Sublte changes in 1.1.0.9

[Snoopy]

disregard I read the above post wrong....but I'll leave the info about DTSAS anyways...

 

It is on the C model....page 1-255 of the C-1 shows the CDU DTSAS page....

 

Page 1-81 has this concerning DTSAS:

The DTC can also contain the Digital Terrain System Application

Software (DTSAS) which is executed using the processor

in the DTC. This software, in conjunction with the EGI navigation

system, LASTE system, and the DTS, provides Predictive

Ground Collision Avoidance system (PGCAS) warnings, ObstacleWarning

Cues (OWC), and Target Ranging (TR) information

on the HUD. The DTSAS function is turned on and off from the

DTSAS Page (Figure 1-93).

Edited July 28, 2011 by Snoopy

[bradleyjs]

I do to....that picture is of EOR (End of Runway) we (crew chiefs) don't have to wear the reflective vest for anything else...

 

EOR - that's where the Weapons Troops pull the safing pins on all of the weapons and perform a minor look-over of the aircraft to make sure nothing is leaking or any other abnormalities before takeoff.

 

Of course, that's assuming that nothing has changed since the late 80's ... :pilotfly:

[Snoopy]

EOR - that's where the Weapons Troops pull the safing pins on all of the weapons and perform a minor look-over of the aircraft to make sure nothing is leaking or any other abnormalities before takeoff.

 

Of course, that's assuming that nothing has changed since the late 80's ... :pilotfly:

 

Close....weapons arm and crew chiefs look the jet over for obvious leaks, damage, etc.

[JaNk0]

Anyone wants to share the new loading screen? :)

[bradleyjs]

Close....weapons arm and crew chiefs look the jet over for obvious leaks, damage, etc.

 

Rog, Paul - I "sit" corrected -- as I'm still testing the 1.1.0.9 patch... :smartass:

 

I used to be a flying crew chief on O-2A/OV-10A/OT-37B's way back when.. We never had the crew chiefs on EOR duty, only the weapons troops (Patrick AFB, FL - 21st TASS) ... Got many hours of flight time before I got my wings ... :thumbup:

[ivanwfr]

Anyone wants to share the new loading screen? :)

[Snoopy]

Rog, Paul - I "sit" corrected -- as I'm still testing the 1.1.0.9 patch... :smartass:

 

I used to be a flying crew chief on O-2A/OV-10A/OT-37B's way back when.. We never had the crew chiefs on EOR duty, only the weapons troops (Patrick AFB, FL - 21st TASS) ... Got many hours of flight time before I got my wings ... :thumbup:

 

In all honesty there is really no reason to have crew chiefs there as a good weapons crew could do what we do at EOR. Wave our arms around and walk around the jet :D

 

I always liked the OV-10!

[amalahama]

disregard I read the above post wrong....but I'll leave the info about DTSAS anyways...

 

It is on the C model....page 1-255 of the C-1 shows the CDU DTSAS page....

 

Page 1-81 has this concerning DTSAS:

The DTC can also contain the Digital Terrain System Application

Software (DTSAS) which is executed using the processor

in the DTC. This software, in conjunction with the EGI navigation

system, LASTE system, and the DTS, provides Predictive

Ground Collision Avoidance system (PGCAS) warnings, ObstacleWarning

Cues (OWC), and Target Ranging (TR) information

on the HUD. The DTSAS function is turned on and off from the

DTSAS Page (Figure 1-93).

 

Paulrkii, since you have full access to A-10C documentation, could you check if A-10C double pipper works in the same way as A-10A LASTE aircrafts? In the document Frostiken uploaded in this post:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=77547

 

It's said that (page 7) "Dual pippers are displayed within CCIP reticle when a VAR TGT ELEV is entered in the OSP WEAPONS submenu". But unfortunately that option is not available in the A-10C in DCS, I wonder whether it's realistic or not..

 

Regards!

[Snoopy]

Paulrkii, since you have full access to A-10C documentation, could you check if A-10C double pipper works in the same way as A-10A LASTE aircrafts? In the document Frostiken uploaded in this post:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=77547

 

It's said that (page 7) "Dual pippers are displayed within CCIP reticle when a VAR TGT ELEV is entered in the OSP WEAPONS submenu". But unfortunately that option is not available in the A-10C in DCS, I wonder whether it's realistic or not..

 

Regards!

 

I'll look in the -1 and -34 tomorrow...

[LostOblivion]

First person view when parachuted is wobbly now. Great! I always thought it was kinda stale with only looking straight ahead.

[BlueRidgeDx]

When selected, Variable Target Elevation dual pippers override the Combat Mix API/HEI dual pippers, and the solution is based solely on the API ballistics.

 

Also, the Variable Target Elevation pippers are only available in HOT elevation mode, so make sure to exit AUTO (DTS) mode if you want to try it out.

[rud]

First person view when parachuted is wobbly now. Great! I always thought it was kinda stale with only looking straight ahead.

 

I've always wanted TrackIR to be active in the parachute view. Maybe someday...

[BlueRidgeDx]

If you have elevation at 2000' and variable target elevation at 100' do the pippers show solutions at 2100' & 1900' or 2050' & 1950'?

 

2100 and 1900. The value set in the IFFCC menu is 1/2 of the total vertical uncertainty.

 

Also the VTE has the effect in both hot elevation and DTS modes, at least in DCS.

 

;)

[Grimes]

The "ADD RADIO ITEM" and remove radio item now have a condition variable for the coalition.

[nomdeplume]

Not sure if this is new in 1.1.0.9, but it used to be the case that the 'day' (green) HUD was brighter than the 'night' (amber) HUD when viewed through NVGs. Now it's the other way around - the green HUD is much more comfortable when flying with NVGs, while the amber one tries to burn your eyes out.

 

Attached are two screenshots from pretty much the exact same moment, with the only difference being the second one has the HUD in night mode. The HUD's set quite dim in both (I had been calibrating it in night mode then accidentally switched it to day and was surprised when it became less intense, not more).

[Migo]

I have to concentrate a lot to see the hud on your first screen. The 2nd one is bright, yes but I can read it a lot better.

[Cibit]

Dont know if its already been mentioned but I like being told to taxi to parking area by ATC:)

[Nate--IRL--]

Not sure if this is new in 1.1.0.9, but it used to be the case that the 'day' (green) HUD was brighter than the 'night' (amber) HUD when viewed through NVGs. Now it's the other way around - the green HUD is much more comfortable when flying with NVGs, while the amber one tries to burn your eyes out.

 

Attached are two screenshots from pretty much the exact same moment, with the only difference being the second one has the HUD in night mode. The HUD's set quite dim in both (I had been calibrating it in night mode then accidentally switched it to day and was surprised when it became less intense, not more).

 

Interesting.

 

EDIT:- Something about the NVGs being less sensitive to green wavelengths rings a bell but I can't be certain.

 

Nate

Edited August 2, 2011 by Nate--IRL--

[MagnumHB]

;)

What's that supposed to mean? Is this intended behavior, or a bug, or what?

[BlueRidgeDx]

I thought this thread was about subtlety?

 

There is a discrepancy between DCS and RL.

[MagnumHB]

I thought this thread was about subtlety?

 

There is a discrepancy between DCS and RL.

Subtle changes in the game (and presumably features, not bugs) sure, but not subtle comments that conflict with your own insistence on certain systems behaviors.

[BlueRidgeDx]

Oh, for cripe's sake.

 

That will teach me to use a smiley and a bit of humor. I used subtlety in my response to a thread about subtlety...get it? Haha... or not, as is apparently the case.

 

What you call "insistance", I call communicating information about how the real system works. You're welcome, btw.

Edited August 2, 2011 by BlueRidgeDx

[Frostiken]

That's okay, I still want your meatbabies, Blue

[BlueRidgeDx]

That's hawt.

[MagnumHB]

I just wasn't amused that you contradicted yourself 3 posts apart, that's all. In any event, the main thread on this issue has received the appropriate attention, so I'm satisfied.