Pushback on Aircraft Settings and Mission Card

I just want to share my thoughts on the upcoming addition of the Aircraft Settings and Mission Card to the Options:Special Menu. I am going to be critical, but I hope it's to help improve everyone's experience.

 

 

My main argument is that everything which this feature hopes to achieve is already available within the Mission Editor and separating this data from the .miz file can negatively impact the player or mission editor.

 

 

 

I'm finding it difficult to describe the concepts which I want to convey, so I'm going to use Wag's post here https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3803475&postcount=131 as a starting point.

 

 

Both will allow you to pre-configure the Hornet before flight in both single and multiplayer. As such, you would be able to setup your own aircraft defaults.

Depending on the phase of flight, I believe this is either the developer or mission builder's job, not the job of the user. For a ramp start, it is the job of the developer to place all switches/knobs in the appropriate position for an aircraft cold on the ramp. At this point it is the pilot's responsibility to configure the aircraft for each subsequent phase of flight. If the mission builder chooses to relieve the pilot of these tasks with a taxi or air start, then the pilot must enter a cockpit already configured for that phase of flight. There should be nothing substantial which needs to be done upon immediately entering the cockpit. This information is stored in the .miz file.

 

 

 

This brings up the first hurdle. An aircraft default is different for each phase of flight, and for an aircraft FENCE in or FENCE out. A user which configures the strobe lights ON in the special tab is going to have an undesirable state should the mission builder choose to spawn them in combat. Likewise, a user spawning in the traffic pattern will definitely want those lights ON. A combat mission is a highly dynamic sequence of events, all of which is currently successfully stored within the powerful .miz file. The current mission editor allows all these variables to be controlled without confusing or confounding the player, for each aircraft, for each situation in which it appears.

 

 

Aircraft Systems include all functions that are NOT specific to mission (.miz) file or Mission Computer settings. This includes such items as lights, bingo fuel, various cockpit switches, altimeter, etc.

Here I have another point of disagreement. All of these items quoted, and all the items included in the posted screens, should be specific to the mission, even if individual users may have common setting which they repeat often. Lets go through the examples:

 

 

Lights -

 

as previously discussed this is highly variable for FENCE IN or FENCE OUT operations. Lights also change depending on TAKEOFF, LANDING, and TAXI. Not to mention the contrast between NIGHT and DAY or LOW VISIBILITY. One size cannot fit all... even for the same user. Another problem arises here. The aircraft cockpit already has controls for all these components... why do they need to be set by a default state? Mission options should only exist for those variables which are beyond the pilot control, and thus cannot be saved by the mission builder during mission creation.

 

 

Bingo Fuel -

What's the point of setting a bingo fuel which has no relation to the route created in the mission editor? Never mind that a single aircraft in a single .miz file can have multiple flight plans, and thus multiple BINGO numbers. Again, there is a perfectly functional cockpit control for this setting. Either the user must set it during preflight or the mission editor should take on this task for hot/air starts.

 

 

Various Cockpit switches -

highly mission and flight phase specific. Should me Engine Anti-Ice be on by default? Am I on the ground? Am I flying in icing conditions? is the OAT +19C? Anti-skid? Hook bypass? These have cockpit controls and are highly contextual! Volume knobs? Why would these ever have across mission default states?

 

 

Altimeter -

there's no default setting for the Kohlsmann window. QNH?QNE?QFE? having uniform pressure systems across multiple .miz files is a builder (neglected) choice. The radio altimeter? Catapult Launch? Carrier Landing? Field landing? What are the minimums for the approach and runway in use, at the airport of use? There's no sensible default here.

 

 

 

Sensor settings, ECM settings, Weapon Profiles -

in addition to be the scenario script, the .miz file serves as the data card for every aircraft given a task in the mission. The poor user staring at the Options:Special tab has no idea what threats to expect today, what targets they are tasked to destroy today, and what weapons they will carry today. In a single player mission, the user has the choice to click "Mission Editor" which will allow them to set all these variables within that specific .miz to accomplish the given goals within the given constraints. The multiplayer mission designer cannot give the user that option, but their job is to set these variables as best they can to allow the pilot to accomplish the MP task given. I know most don't choose to do that. They give the aircraft a set of waypoints and call it a day. Default options aren't going to solve that problem.. it's not a programming one

 

 

The Mission Card allows you to set up software options for all missions that includes such items as radar settings, countermeasures, AG weapon programs, and navigation settings.

Outside of preflgiht planning (which is perfectly functional in the mission editor), this isn't the job of the user, and there's no way these variables could be "defaulted" across the wide variety of threats, targets, and .miz files that the helpless user will encounter. All these options are already stored in the .miz file... why not keep them there? Many can be modified while sitting in the cockpit. Why deny users that interaction? This is a crutch for bad mission building IMVHO. I have yet to see a mission in which the F/A-18C Lot 20's radio presets have been configured for the starting airfield, local ATC, and support assets, or even the Carrier. Those are all highly variable and yet very specific to the .miz. They should be set by the builder, the pilot in mission planning, or the pilot upon entering a cold jet. This special tab is wholly unnecessary.

 

 

As always, a mission is created with a set of waypoints and properties when the mission is created by the mission designer.

Mission designers need to come to terms with the reality of modern computerized combat aircraft. Their job does not stop at dropping waypoints on the chart. They know the weapons to be used, they know the targets assigned, they know the threats likely to be encountered. They must give orders to their virtual pilots in the form of completed mission data cards on the sensor, countermeasure, and weapon settings they must use in the conduct of their mission. They must set the RULES OF ENGAGEMENT. In single player the user can enter the mission editor and make some of these choice for themselves.. the point is that these choices are highly dependent on the .miz loaded, and thus must be stored and recalled from the .miz. Not anywhere else. The .miz is a powerful file.. please don't squander it's utility be confusing users needlessly.

 

 

For the Hornet though, we are greatly adapting this to account for a much more realistic Hornet waypoint system that accounts for up to 60 waypoints in the database, of which waypoints can be assigned properties of sequence 1, sequence 2, sequence 3, initial point, A/A waypoint, Pre-Planned (PP), or Pre-Briefed (PB).

Very similar functionality already exists with other aircraft, and is perfectly happy residing in the .miz

 

 

In the Mission Planner, the player would be able to then adjust these if desired on a per-mission basis. We are also looking to making the Mission Planner available in multiplayer.

Just encourage mission designers to more thoroughly program the mission data cards which they supply to their clients via the downloaded .miz file. Waypoints are not enough any more. It should be up to the .miz builder what and how much information a client may modify.

 

 

 

 

This is just my feedback. I hope you find it useful!

randomTOTEN

Hi. Thanks for the time to write this up.

I disagree, I think this feature allows many of us to simulate data cards available in real jet. Additionally it's going to work nicely with missions that do not include cold start. No longer will hot start with wrong altimeter setting for instance.

I understand form Wags' post this is going to be optional setting. You don't have to use it.

I was excited to see that this feature is being developed. This feature would have a lot to do with the MUMI page in the aircraft.

I am so into the countermeasures program settings aspect and waypoints.

However it seems some of the settings realistically done by the pilot in the cockpit would be have been done before entering the cockpit taking away that immersion.

Second post kind of put some light into it as it would be optional and for mission that requires a pilot to jump in and get in the mission right away.

 

Again, mission makers could do more by infusing mission data card in the kneeboard with all mission information like radio channels, tacan, altimeter etc

A good example are missions done by Red flag (Beppe).

DCS needs some sort of WDP feature badly. I just hope it gets to the A-10C as well someday. There's no need to go through configuring many standard things to your liking each and every time. Setting non-standard weapon release programs is tedious as well, especially if you restart the mission.

Ofc it would be nice to save current a/c settings to the defaults card and having several cards to choose from in briefing and mission planner -- at least for the day and night operations.

Disagree with the OP almost entirely. Although I do agree that some of the settings shown arent realistic, such as presetting the altimeter and such.

 

Real fighters have the ability to preset dozens and dozens of avionics options that, realistically, vary from sortie to sortie and some that vary from pilot to pilot. The problem is that currently, what settings one jet gets from the .miz, they ALL get. And for reasons that are too complex to type right now, that's not realistic at all.

 

We NEED to be able to individually setup our avionics independent of what the mission designer does. In fact, the ME and any sort of flight planner should actually be totally detached. Why is the mission designer deciding what route I take to the target? Why is the mission designer forcing my TAD display settings? The concept of creating a battle space with targets and assets should be totally divorced from the mission planning which decides how to attack those targets and what weapon profiles are loaded in my SMS/DSMS.

I dont use single player for anything but some goofing off while learning an aircraft.

So I want this new tool mostly so I don't have to change the settings for countermeasures on every single start up, its really annoying to have to go into those settings every time.

Disagree with the OP almost entirely. Although I do agree that some of the settings shown arent realistic, such as presetting the altimeter and such.

 

Real fighters have the ability to preset dozens and dozens of avionics options that, realistically, vary from sortie to sortie and some that vary from pilot to pilot. The problem is that currently, what settings one jet gets from the .miz, they ALL get. And for reasons that are too complex to type right now, that's not realistic at all.

 

We NEED to be able to individually setup our avionics independent of what the mission designer does. In fact, the ME and any sort of flight planner should actually be totally detached. Why is the mission designer deciding what route I take to the target? Why is the mission designer forcing my TAD display settings? The concept of creating a battle space with targets and assets should be totally divorced from the mission planning which decides how to attack those targets and what weapon profiles are loaded in my SMS/DSMS.

 

+1 couldn’t have said it better.

Thanks for the feedback guys, it helps to further clarify what I mean, and what that means for each of your goals.

 

I think this feature allows many of us to simulate data cards available in real jet. Additionally it's going to work nicely with missions that do not include cold start. No longer will hot start with wrong altimeter setting for instance.

I think you miss the details of my post. I very much think we should have some sort of interaction with the aircraft's data cards. My problem lies with it's proposed location. It should be in the mission/mission editor, not in the options screen. No longer will hot start with wrong altimeter setting for instance. BARO and RADIO altimeters should not interface with a data card, as they are manually controlled by cockpit knobs. Setting them is part of the startup procedure. The alert altitudes should be stored, but will vary based on the mission. Different scenarios are going to have different hard decks, ceilings, and minimum safe altitudes. Depends on mission/threats/target/location/weather.

 

Again, mission makers could do more by infusing mission data card in the kneeboard with all mission information like radio channels, tacan, altimeter etc

A good example are missions done by Red flag (Beppe).

You bring up a good point about the current "kneeboard" system. While these options aren't "data cards" as they are just exterior settings for aircraft/ordinance, the interaction is very similar as it's something that needs to be set up before the flgiht, and is exterial to avaialble cockpit controls. These controls could be removed from the kneeboard and transferred to the new "Aircraft Systems and Mission Card" (e.g. setting CM programs for the F-5, M2000, laser codes, rocket salvo etc). My assertion is that this needs to still be linked to the misison, as they are still mission specific... need to set LGB for the code provided by the in mission JTAC)

 

DCS needs some sort of WDP feature badly. I just hope it gets to the A-10C as well someday. There's no need to go through configuring many standard things to your liking each and every time. Setting non-standard weapon release programs is tedious as well, especially if you restart the mission.

Ofc it would be nice to save current a/c settings to the defaults card and having several cards to choose from in briefing and mission planner -- at least for the day and night operations.

I agree with a lot of this. WDP should be accessed within the loaded .miz, either in game or in ME. Consider how this will work with the proposed sysem. You read the mission briefing and have an idea of the settings you want to use for the Data Card. You must now EXIT THE MISSION/SERVER to return to the OPTIONS>SPECIAL tab and configure this data, then you must re-enter the .miz to use it. If you have changed nothing then the jet loads with the mission data for the LAST MISSION you programmed it with. Some users will be happy with this, as their last misson data is "default" for them.. but this I feel undermines the potential that this feature will bring to DCS World. I wil be a welcome feature for many modules including the A-10C. I would like to see it more fully integrated with the core simulation, specifically the .miz. I'll touch on your "several cards" idea, I agree here.

 

Real fighters have the ability to preset dozens and dozens of avionics options that, realistically, vary from sortie to sortie and some that vary from pilot to pilot. The problem is that currently, what settings one jet gets from the .miz, they ALL get. And for reasons that are too complex to type right now, that's not realistic at all.

I can get where this comes from. DCS was built from a single player game, thus it would only make sense for a single cockpit's setting to be saved in the .miz file. Thus it needs to be expanded to account for multiple aircraft. It would be nice to choose multiple card, but I want to discuss the ease of creating and using a single card. My main push is to move Aircraft Systems and Mission Card from the Options page to the Mission Editor/In Game, but there are some other ideas for data card management.

 

We NEED to be able to individually setup our avionics independent of what the mission designer does. In fact, the ME and any sort of flight planner should actually be totally detached. Why is the mission designer deciding what route I take to the target? Why is the mission designer forcing my TAD display settings? The concept of creating a battle space with targets and assets should be totally divorced from the mission planning which decides how to attack those targets and what weapon profiles are loaded in my SMS/DSMS.

Agree with this as well. In fact the Mission Editor has a specific mode called "Mission Planner" which allows you to accomplish much of the functionality you decide. I propose that Aircraft Settings and Mission Card live in here (just the Mission Editor with controls disabled) so that route/profiles/frequencies/loadout can be set up all as one, as if you are the pilot/commander planning the mission at HQ. I feel this mode is under-used by many players, but serves as a wonderful foundation for the improvements I propose.

 

;3805716']I dont use single player for anything but some goofing off while learning an aircraft.

So I want this new tool mostly so I don't have to change the settings for countermeasures on every single start up, its really annoying to have to go into those settings every time.

Not to be harsh, but it feels like you're the only player this feature is made for. In my system you would be left with setting these profiles in every mission, as they really are mission dependent. You just have a common setting you like to repeat. It's similar with weapon choices, you probably have a "default" loadout that every mission makes you manually choose. Perhaps a compromise exists with the "multiple misson card" idea already proposed. If these can be saved on your computer and not just within the .miz file, you can have one that includes your 'default' settings saved, and just load it once inside the mission/ME/MPlanner. You only need to then make changes you desire. As it's currently proposed you're stuck with the defaults when you join a misison. This would also help single player users, as they can save the Mission Card external from the .miz for difficult mission which would need to be repeated (if the .miz cannot save user data, I still prefer the .miz to store this data even if the player dies/restart).

 

I want to use the current loadout system as an example of how this would work. Imagine if each aircraft's loadout was stored as a 'default' under OPTIONS>SPECIAL, and you had to choose a loadout before you entered a mission. I personally would find that extremely annoying, just as I find the proposed OPTIONS>SPECIAL>AC/MC system annoying. Only the guy that flies around with the same ordinance is going to like it. Under the current working system loadout is saved on a per aircraft basis in the .miz. It's primarily controlled through the Mission Editor, but the user has other means of accessing loadout. They can set this data using the Mission Planner, or they can (within a running .miz) select the Reamring/Refueling window (really just a mini-ME window) to change these settings, based on the current real time conditions within the session. I want the Mission Card to be accessed the same way. Let me read the briefing, consider the task at hand, and then choose how I want to set up my MC before loading it in the aircraft. Going above and beyond would be to let me create multiple MC for a single mission, allowing me to quickly reload settings as I complete multiple sorties within the same running .miz, just as I choose multiple loadouts for multiple sorties in the same running .miz. While it would be nice to load a default MC from an external file, I would also like to see this functionality extended to weapons, so users can load a "default" loadout as well. There's barely any difference IMHO between the two, and it saves you Devs from having to separate SPECIAL data from .miz data. Just keep it all together.

A picture's worth a thousand words?:pilotfly:

Absolutely disagree with with @randomTOTEN on this. The inability to frag a package in a multiplayer environment is a huge problem for SA and co-ordination, and is a feature that is greatly desired by many people, especially those of us who have experience in a certain other F-16 sim. If it can only be done within the mission editor, that would mean pre-made missions would have to all be edited by the user before flight, and anyone playing multiplayer is subject to the whims of the server, unable to set objectives, waypoints, flight composition, ToT, etc...

 

If it can only be done within the mission editor

In fact, it should be available at flight planning phase, after the mission loads and you can pre-select your loadout and other stuff. And yes, probably some settings like waypoints should be distributable through commander's flight by commander from inside the game as well. Of course, that would require implementing some support for per-flight organisation of people in multiplayer.

 

My main argument is that everything which this feature hopes to achieve is already available within the Mission Editor

 

Thanks for your thoughtful original post... but this is not true.

As I see it, a big goal of these upcoming features is to make air starts easier. For example when flying some of the instant action dogfight missions, I have around 30 seconds before the merge to turn on JHMCS, set up my altimeter and turn on the radalt, set up my navigation on the HSI, declutter the HUD, and if I’m lucky I have a few seconds left in which to desperately setup my countermeasure programs. As I understand, the new aircraft/mission cards would let me have some default settings for some of these and would make life a lot easier. I am interested in what you’re saying about some of these features being available already to the mission creator. My only experience with this is flying Bankler’s Case I Recovery training mission. As soon as the mission starts, the HSI is already setup correctly with the right course selected, and TACAN is set to the carrier without me having to do anything. My guess is that this is accomplished through some scripting in the ME, but I have yet to see anyone else do something similar.

As I see it, a big goal of these upcoming features is to make air starts easier. For example when flying some of the instant action dogfight missions, I have around 30 seconds before the merge to turn on JHMCS, set up my altimeter and turn on the radalt, set up my navigation on the HSI, declutter the HUD, and if I’m lucky I have a few seconds left in which to desperately setup my countermeasure programs.

 

This is right on the money. :thumbup: Little or none of the mentioned above can be done in the ME.

Disagree. I fly only in SP, and more just random flying and training various things than actual missions.

 

So I very much welcome this feature.

 

Don't want it? Don't use it, easy. :)

The MDC will be very helpful for people using the Multiplayer. The mission designer usually does not plan for each individual flight. Public server or private server of a group, the client aircraft usually have only waypoint 0 and are parked cold on the ramp or an aircraft carrier. There is no way he coordinates with 20-60 people what they want to do. The MDC will get really useful if we can load flight plans, sequences and programs for weapon and CM.

Hate to break it to the OP but not all these features are in the ME and they shouldn't be either nor should it be 'you have to manually enter every thing every time'. MUMI exists for a reason as others have mentioned, My personal preferences for ALE-67 programs might be different to the OP's, lets say the OP makes a mission, why should I be forced to use his ALE-67 programs or manually have to change them (like we do now) ? I shouldn't that's why MUMI exists but it's not in the current ME (so there's one great example of stuff that the new Datacard will allow).

 

As others have mentioned Ideally.. ED would decouple FLIGHT PLANNING from MISSION EDITING for anything that has 'Client' as an option, PLAYER could still have their mission set in the ME but really CLIENTS need to be able to plan their missions and load the data into their birds on the fly as CLIENT is designed to mean a Multiplayer jet.

 

The MDC we see so far is hard to tell exactly what/how it's going to impact the game because we don't have it, Wag's has not said if we will be able to edit it from the options menu while in the slot list etc.. and honestly if we have to go all the way out it's likely to be used exactly as the personal data preferences in MUMI are.. for Chaff, Flare, and default weapons ranges etc.

 

That brings up actually another thing that can't be set in the ME and shouldn't be tied to a Mission Designers whims.. AIM120, 7, 9 radar range, scan and bar preferences items which can normally be set as part of MUMI.

 

Ideally there would be a few new options in the ME and that 'Mission Planning' option that is in SP open to MP though the issue there is of course that the 'Mission Planning' option in SP is really just ME with a lot of it's UI dead and it saves a temp mission.. which MP doesn't allow for. the 1 thing that the ME should have the option to do with the MDC/MUMI is override the MDC stored Channel List IF it's included in the MDC options for players (as a lot of missions etc have the comm card/studs set up). Or an option to enforce it and maybe Pre Briefed SAM sites, that's it..

 

In a perfect world.. we'd have a certain other sims DTC, Pre Mission package capabilities and all that jazz.. plus the WDP external app.. in a perfect world..