Tanker-issues
-
-
Frequency inconsistency: known issue. Though the right frequency is 251.075, it should work.
Every 0 between the mark and the next number is not displayed in 2D ATO list. So, 267.025 is displayed as 267.25. It’s correct elsewhere.
Can’t check the TE but I’ll bet the tanker is not active on station when contacted.
-
Frequency inconsistency: known issue. Though the right frequency is 251.075, it should work.
Every 0 between the mark and the next number is not displayed in 2D ATO list. So, 267.025 is displayed as 267.25. It’s correct elsewhere.
We tested both. No one worked
Can’t check the TE but I’ll bet the tanker is not active on station when contacted.
I don’t think so. The tanker was on station and did his turns. If he was not active, I don’t know why…:?:
-
We tested both. No one worked
I don’t think so. The tanker was on station and did his turns. If he was not active, I don’t know why…:?:
I just tried your TE, Texaco2 answered on the freq I mentioned to be the correct one.
-
Hi,
for a bigger TE we want to use three tankers. TE-editor automatically uses Texaco-1, Copper-1 and Texaco-2.
Texaco-1 and Copper-1 can be reached without any problems. You can refuel at both tankers. Only Texaco-2 makes problems:The UHF frequency in the ATO does not match that from the radiomap.dat ( \ Falcon BMS 4.34 \ Data \ Campaign).
ATO: 251,750
.dat: 251,075
We tested both frequencies. Unfortunately, the tanker did not answer.
If someone asks: Yes, we were within the 10 NM
Theater: KTORegards
MadDoc
Please make a proper Bug Report so I can forward it on Dev forum.
-
I just tried your TE, Texaco2 answered on the freq I mentioned to be the correct one.
Hi,
that’s weird…
In that case we will try again…
Did you enter the frequencies in 2D-DTC or inflight?
Did you enter the 251.750 or 251.075?Please make a proper Bug Report so I can forward it on Dev forum.
Will do if the 2nd test runs bad
-
Hi,
that’s weird…
In that case we will try again…
Did you enter the frequencies in 2D-DTC or inflight?
Did you enter the 251.750 or 251.075?Will do if the 2nd test runs bad
Checked both 2D and 3D. Please refer to my post.
-
Hi,
for our German Buchenau- LAN we expect 30 to 40 pilots. We’ll need more than two tankers.
Yesterday we did a test flight with six tankers.
My idea was to simply delete the tankers which cause communication problems. My tests showed that actually only the second tankers cause problems, So
Texaco 2, Copper 2.
The online test flight was a complete success.
We use 6 Tanker
We have tested it with 7 pilots in 4 flights with about 40 refuelling operations.
All 6 tankers flew parallel in one tank track with a distance of approx. 5 NM.
Each pilot could communicate with each tanker and pick up fuel.
To find the correct tanker, we use IFF Mode 2.Towards the end of the test there was unfortunately a midair collision.
we lost two human pilots and a tanker.
After this incident, some pilots could not refuel.
Why they could not refuel any more must still be clarified.
What the pilots had in common:
The pilots lost their Wingman
All pilots were in the immediate vicinity of the tanker that crashed at the time of the accident.
One flight was already finished and deregistered from the tanker, one flight was still in the queue.Flights that were further away from the action could still refuel without problems.
Here are the spins for the flight
-
Hi,
for our German Buchenau- LAN we expect 30 to 40 pilots.
…
Towards the end of the test there was unfortunately a midair collision.
we lost two human pilots and a tanker.
After this incident, some pilots could not refuel.
Why they could not refuel any more must still be clarified.
What the pilots had in common:
The pilots lost their Wingman
All pilots were in the immediate vicinity of the tanker that crashed at the time of the accident.
One flight was already finished and deregistered from the tanker, one flight was still in the queue.Flights that were further away from the action could still refuel without problems.
Hi Bumi,
39 to be precise
Could you be more specific on the second part of your post?
It would be helpful to describe which jet was in the cue of which tanker and who was involved in the mid-air collision.
If you could provide an ACMI that would be really helpful as well.Regarding the IF the fourth digit is a 0 issue I’ll have a look.
Although I’ll bet this is a code issue. -
Good, after consultation with the pilots concerned the situation was NOT an midair collision.:uham:
The situation is as follows:
a human pilot logged on to the tanker and immediately logged off again. His KI Wingman didn’t make any effort to refuel. He remain in observation area.
I guess the unsubscribe from his lead didn’t work out. . .Okay, here it comes.
the flight behind in the queue fires a bunch of bullets at the KI to scare him off the tanker.!!! :fart:
Unfortunately not only the AI exploded but also the tanker and another human pilot.Since this flight was followed by RTB, only two pilots had the problem of not being able to take up any more fuel.
One had lost his KI wingman.
He’s the one who might not have been able to unsubscribe.
The other had lost his human wingman.He was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Because of a possible court martial, the tape disappeared.:-(;)
-
Haha, nice story for a lessons learned in Buchenau! I’m sure you’ll find the tape until then.
Probably that’s the exact reason most fighter pilots have ACM lessons first rather than AAR.So, what is the conclusion from that?
Do you still think there is something wrong with AAR?
Do you plan another tests?
If so, feel free to drop me a note (preferably email or 49th as I don’t check this forum daily).
I’ll try to participate then. -
Regarding the IF the fourth digit is a 0 issue I’ll have a look.
Although I’ll bet this is a code issue.Unless you are a dev and already saw it’s supposed to be handled already, I’ll inform you this is a code issue that is being handled already.
-
Correct. Already fixed in U1.
-
Oversight on my part really, but easily fixed in the code, yes.
-
Hi, folks,
yesterday we did another tanker test flight.
The result is positive again.:)We have also gained two new insights.
1.
Sometimes it can happen that a pilot who has been cleared for pre-contact does not receive Contact Clearence. In this case a new request “Z2”; (back in precontact position) helps.2. you can unsubscribe before Contact, even if you are in the waiting loop at position 2 or 3 and the flight before takes too long. . .
Important: The flight lead registers the entire flight.
But every single pilot has to log out so that the tanker is free again!!!Greetings
Bumerang -
We had a similar situation last weekend. I lead a flight of four and my number 2 was not able to catch up with us in time. Thus number 1,3 and 4 were first within 10 miles to the tanker. We three had no issue and got refueled.
Then number 2 came in and requested to refuel with no response from the tanker. While still on a echelon right to the KC-135, I requested fuel for the whole flight. No luck - boom still up.
Then we decided to stay in formation and wait for a while. After a quarter of a circle on the tanker track, we asked again and “voilà”, we got response, boom came down and number 2 was able to refuel.
Lessons learned:
- Check tanker frequency twice
- Don’t forget to call “Done refueling”
- Give the tanker crew some time for a coffee break to reset
-
@Nick:
Lessons learned:
- Check tanker frequency twice
- Don’t forget to call “Done refueling”
- Give the tanker crew some time for a coffee break to reset
True that, dear Nick.
If not already in the manual (and it would seem strange, I recall something about), they should deserve to become a SOP… the last one, most of all. :lol:
With best regards.
-
Here’s another wild tanker goose chase for ya. (have .cam saved somewhere , but need to find which one, in Balkans)
In SP , I was exercising my - dick on dick action with harrier in tanker turns … Me and AI wingman were flight 2 to tank , 1st flight were 3 F-14’s …
So, lead F14 is committing right when we visual on tanker and we follow deep inside 10nm (visual range) … and then just like that whole flight of F14’s dissapear from the sky (some bug at that moment in campaign) … zap ,… tanker boom still down.
Tanker looks like ‘resets’ and begin climbing to some altitude (22k) , . I request to join and tanker affirms … stabilize and make a call … but just cant hit ‘the spot’ , and tanker never lowers the boom … sometimes in turns it seems that he becomes aware of me and it begins lowering the boom but aborts half-way /
Finnaly gave up , goodbye ***hole , (T3) … and then … my wingman never commits to tanker but just rejoins on my wing. wtf? … I guess not thirsty enough…
We went 15nm away … then return to try again … I request … BAM … ctd. whoooah, enough for today.
And that is saved at that position in .cam save, every time I reload that mission , the outcome is the same. -so repeatable.
My guess is that F14 flight which is bugged and disappears. are somehow sitll ‘locked’ to the tanker, why? .
Tanker default circle waypoint is @20k , but he wants to receive my harrier flight @22k ,… but harrier tank @20k in dat. / F14’s tank @22…
So bloody fella still thinks that he has F14 on the line , even after (de aggregate?) ~15nm , and then come back… So all in all , I don’t think that he resets at that point… why… dunno.
Yeah, it is isolated case in that save , but is another interesting ‘chewing gum’ to check ->
Do tanker really resets with deagg (>15nm) in some peculiar circumstances …
(otoh , is really a peculiar case, I’ve never seen whole flight just disappears out of blue sky, and in tanker queue… but it is)