Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RocketmanAL

  1. So I tried this mission several months ago and while I questioned the mission concept (albeit innovative and nice idea), it was pretty straight forward jump in the cockpit and fly. Last week I went back and tried it again and found that a bunch of cinematic elements had been added. Watching aircraft do aerobatics from a ground view is very cool in concept, and I'm sure works well on a monitor. However, in VR it can be VERY disorientating and probably for some painful. Having the view forcefully moved while in VR is a recipe for vertigo and I had to quit out before actually jumping in the je
  2. In testing a mission I put together I have an enemy flight entering an area where friendlies have been operating. I have the enemy flight set to active the en route task "CAP" if blue forces are still in an area, then deactivate it with the"CAP-x" task if they leave the area. I've done this successfully before in other missions, and I went back to double-check the scripting was correct. Now, the "CAP" task doesn't seem to cancel. Even after leaving the area, the enemy aircraft continues to follow and attempt to shoot me down. I have messages letting me know when the enemy plane changes stat
  3. Object type name change messing up old saves; also causing crashing See my thread below where I had a mission using the Type 54 that I could not load into the ME. Turns out that the object type names were changed by Deka at some point. This changed caused the ME to look for an object type that didn't exist, and delete the unit. In my case I had a helo landing on the ship, so DCS got hung-up trying to figure out what to do. All old missions will have this issue I think. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=287771 Manually changing the object type name fixed the issue, but you have
  4. Sounds like I'll be manually editing at least a couple of missions. As I had them carefully scripted as part of the mission.
  5. Thanks man! Really appreciate it. I have a few more missions with Deka ships, though I don't think any involve helos landing on them. Do I need to go in a manually change the name? Or is a patch for this expected?
  6. I have a mission I'm working on as part of a campaign. I re-visited it after a few months and now I'm unable to load it into the ME, or into it as a mission. It appears to get stuck on the loading screen and never gets into the mission or ME screen. When attempting to close DCS it gives me the "Do you want to save" window, but if I try and save it under a new name it doesn't actually save it. I have multiple versions of the missions that I saved as I progressed, but all of them have the same behavior. The missions immediately before and after work fine. Something specific with this mission.
  7. Sorry for the delayed response, wasn't really watching this thred after the first week or so. You can create your own templates. It's the bottom section of the templates window. Just set-up a site like I have in the guide, or in your own style, and save it to have it avaliable for future uses.
  8. Sorry for the late reply, honestly stopped paying attention to this thread. In my experience adding the BIG BIRD significantly improves the SA-10's ability to engage higher altitude and longer range targets. The CLAM SHELL is better for low-altitude, but if you put it's detection range next to the BIG BIRD it's significantly outclassed.
  9. In running a mission on Syria, I had 135MPRS tankers set to CTJF. They refused to respond to anyone trying to contact them. Eventually, I figured out being set as "CTJF" was the issue. After setting to USA they work fine again. So there is some disconnect with that particular country setting. Attached mission shows that. Shell and Texaco are exactly the same 135MPRS. The only difference is the country of origin. Testing with JF-17, Hornet, and Tomcat confirms that you can reach Texaco (USA) but not Shell (CTJF). Might mean there are similar issues with other units, like AWACS, but wasn't ab
  10. Thanks for the insight! What data is passed to the launchers? Heading and range? 3D coords? What is the data rate? Maybe it's better to characterize it has there is no ability for the player controlled launchers to see an active feed from the search radar? The fact that Deka had to give the HQ-7 its own dedicated imaginary search radar indicates that they were not able to tap into the battery search radar feed directly to show the player. If the data is available, but not the live feed, that would be useful at least for verbal cueing. Putting multiple batteries in the same group is a soluti
  11. Thanks for passing it forward! I honestly didn't expect anyone of note to see it, really just wanted to get some discussion going and some ideas out there. So I'm glad it will hopefully be useful. If I can help with testing or anything I'm happy to help make the game better.
  12. I'm making this thread as a result of many months of testing and contemplation of DCS air defense units. I know that this will be long and probably only a handful of people will read the whole thing. However, I hope at least one dev will take notice as I truly believe CA can be made into something so much greater than the sum of its parts. Just to preface this, I have extensive experience with DCS air defense units and CA as a mission maker, operator, and as a guide maker. My guides include SEAD reference guides, CA guide videos, and flare effectiveness studies. F-18C Flare Effectivene
  13. On the surface I would be immensely interested in this. But before anything like this should be attempted by a third party ED needs to get the SAMs that are part of DCS sorted first. We can't control anything with a central radar or command cabin. If that can't even be done forget integratng multiple SAMs. Being able to control the 2, 3, 8, 10, 11, and Patriot is a desperately needed capability for CA. They can so lay the groundwork for a inter-group communication system.
  14. Building on flare testing of the A-10C and AV-8B, I've conducted a study of the flare effectiveness of the F/A-18C. TL;DR: FLAR: 8 RPT: 1 INT: N/A provides the best protection, of the tested profiles, with the minimum required flares. For this study, I did a bit more testing to determine the effects of the three variables that can be programmed in the F/A-18C: Flares per cycle, cycle repeats, and cycle intervals. There were some interesting results, but overall they are consistent with the previous testing. You can find the results of the F/A-18C study here: F/A-18C Flare Effectivene
  15. Mercenary Huey Missions I put together several Huey missions for my squad as part of a mercenary campaign. Since we don't play them anymore, I figured I'd post them here for others to enjoy. Slingload Mission
  16. SEAD Practice Mission Featuring Skynet Mission File Page I created this for my squad, but thought others would find it useful. This training mission is for groups to develop and practice SEAD procedures and doctrine against a large scale networked SAM system. I hope to continue to improve it over time with additional features. This mission is designed as a large scale sandbox to test and practice SEAD doctrine. It is meant to be difficult and requires significant effort to roll back the SAM network. The enemy IADS consists of four separate zones; East, Bandar Abbas, Qeshm Island, and
  17. Operation Opera- Now with F-16 Operation Opera MP Mission This mission replicates the infamous 1981 strike on the Osirak Facility by the Israeli Air Force, dubbed Operation Opera. I did significant research on the raid to replicate it as closely as I can within DCS. This mission replicates the real-life aircraft, weapons load-outs, route, distance, and defenses around the Osirak Facility.
  18. I couldn't find a better spot for this, so feel free to move this if it has a better home. I have a collection of missions I did for my group as part of a defunct mercenary scenario. I put a lot of work into them and hate to see them go to waste. I'm happy to post them here and to the user files, but thought I'd ask if ED is interested in taking user made missions for inclusion in the core DCS game for all to enjoy. These missions center around modules that don't have as many instant action or single missions available; Huey, L-39, Gazelle. So I thought it might be nice to fill out some
  19. I put together a SEAD Reference guide for my group and thought others might find it useful. SEAD Reference Guide Includes a basic overview, order of battle, deployment template, and system engagement procedures for the RF equipped air defense units within DCS. Open to comments or suggestions.
  20. Well, unfortunately, most of what I talked about isn't currently implemented in DCS. You can fire the 9M317 SAM from the Type 52, which has an in-game range of 50 km. It's very interesting engaging targets that you can't visually see and having to rely on the PPI scope. I would love to see a scope for the TER incorporated eventually. One that requires you to maintain track instead of the system handling it automatically.
  21. First off, I want to say bravo for your team's efforts in expanding the CA arsenal, in terms of ground and naval assets. Having a controllable ship is amazing, and brand new experience with so much potential. Having said that, I'd love to discuss the implications that the Type 52B Destroyer has on the current and future efforts to expand CAs. This particular unit contains several elements that can lay the groundwork for some long-awaited CA features. 1. Medium range SAMs. So this was probably one of the most immediately exciting things to me. The 9M317 missile immediately outclasses eve
  22. Three years ago I did a study on the flares with the A-10C, primarily to determine an optimal flare profile and to see how different factors impacted the decoy rate. You can find the results of that study here: A-10C Flare Effectiveness Study Recently I decided to do another study in the Harrier, as I'm been flying it quite often and find the inconsistency of the flares annoying. The results are available here: Harrier Flare Effectiveness Study TL;DR: Program G QTY: 2 INT: 1 provides the best protection with the minimum required flares. Next, I will be testing the Hornet's flares i
  23. After moving the large mast away from the target iI was able to get a clean bomb into the target. It still seems to not quite be hitting the bunker itself, as there is still a bit of off-set. Will test again, but seems you hit the nail on the head. Much thanks!
  • Create New...