LotAtc 4 DCS - 0.9.0

[muffler]

• Be sure you get the second version of the file, the first one will not work. Check
  
• Check server install with this link Check
  
• Check that you have correctly enabled LotAtc in DCS options Check
  
• Check port 10310 is opened in Tcp Check
  
• You run DCS 1.2.6, if it is 1.2.7 check this Check
  

If you pass this checklist and it is not working, launch a mission, stop it after some seconds, and send me:

 

• DCS.log
  
• LotAtc_server.log
  
• LotAtc_client.log
  

All these files I will send to you tomorrow after test. Thank you DArt!

Can you send me your working version of serverman?

Edited January 16, 2014 by muffler

[DArt]

I used this one http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=102823&highlight=servman at version: 1.2.6.20768. The only modified file is servman_server.lua from my website.

[muffler]

 

If you pass this checklist and it is not working, launch a mission, stop it after some seconds, and send me:

 

• DCS.log
  
• LotAtc_server.log
  
• LotAtc_client.log
  

All theses files are in your {Users}\Saved Games\DCS World\Logs

 

In {Users}\Saved Games\DCS World\Logs I found only DCS.log

dcs.zip

[DArt]

In {Users}\Saved Games\DCS World\Logs I found only DCS.log

[ATTACH]93148[/ATTACH]

 

Thanks,

 

I am not a ServMan expert, but it seems that the error line 200:

00022.373 INFO NET: Lua: ERROR: No missions found in Missions/Multiplayer folder, script will not run correctly!

00022.373 ERROR Lua::Config: Call error server.on_mission:[string "Scripts/Addons/ServMan3/servman_server.lua"]:2159: attempt to compare nil with number.

cause an error, so the current function is stopped and avoid LotAtc lines to be called, that is why it is not working. Try to fix this error and it should be ok.

 

Otherwise, LotAtc seem correctly installed and loaded.

[muffler]

Ok. We will try. Thank you!

[DArt]

Some users asked me if LotAtc supports the DCS open beta 1.2.7.

 

As you know, it is installed in another directory and if you have 1.2.6 installed with LotAtc, you can install it for 1.2.7 with some manual steps.

 

See the LotAtc website for more explanations: http://lotatc.dartsite.org/news/29

 

Needed for the release of DCS 1.2.7 (Make a DCS crash if you do not patch it). The 0.9.1 will be released soon to include the fix and add lot of new features ;)

[SchniX]

Hi

 

About the detection, how is it working? it must be radars from AWACS? Ships? or ground radars, or any radar on the map?

 

Which object i have to put in the mission?

 

Thx

[DArt]

Hi

 

About the detection, how is it working? it must be radars from AWACS? Ships? or ground radars, or any radar on the map?

 

Which object i have to put in the mission?

 

Thx

 

Hi,

 

You will find everything about that on my website: http://lotatc.dartsite.org/projects/lotatc/wiki/Detection_Profiles :)

[SchniX]

Thx

[vJaBoG32]

Great!!! Perfekt work

 

This tool works real perfekt in realistik mode. No crashed, no bugs, even with 30+ Units and human players.

Only one thing: I´d like to extend the relief Map (CTR borders, TCN, Entry/Exits, etc.). How does this work? .mbtiles seems to be a typical map file. What software is needed to edit it?

THX for any help!

Greets

Siddharta (JaBoG32)

Edited February 12, 2014 by asticher

[GGTharos]

Why doesn't realistic mode have an option for aircraft type? Real AWACS does that.

[DArt]

Why doesn't realistic mode have an option for aircraft type? Real AWACS does that.

 

Yes you are right, real AWACS can determine aircraft type as some others radars too. For 0.9.0, it is not implemented. The reason is that I need to define which radar has this capacity or not and be able to determine for each aircraft if a radar with this capacity can see it.

 

It is planned for future (certainly in 1.x, perhaps the 1.0.0). For 0.9.0, I take decision to hide aircraft type for all in realistic mode ( I can only set the feature for all radars from now in current LotAtc engine). I hope to have enough time to implement this advanced feature in future release to add more realism in the engine.

 

I am currently very busy with 0.9.1 validation and the ground/ATC/ILS work for 1.0.0 ;)

[GGTharos]

Don't worry about which radars can do NCTR and which do not ... assume the information comes from many intel sources, like RL :)

[Galwran]

Don't worry about which radars can do NCTR and which do not ... assume the information comes from many intel sources, like RL :)

 

maybe not realistic, but how about identifying targets when they are within 70% of the detection range? That way powerful radars like the AWACS could really shine.

[Supersheep]

The German translation needs support, because in the long run, I cannot reliably translate for updates in a timely manner.

This coming update is certainly going to be ready in time, so don't worry.

 

 

 

@GG

 

Suppose I'm happily motoring along in my SPAAG, and my radar is "slightly challenged". Suppose further that I get a contact. Do you mean that I'm going to stick my head out to get other intel, then see "Holy Cow, that's a (insert random airframe here)" and that info gets up to battalion and back? :D

 

Ok seriously, I think your suggestion is good :P

[GGTharos]

Sort of, haha :D

 

I am not thinking of limited situations like you are alluding to, but rather a full-up battle management capability. In a real AWACS you will use IFF, Datalink, NCTR, RWR/ELINT, Geolocation+OB information, flight profiles and other knowledge to identify an aircraft. It may not be perfect, but the problem is always simulating the imperfections, not the other way around. :)

 

I would prefer to battle management to be simulated rather than the limited one by default, however ...

 

There could always be a bunch of checkboxes (per side, even!) that would tell you what type of info you can get.

 

I mean, maybe your MANPADS commander has a great cell-phone plan, steady hand with the binocs and is great at ID'ing airframes :D

 

@GG

 

Suppose I'm happily motoring along in my SPAAG, and my radar is "slightly challenged". Suppose further that I get a contact. Do you mean that I'm going to stick my head out to get other intel, then see "Holy Cow, that's a (insert random airframe here)" and that info gets up to battalion and back? :D

 

Ok seriously, I think your suggestion is good :P

[Azrayen]

Tharos, while the "type" is not editable (and always UNK for ennemies in Realistic) for now, don't forget that you already have the ability to edit the "name" (TN for ennemies). And, why not, write a type if you want.

 

You may decide what is likely to be what based on the flight profile (altitude, speed, trajectory) of the boguey/bandit.

 

You may communicate with RWR-equipped (or even Mk-1 equipped, at short range) allied flights to use their data if they're spotted: it's part of the job (and it's fun to cooperate!)

 

Cheers

Az'

[GGTharos]

No, you misunderstand. I know I can do that, I could do that since the original LOTATC.

 

That's not enough. Real AWACS will give you the type of aircraft from multiple onboard sensors, intel and off-board sensors. Since I'm one guy, LOTATCS can pretend to be the rest of the crew and stick that in.

[Azrayen]

Sorry, I understood you well the first time.;)

 

I was simply saying that, as LotAtc doesn't do that for now, you have other options. I'm glad to learn that you're already aware of that.

 

It would be unrealistic to get the type for all aircraft. I understand your PoV on this ("if not sure, give it all") but I disagree with it. Indeed, for now, LotAtc doesn't make a difference for a target detected by an AWACS or detected by a ground-based system (which could be more "basic"). I feel displaying all types (for ennemies too) would be a bit like cheating.

 

Anyway, I agree with "that's not enough" and the fact that a LotAtc player usually doesn't have radar operator to sort and assess tracks before they're displayed on his screen.

As DArt answered: in the end LotAtc will evolve, and will include more realistic automated type detection (as an option, perhaps, we'll see). :)

Edited February 14, 2014 by Azrayen

[DArt]

I have planned to add a "Custom" mode to let users to choose themselves the different options in a future release. So, everyone could choose the behaviour they want.

 

It is sometimes complex for me to choose between the IRL and the simulation behaviours in LotAtc. I understand the GGTharos point of view even if I took another decision for 0.9.x. I hope that the future custom mode could satisfy everyone :)

[Kaiza]

Sounds good Dart, it will also allow us to temper the capability to the scenario. If it is a quiet air picture, then I would prefer having to identify friendly targets manually, while in a busy environment, no so much.

 

Thanks

[Azrayen]

Indeed Kaiza :)