Danny_P

I can confirm that turing the FCR off works... I then turned on the FCR, waited the magical 20-25mins and boom dead.

Ahhhh why thankyou sir!

Elec Sys failure on ramp Hi there, Myself and a mate having been running into an issue with the F-16. Hot Start on the ramp, after a while we both get an Elec Sys warning, the mdf's flicker and reboot. The warning will not go, and there's a Main PWR warning on the battery panel. The FCR doesn't boot back up and the INS alignment is lost. On this occasion for testing I joined the slot, and haven't touched anything bar navigating through some pages on the ded whist explaining some pages to someone. All previous times I've turned on things like the backup radio, rwr, plugged in some steerpoints. It always seems to happen around 20mins of sitting there. An additional thing to note is that myself and my mate has also experienced it whilst taxing to the runway after sitting there for a bit. The attached log shows nothing apparent, you can see I join the slot and sit there for about 20mins until it happens. I've also included a track file https://www.dropbox.com/s/ry7ml1gyleh2qrg/F16_elecSysFailure.zip?dl=0

Again like others have said this is one of the many, many things that should just be a 'thing' in the editor. To be honest there really should just be mission editor 'module' (referencing how BI have implemented functions in their mission editor) or something similar that create a carrier battle group, and you define it's area of opperation and it deals with it all. In the meantime I highly recommend, again like others have, for you lot to have a look at MOOSE. Whilst it does require SOME input from the user, it only takes a short amount of time to understand at a high level.

Well yeah I can do that, But I'd rather have it on a hat.

I use a TM Warthog and I have the radar antenna elevation bound to the china-hat up/down. I find the sensitivity of the control to be far too much, from what I remember this was similar with the F-18 for a while and then it was changed.

+1 I was also thinking last night, that airfields could have some way of quickly telling their coalition rather than just clicking on them. Simply by just changing their colour: blue/white. red/white. green/white. Or something like that. It might help new players 'understand' the battlespace/scenario more, plus as a mission designer it would be handy as it saves clicking to check it's set correctly.

Well based from the move of ED creating their own in-game voip system, they are going to make an in-game system. Creating api's for modders to hook into doesn't make their job any easier as they don't have control over the development of said tool.

Becasue it's still a long way off

Becuase the map is new and it needs to be widely tested first??!

Interesting idea are you just talking about time but no unit movement etc or are you actually talking about the entire campagin to 'run'. I wonder what it would take to accomplish something like this. It would have to simulate the time when you first load the campagin at a crazy speed.

Yes... Piss on other peoples achivements, that's the correct way to go about life chap.

Two options: Use Skatezillas' tool: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=160053 or Create a shortcut to the dcs exe with target: "*****\DCS World\bin\DCS.exe" --force_disable_VR

"New features for DCS: F-16C Viper include but are not limited to;"

So you do know what I mean. I'm going to take a guess here and say you only fly in SP? The MP community isn't airquake, though I would agree to say they're the ones who shout the loudest. I fly with a very small group, one of my good mates has made an amazing sandbox mission template that utilises MOOSE, Skynet, and other scripting tools to create a dynamic environment whereby we can easily jump into a session, come up with a mission/target, fly out towards it and the scripts will work their magic and try to contest us. There are a lot of other PvE servers who do the same thing. Having mission planning tools would allow us to do just that, correctly plan a mission and then load the data into the aircraft via the dtc.

The ATC in dcs is pish at the moment anyway, I'd wait till the suposed rework of the ATC.

^^^ I really hope that the ED, in some way work with you scripting lot. You'll be able to add Skynets IADS system to that list too.... That partnership is set to be amazing

Heatblurs pilot/rio Rig is just amazing. Whilst it's a visual element it really adds so much

This HAS to be a thing, mission planning is a vital part of what we are trying to recreate/simulate. Like many have said, entering data into the cdu, editing cms programs or requencies just isn't how it's done. This would allow mission makers more flexibility in terms of how they design mission, missions should be more 'senarios' where by the pilot should have to make up their own plan on how their mission is achieved. In terms of multiplayer: Select your aircraft>Enter Mission Planner. Due to the way DCS handles flights, most large mp servers have just solo aircraft. But in the mission planner it would be awesome if you were able to make a flight by 'inviting' players to it. Whilst a 'simple' planning tool would be great for now, it really needs to be a system where multiple clients can all see the same map and be able to discuss and plan with realtime tools. This would then mean a flight would be able to all have the same plan. Also I feel that you should not be able to enter the planner whilst in the aircraft. For MP you should go back to the slot selection and start again, I do feel that there should be a 'process' to this mechanic.

This is supposedly being looked at with the F-16 module... It's one of the fundemntal things missing in this game, and one which I hope becomes a standard for all modules (note the f10 marker 'hack' method that HB worked out for the 14 and Viggen for waypoints)

Just to confirm, you can see the module installed on the homepage. And then you cannot see 'f-14b' in the aircraft list? Pictures attached

I suggest you watch: And some of Wag's other videos

Oh I completely agree about the pestering, sometimes it just feels as though there's no true acknowledgment apart from [investigating]. And yes it may well be an easy fix, there are many of them in the list ;) But unfortunately time and time again we are seeing a clear ceiling that we are crashing into in terms of complexity and performance.

Whilst there probably is things they could do to 'improve' performance at the moment. I think that we'll be unfortunately waiting on the 'new' graphics engine to see anything major. Real time lighting is expensive, only recently have other engines made massive improvements on the number of lights and objects casting shadows. I feel that a large amount of the performance and graphics issues all fall into this pot. Only time will tell eh.

It's being 'investigated'....