[FIXED] 1265.1 aar missions still fly at 2000ft

[mikke61]

Just tested 1265.1 for this and it is still there. Also they ignore the loiter speed when in the patrol area. Has happened in every scenario I have tried for both player and ai units.

[Dimitris]

We cannot replicate this here. Can you please provide a save? Thanks.

[Swant]

Here is a save
If you change the flight size to one it fixes the altitude issue, but the speed issue still remains

[Gainful]

I can confirm this is still happening in the new build.

[tmoilanen]

Here's a .save file with the 2000' altitude problem on Air Patrol missions.

[rickywild]

I have it too but like in 50% cases. Transit to station is at 2k then planes go up to 36k

[Faceplate]

CAP: stuck at 2,000 ft and 480 kts, even in patrol zone. Manually setting altitude, then cancelling altitude (all while paused or not) fixes altitude. The same does nothing for speed, which is only amenable to manual forcing it. Not ideal when expecting combat.

ASuW Patrol: ditto.

ASW Patrol: stuck at cruise while moving inside patrol zone, but no altitude problem.

AEW Support: no problems.

ASuW Strike: no speed problem, but maintain 2000 ft until Turning Point 2, whereupon they gain altitude appropriately.

I include a second save at + 20 minutes to demonstrate the siutuation, in case your tests produce no findings.

[Tcao]

Yea, I have noticed this bug since 1243.3
Here are some of my observations, hopefully it will be helpful on figure out the root cause

First, it seems that the flight group cause the issue. If you change flight size to 1, everything works fine.

flight.jpg (729.32 KiB) Viewed 401 times

[Tcao]

Second, here is the most weird part. If the flight groups are already in the air, you save and load. After loading they are still at 2000ft. But if you delete the existing flight course then the flight group will climb to 36k ft.
And if the scenario begin as the A/C on the ground, take off. Delete the flight course will not make the flight group climb to 36kft (unless you do a S/L)

[DaveFromCTX]

Can confirm I'm having the same issue on 1265.1

[Dimitris]

I believe this has been fixed in B1266.1 or B1267.1 .