Jump to content

shagrat

ED Translators
  • Posts

    12353
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by shagrat

  1. Just put a unit like a truck (OpelBlitz?) or some antenna or even a single soldier adjacent to any building in the mission editor. Then create an advance task top "set frequency" (it's MHz so 2.4 kHz is 0.24) and below add a "Transmission" task with any way or ogg file you want to transmit. Check the loop option, power to 100W. That's it you created a "beacon" transmitting from that unit.
  2. Wenn du den Funkschalter am HOTAS gemapped hast, kannst du eines der beiden Funkgeräte anwählen und es sollte das Funkmenü oben rechts erscheinen. Dieses lässt sich auch per Maus anklicken oder in VR mit dem Punkt und dem Mausemulationstasten.
  3. A quick video from Casmo: https://youtu.be/3w-OWojSjtY
  4. When AV-8B spawns on the deck (aft of the island) on the LHA-1 Tarawa the aircrafts nose points towards the bow of the ship. It should in fact point towards the stern of the ship (angled of course, but switch the direction from front to back), to allow the aircraft to roll to the stern, turn on the tramline and line up for take off, without requiring a 270° turn. If you look at basically any picture, showing AV-8B on the deck of LHA or LHD and they are preparing to launch or parked after recovery they all point aft to the stern of the boat. The rare photograph where they don't, shows either port visit line ups, or crowded decks to store the aircraft/optimization of storage space, so they can't launch anyway. This should just need a simple tweak to the spawn position and plane direction on spawn.
  5. Without having looked at the Miz file, a common issue is that the Waypoint with the attack is too close to the target, so when the "order" comes they turn around to get the necessary distance for the attack run, first. Try setting the waypoint at least 10-15 NM away from the target and verify the attack task does not specify a specific attack heading etc.
  6. Ok, so I checked today. Disclaimer: no real life F/A-18C pilot here, so can not tell if this is true to life or not. I have realistic TDC enabled in the special options. Set up a similar scene. Oil rig with a T-55 some 60m away. WP1 is at the base of the Oil rig. Ingress, make sure Master arm is on, A/G mode selected, TGP on RMFD, stores on LMFD, center MFD HSI. Box WAYP on center MFD, select WP1, then WPDESG. This slaves TGP and MAV to the designation. TGP should now look at the oil rig. On LMFD box MAVF and press OSB again to call the MAV video feed. Sensor Select left to get the diamond on the MAV screen, this should uncage the MAV, as well and commands it to look at the oil rig(WP1). It should lock the oil rig. As long as there is a ground designation, everything is slaved to it! Now, there are to options. 1) change the designation and Cage/uncage the MAV to slave to the new point (useful if you switch between Markpoints or prearranged waypoints with different targets) or 2) with focus still on the MAV screen, press NoseWheelSteering/undesignate once to remove the INS designation and then depress and hold(!) the TDC while slewing the MAV seeker over the T-55. Releasing TDC depress will command the MAV seeker to attempt a lock. Again, I can't say if this is the correct implementation, but like this I can operate the MAVF manually. Please check, if this works the same, for you.
  7. The right MFD with the TGP is selected for control with the TDC. Indicated, by the diamond symbol in the upper right corner. Switch to the left MFD with the MAV, with SensorSelectSwitch left (check diamond is on the MAV screen) then you control the MAV seeker with the TDC. It may be necessary to depress TDC to actually command a lock, if it can't lock the tank immediately on slew.
  8. After one year, the update with Cyprus released and me currently testing a mission in northern Syria, again, I'd like to bump this thread and kindly ask, if it's possible to add a couple generic city blocks and streets where the city of Afrin should be? It was very popular in the news when contested and sieged... also it is one of the cities actually present by name on the F10 flight map and thus an important landmark for VFR navigation.
  9. Yes, I definitely would, though a simple extension to the south, with low detail beyond the Pakistani border at Helmand should work to add a bit of ocean...
  10. Hmm, Abkhazia/South Ossetia and Georgia are quite relevant, so is Syria. Afghanistan and Vietnam were not the only conflict zones after WW II. Just saying...
  11. Actually, the AI has a lot of things factored into the "detection" of enemies. Light is just one variable. Contrast against background, fog/weather reducing visibility (range) and factors like "has another aircraft of your flight already been spotted" all factors into the equation how long it takes the AI to spot you, if you are in range of the available sensors. What we underestimate is that AI groups have radios, as well, so if one Tank spots an enemy aircraft, the whole group is aware. A large group of 4 aircraft together is more likely to be spotted as a single plane. Front/side/rear, movement and aspect affects time to detection, as well. Modern combat vehicles like T-72, BMP-2 or newer have IR optics and even without a zoomed optic can identify an enemy at range. The most important thing to keep mind is, if you fly or hover in front of an enemy group for 5 minutes and you are in range of their sensors, even if it is Mk I eyeballs, they will spot you sooner or later if they have LOS, no matter what.
  12. If a tester can't reproduce the error you describe, a track file (not a video!), provides a lot of detailed information for debugging. For example it contains your complete settings and options configuration, all your input from buttons pressed, switch position to system states. Even without EDs debugging tools testers and devs can use track replays to compare procedures to what you did in game and identify what's different.
  13. In DCS you have to look at a switch to be able to switch it. You can only operate them in your field of view (2D and VR alike). A pilot under the effect / pressure of Gs will feel the switch and operate it, without looking at it. IRL the pilot feels(!) how exhausted he is, as well as he feels(!) the G- forces. The later is somehow simulated with visual cues and heavy breathing in a limited way. Now, if we add "artificial" (blurry vision, tunnel view etc.) we add another "unrealistic" visual cue to simulate the physical feedback. If we start adding visual or audio cues for everything we can't feel, it's not going to be more "realistic", but at some point oversaturated with artificial cues... Add that on top of all the "unrealistic" limitations we suffer already, like no peripheral vision, not everyone having a 1:1 Simpit replica to operate without looking, just by touch. No motion feedback to feel drift, acceleration, deceleration, movement, etc. what is the point? Make it the most difficult arcade game on the planet? Because it can't add "realism", only simulate additional difficulty. I'd rather see enhancements to the AI and a living environment. Anyway, as long as it is an optional setting, I am fine. I just don't see it adding immersion or realism for me. But I am not the guy to circle for minutes close to blackout anyway, as I tend to react on the existing cues pretty well.
  14. I understood Revi's idea as "exhaustion" through pulling Gs, not being tired, dehydrated or just having a bad day. I am not sure, but isn't the current system already with some sort of timer when you go over a certain amount of Gs, so when you pull too hard, you don't just have the tunnel vision, but the screen blacks out and if you keep that too long you suffer G-loc, the same when you pull over the maximum G threshold?
  15. The main issue remains: How do you simulate "feeling" exhaustion? I am not talking about simulating the effects of exhaustion, but getting feedback from your body, so you know you can't go on and pull longer/more because you will certainly G-loc? In the end it would boil down to a guessing game of "What is my current stamina?" ...who dares wins or loses depending on a more or less unknown level in an "exhaustion Mini-Game". That doesn't sound any bit realistic, just like adding random dice rolls...
  16. But isn't that what's implemented, already? You pull quick and hard, you black out, more or less instantly... You pull deliberate building up Gs you see the tunnel vision ('blood draining") and if you stay close to the threshold for long you black out, because you can't fight it any more, or you need to reduce pull to lessen G-forces.
  17. As long as it is an option that can be deactivated by mission designers or for single player campaigns, ok. Though I think we still have enough disadvantages compared to a real pilot. No peripheral vision, no feeling of orientation in the cockpit (VR is an advantage here), no way to operate switches and stuff without looking at them, not able to distinguish switches by feel, no feeling of G-forces building up. Especially the last one is interesting... so how do I judge if I currently pull 6G or 8G continuously other than G-loc happening? Currently you judge by time and keep it at the point, where the tunnel vision holds steady. Now with a dynamic time (invisible health bar) what indicates I am close to G-loc? I can't feel how much I am exhausted, the visual reference could pass the threshold at any time and judging time left, by experience doesn't work.
  18. There is a difference between public in "US citizens" and public as in "won't mind if you mail a copy to North Korea". Though it's debatable, if in today's world that regulation is sensible or even effective, it still is in place. So a document can be de-classified and available to NATO Partners, military contractors etc., de-classified and available to the public but restricted for foreign countries or countries under ITAR, or de-classified and publicly available to everyone. Some stuff is sold worldwide by Amazon, as print on demand, but fortunately it is more complicated than just "de-classified".
  19. Ah ok. For DCS helicopters shred of tips of blades, then disintegrate the whole blade, or dent the tail rotor, or clip the tail. Aircraft shred of wingtips, lose/damage, wings or nose at slower speeds, and explode when flying into objects at higher speeds. There is no difference that I know of between damage taken by trees, poles, masts, or buildings if you clip your wing for example. The factors seem to rely on speed, mass etc. and calculated damage dealt on impact to the section "touching" the object. So if you hit a collision model with the fuselage of the plane at 500 kts plus the damage dealt to the fuselage will result in an exploding aircraft. It is open for debate, if the explosion, should be the same as we know from a larger missile hit, with the plane breaking apart, and parts tumbling down with a flaming trail, but that's part of the damage model of the plane, not the trees.
  20. Actually there is a head movement limit implemented in DCS, that applies neatly to Track it and prevents you from rotating your head further than over your shoulder. You even need to lean forward as IRL to better check six. The perceived "cheat" is actually the Field Of View, compressing a wide viewing angle into a 2D screen. The problem is, this isn't even remotely compensating for the limitations we have in DCS vs. real life. And this is true for 2D-TrackIR and VR headsets, alike. Your real life view including peripheral vision includes far more than what either VR or a flat screen can provide. That doesn't even account for the fact we can't glance sideways with our eyes in DCS as we are "staring" straight ahead, fixed to our head position... So if you limit the head movement you can't even look behind you in VR, as you can only tilt and turn your head so far. Same for TrackIR depending on FOV you can put on your ultra widescreen 3 monitor vs. 1 normal screen.
  21. Then, fly an F-18C or A-10C into the trees and be amazed by the disintegration of wings, burning parts tumbling to the ground in beautiful cascade of events, triggered by collidiing with an object. Their damage model is more detailed and can even model "shearing off/damaging a wing tip" and limp home with that. To sum it up: the tree model is fine, what you want is an upgrade to the FC3 damage model to provide a more detailed destruction after hitting objects at high speed. What version of DCS (stable/openbeta, version no.) do you use. Because ultimately that is an interesting point worth investigating... The plane should disintegrate more or less similar to being destroyed by a direct missile hit.
  22. Nice picture there Now, imagine what happens if you shear that of and feed it into your engine turbine at 500kts... BOOOM! ...and as I've tried to explain multiple times: the FC3 planes lack the detailed internal damage model for engines and avionics so the result of the calculation is a big explosion. Turbine blades are not designed to chop wood... That is the main reason aircrew clear runways as part of FOD prevention. And a bunch 30x1.5 branches plus a dozen egg-sized cones may classify as foreign objects. Just saying...
  23. If you reference MSFS, there is no damage modeling at all. Whenever something breaks the simulation stops, you get a black screen with a message "what" you broke/how, e.g. "overspeed airframe" etc. and then you exit or restart. It hasn't changed since the first MS Flightsimulator.
  24. They have. Actually any contact with an object while airborne results in a black screen with a message that you made a mistake and damaged the plane. Then you can restart.
  25. Ok, that's different than "I hit a tree top with my wingtip". If the issue is collision boxes extending beyond the actual tree model, that's actually something that should be fixed. When I last in the Huey close to some larger trees on the Syria map I had the impression the collision model isn't extending to the top, but stops a bit below, which is a good compromise, in my view. Still the issue with the exploding plane is most likely related to the more generic damage model of the FC3 planes if I am not mistaken. The helicopters do not explode when touching a tree, ripp of stuff, they break the blades, etc. but don't explode unless you smash into the trees at hi speed.
×
×
  • Create New...