All Activity

Right - but this is pin point accurate after turning them off immediately after launch from more than 30nm without much time to evaluate and refine the target. I just downgraded to the previous patch (DCS 2.9.17.12034) and they all missed

I meant it more about the Mirage, Harrier and MiG-19 than the F-15E. Yeah, I'm still able to refund the 15E at any time but the Mirage 2000 is something I've always wanted in a sim. Specifically this very variant and it bothers me that I'll have to purchase it again at some time.

Sure! Also, I've just updated the mission and completely removed the second option to attack alone. So there is only one course of action now (as of next patch), which should make things much more clear (and realistic, because: why would you not use a wingman against two AAAs?). So thanks for that feedback!

This is not a bug. I have to set up player and wingman as different groups because then I have much more control over the AI. And since the stock wingman in DCS is stupid as a brick plus cannot follow any advanced orders, I stopped using him a long long time ago. So unfortunately you'll have to live with a wingman being a blue icon instead of green in the campaign...at least he doesn't crash into every second mountain and doesn't repeat "two, unable" and "two, RTB" after every order you give him

It is. The translation is not correct. See above. "Mit Anlauf der vollständigen TS/TH Triebwerke wird die bisherige Serienbezeichnung Fw 190A-8 geändert und erhält die Bezeichnung Fw 190A-9." With the beginning of serial production of complete TS/TH engines [TH never was built in serial production], the designation will be changed from A-8 into A-9. This is a remark to the fact that the TU motor was a combination of D and TH components, which the TS wasn't. "Anlauf" designates the beginning of serial production. There's no reference of an engine swap at all. "Anbau" / "Einbau" would make sense in that regard, but not "Anlauf". By the time of the report, factory-built A-9s were already in service. Production started in September '44 (Fw @ Cottbus, mostly R11s). The A-9 designation for TS powered aircraft was already in place by August. Mimetall at Erfurt supposedly built A-9s starting in August 44 (!), which does not make sense and they were most probably a mix-up. Other sources (acc Rodeike) identify those as A-8s. Externally, the A-8 and A-9 would look very similar, depending on the motor (e.g. TU in the A-8) and canopies fitted.

I've not had this as a problem. Did you put the TGP back into slave mode (TMS-aft)? -Ryan

I honestly don't know why. I used exactly the same filters etc as for all my other campaigns and none of my testers - and there were quite a few - never complained. I also don't have this issue when flying the campaign myself. I can't make the audio louder, because it will become even more garbled, it is already at the limits. Honestly, don't know what I could do here and where it comes from - as everything is set up in the same way as everywhere else.

In the air. A-10 pilots would sometimes use other A-10's, per an article on the internet.... somewhere. While ground boresighting kinda works in DCS, IRL Mavericks drift during takeoff and when pulling G's. IRL, I'm sure pilots are briefed on suitable places to boresight (a town, for example). In DCS, this gets tricky since Mavericks may not "grab onto" a static map object, so that would effectively break the mission. In the ME, it would be best to build a little area near a town to boresight on the way to the AO. -Ryan

Thanks! Yeah, based on real story.. and as for the first technical, this is now internally fixed. Indeed - not intended, things changed with new splash damage for the Mk-80s

Razbam is Veao 2.0, the only difference is that they are administering it to us a little at a time, to make the pill less bitter. Razbam modules are lost, they are no longer for sale, they will never be updated. Razbam has no intention of returning to DCS, just as it never had any intention of returning to MSFS. Certainly, this whole story does not make me want to purchase new modules, I myself am not buying any; however no software lasts forever, we have to come to terms with it. This time it's Razbam's turn. Sooner or later we will have to go back to enjoying DCS for what it is, and let go of the past. Chi ha avuto ha avuto ha avuto, chi ha dato ha dato ha dato.

Which means they are dead. New customers are also ED customers, so if they cannot buy them it means these modules are not part of DCS World anymore. They are just on life support

I think he means if HB were handed the MudHen and told to get it working again it'd delay the implementation of the player-drivern Intruder.

Thanks for the feedback. And here I was proud this was the best structured briefing in any of my camapaigns, with clear references to each briefing slide, with the most important things available on hand in the kneeboard... I'll keep it in mind though for future projects, this is a good idea that won't take long to implement but will help.

Why would the imminent release of the AI A6E Intruder by heatblur be effected by any Razbam shenanigans?

'Making new versions' is a very tall hurdle to cover. Who is going to do it? The ED teams working on ED Projects? The Third Party teams working on their projects? Frankly, if RB going belly up were to delay my A-6 Intruder, I'd be ready to throw hands. The ideal solutions are either store credits or getting RB back in, in some form. Beyond that is dicey.

I am not experiencing any issue with F16C JDAM accuracy in 2.9.18.12722. For best accuracy, use targeting pod to refine actual target position and use laser ranging, adjust the impact angle to near vertical, release near the center of the launch window.

Look like 2 quotes were merged, but just one response, apologies, not directed at your comments, but Alejandros

Please attach a short DCS track.

I mean... there is an option... one that's been brought up several times, and now has a whole thread in the wishlist section: Make new versions, and if someone hasn't gotten a refund, they get the new toy for free or significantly reduced cost

I cannot reproduce the issue for now, even with fog. Can you please post a track demonstrating the issue?

ED running into this thread "Lemme scootch past ya der."

No, it is not. Factually the Luftwaffe Depot maintenance facilities overhauled and recycled damaged aircraft all the time. That is exactly where White 1 came from as it started out an FW-190F8 as delivered from the factory and was converted to an FW-190A8 by the receiving yard/Depot Maintenance in Norway. When magic happens and a BMW801S motor appears upon an FW-190A8 it now to called an FW-190A9 and NOT an FW-190A8/R4.

ok, will wait for the fixed version, maybe there will be also the updated Mission 10...

I tested the same scenario with the old TGP. I got the same thing, once I boresighted the Mav's in the air, the TGP would not focus on the actual next steerpoint, which is my target SPI. It seems to be locked on the boresight target at the last steerpoint. I don't know if I'm doing something wrong. I reset the CZ (never been an issue before). I will add a TRK file in the bugs section once I have time. THIS IS NOT AN AQ-33 BUG - POSSIBLY A GENERAL TGP BUG.

Request for a 509 FS G9-L / 44-33813 Balls Out (Capt. Milt Thompson) Skin