All Activity

Are you saying they have reported the issue on the Ru side?

Due to recent steam policies- You cannot put a pre-order on DLC unless a release date is given. now, with the Mig29 ED actually put the release date as the very last day of september- and those with a keen eye would notice, that before the pre-order opened on steam, it was marked as either "TBD" or coming soon. But as soon as pre-orders open there has to be a release date. What I have seen 3rd parties do- is to have the product release on steam on launch day- and keep the pre-order discount applied on the steam store for a week or two, HB did it with the Phantom since they avoided opening pre-orders on steam, so they offered the equivalent discount amount for a few weeks post- release.

Спасибо! Заказал, посмотрим что придет

Same was happening to me during first Corsair flights after installing last week patch. With everything seemingly centered, plane required full left aileron trim just to stay somewhat level, it was also loosing all directional stability when slowing down for landing and once it failed to retract right main landing gear even though I didn't hit any ground object that might cause damage. First check of the forum if other users were reporting the same returned nothing, so I disabled my mods, ran a repair (not even full one, only the fast one) and enabled mods. Problem disappeared (for the time being, at least). I guess something got messed up during that loooong and slow patch download and installation process. Try repair youself, maybe it'll fix the issue for you as well.

Hi Jef, Wonderful catch! For sure I will fix it. I will use the armaments a bit more to mature my knowledge about its employment by the Fulcrum and I will release vs 1.1, but rest assured that I will use your video reference as a guide line. Tks a lot.

The Operation Firestorm mission seems like it would be an easy thing, Ike you mention but I still can’t get it!! My first try was really bad. I flew way too high and got dropped, as I should have!! The second I couldn’t get George to shoot on the target!! Then since he wouldn’t fire I got confused and thought maybe they were friendly and as I closed the distance I paid the price Again!!! Ughh!! I love it though!! I’ll post a Part three when I actually finish it which I’m hoping is very soon! I flew a few slots on your Rototheads Sandbox and had a lot of fun with it!! What a great idea and you put so much work into it! I looked at the mission in the ME and it blew my mind how much stuff is in there!! I did run into an issue that I wanted to ask you or point out. In the RED missions with the Mi24P Hind where you attack the Tank platoon on the front; The ground units do not shoot at each other nor did the Blue side shoot at me in the Hind, even when I flew right over them. Is that a setting I am supposed to set or choose or is that how it’s supposed to be? On other missions like in the Kiowa they definitely shot back at me! Big time!!! So I wanted to ask you about this. Thank you and thanks for making these missions, such a great idea!! I hope you make one for Afghanistan since it’s such a cool map!! This is a perfect mission idea for people who get DCS and just don’t know what to do in it or don’t want to spend the time in the ME to make a mission. This allows you to choose from a ton of different missions and it’s a lot of fun!!! Thank you again.

https://giphy.com/gifs/blakelivelyfan-who-me-oh-is-it-O93Bd3yrt1ozxWmU0i

Yes, that seems to be the problem, but still, is only broken in the Hornet, not on other airframes that can also display maps in their cockpits. Mission editor is fine too, you can see the map at any scale. Could be a map issue, but it only manifests on the F-18 for some reason. As far as I know, only happens on Syria and Marianas, (which is an ED map, that´s why it seems so strange to me). I also don´t understand the completely lack of priority with this bug, when less important others are fixed in weeks. I know is not a main issue, but it will be really nice to see it sorted out. Thank you for the answer

Ну как бы да

Yeah agreed, the best we can do period wise in DCS, is F4/14(early) vs the 29 for a vaguely peer setup. Which does fit iran/iraq (The very end of it) or would also fit CW germany for 83 or therabouts, since the bulk of the luftwaffe and most other allied airforces were flying F4's, F5's, and f104s (coming soon tm). There were only a few barely working F15's in theatre (3 squadrons), and a few F16/A10 squadrons as well for the USAF, but it was a transition period then. Would be nice to have gotten that 23 to flesh out the 70's era, but it is what it is. And the new Su-17/22 mod looks pretty good, so hopefully that will come soon as well to flesh out the period AF's. As for the 29, its a fairly typical ED release. The most annoying thing being IFF not working in MP, but that seems to be a literal ED trademark at this point, cuz it didn't work with the F18 or 16 on release either IIRC, I'm hoping the "week1" patch fixes that. Also, hopefully the SPO gets "Fixed" so it works as it should based on the feedback in the other thread (not really sure why they did it like that in the first place). And then the COOP modes for the radar/IR. On the upside, I'm actually stunned that the IRST sees clouds, so hopefully IR missiles will see them (and be blocked) soon(tm).

One by design the mig-29 can't use the air brake with the fuel tank. Two. Make sure you have the tank jettison cover in the uncovered position, or you can't jetison the tank. Jetisoning the tank requires 2 key bindings, or looking around the front of the stick to click the button cover.

Комрады, а на чем сошлись по поводу размеров изображения на ИЛС? В реале тоже все такое маленькое?

Yea agreed with alot of what you have wrote. That said i would also say it's never been in a better state that what we have now. F4 vs Mig 29 in the BVR role will be interesting, but yea inclose put me in the mig everytime lol, countermeasures, not needed! I've noticed a few wacky things with certain fox 1 shots tracking post launch and post lock lost, interesting, on non emitting (HOJ) targets. I need to replicate and turn on track recording though to get it posted (still playing around at present and just having fun). F14A is by far the most competant, especially if your in the back seat at range. The 29 will not compete up high with that. But for me it will be used in close, sneak, pull up attacks in places with lots of terrain cover to dip into and pull right up into high flying targets. The fox 2's 73's seem to have had a boost also, unless im just getting alot of "lucky" shots. I think there is going to be a lot of fun as this era pads out more - also big advocate of the F1, despite its radar being "cheat" mode at present but that aside its great fun. As for the sea harriers, the chaff bundle in the airbrakes was a thing, i think it was more for the early days however and/or the fear of roland, but don't quote me on that. They would have benefited though no doubt from a whole host of ECM from other assets too not airborne. Your first point, 100% - there is a reason why flares are emergency jettisonable enmasse!

Doctrine mostly I imagine. The primary threat was manpads or IR based systems vs low flying ground attack jets. In terms of A/A combat I imagine the idea was it wasn't needed or would be ineffective since a lot of combat was ambush based. Plus unlike DCS where there is no downside to a "pixel plane", IRL carrying a bunch of highly flamable flares does come with extra risks and hazards. At a guess the change in thinking occurred during the iran-iraq war where at least some air-to-air "myths" got busted, (like in VN, and the Arab israeli wars as well). Especially with the new "threat" of all aspect AAM's. Prior to this I think the thinking was, just fly better than the other guy and you won't need flares. Interestingly the Mig-23MLA did have 6 large flares as stock (downward firing) and then in 82 or whenever the MLD hit, they did add the top mounted dispensers like the 29's got. Though I'm not sure what drove that thinking for the soviets, possibly stinger threats in afghanistan. But if you want a "period" DCS server in the 60's/70's flares should probably be removed from A/A jets, and probably alot of A/G jets too depending on the setting. The obvious problem there is the "rearm" exploit for MP.

Any update on the future of this map? Very much seems like it's abandoned?

You don't have VoiceAttack by chance? If yes, you can add the free community driven plugin which let's you skip that radio menu, and let you speak the commands. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

I had this problem too, I could not extend the speed brake with the fuel tank installed, then I couldn't drop the tank either ,regardless of all my tries, resulting in fast landings and broken gear.

The optimal solution would be to manually move power lines further from thresholds (easier than moving airfields themselves or adding another mast type).

Interesting! Why? Sad but true.

Re. the armament, the dead horse that has been beaten numerous times on this forum, apparently Priller's book is the only anecdotal source claiming pods were used on -K, and there's no evidence of 151 being used in frontline units as Motorkanone either. Thus I wouldn't expect anything 20 mm being added. Cockpit refresh, on the other hand, why not? Albeit, if you're not fussed about multiplayer and integrity check, have you tried Sab0t's excellent 4k mod?

Its actually a terrain issue, believe it or not, I am following it up to see what is going on. But the terrain builders, both us and 3rd Parties, need to supply the map levels for each. So while not specifically a F/A-18C bug it does affect it. I am trying to chase up where we are at on this.

@joso Sweet! How long is from the top of the mounting on the base and the bottom of the grip? Is it comfortable when deflecting in any direction, and are your legs in the way? Cheers! Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

The masts at Waren Vielist are certainly not Danube-type, but something considerably shorter. They also located further from the threshold than in DCS (1800 ft vs 1400 ft). The masts near Hasselfelde are indeed Danubes (160 ft / 50 m tall in DCS). But that powerline passes way closer to the in-game threshold than it does in reality (1600 ft vs 3200 ft), so it looks more threatening than it should. Weser Wumme seems correct both in terms of mast type and threshold distance, so I'll remove it from the report.

Hello Sydy! Thank you for your work, I use your checklist everytimes. In the following vid, at 00.44 we can see that he switches of all the systems then cut both engines and after switches off all electrical . Could you amend your checklist to match this please? https://youtu.be/CwMwTyO4OwI?si=71vynQ9x8NMHmm9u Cheers