude. Perhaps it is easy (for the competent to advanced virtual A-10 pilot) but the truth is that I like realistic scenarios, therefore in any scenario of mine except Allies vs China or Russia, Blue will either have air supremacy or a high CAP. This means that it's always possible to hit SA-19s from 20k and longer-range SAM systems in missions will always be countered by SEAD.

I have three flights of A-10s (each a 2-ship). I have classified each a/c as "Client". As you know, there are no actual "flight" groupings in A-10 MP, you have to create individial aircraft and just organise/locate/name them as "flights". When I load the mission in the MP .exe, none of the A-10s show up. Should I make one a/c in each flight "Player" and the other "Client"? Thanks for the assist, as ever.

Hey Sorcer3r, your English is good, much better than my German. Yes, AFACs can only be tasked with one JTAC assignment -- theoretically they can do more but I haven't got it to work yet -- so their ability to linger and call out bullseye coordinates on remaining targets is often very useful. This is exactly what I am going to do in my new .miz.

It's generally not necessary to alter the default delivery consent modes. Where it can be very effective, however, is in a low-level ingress with, say, CBUs. Switching from consent mode "Off" to "3/9" enables you to make a much shallower dive to get the pipper on the target. You'll get a non-segmented azimuth consent line in the HUD at 3 -5 degrees nose down. The 3/9 and 5 mil modes present narrower margins for error and will refuse consent if the release does not conform to these parameters. For this reason, I do not switch to 3/9 or 5 mil unless there are specific advantages such as the example given above. In my experience, 3-9 and 5 Mil are used mainly as default modes, not in CCIP but in CCRP, where, for example dropping an unguided Mk-82 on a designated target requires a 5 Mil release consent mode to maximise the chances of a hit. When dropping an LGB, however, the symbology and process is basically the same but the consent mode is 3/9 (I seem to recall) because a small deviation in aiming calculations can obviously be compensated for by the bomb's (limited) ability to guide itself to the target.

Huh... Embarrassing to confess but I did not realise that JSTARS was modelled in DCS A-10. Which aircraft can be given a JSTARS role?

Yes, just make a subdirectory in your .../Missions/Multiplayer file called DragonsTrainingPack (I don't think the name matters) and put all the unzipped files in there.

Funnt, I could have sworn I heard AWACS calling out ground targets but that might have been in YouTube videos of missions made with customised voice triggers.

I thought I'd use an AWACS in my next mission, and challenge the player to input AWACS bullseye readouts into the CDU and create offset markpoints. I'm a bit fuzzy on what kind of "service" the AWACS can provide for an A-10 flight. It calls out ground targets as well as air targets, right? If so, what kind? Stationary as well as moving? Obviously you do not give AWACS specific targets in the ME -- or so I assume -- so what are the criteria for its selection of objects to call out? I'd be grateful if someone could clarify, many thanks.

Use CCIP and run in on your SPI at 10,000 ft AGL. At about 3.8 nm from your SPI, cut power and quickly push nose down to about 45 degrees below the horizon line. As you pull the pipper up onto the target, power up smoothly and aim to be at full power by the time the recticle is over the target and you pickle the bombs. I know you didn't ask for a CCIP tutorial but I thought I'd supply this info as it has made me very accurate with delivering CBU-97s using CCIP and the described profile, especially using full power for the pull out and egress, will enable you to avoid almost all ground defenses including very lethal AA from BMP-2s. If you go CCRP, my best tip is not to run in at full power or highest possible speed; I have found this can make the solution very elusive in flight. And if you are not at full power then you shouldn't be too low, as this will only increase your exposure to ground defenses further. Having practiced quite extensively, I can get direct hits using CCRP/5 Mil on single vehicles from 8,000 to 10,000ft with regular Mk-82s, so I cannot imagine this technique not working with CBUs. The more stabilised your ingress, the greater your chance of success. Finally, remember you can alter the CBU's HOF (Height of Function, or burst height) in the DSMS Inventory menu. For widely dispersed targets, a higher than default HOF will be more effective.

Yup, the MP version is included in that d/l.

Fishbot, that's odd. However, I don't know anything about 7-Zip (I use WinRAR) and I know that zipped files can get mangled and corrupted by certain processes or programs. It cannot be a problem with the d/l itself ot I would have heard more about it. Try downloading it from the d/l page on the ED site here. Let me know how it goes.

Glad someone is flying it in MP. Springfield 3 and 4 have CCRP-only CBU-105s so that you can hit the armor from altitude if you prefer not to deliver 97s in the traditional manner.

Hey Avatar, glad you enjoyed the .miz, thanks for the encouragement. It's an acknowledged bug that in ground started missions the AI won't obey "Attack with...Maverick" orders; hopefully this will be addressed in 1.0.0.8. Regardless of this, even the devs recommend you order your wingman to anchor out of range rather than let him dice with the SA-19s. However, Tiger's mod (see notes above and enclosed in mission file) corrects most of this behavior and improves AI prosecution and evasion of SAMs. The mod enables them to attack effectively on "Attack with..." orders but they will still jettison all bombs on launch.

In doing an ILS approach from the southwest to runway 07 at Kobuleti, ATC always gives a direct vector to the airport, not a course intercept vector for the localizer. It's ok if visibility is clear for the approach but attempting this in IMC would be a problem, as you'd be unable to get on the localizer far enough out to fly a stabilised ILS approach via the localizer for 07. You have to hope you break out early enough to make unwise, radical course corrections, or go around, converting to a VFR pattern. It's odd. Can anyone comment? I know my process is not at fault; I've shot a hundred ILS approaches in the sim, but never to Kobuleti. Approaching Vaziani you get a sensible localizer intercept vector, not a direct vector to the airport.

Do you have a CH HOTAS, by any chance?

"Mark" is by far the best solution. TMS Right/Short over the nav WP in your TAD, switch your steerpoint dial from "Flightplan" to "Mark" and you're done. Messing about editing waypoints is just not necessary and slewing down from nav altitude is imprecise and time-consuming.

Well a common sense definition is not one in which a "tactical" withdrawal under fire is accomplished by presenting the thinly-armored backsides of defending vehicles to an approaching offense! Reversing into prepared positions is a tactical withdrawal. Turning about-face and driving away from the threat is a rout. I realise that what you are talking about is something different, not a defensive maneuver in battle but a redeployment of defensive units that are not being engaged by the enemy. Your script sounds pretty impressive, and you have the skills to make it work well, but I want to create a simple, mobile set-piece defense under fire (like Israeli tanks performed when heavily outnumbered in the Golan Heights in '73). This kind of mobile defense in depth is the only option available to a commander with no prepared (dug-in) positions, facing a determined offense, if he does not want to squander his forces by defending statically without revetments for his armor. However, with no reverse gear for defending vehicles, defensive scenarios in the ME will always be attritional, a slugfest favoring the offense, rather than tactical, i.e. maneuver-based, because whereas the offense can maneuver to its advantage, the defense cannot move without disengaging and turning tail -- a disaster -- and then doing another 180 in order to re-engage. It makes no sense, and highlights the difference between "move" and "maneuver". It's unlikely to happen but I'd love to see some kind of prepared defensive positions in the ME, a tool to calculate line-of-sight, the ability to position vehicles in defilade with some precision, mortars and, simplest of all, a reverse gear for armor and AI that could use it to withdraw tactically when under fire. Defilade is no good unless vehicles can back up when enemy artillery draws a bead on them. Dream on!

Thus I stand behind my initial point, which is that "as vehicle movement commands currently stand, a mobile, tactical defense is impossible to create".

It is one of the most difficult airplanes to persuade to leave the ground in an orderly manner that I have flown, in sims or r/l.

Check your spam folder. I've scratched my head for hours before remembering that anonymous, automated email often goes directly into spam.

The lack of a "reverse" command for vehicles, and the absence of dug-in defenses, seem to me to be the two biggest omissions from the ME's tactical repertoire (not that I'm complaining, I believe the glass to be more than half-full). I'm sure nothing can/will be done about dug-in defences but a "reverse" command is AI rather than terrain-based and might be fairly easily implemented, no? As vehicle movement commands currently stand, a mobile, tactical defense is impossible to create.