All Activity

Likewise!! so the video of the "program" is actually irrelevant. Regards

Let me take a look tomorrow and see if I am encountering the same issues. I HATE to say this, but since work has been super busy, they guys have been out for personal reasons, and I have been hooked and my lost love (Corsair), it has been a while since I flew it. Let me see whats going on and I will get back with you.

I have completely enjoyed the Into The Jungle Missions, but since the last DCS Update, the Missions don't appear on my computer. Where it showed into the jungle in the missions folder now it shows: I10n, then DEFAULT The Mission will not execute. Any idea on how to fix the issue?

According to Google AI this is the full moon stage for Sochi The full moon in Sochi, Russia, in 2025 will occur on July 10th at 11:36 PM, according to Time and Date. This full moon is also known as the Buck Moon. If you set that in the editor for Caucuses it doesn't give you a full moon at all.

Currently the civilian traffic is either on or off across the whole map. It would make more sense to have the map divided into sectors and allow the mission maker to have it on in the specific sectors that can benefit from it in the mission (implemented by ME zones ?). I don't need there to be cars running around on the Pakistan border if I'm flying a helicopter at an Iranian border crossing. It's just wasting CPU cycles. (Same Tblisi / Batumi) The civilian traffic seems to be fairly light from a CPU load POV (Given how much of it there is spread across the map). That being the cases, couldn't we get civilians (just folk wandering the streets) implemented via the same approach on a sub region by sub region basis? Perhaps civilian vehicular traffic at the bases we use but none at the actual front line but still some civilians on the streets of nearby villages etc. - Whatever the mission maker thinks is appropriate... Have the routes pre-calculated and some minimally animated figures that can be activated by the user. (Ideally by creating a zone & ticking one or both of Civilian traffic on ▢, Foot traffic on ▢.) They don't need A.I., they don't need collision calculations they just need to wander around giving atmosphere and making it harder to tell what's target & what's civilian - but they don't really need to be doing that 1,000 km away from where I'm flying...

I may have found a potential cause, I'll make a change for a future release. Whilst not yet reported by other folk it may crop up in the future given you have encountered a problem. If it's currently working on your desktop then you may just need to use from there until such time as I've made a change which means it potentially works for you from another location. I'm happy to make a change and release a beta to you if you wanted to try it out prior to a full release down the path, will at least help verify that it resolves it. Up to you.

This sound mod is just

Reflected Working on learning the F14 with the Take Flight group on Discord. I was wondering if there is an order to follow in playing your 3 F14 campaigns?

How lazy shall we be? How about some spell-check and then starting your own thread? I'll even give you the title: something like, "The DCS Hornet flight model is wrong according to Mover." This thread is for praise for the real world Legacy Hornet... which, by the way, the guys agreed: That Growler pilot was wrong about the Hornet in BFM.

PD 1.5 мне не показалось? Такой параметр наверное только гипотетическая RTX 9090 потянет. У меня 4090 на 1,2 стоит.

But... It has to be done right or not at all. It's very tough making thunderheads in a sim. They just look "fake" relative to other in-sim cloud types.

Unpopular opinion, but ED just needs to go back to “no dot spotting” and be done with these arbitrary “auto, 1/2 pixel” settings, it’s just made it worse.

Exactly. Folks keep wanting “pixels” to solve their problems but it’s made it worse. I vote ED remove the pixel settings and return to LOD only “no dot spotting”. ED caved in and it’s not good, not realistic either. It’s why they made radars and added more sensors irl…

Maybe if ED removed this false “pixels” and just use the LOD (no dots). Creating pixels is not a good solution. Spotting is hard, it’s why they made radars and JHMCS and boxes around targets. But in DCS by using pixels it’s manipulative, folks lower res, etc and now your at a disadvantage. I recommend promoting ED to do away with the fake pixel (auto, 1/2 pixel) . Just using the LOD evens the playing field and is more realistic.

Except that it never works. https://northernstories.no/books/125-bjorn-berge-a-pacifist-s-guide-to-bombers

Very realistic, it’s known that against that darker sky vs the light blue, and much depends on the plane form. I’m not sure I agree this is a bug.

I realize that Hawkeye's expertise lies with the naval variety however, given the title of the post, I thought I'd throw in my suggestion/request for a couple of iconic PTO aircraft: how about a PBY for us to place on the airfields as eye candy or have flying in the mission? And while you're at it, why not a PB4Y (B-24) that can carry and deploy the Bat bomb, since I believe that it was the only a/c that actually employed that particular weapon in combat. I also realize that ED is planning to produce the PBY as an AI asset at some point in time however I have much more faith that a modder such as Hawkeye would have it in game at least a year earlier than ED!

....dude, believe what you wish. ED isnt required to discuss legal matters with us, nor should they. Its public knowledge Razbam was making the Tucano for the Equadorian AF, and its public knowledge that any entity that represents a government interested in training their pilots should look towards TBS and not DCS. Because its TBS, ED wants to keep this topic to DCS for everyone to not even reference this because its OT. Its kind of obvious at this point you dont care about the truth, so I will just remind everyone that there is - in fact - a such thing as a dumb question. Let it go, please?

So I created a F16 DTC profile in the mission editor. When I went to multiplayer and selected the DTC, that profile was not in the dropdown (dropdown empty). Are saved profiles suppose to be available in MP missions ?

I feel like the Corsair is much easier to takeoff than it should be. Never flown a real one - if you have connections, contact me ASAP, like knock on my door if you have to - but there are a few components of left turning tendency that seem to be missing perhaps. When I gun the throttle very quickly, the Corsair seems to just go straight on the rails for me. Yes, I have the rudder trim in, but at very little to no airspeed, the rudder isn’t doing anything. Left turning tendencies I’m not noticing too much: P-factor when the tail is low, left wheel digs hard into ground, and slipstream hitting the fin from the left side. Also as the tail lifts up early on with little airspeed, the gyroscopic force of that huge prop will want to torque the nose left. I usually have the habit to apply a little bit of throttle, let the airspeed build up and let the tail fin become effective, and then continue to push the throttle slowly to takeoff MP. I was playing around with this earlier today, and even gunning the throttle doesn’t seem to affect my takeoff roll heading too much. Once she’s up in the air though, everything feels really great. Just the takeoff roll feels a little unnatural, but I don’t know. Never flown anything with that much HP IRL. It’s minor, I don’t mind easy This is still my favorite module at the moment. It’s really well done overall Maybe this was all done on purpose to make it a little more friendly in the sim. I can totally see people reporting bugs if they jammed the throttle full and the plane ended up in the grass each time. If so, then I think M3 already found the correct balance and I’m happy with it Great job on the module, again. I’ve really been putting a lot of time on it Thanks -GT-

Thx for that link. I'll keep playing with the file location to see if I can figure out another spot to put it

It's important to take SMEs in context. I don't think they flew our particular Hornet revision with the upgraded engines, and their F-16 experience I don't believe was with the Block 50, but with lighter, older blocks. These guys have some EXCELLENT experience, and their commentary is very much worth listening to, but this also is a complicated puzzle.

Aapje you have evidence of ED being shady ?

Yes one would hope so. However, I thought it worth highlighting as the previous bug reports seemed to be confined to people using VR headsets and not flatscreen.