Question about upcoming patch.

[Nate--IRL--]

Seeing what guys are doing in the 3D modeling forum section I wouldn't be surprised if they were on the task as soon as necessary technical details get published. I'm not in touch with the subject but AFAIK DCS is far from being moder friendly even for 3DS max users, not to mention the Blender bunch.

 

I suppose all they'd need is a list of the cockpit arguments..... hmmm interesting. Blender Plugins from ED would be great, maybe if they ever get around to doing an SDK...

 

Nate

[AMVI Scorpione]

I have noticed that the F and A indicators are inverted, at least in the english cockpit.

 

Here's the discussion:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=927489&postcount=7

 

Also, the crossfeed valve bug.

 

Any plans to fix them in the upcoming compatibility patch?

[Nate--IRL--]

What is the cross feed bug? I'll test the other one.

 

Nate

[AMVI Scorpione]

For the inverted fuel indicators, i've loaded the Shark with one external fuel tank on the right side, so that i would end up with an empty tank and a full one. Also managed to close the crossfeed valve, after reading what AlphaOneSix wrote here about the crossfeed bug:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=926770&postcount=3

 

 

The A indicator wasn't going down , while the F one was showing almost empy, the opposite of what should happen based on the fuel system as shown on the Manual.

 

The helicopter should have been tail heavy trusting the fuel gauge, but it felt very nose heavy. Resetting trim usually brings the helicopter to pitch up and go backwards , in this case it was still going forward quite happily.

Edited August 12, 2011 by AMVI Scorpione
Corrected some mispelling

[Nate--IRL--]

According to the manual the crossfeed switch in the up position is the closed position (Matching the switch cover).

 

I've reported the Needles though. No guarantee it will be fixed remember.

 

Nate

[AMVI Scorpione]

Thank you!

[luckybob9]

I actually do remember the crossfeed bug. If im remembering correctly, someone managed to fix it by editing a lua file I believe. Ill try searching for it.

[Nate--IRL--]

There is nothing to fix though. Down is off (matching Cover) Up is on.

 

EDIT:- actually the manual picture is wrong.

 

Nate

Edited August 12, 2011 by Nate--IRL--

[Bucic]

There is nothing to fix though. Down is off (matching Cover) Up is on.

 

EDIT:- actually the manual picture is wrong.

 

Nate

It's not what AlphaOneSix / AirTito told us, AFAIK...

Edited August 12, 2011 by Bucic

[Nate--IRL--]

It's not what AlphaOneSix / AirTito told us, AFAIK...

 

The crossfeed switch is backwards. Switching it down actually opens it. Known bug. In the up position, the crossfeed valve is closed.

 

There is nothing to fix though. Down is off (matching Cover) Up is on.

 

EDIT:- actually the manual picture is wrong.

 

:P

 

Note I am using the testers version - I didn't check 1.02.

 

Nate

Edited August 12, 2011 by Nate--IRL--

[Bucic]

:P

 

Note I am using the testers version - I didn't check 1.02.

 

Nate

I only said A16 did identify it as a bug :)

 

 

BTW, thanks for keeping us informed! :thumbup:

[m0jo]

There is a few things missing in the export.lua that could be implemented in this patch. A function similar to :

EKRAN:get_actual_text_frame() -- return UTF8 string with current text of EKRAN screen

should be implemented for the screen of the PUI-800 and the screen of the PVI-800. This function could also be used on countermeasure display of the A-10C. This function is quite essential to pit builders because without it, the data on these screen need to be guessed indirectly from the waypoint table and the weapon table.

 

Also, a setting do deactivate the center trimming on the rudder axis would be great for user with either force-feedback pedals or non-self centering pedals. Without this setting, the self centering is a PITA with those type of rudder.

[AlphaOneSix]

With regard to the fwd/aft tank crossfeed switch:

 

In the game and in the real aircraft, the crossfeed switch defaults to CLOSED, so that's good. The issue is that in the game, the switch is in the UP position with the switch cover closed over it. In the actual aircraft, this switch should be covered in the DOWN position. This would also be a logical continuation of the whole "up is on/open and down is closed/off" mnemonic for cockpit switches.

 

SECOND EDIT: This is fixed in the current testing version. That is, the switch defaults to CLOSED, and is covered in the DOWN position. When the switch cover is opened, and the switched flipped up, the crossfeed valve opens and the associated caution light illuminates.

Edited August 13, 2011 by AlphaOneSix

[Bucic]

With regard to the fwd/aft tank crossfeed switch:

 

In the game and in the real aircraft, the crossfeed switch defaults to CLOSED, so that's good. The issue is that in the game, the switch is in the UP position with the switch cover closed over it. In the actual aircraft, this switch should be covered in the DOWN position. This would also be a logical continuation of the whole "up is on/open and down is closed/off" mnemonic for cockpit switches.

 

SECOND EDIT: This is fixed in the current testing version. That is, the switch defaults to CLOSED, and is covered in the DOWN position. When the switch cover is opened, and the switched flipped up, the crossfeed valve opens and the associated caution light illuminates.

Thanks! So it means it's fixed and there's nothing to discuss :)

 

One add. question - isn't the mnemonic "for flight it's UP"? E.g. if some device is required to be deactivated for flight it would be set for flight as UP=OFF. I don't remember how it was for the rotor brake...

[AlphaOneSix]

One add. question - isn't the mnemonic "for flight it's UP"? E.g. if some device is required to be deactivated for flight it would be set for flight as UP=OFF. I don't remember how it was for the rotor brake...

 

I can't think of any cases where that's true, although I am not an absolute expert on the subject, it could be that way for airliners or any number of other aircraft. On all of the aircraft where I have a decent amount of experience, up is always on, and down is always off. Well, except for Eurocopter, where on the overhead panel forward is on and aft is off.

 

For the Ka-50 rotor brake, down is off.

[Bucic]

Ah, I see. Thank you.

[P1KW]

Hello.

 

Excuse me if any have already posted this.

 

When you load a flight plan in the ABRIS, in the bottom window of information, the field "TO" appears empty, without the WP name.

On the map, and the WP list appears correctly.

How to Fix it is to edit the flight plan, but it seems dangerous to edit during the flight.

 

Is it a bug?

 

Will it be corrected?

 

Greetings.

Edited August 14, 2011 by P1KW

[Divide Et Impera]

Does The cbu bug which put cbu87 bomblets in cbu97 and makes very difficult to kill armour with anti personal bomb will be resolved ?

[EtherealN]

Wrong simulator thread, Divide. Ka-50's dont have CBU 97's. ;)

 

Anyhow, it's not a bug. The 97's are undergoing an overhaul to give them their proper function - they were previously basically 87's with a little added punch, which is about as correct as making Mavericks be hydra rockets with a higher explosive yield. ;)

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=78046

[Jona33]

Sorry if I missed this. Will a JTAC work with the Shark? I think I saw something somewhere that showed it was possible to check into JTAC with a Shark (obviously not in game because they haven't built the functions for it) But this would be great in my opinion.

[Nate--IRL--]

Unknown at this point - however it is important to remember this is a compatibility patch, any new features to Black shark are a bonus.

 

Nate

[gagipro]

Hi,

 

I opened a support ticket some months ago :ticket #7159

 

The question was :

 

"Are you planning to update at least DCS BS 3D Engine (I know FC2 uses another 3D engine) to solve this problem?

 

Is there a fix somewhere to get the same FOV in BS as in A10C???"

 

 

your answer to this ticket was :

 

"FC2 uses the same engine as BS. For certain there will be only patch for BS which will update its engine to the recent version. We do not plan such patch for FC2. But it's subject to change."

 

Are you still planning to update BS 3D engine to DCS A10C 3D engine? Will it correct the FOV problem?

 

For FC2 ... we are waiting for your next plan in the DCS serie :) the advantage of FC2 was lot more air to air combats ...

 

Thanks

[Nate--IRL--]

Please describe the FOV problem in detail, I haven't heard of it before.

 

Nate

[gagipro]

Hi Nate, Hi all,

 

in BlackShark or Flamming Cliffs 2, everyone who wants to go triplehead rendering is obliged to tweak a lot in .lua files. Even with that, you can play triplehead (more than 2560*1600 -> ex 5760*1080) but the Field of View is not good (you seem to have the nose in the HUD and for this you have to zoom out at max and when it's fully zoomed out, the fps goes down & it begins to stutter, and it's not playable).

 

http://widescreengamingforum.com/node/10105

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=37008

 

There are guys who managed to correct this by tweaking a 32 bits DX9 dll, and that was doing the trick. But it's not available for 64 bits os.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=59249

 

So I ended up trying to make FC2 or BS work in TripleHead mode, every other games work in this configuration (I mean any FPS or Arcade games). DCS A10C work in this configuration straight out of the box you just have to be close to the middle screen and F12 track IR. No tweaking, no dll hack, is it the 3D engine that corrects the problem...we've got no clue to answer. It just work @ any resolution except that you have to zoom out (which is bad).

 

So I opened the ticket #7159

 

And you gave me an answer that the 3D engine from DCS A10C will be ported to Black Shark, so we wanted to know if you'll finally port the 3D engine of A10C to BS and if it will correct this FOV/Zoom bug which is arround since the begining ...

 

The way you're programming the DCS serie doesn't seem really coherent, as we have to wait 2 years for a patch. It should be programmed in // not in serial mode...otherwise it's not possible to make a "SERIE".

 

if it's only a patch to let BS work with A10C in LAN/WAN... it's totally useless...and should be ported automatically to BS without a "PATCH". That's not serious!

 

When do the core engine will be multithreaded? It's a shame that the engine doesn't use more than one core at a time. It was the case 3 years ago ... still the same, hoooo sorry : one dedicated thread for the audio ...

 

 

Thanks for your answer to these questions!!!

[gagipro]

An other possible explanation for the FOV problem,

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=991576&postcount=8

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=59249&page=2

 

thx