1.1.1.0 changelog

[lobo]

Thats still on the to do list AFAIK.

 

Nate

 

Looking forward to this one being fixed in a future patch as. (ILS steering bars behaviour as mentioned above).

 

The current patch list is impressive! :thumbup:

[159th_Viper]

Then that avionics issue does not occur at other airfields.

 

Aye

 

The starting point would be to ascertain whether the airfields are placed on a magnetic north heading, alternatively a true north heading. A cursory glance at the ME map has provided me with conflicting bearings for various airfields.

 

I'll see what I can dig up - either way there's definitely something 'fishy' going about :)

[cichlidfan]

I'll see what I can dig up - either way there's definitely something 'fishy' going about :)

 

Thanks, I thought the devs had known about this issue based on the various threads on the subject.

 

'fishy' ==> cichlid (nice one);)

[Druid_]

True Bearing equals Magnetic Bearing plus Magnetic Declination. As a consequence 126mb and 306mb + 5md = True bearing of 130.89º and 310.91º respectively.

 

Or have I got it backwards? Quite possible.

Afraid so

 

At Batumi , var is 5.5E so Mag Hdg = True Hdg - Mag Var making the aircrafts heading when lined up 300..5 or 120.5 ( the old aviation phrase 'West is best, East is least' springs to mind).

 

So as long as the ME ruler is orientated on true North (not sure on this one but I thought it was magnetic) the ME map is correct and cichlidfan's HUD display is correct. Batumi should be redesignated 30/12.

[159th_Viper]

Afraid so

 

How so if declination is positive when the magnetic north is east of true north.

[cichlidfan]

Afraid so

 

At Batumi , var is 5.5E so Mag Hdg = True Hdg - Mag Var making the aircrafts heading when lined up 300..5 or 120.5 ( the old aviation phrase 'West is best, East is least' springs to mind).

 

So as long as the ME ruler is orientated on true North (not sure on this one but I thought it was magnetic) the ME map is correct and cichlidfan's HUD display is correct. Batumi should be redesignated 30/12.

 

I knew I should have taken that orienteering merit badge when I was in scouts.:D

[Druid_]

How so if declination is positive when the magnetic north is east of true north.

 

Declination is negative if variation is Easterly. Magnetic North must therefore be west of true north in Batumi (and whole playable map area for that matter) giving an easterly variation.

 

Maybe you are getting confused with the isogonal lines. They don't point at Mag N, they are lines of equal Mag variation. Go 5 Isogonal lines left of Batumi and that is Zero degrees variation. It doesn't help that the lines are in a fairly NOrth/South direction, this isn't always the case .. Earth Iso Lines link

 

btw, the magnetic pole is moving Northwards at around 40-40 km/year, in 40 years it will be in Siberia. God knows what the Russians will do with it;)

Edited October 23, 2011 by Druid_

[Backy 51]

Any chance the E-2 Hawkeye stops flying around with feathered props?

 

Also, can the Mission Editor be fixed so that you can build, display and measure routes in Nautical Miles (NM) instead 20,000,000 meters?

 

FWIW - True Course (TC) = Magnetic Course (MC) +/- Magnetic Variation (MagVar)

You can read a runway's TC off of an Approach Plate. Without getting into a dissertation, which I could, NAVAIDS often have a variation at the station that must be applied to the TC to derive a correct MC for plotting purposes. (An example would be plotting a Radial/DME from that NAVAID) This is NOT to be confused with the displayed magnetic variation on your navigation scale chart in that area. In DCS A-10C, we are operating in Easterly Magnetic Variation throughout our virtual world. For example, UGTB, Tbilisi Intl sits at 5 East MagVar. If I measured a True Course between two waypoints of 355 degrees, my Magnetic Course would be 355 - 5 East MagVar = 350 Magnetic Course. If there was zero knots wind, I could fly 350 MC to my waypoint. Unfortunately, wind produces a +/- drift angle that must correct the Magnetic Course to a Magnetic Heading that we fly to make good a drift killed Heading to the waypoint. Left drift is a positive correction and right drift is a negative correction. So, in our example above if we had 5 left drift, you would add +5 to the MC 350 to derive a Magnetic Heading (MH) of 355 to fly. Lucky for you, the A-10C INS does all that work for you until you get riddled with AAA!!!! Any good Private Pilot training syllabus should cover this concept in greater detail.

Edited October 23, 2011 by Backy 51
Expansion

[Ranger79]

Is the issue regarding airbases not responding to rearm refuel requests been fixed in multiplayer?

[159th_Viper]

.....At Batumi , var is 5.5E so Mag Hdg = True Hdg - Mag Var making the aircrafts heading when lined up 300..5 or 120.5 ( the old aviation phrase 'West is best, East is least' springs to mind).

 

So as long as the ME ruler is orientated on true North (not sure on this one but I thought it was magnetic) the ME map is correct and cichlidfan's HUD display is correct. Batumi should be redesignated 30/12.

 

At the risk of belabouring the point and apologies in advance for doing so, but is that not what I said in the first instance?

 

Mag Hdg = True Hdg - Mag Var Druid

 

True Hdg = Mag Hdg + Mag Var Viper

 

We have a constant: It's a given that In Real Life Batumi RW True Heading is 130.89º and 310.91º respectively.

 

Now rounded off and at a factor of 5 degrees for Mag Var, in accordance with the formulae we have the following:

 

True Hdg (131) = Mag Hdg (?) + Mag Var (5)

 

131 = 126 + 5

 

alternatively with your formulae, Druid:

 

Mag Hdg = True Hdg - Mag Var

 

126 = 131 - 5

 

 

In both instances, Mag Hdg = 126. Accordingly the SIM placement is correct IF WE ASSUME that the ME is aligned according the the Mag Hdg. If so, the HSI should also indicate a Mag Hdg of 126. At present it indicates a Mag Hdg of 119.

 

Alternatively, if the ME at present should be aligned to True Hdg then the error margin is substantially less. We would then have Mag Hdg (121) = True Hdg (126) - Mag Var (5), giving the HSI an error of 2 degrees (119 as opposed to 121).

 

Hence the importance of first ascertaining whether the ME RW heading numbers are indicative of True Heading or Magnetic Heading.

[Silver_Dragon]

Ticonderoga missile cruiser has fix your capability of fire and guide multiple missile volleys to group targets and use your Illumination radars SPG-62 to SM-2 terminal intercept manoeuvres and the AEGIS radar horizon radar detection?

Edited October 23, 2011 by Silver_Dragon

[Eddie]

Is the issue regarding airbases not responding to rearm refuel requests been fixed in multiplayer?

 

If you're referring to airbases showing as neutral rather than blue or red for clients connecting after the sim is unpaused, then hopefully, yes.

 

If that's not what your're talking about then please elaborate.

[Ranger79]

If you're referring to airbases showing as neutral rather than blue or red for clients connecting after the sim is unpaused, then hopefully, yes.

 

If that's not what your're talking about then please elaborate.

 

Eddie thanks for the response. The problem occuring is when an airbase is "blue" and players land to rearm and refuel and no response from ground crew. Problem occurs randomly to random flight members, some can rearm, others cannot. For example the mission I edited is blue side at start and throughout, even have Hogs 5&6 (client start there). Some members could not rearm/refuel there during the mission.

 

Problem discussed here:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1276015&postcount=32

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1298131&postcount=48

 

Thanks for any info in advance, patch looks great!

Edited October 23, 2011 by Ranger79

[Eddie]

Yep that's the one. It's in the hands of the dev team and it'll hopefully be fixed.

[miguelaco]

Hi,

 

will this one be fixed, or is this not a bug?

It's a good question, Anyone knows ?

 

Thanks for the update, this sim is growing day by day, Good work !!!

 

Any word on this. I still don't know if it's a bug or not, but just in case, I'd like to see it explained/acknowledged.

 

Thx in advance.

[Olgerd]

Hi,

 

will this one be fixed, or is this not a bug?

 

It's a good question, Anyone knows ?

 

Thanks for the update, this sim is growing day by day, Good work !!!

 

It is fixed, but is not included into the patch yet.

[miguelaco]

It is fixed, but is not included into the patch yet.

 

Many thanks. How about the offset page problem? I guess it's been solved in the same pack. Can we have a confirmation?

[Olgerd]

Many thanks. How about the offset page problem? I guess it's been solved in the same pack. Can we have a confirmation?

 

Sorry can you provide any details of the problem? Many be a link on the forum?

[miguelaco]

Sorry can you provide any details of the problem? Many be a link on the forum?

Look here:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=79163&highlight=offset+page

 

Also, I'm providing three sample images showing the problem when creating a new waypoint providing mh/dis of 180/90. In the third image you can see actual offset is 7 degrees off:

[Olgerd]

Yes this issue was fixed.

[LostOblivion]

Any information for a fix on the issue where sometimes PartOfGroupInZone rules do not work? It never works with aircraft for me, and sometimes it happens for ground units as well, where I have to use PartOfUnitInZone times, say, twenty to check the same thing for a group.

 

I have tried to find what causes it, and make a bug replication mission for you guys, but I have failed so far. I have it in this one mission I am currently making, and it's driving me nuts. I am 99% sure I'm not doing anything wrong, and that it is, in fact, the rule not becoming true when part of a group enters the zone in question. Assert for me, please, that the trigger logic below will always either print out "AMBUSH!" or "NO AMBUSH!". I marked the differences between the two in bold. It works with other missions. I do have like 30 triggers in the mission, so it may be too much for the ME?

 

Trigger 1

Once;

FlagIsTrue(54) AND PartOfGroupInZone(Group1, Ambush 1 Trigger)

OR

FlagIsTrue(54) AND PartOfGroupInZone(Group2, Ambush 1 Trigger)

OR

FlagIsTrue(54) AND PartOfGroupInZone(Group3, Ambush 1 Trigger);

CoalitionMsg("AMBUSH!"), CoalitionSound(...), SetFlag(7)

 

Trigger 2

Once;

FlagIsFalse(54) AND PartOfGroupInZone(Group1, Ambush 1 Trigger)

OR

FlagIsFalse(54) AND PartOfGroupInZone(Group2, Ambush 1 Trigger)

OR

FlagIsFalse(54) AND PartOfGroupInZone(Group3, Ambush 1 Trigger);

CoalitionMsg("NO AMBUSH!"), CoalitionSound(...), SetFlag(9)

Edited October 24, 2011 by LostOblivion

[Ranger79]

Yep that's the one. It's in the hands of the dev team and it'll hopefully be fixed.

 

Awesome, thanks for the reply.

[elchacal]

Thanks for the update! I hope the patch will come out soon! :thumbup:

[Maxpilot]

It is fixed, but is not included into the patch yet.

 

Great! Thanks.

[159th_Viper]

....Any word on fixing Batumi so that runway numbers reflect something closer to 119 degree heading that the runway is actually on, or moving the runway so that it is on the correct heading?

 

Wee Update on this issue: Confirmed and verified that Batumi AB runway heading as per ME is the Magnetic heading and as a consequence accords with current RL charts of True Heading 13/31.

 

Error at Batumi as a result of an HSI-offset issue which is currently being addressed. Runway is aligned as it should be - HSI is not.