Cold War 1947 - 1991

[Alpenwolf]

7 minutes ago, Dagger 2-2 said:

Will you be using SC or standard carriers for the new mission ?

 

2 x Super Carrier for Blue. 1 x Kuznetsov for Red.

[Dagger 2-2]

2 minutes ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

2 x Super Carrier for Blue. 1 x Kuznetsov for Red.

I assume the Kuznetsov will be the SC version though.

[Alpenwolf]

34 minutes ago, Dagger 2-2 said:

I assume the Kuznetsov will be the SC version though.

 

I'm not aware of any SC Kuznetsov. Unless you mean the 2017 (remake) Kuznetsov? In that case, yes. It simply looks way better with more details onboard.

[reichenwald]

vor 19 Minuten schrieb Alpenwolf:

 

I'm not aware of any SC Kuznetsov. Unless you mean the 2017 (remake) Kuznetsov? In that case, yes. It simply looks way better with more details onboard.

It can't be used by non SC owners though.

[Alpenwolf]

35 minutes ago, reichenwald said:

It can't be used by non SC owners though.

 

I know but I recon all the navy enthusiastic players have the SC carriers. We'll see...

[NELLUS]

9 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

Server News:

 

* Check here for today's MiG-15 vs F-86 event on the KOREA! 1952 server.

 

* As announced some days ago, work on a new mission featuring the Mariana Islands map has started:

- It will be an exceptional mission featuring modern jets and aircraft carriers. Pretty much like operation Tiberias.

- China and Russia vs USA, France (SA342Mistrals) and Sweden (AJS37's).

- There will be some weapons restrictions.

- Blue invades, Red defends.

- Amphibious operations included. Blue APC's (AVV-7) crossing the waters between two islands (10 km distance). Chinese Mi-24's must stop them!

- Russia supports China through its navy: Su-33's and Ka-50's.

- No Mi-8's, no UH-1's => No transport tasking.

- So far, no ET's and no AMRAAM's. Only Su-33's have access to ER's and F-14B's have access to Phoenixes. The rest will have access to R's, T's and AIM-7M's.

- R-73's included. AIM-9M's included.

 

Russian Forces: Su-33's and Ka-50's.

Chinese Forces: J-11's, MiG-29S' (Though as Russian units due to limits in the ME but with Chinese skin), Chengdu J-7 (MiG-21's) and Mi-24's.

US Forces: F-14B's, F-18C's, F-15C's (once a certain island is captured), AV-8B's and A-10C's (once a certain island is captured).

French Forces: SA342Mistrals tasked with covering American APC's crossing the waters. Which means they hunt Hinds and maybe Ka-50's if...

Swedish Forces: AJS37's.

 

- I might add the Su-25 or Su-25T.

- Also, I might add the M-2000C to the French forces.

 

More details will be shared soon. As for now, hone your "navy skills" and practice some takeoffs and landings on carriers. We don't want to have aircraft crashing into carriers wasting assets so practice now instead on the server, please.

Got the part that AV8B’s will be activated ones an island is captured, but would it be possible to add a smaller amount of AV8B’s departing from Tarawa? Maritime ops are insanely fun

[Alpenwolf]

8 minutes ago, NELLUS said:

Got the part that AV8B’s will be activated ones an island is captured, but would it be possible to add a smaller amount of AV8B’s departing from Tarawa? Maritime ops are insanely fun

 

The "(once a certain island is captured)" stands next to the F-15C and A-10C. Not the AV-8B

The Harrier can and will certainly spawn at an aircraft carrier. The other two can't, hence the later activation if certain islands are captured.

[Grievo]

On 7/10/2021 at 7:54 PM, Alpenwolf said:

Server News:

 

 

- No Mi-8's, no UH-1's => No transport tasking.

 

you mis-spelled “Huey gunship”

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

* Operation Last Man Standing:

- Less structures to destroy at the TA's (mainly the "big/bigger" ones).

- Added ammo trucks to many AAA's which were lacking the ability to rearm.

 

* The new mission featuring the Mariana Islands map is almost finished. Briefing and briefing images are being finalised. After that I'll need to run some tests. Unlike operation Tiberia cmdr is excluded. Only JTAC is allowed. The US American AVV-7's (Assault Amphibious Vehcile) are AI controlled. AA's and AAA's can be controlled by JTAC operators. That means a human driven SA-15/19 in the right hands can become tough for F-18C's to destroy. However, not many SA-15's/19's are available in the first place.

 

Note:

AA's and AAA's might become AI controlled if players start hiding them around which is possible. They're there to fight off the enemy and not hide in the forest until the mission's up to win it like that. So JTAC players keep that in mind, please. We'll see how the first round goes.

Edited July 12, 2021 by Alpenwolf

[Enigma89]

Alpenwolf, any thoughts on the plan when the Mig-23 and Mirage F1 come in? Server has been really great lately. I know that each mission is designed around the F-5 and Mig-21 but seeing as the F-14 is a fan favorite in DCS, it could be really interesting to start adding in some later cold war servers.

 

My guess is that as people who play this server are cold war enthusiasts, they will probably buy the F1 and the Mig-23 when it comes out. 

[Alpenwolf]

On 7/12/2021 at 3:17 PM, Enigma89 said:

Alpenwolf, any thoughts on the plan when the Mig-23 and Mirage F1 come in? Server has been really great lately. I know that each mission is designed around the F-5 and Mig-21 but seeing as the F-14 is a fan favorite in DCS, it could be really interesting to start adding in some later cold war servers.

 

My guess is that as people who play this server are cold war enthusiasts, they will probably buy the F1 and the Mig-23 when it comes out. 

 

The F-14 is already part of the server. The MiG-23 (Red) will surely be added as well as the F-1 (Blue). The MiG-29A will be a full fidelity module one day as confirmed by ED and is there already.

The only thing missing is the F-4 (Blue). Oh, yes! The Phantom what else!

 

All the above will be/is available. It's just that it always comes down to each and every mission separately regarding what modules will be/are included and if so how many slots and how many aircraft. Missions covering large areas such as Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed, Search & destroy, When The Mountain Cry, Open Range, etc. already have the MiG-29A and the F-14A and surely will have the MiG-23 and F-1 added to them even in bigger numbers and slots. Rule of the thumb is this: The more modern an aircraft is the less slots and units it has. The MiG-21 and the F-5 draw the zero line so to speak. Anything superior or inferior to them is in lesser numbers. The I-16 and the P-51D are way inferior, therefore, you see them in very limited numbers and missions. Just as it is with the other extreme with MiG-29A's and F-14A's as mentioned above.

 

The same applies to helicopters which is why you see more Gazelles than Hinds and way less Ka-50's these days.

Edited July 21, 2021 by Alpenwolf

[Xerxes17]

Hi there Alpenwolf, first I'd like to thank you so much for the server. Having a server that focuses on teamwork, communication and combined arms is absolutely ace. By also focusing on Cold War tech, it makes the conflict much more tactile and crunchy instead of being a BVR missile slinging match, and for the ground the limitations on PGMs and the construction of targets give us a reason to use dumb weapons, which is rather rare in DCS! I've been having a great time in my Mi-8, Su-25, A-10A and doing GCI intercepts.

 

However one thing I find strange is your position against having a discord. I understand your objections about it with regards to wanting people to use SRS and not discord voice chat, but I think it would really help things if we had a text-only discord setup so that people interested in the server had a common area to hang out in, put out calls for more players, discuss airframes and tactics, and so on.

If you are still against it, would you be opposed to the creation of an unofficial DCS Cold War Discord?

[NELLUS]

4 hours ago, Xerxes17 said:

Hi there Alpenwolf, first I'd like to thank you so much for the server. Having a server that focuses on teamwork, communication and combined arms is absolutely ace. By also focusing on Cold War tech, it makes the conflict much more tactile and crunchy instead of being a BVR missile slinging match, and for the ground the limitations on PGMs and the construction of targets give us a reason to use dumb weapons, which is rather rare in DCS! I've been having a great time in my Mi-8, Su-25, A-10A and doing GCI intercepts.

 

However one thing I find strange is your position against having a discord. I understand your objections about it with regards to wanting people to use SRS and not discord voice chat, but I think it would really help things if we had a text-only discord setup so that people interested in the server had a common area to hang out in, put out calls for more players, discuss airframes and tactics, and so on.

If you are still against it, would you be opposed to the creation of an unofficial DCS Cold War Discord?

There is one already, not sure who runs it: https://discord.gg/rpeQ5Jjc

[Xerxes17]

19 minutes ago, NELLUS said:

There is one already, not sure who runs it: https://discord.gg/rpeQ5Jjc

Ahh, thank you NELLUS!

[Alpenwolf]

4 hours ago, Xerxes17 said:

Hi there Alpenwolf, first I'd like to thank you so much for the server. Having a server that focuses on teamwork, communication and combined arms is absolutely ace. By also focusing on Cold War tech, it makes the conflict much more tactile and crunchy instead of being a BVR missile slinging match, and for the ground the limitations on PGMs and the construction of targets give us a reason to use dumb weapons, which is rather rare in DCS! I've been having a great time in my Mi-8, Su-25, A-10A and doing GCI intercepts.

 

However one thing I find strange is your position against having a discord. I understand your objections about it with regards to wanting people to use SRS and not discord voice chat, but I think it would really help things if we had a text-only discord setup so that people interested in the server had a common area to hang out in, put out calls for more players, discuss airframes and tactics, and so on.

If you are still against it, would you be opposed to the creation of an unofficial DCS Cold War Discord?

 

Which is why there has always been a TeamSpeak channel where years ago when I had my own channel 10+ players where there every night. Then I decided to join my TS channel with that of the 104th so players have access to both servers (back in the day the 104th server was constantly top 3 on the servers' list).

 

... and then Discord happened and players started switching over because you can share images and videos and stuff. Because it was something new and people always rush to new things any time anywhere. And quickly players started talking bad and complaining about it. One of the big servers I know of had to shut down their Discord due to continuous complaints and unavoidable childish behaviour. And I'm supposed to leave TS and join the others?! Imagine the messages and complaints I'd be receiving as a Discord channel admin. I never ever had such experience with TS. Not once! It's all about team speak. Literally, team speak.

[Enigma89]

23 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

The F-14 is already part of the server. The MiG-23 (Red) will surely be added as well as the F-1 (Blue). The MiG-29A will be a full fidelity module one day as confirmed by ED and is there already.

The only thing missing is the F-4 (Blue). Oh, yes! The Phantom what else!

 

All the above will be/is available. It's just that is always comes down to each and every mission separately regarding what modules will be/are included and if so how many slots and how many aircraft. Missions covering large areas such as Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed, Search & destroy, When The Mountain Cry, Open Range, etc. already have the MiG-29A and the F-14A and surely will have the MiG-23 and F-1 added to them even in bigger numbers and slots. Rule of the thumb is this: The more modern an aircraft is the less slots and units it has. The MiG-21 and the F-5 draw the zero line so to speak. Anything superior or inferior to them is in lesser numbers. The I-16 and the P-51D are way inferior, therefore, you see them in very limited numbers and missions. Just as it is with the other extreme with MiG-29A's and F-14A's as mentioned above.

 

The same applies to helicopters which is why you see more Gazelles than Hinds and way less Ka-50's these days.

 

Is there any chance that as we get more powerful cold war aircraft they can be more available without doing pre-requisites to be able to spawn them? I am just thinking of a brand new player who has never played on the server and is locked out from everything but the F-5 and Mig-21 before spawning.

[Alpenwolf]

14 minutes ago, Enigma89 said:

Is there any chance that as we get more powerful cold war aircraft they can be more available without doing pre-requisites to be able to spawn them? I am just thinking of a brand new player who has never played on the server and is locked out from everything but the F-5 and Mig-21 before spawning.

 

It is the case in most missions already. It's only Open Range where they need to be activated. And a brand new player who's never been on the server will be facing all types of new challenges he should be focusing on before anything else.

[ConkersBFD]

Mission Behind Enemy Lines is bugged rn, none of the Blue units spawned and Red EWR is not working. We're trying to rotate quickly 
It must be related to the ED servers update, hopefully it will run fine next rotation.

If you see this in the next few minutes @Alpenwolfwe'd appreciate a mission rotation 
 

Also, the briefing says 2 different things about the rotation :

Edited July 13, 2021 by ConkersBFD

[Enigma89]

2 hours ago, ConkersBFD said:

Mission Behind Enemy Lines is bugged rn, none of the Blue units spawned and Red EWR is not working. We're trying to rotate quickly 
It must be related to the ED servers update, hopefully it will run fine next rotation.

If you see this in the next few minutes @Alpenwolfwe'd appreciate a mission rotation 
 

Also, the briefing says 2 different things about the rotation :

 

Can confirm this was happening. Red EWR was unusable and bugged. 

[Enigma89]

I am conscious of the fact that I have been throwing around a lot of suggestions very quickly. Just want to preface this and say that I think this is the most interesting and fun server in DCS right now and aware that I am not someone who has played here for years. 

 

With that said I have some high level ideas I would like to share. I play on the server at least once a week. I don't typically play there (or DCS) everyday because IL-2 is my main squeeze so take my ideas from the POV of someone who loves the server but not in love with DCS and doesn't follow the community super closely.

 

-I love how the server is grounded in a thematic concept. With that said, I think it would be interesting to go narrower and deeper. What I mean by that is, you have some great missions but they are really more of the same but they are different enough to keep people off balance who aren't used to the scenarios. Not to say that the core concept is bad. the core concept is great and it's the most interesting server in DCS. I think it would be beneficial to ground some of the missions into a more static state. For example, some of the missions on the caucauses map REDFOR spawns on the eastern airfields and other times they spawn on the western one. For situational awareness building, maybe its just better to keep the airbases more fixed to one side for the same map but different scenarios - meaning REDOFR always spawn east and blufor always spawn west for caucases, or north vs south for persian. That way players who play more casually always know the general flow of things.

 

-To spice things up, you can have some versions that have later cold war aircraft and others that are just F-5s and Mig-21s as the big boy planes. Again changing the orientation (starting bases) of the map isn't really adding anything interesting, it's just adding confusion for the new players. Lastly, by focusing on just a handful of scenarios per map you cut down on the bugs and such of missions that are part of DCS mission editing, it should make your life easier. 2-3 scenarios per map would be ideal. Thinking 6-9 total.

 

-I think for some scenarios, it could be interesting to add more broad and perma ewr or even awacs coverage. Will players fly higher if they can't hide? 

 

-Reduce the number of scenarios. Get the best ones and flesh them out. If variations of the same need to happen with different unit placements that is fine. But as someone who plays kinda regularly, again not every day but every other couple of days, I feel like every time I play it's a new mission. 

 

-SAMs I feel like are unnecessary outside of airfield protection. I would rather see more AAA. It's really not satisfying to have people you are fighting die to a SAM site.

 

-I would like to see the cloud covers removed or raised up. DCS spotting is hard enough, one big loop and you are in a cloud and you lose track of someone.

 

-I like the idea of having some ship based objective scenarios (I think we have 1 or 2 but not sure, again there are so many scenarios that I just don't know). They are easy to spot, they can't be abused as bad as tac commander. They also make spotting easier which is one pain point of DCS which impacts the server.

 

Those are my ideas. Don't mean this at criticism just a thought as there are a lot of players like myself who like the server and want to understand it more but the UI in DCS is so shitty that it is not super easy to understand what is going on. I am obsessed with understanding the rules, so I try to figure it out but I know most aren't like me so I know others are still figuring it out and they may feel lost. 

 

Ultimately, I really love the server and this is a testament to where DCS should go, the cold war stuff is infinitely more interesting than the fox-3 fights. Just throwing these ideas out with love. I am a very casual DCS player so I don't have as much context as others. Again my main squeeze is in IL-2 so I just am throwing out ideas with my relatively limited experience on the server.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Enigma89

[Alpenwolf]

10 hours ago, ConkersBFD said:

Mission Behind Enemy Lines is bugged rn, none of the Blue units spawned and Red EWR is not working. We're trying to rotate quickly 
It must be related to the ED servers update, hopefully it will run fine next rotation.

If you see this in the next few minutes @Alpenwolfwe'd appreciate a mission rotation 
 

Also, the briefing says 2 different things about the rotation :

 

 

Check out FAQ number 8 on the main post so you understand why the EWR wasn't working among other things.

 

The mission runs for 4 hours and he who holds both airbases by the end of the mission wins. The other line is from the first version of the mission and I forgot to take it out. thanks for reporting.

 

Had a night shift yesterday and wasn't able to check out the server for one second.

[Alpenwolf]

5 hours ago, Enigma89 said:

I am conscious of the fact that I have been throwing around a lot of suggestions very quickly. Just want to preface this and say that I think this is the most interesting and fun server in DCS right now and aware that I am not someone who has played here for years. 

 

With that said I have some high level ideas I would like to share. I play on the server at least once a week. I don't typically play there (or DCS) everyday because IL-2 is my main squeeze so take my ideas from the POV of someone who loves the server but not in love with DCS and doesn't follow the community super closely.

 

-I love how the server is grounded in a thematic concept. With that said, I think it would be interesting to go narrower and deeper. What I mean by that is, you have some great missions but they are really more of the same but they are different enough to keep people off balance who aren't used to the scenarios. Not to say that the core concept is bad. the core concept is great and it's the most interesting server in DCS. I think it would be beneficial to ground some of the missions into a more static state. For example, some of the missions on the caucauses map REDFOR spawns on the eastern airfields and other times they spawn on the western one. For situational awareness building, maybe its just better to keep the airbases more fixed to one side for the same map but different scenarios - meaning REDOFR always spawn east and blufor always spawn west for caucases, or north vs south for persian. That way players who play more casually always know the general flow of things.

 

-To spice things up, you can have some versions that have later cold war aircraft and others that are just F-5s and Mig-21s as the big boy planes. Again changing the orientation (starting bases) of the map isn't really adding anything interesting, it's just adding confusion for the new players. Lastly, by focusing on just a handful of scenarios per map you cut down on the bugs and such of missions that are part of DCS mission editing, it should make your life easier. 2-3 scenarios per map would be ideal. Thinking 6-9 total.

 

-I think for some scenarios, it could be interesting to add more broad and perma ewr or even awacs coverage. Will players fly higher if they can't hide? 

 

-Reduce the number of scenarios. Get the best ones and flesh them out. If variations of the same need to happen with different unit placements that is fine. But as someone who plays kinda regularly, again not every day but every other couple of days, I feel like every time I play it's a new mission. 

 

-SAMs I feel like are unnecessary outside of airfield protection. I would rather see more AAA. It's really not satisfying to have people you are fighting die to a SAM site.

 

-I would like to see the cloud covers removed or raised up. DCS spotting is hard enough, one big loop and you are in a cloud and you lose track of someone.

 

-I like the idea of having some ship based objective scenarios (I think we have 1 or 2 but not sure, again there are so many scenarios that I just don't know). They are easy to spot, they can't be abused as bad as tac commander. They also make spotting easier which is one pain point of DCS which impacts the server.

 

Those are my ideas. Don't mean this at criticism just a thought as there are a lot of players like myself who like the server and want to understand it more but the UI in DCS is so shitty that it is not super easy to understand what is going on. I am obsessed with understanding the rules, so I try to figure it out but I know most aren't like me so I know others are still figuring it out and they may feel lost. 

 

Ultimately, I really love the server and this is a testament to where DCS should go, the cold war stuff is infinitely more interesting than the fox-3 fights. Just throwing these ideas out with love. I am a very casual DCS player so I don't have as much context as others. Again my main squeeze is in IL-2 so I just am throwing out ideas with my relatively limited experience on the server.

 

 

I'm glad you're having fun on the server and finding a place for yourself in DCS. Criticism, feedback, ideas, suggestions, etc. are always welcome and quite often they helped me improve things around and I always urge the community to never stop throwing that at me, so no worries there.

 

You made 7 points so here's my response:

 

1)

I understand your point but I owe it to hose who fly regularly on the server who want new missions and challenges every now and then.

 

2)

I have a mission like that and another one is currently being made. Check here.

 

3)

Players always tend to fly low on the server no matter what I do. Operation Springfield was loaded with IR SAM's and still they flew low and complained about being shot in the face so often by air defences. AWACS is bugged, EWR is better.

 

4)

Again, don't get me wrong but I think more about those who fly regularly on the server and they deserve more new missions of more or less different scenarios and areas covering different parts of the featured maps. Can't please everyone, although I understand your concern.

 

5)

Some missions are like that. Again, it's the difference in the details that make missions more different from one another. Not just the scenarios and the objectives.

 

6)

Spotting is tough, that's true. And again, some missions have clouds, others don't at all or less clouds.

 

7)

True, however, having more missions with so much water involved isn't a thing for the community. One of my latest missions, The Tunb Identity, is mostly over the waters and instantly helicopter pilots started complaining about having to fly over nothing by water while getting easily spotted and destroyed by enemy fighters. Besides, it's boring to most of them flying for 15-20 minutes over nothing but water. The mission had 5-10 players at the most and was online 3 times over the weekend nights. Players couldn't stand it, I guess, so now it's out. I have to deal with what the geography of the DCS maps have to offer. I can't just have ships involved if no airbases are nearby where it wont make any sense to have them in the first place if the mission's scenario doesn't support that.

 

I hope I was able to shed some light on your ideas or concerns. I feel like I let you down a bit with my response, it's just that I've been doing this for years and it's been working and even getting better for years. Sometimes some ideas might seem harmless for the user but would mean a radical change for me regarding the server's "principles" so to speak.

[Enigma89]

2 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

I'm glad you're having fun on the server and finding a place for yourself in DCS. Criticism, feedback, ideas, suggestions, etc. are always welcome and quite often they helped me improve things around and I always urge the community to never stop throwing that at me, so no worries there.

 

You made 7 points so here's my response:

 

1)

I understand your point but I owe it to hose who fly regularly on the server who want new missions and challenges every now and then.

 

2)

I have a mission like that and another one is currently being made. Check here.

 

3)

Players always tend to fly low on the server no matter what I do. Operation Springfield was loaded with IR SAM's and still they flew low and complained about being shot in the face so often by air defences. AWACS is bugged, EWR is better.

 

4)

Again, don't get me wrong but I think more about those who fly regularly on the server and they deserve more new missions of more or less different scenarios and areas covering different parts of the featured maps. Can't please everyone, although I understand your concern.

 

5)

Some missions are like that. Again, it's the difference in the details that make missions more different from one another. Not just the scenarios and the objectives.

 

6)

Spotting is tough, that's true. And again, some missions have clouds, others don't at all or less clouds.

 

7)

True, however, having more missions with so much water involved isn't a thing for the community. One of my latest missions, The Tunb Identity, is mostly over the waters and instantly helicopter pilots started complaining about having to fly over nothing by water while getting easily spotted and destroyed by enemy fighters. Besides, it's boring to most of them flying for 15-20 minutes over nothing but water. The mission had 5-10 players at the most and was online 3 times over the weekend nights. Players couldn't stand it, I guess, so now it's out. I have to deal with what the geography of the DCS maps have to offer. I can't just have ships involved if no airbases are nearby where it wont make any sense to have them in the first place if the mission's scenario doesn't support that.

 

I hope I was able to shed some light on your ideas or concerns. I feel like I let you down a bit with my response, it's just that I've been doing this for years and it's been working and even getting better for years. Sometimes some ideas might seem harmless for the user but would mean a radical change for me regarding the server's "principles" so to speak.

Okay fair, thanks for the answers and the additional context.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Enigma89

[=475FG= Dawger]

Quote

 

Hey @Alpenwolf

I asked SeaQuark admin of Korea! 1952 server on how he gives custom srs radio freqs for planes with limited freq band. For example he set radio freq 270 for P51s in his mission and it works for srs! I think it would work for any module and you can set any frequency for any preset radio station

 

So what you need to is:

1. Backup of the mission miz file (never to safe

2. Open mission miz file using 7-zip archive

3.  unpack the  file called 'mission' (which is inside miz file)

4. open copied 'mission' file with eg notepad++

5. Find airframe slot name, 

6. few lines above of slot name you have radio preset frequencies, change them to your preference (251 for P51 in Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed perhaps? ;)

7. Copy (drag and drop) saved mission file to miz archive

8. load mission in dcs

9. profit $$

 

A much easier way to do this is to just turn on the expansion radios in the SRS server. It gives all aircraft access to extra "fake" radios to allow aircraft that normally do not share frequency bands the capability to talk to each other. These fake radios appear in the SRS overlay and have to be tuned to through SRS. I think its a great feature.

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by pmiceli

[Alpenwolf]

4 minutes ago, pmiceli said:

A much easier way to do this is to just turn on the expansion radios in the SRS server. It gives all aircraft access to extra "fake" radios to allow aircraft that normally do not share frequency bands the capability to talk to each other. These fake radios appear in the SRS overlay and have to be tuned to through SRS. I think its a great feature.

 

 

 

Thanks a lot! That would save me a lot of work.