Jump to content

Quaggles

ED Closed Beta Testers Team
  • Content Count

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Quaggles

  • Rank
    Closed Beta Tester
  • Birthday September 26

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS: A-10C
    DCS: Blackshark 2
    DCS: Flaming Cliffs 3
    DCS: Combined Arms
    DCS: Mi-8MTV2
    DCS: MiG-21bis
    DCS: P-51D
  • Location
    Queensland, Australia - Behind your 3/9 Line
  1. Problem: Mission Editor triggered failures to the Hydraulic Pumps/Transfer Pump or the Wing Sweep will persist even after restarting a mission Reproduction: 1. Play the attached mission, Hydraulic Pumps/Transfer Pump and Wing Sweep should fail within 1 minute of flight 2. Play another mission such as a free flight 3. Observe that the Hydraulic Pumps/Transfer and Wing Sweep are still broken. Game restart is required for them to work again. DCS Version: 2.5.6.52196 Notes: This potentially could be the source of other issues people are having such as the right engine startup bug
  2. Problem: Changing scan bars in TWS AUTO causes scan elevation to become stuck in RWS and sometimes TWS Manual/BIAS. I can't find a consistent workaround to get it working again, sometimes designating an empty space on the ATTACK RADAR fixes it but often not. Reproduction: 1. Open AA Radar 2. Change to TWS 3. Change to AUTO steering 4. Click the elevation bar pushbutton 5. Change to RWS mode 6. Observe that you can't change scan elevation anymore DCS Version: 2.5.6.52196
  3. Problem: In NAV or AG master mode having a WPDSG while using the AIR submode of the Attack Radar page prevents you from changing the range scale and antenna elevation. I assume this occurs because the jet is trying to set the automatic range and antenna elevation for the AG radar to focus on the designated point but isn't checking the submode is actually SURF. To Reproduce: 1. Be in NAV or AG master mode 2. WPDSG a waypoint 3. Bring up ATTACK RADAR in AIR mode 4. Can't change elevation or range DCS Version: 2.5.6.52196 FA-18C Designation AA Radar Bug.trk
  4. You could set the Computer Address Panel to the NAV category and then press "OWN A/C" to hook your own aircraft again (Same result as TID half action).
  5. Here is another example of it happening in a 2 ship formation with the same setup as my previous example: ${1}
  6. Here is my reproduction ${1} Target was a 4 ship of MiG-29A flying at 4000m at Mach 0.8 in Line Abreast 2743m x 0m, no chaff was given to them and their task was set to 'Nothing' and they were forced to not react. Started by swapping to Pulse Search to make sure the TID was cleared, then swapped to TWS. It seems like in certain target formations the AWG-9 needs to decide which cluster of returns to group as a track, as it flip flops between choices it can seem like the target is doing an erratic instant movement which can cause the track to disassociate from the returns
  7. I have all the old sound files (For DCS core sounds and ED module sounds) backed up but I'm not sure on the legality of sharing them, clarification from c0ff would be nice. They are freely available to download by people that don't own the modules though by using the DCS updater to revert to the version before they were encrypted and then installing the modules manually though so it's not like they are only available to paying customers, it's just a pain to do.
  8. That should be correct, I've used that method to install sound mods before and they work https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=190778
  9. You'll need to create an empty .ogg file and place it in the "Saved Games\DCS\Mods" folder with the same relative path, for example if the file used to be: "Mods\aircraft\F-16C\Sounds\Effects\Aircrafts\F-16\Cockpit\Betty\Example.ogg" Then your empty file would need to be in: "C:\Users\YOUR_USERNAME\Saved Games\DCS\Mods\aircraft\F-16C\Sounds\Effects\Aircrafts\F-16\Cockpit\Betty\Example.ogg" You could try creating an empty txt file and renaming it to .ogg but if that doesn't work try using something like Audacity to create a 1 second silent audio clip, exporting it as .ogg and using
  10. Well lets compare those two: Ka-50 after an engine upgrade in 2018 now needs the properties of some materials/textures updated to match the new lighting model. They announced soon after that they are working on a cockpit overhaul to resolve this, in the meantime any functional issues can be resolved by a user mod. Gazelle since 2016 has had fundamental flight model, damage model, systems modelling and weapons modelling bugs, issues and inaccuracies that have remained largely unaddressed since release. Doesn't sound exactly comparable to me.
  11. Yeah I thought I had read it had Link-16 somewhere then I looked it up again and realised that the JF-17 has "Link-17" which is a proprietary Pakistani datalink.
  12. From my understanding the JF-17 implements Link-16 since the PAF needed interoperability with their F-16s, is the datalink only working between JF-17s and AWACS because of an ED limitation where they haven't defined a Link-16 API yet to work with their Hornet?
  13. The priorities I refer to aren't which bugs are looked at first, it's the priorities between the amount of developers on the Viper/MAC/Carrier DLC/(Insert various other future paid module here) and the number of developers that focus on the core issues. I understand that now that these products like the Viper are in development ED is not going to shift around each engineers focus on a week to week basis. But at some point months/years ago the decision has been made that X amount of developers work on core issues and X amount work on the Viper. It seems we probably won't agree that the ba
  14. I don't see anyone contesting that they are complex and take time to fix. The issue I see is prioritisation, we all understand that money needs to come in to keep the lights on but ED is at a point where the underlying sim itself has so many issues it's turning many people away from buying any new modules from ED. Why should I buy the F-16 when it might be in an environment where the AI won't shoot back for 2 months? Why should I buy any new module when the AI flight models are fundamentally broken and MP is falling apart from unresolved issues? These are the questions ED needs to ask the
  15. There is a difference between entering them a bug tracker to be lost for years and actually prioritising fixing these issues. Sure it's not technically ignoring them but it certainly doesn't get them fixed any time soon. We're in a situation now where AI units (Like IR SAMs and some AAA and tanks) are completely blind on dedicated servers. This issue has existed for going on 7 weeks now I believe and it was just pushed to the STABLE branch. It's clear the ED has no interest in actually maintaining their base simulation while server owners have to spend time picking up the pieces and comi
×
×
  • Create New...