Military Assets for DCS by Currenthill

[alik93]

Hi @currenthill, thanks for your work - great stuff!

Have two questions:

1. The LACM for the Russian asset pack (3M14T) does not seem to be targeting accurately; it seems to miss the intended targets maybe 60-70% of the time; sometimes they're near misses (~30-40 m), other times several hundred meters. The orbiting bug previously observed is not a problem since I'm now using the most recent 2.9 openbeta to get around this.
   I first thought it could be an issue with one or two particular ships (e.g., Gorshkov and Grigorovich), but can now see it's recurrent for all ship classes.
   This relates to the "Fire at Point" task, set weapon to either "Auto" or "Cruise Missile" and round expend to 1.
   I've tried similar scenarios with BGM-109 in the US asset pack and no such problem occurs. In fact, tried to compare the .lua files for the US and Russian missiles and parameter-wise didn't see anything too different to justify such a discrepancy.
   My question is - am I doing something wrong? I made sure that your mods are the only ones in the Saved Games folder to avoid conflicts (I "installed" the mods manually).
2. For the anti-ship missiles, the launch acceleration seems to be very high (for both ship-based ones such as the Kalibr and 3M55 and land-based Bastion system). I understand that it's not really possible to get an accurate set of launch parameters such as impulse and so on, but has this been flagged before by other users?

Thanks again and keep up the great work!

Merry Christmas and a happy new year.

[currenthill]

21 minutes ago, alik93 said:

Hi @currenthill, thanks for your work - great stuff!

Have two questions:

1. The LACM for the Russian asset pack (3M14T) does not seem to be targeting accurately; it seems to miss the intended targets maybe 60-70% of the time; sometimes they're near misses (~30-40 m), other times several hundred meters. The orbiting bug previously observed is not a problem since I'm now using the most recent 2.9 openbeta to get around this.
   I first thought it could be an issue with one or two particular ships (e.g., Gorshkov and Grigorovich), but can now see it's recurrent for all ship classes.
   This relates to the "Fire at Point" task, set weapon to either "Auto" or "Cruise Missile" and round expend to 1.
   I've tried similar scenarios with BGM-109 in the US asset pack and no such problem occurs. In fact, tried to compare the .lua files for the US and Russian missiles and parameter-wise didn't see anything too different to justify such a discrepancy.
   My question is - am I doing something wrong? I made sure that your mods are the only ones in the Saved Games folder to avoid conflicts (I "installed" the mods manually).
2. For the anti-ship missiles, the launch acceleration seems to be very high (for both ship-based ones such as the Kalibr and 3M55 and land-based Bastion system). I understand that it's not really possible to get an accurate set of launch parameters such as impulse and so on, but has this been flagged before by other users?

Thanks again and keep up the great work!

Merry Christmas and a happy new year.

1. I've recreated the issue and I'm working on a solution. But I'm a bit hesitant since every small DCS 2.9 update seem to change (both fix and introduce new issues) with the cruise and antiship missile schemes. I will at least have to wait for the next DCS update before I do anything. 

2. When the cruise and antiship missile configurations are stable I will look into the fine tuning, I'll put it on my todo list.

[cao990]

ED Every time there is an update, there are too many issues and I feel dizzy

Edited December 28, 2023 by cao990

[Hawkmoon]

hi CH i was wondering if you are considering making a simple drone like the Orlan-10 for recon purpose, i currently have a campaing were ground battle needs recon to do stuff and i was using the playable predator mod but i think it's currently broke for some reason and i was thinking that maybe an orlan 10 would be a nice addition especially if flyable or at least with a Su-25 camera as the predator, i mean i don't know if you can implement it on the TB3, no need for something complex but would be a nice addition for some players who like to recon before strike

thanks!

[Timex3]

22 hours ago, currenthill said:

Delete the three folder from your saved games. They are already included in my new asset packs.

Thanks

[DelRoy]

Hi CH. LOVE THES MODS! (Did I overstate that?)

I have a weird one for you. How do you set up a SAM site. Radar first? then ECS, EPP etc then finally the launchers? If so, which radar? I'm running them with Moose MANTIS and Chief. I have a sneaking feeling that they arent firing because there are friendly air assets in the area, but I'd like to eliminate any set up issues I might be having. I have the keyword CHM in the group name.

 

Oh and a request....

R-330Zh Zhitel - Wikipedia

Edited December 28, 2023 by DelRoy

[Abburo]

41 minutes ago, DelRoy said:

Hi CH. LOVE THES MODS! (Did I overstate that?)

I have a weird one for you. How do you set up a SAM site. Radar first? then ECS, EPP etc then finally the launchers? If so, which radar? I'm running them with Moose MANTIS and Chief. I have a sneaking feeling that they arent firing because there are friendly air assets in the area, but I'd like to eliminate any set up issues I might be having. I have the keyword CHM in the group name.

 

Oh and a request....

R-330Zh Zhitel - Wikipedia

 

SAM sites IADS setup question is not for CH. He created the assets then the logic is applied from various scripts which already know the units capabilities. 

To answer your MANTIS question: is always a good practice to setup the SR as first unit, then there is absolutely no specific order. Having SR as first unit is more like a requirement for the Skynet IADS (mist), but definetly not hurting MANTIS.

As we speak MANTIS is having an automode setup which works best of all. It requires just two lines of code, while rest of information is taken from the internal definition of sites (lorad/merad/shorad).

Be carefull about SAM sites naming convention which is very clearly stated on the Mantis doc page: flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS_DEVELOP/Documentation/Functional.Mantis.html

local BlueMantis = MANTIS:New("BlueMantis","Blue SAM","Blue EWR",nil,"blue",true)

BlueMantis:Debug(true)

BlueMantis.verbose = true -- watch DCS.log

 

BlueMantis:__Start(5)

Edited December 28, 2023 by Abburo

[tripod3]

Now mods will be released less frequently, and will I have to re-download the entire archive for future updates? Or are they finished forever?

[Wild_Weasel_31]

@currenthill, you definitely have to add this hell of a truck into your Ukraine asset pack. Will be a cherry on top of a cake!

Seems not to take much time, this is an usual S-60 AAA, mounted on some heavy truck chassis (KrAZ-255B in this particular case)

Spoiler

 

Edited December 28, 2023 by Wild_Weasel_31

[clanitho]

@currenthill It's undoubtedly simpler for you to manage your mods, but for us with a weak internet connection, it's a pain to download them. If you're going to change a few bytes in a mod, do you plan to do a simple update rather than having to download the full package again ?

Edited December 28, 2023 by clanitho

[Timex3]

N\A

Edited December 29, 2023 by Timex3

[bennyboy9800]

On 12/21/2023 at 12:51 PM, currenthill said:

 

Hello Currenthil. The Tu95MSM is fantastic! Would you be willing to provide a clean loadout option with removeable external hardpoints? 

[currenthill]

15 minutes ago, bennyboy9800 said:

Hello Currenthil. The Tu95MSM is fantastic! Would you be willing to provide a clean loadout option with removeable external hardpoints? 

Sure, I'll add it in the next release.

[bennyboy9800]

Thank you! 

[flyingscotsman]

On 12/26/2023 at 11:37 PM, gabriel said:

I'm an American living on Portugal, and the currency here is the euro and I'm not able to buy the DCS packages that are on dollars, can anyone Help me?

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/troubles_with_orders/#:~:text=Payment system declined transaction%2C Payment rejected,-Saferpay payment system&text=Please make sure your card,and Credit cards are different !

I googled unable to pay and got this. I'd contact ED or open a suppport ticket. Hope this helps

[currenthill]

[Joey_Destroyah]

Just now, currenthill said:

TU-160M1!

[Hawkeye60]

@Timex3

I feel your frustration.

I made a bug report.

Here.

 

You may rant here all you like!

Sorry @currenthill

Did not mean to de-rail your thread.

But today's up=date did nothing to fix many issues.

[toan]

2 hours ago, Timex3 said:

I have to point out my frustrations! I have to say that I'm extremely disappointed with ED. Version 2.9 is NOTHING to write home about. They have ruined DCS World in my opinion! I have NEVER seen an update cause so many problems! It's very disappointing that I had to delete all my Mods for the Simulator to perform correctly! The only Mods I have are made by Currenthill. Eagle Dynamics had to know that the current update has caused disappointment and frustration, & I feel pissed off! I don't know about anyone else, DCS World has been a Hobby for me since its release! The DCS World Community now has very limited Static options. Mods like Massun Asset, Civil Objects, NATO Assets, and so on don't work! Thank goodness for CH, his Assets work perfectly! ED has to do something to correct these issues in my opinion! They need to understand that DCS World is a major Hobby for most Members! All that ED has done is screw up everything, and who knows when these issues will be corrected. My apologies for my rant, I'm just so frustrated and disappointed! I hope everyone had a good Christmas! All the best in 2024!

Timex 3     

Hi, As posted previously, ED will argue that they can't take into account the myriads of existing non-ED Mods, not sure they could even list them all. That's correct. Also, they said that OB releases are what they are qualified, i.e. Beta, meaning that there might be unknown bugs, and known issues. And there are a number of them, obviously. However, in those circumstances, it would be fair from ED to provide the users with the ability to revert back to a previous version. And there is another final option for us, that I always use for myself, it's not to upgrade immediately to the latest versions. Considering the number of bug reports I read, I'm quite satisfied to run OB 2.8.8, without any particular problem. This means that I'm at least 4 months late compared to ED's roll-out program, but I can happily spend my time on more important aspects of DCS : improving existing Mods, without wasting hours trying to upgrade the Mods one by one to conform to the lastest version. And I confess that, considering the current situation, I'm not near to upgrade to 2.9. My two cents. Enjoy ! 

Edited December 28, 2023 by toan

[currenthill]

Download links and traffic limits update

I've been working the issue with traffic limits and I've come to a conclusion. Dropbox backed from their earlier statement of their Transfer service. So I will be cancelling my Dropbox service. Instead, after experimenting with many different solutions this is how I'm implementing it for the time being:

On the frontpage of my website you will see three download links, they will take you to three different Google Drive accounts which have their own and separate traffic limit. This is the best price/performance I can get when it comes to file sharing services.

The links will only be on the frontpage for ease of maintenance. And the links will take you to the shared folder where you can chose one or more packs to download. I've already updated my website. 

 

[Rudel_chw]

4 hours ago, Timex3 said:

I have to say that I'm extremely disappointed with ED. Version 2.9 is NOTHING to write home about. They have ruined DCS World in my opinion! I have NEVER seen an update cause so many problems! It's very disappointing that I had to delete all my Mods for the Simulator to perform correctly!

 

I use a lot of user mods too, but I don't get angry at ED for updating their Sim ... I just disable any affected user Mod and wait for the Mod developer to update it. No need to delete User Mods if you employ a Mod Manager.

This is not the first time that a DCS update affects several user Mods at once, the update to v2.5.6 was similar, as the graphics engine stopped support for older 3d models. Most Mod makers updated their 3D models within a lapse of a few weeks ... only moders not in the scene anymore, like Ranger79 or Lilkiki, couldn't update their Mods and they had to be abandoned, sadly.

[HighMaintenanceB]

5 hours ago, currenthill said:

This is awesome!  After the Tu-160, I'll try to find you some PLA helicopters and other PLA equipment, and send you some money in the coming weeks.  That said, what are your thoughts on Turkish military equipment like the Altay tank, FNSS infantry fighting vehicle, Kaplan, and BMC185 4x4 truck? 

[RaisedByWolves]

6 hours ago, Joey_Destroyah said:

TU-160M1!

Stop! My penis can only get so erect.

[clanitho]

@currenthill May be you didn't see my previous post, It's undoubtedly simpler for you to manage your mods (especially the US and Russian packs), but for us with a weak internet connection, it's a pain to download them. If you're going to change a few bytes in a mod, do you plan to do a simple update rather than having to download the full package again ?

In any case, thanks again for the fantastic work you do. Happy New year

[currenthill]

18 hours ago, tripod3 said:

Now mods will be released less frequently, and will I have to re-download the entire archive for future updates? Or are they finished forever?

Yes, the packages will be released less frequently since I update a larger amount of assets (all the ones in one pack) before releasing. 

Yes, you will have to re-download the entire archive until another technical solution is implemented. I'm looking into that. 

No, I don't stop maintaining my asset packs. It's just not possible based on how DCS works. If I were to stop they'd be broken within a DCS update cycle.

18 hours ago, Wild_Weasel_31 said:

@currenthill, you definitely have to add this hell of a truck into your Ukraine asset pack. Will be a cherry on top of a cake!

Seems not to take much time, this is an usual S-60 AAA, mounted on some heavy truck chassis (KrAZ-255B in this particular case)

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Haha, I love all the special contraptions.

17 hours ago, clanitho said:

@currenthill It's undoubtedly simpler for you to manage your mods, but for us with a weak internet connection, it's a pain to download them. If you're going to change a few bytes in a mod, do you plan to do a simple update rather than having to download the full package again ?

 

If I don't make these changes, there won't be any assets from me at all. I spend a lot of time and money (thank you donators!) making and maintaining my assets, and then I provide them for free. Then only thing a user have to do is download and use them. And you still think you're getting a bad deal?

6 hours ago, HighMaintenanceB said:

This is awesome!  After the Tu-160, I'll try to find you some PLA helicopters and other PLA equipment, and send you some money in the coming weeks.  That said, what are your thoughts on Turkish military equipment like the Altay tank, FNSS infantry fighting vehicle, Kaplan, and BMC185 4x4 truck? 

Thanks! I'm definitely for implementing more Turkish assets, I even have the country pack already.

6 hours ago, RaisedByWolves said:

Stop! My penis can only get so erect.

Haha! To manage expectations though. I've been searching for well made models to use for this one, it wasn't easy. I've had to make a lot of manual changes to this one. Unfortunately it won't come with a cockpit. But, it's tenfold better looking and working than the in-game version. I've even added the 6 missile rotary launcher (will also update the Tu-95MSM with it).