All Activity

@BIGNEWY @Wags @NineLine Should probably find someone who interacts with your customer basis better if they are going to represent ED by presenting your information on the Road Map. Especially since wags just bragged about your renewed standards on how you approach bringing on third party devs and people to represent ED to include their social media posts and how they behave with people on the forums and others. This is not the first time SD has jumped in with wild accusations and sierra talk when he was proven wrong. I will accept my firm response to him above as a provocative measure, but he consistently likes to antagonize and kick the hornets' nest with unfounded opinions and what clearly appears to be a lack of real-world experience, which I have plenty of. Just sayin.

With that said, if we end up with the F-35, then we need also the F-22, the Chinese "Stealth", the Russian F-57, and advanced radar. That will change the entire battlefield, and may seriously detract from the game overall. Hoping they decide to direct some resources to this Nevada map instead.

You also have continuous cm released for 1 per second release

It ultimately depends on what you're trying to do. The MiG will usually be trying to intercept something over friendly territory. That means it can afford to go low, since ground forces are unlikely to be shooting at it. So what's the Phantom doing? If it's trying to CAP (say, to prevent friendly CAS from being splashed), it's at a massive disadvantage, because MiG will be in the weeds and the Phantom isn't that great at searching, anyway. If it's escorting, then it's a matter of keeping the MiG away from whatever it's protecting. The MiG will likely eat it for breakfast, but it might run out of gas or simply be unable to catch the strikers afterwards. If it's a mud mower of some sort... it had better have some escort, or it's going to have a bad day. OTOH, if the MiG is the one doing escort and the Phantom is an interceptor, it could try blowing through the MiG screen and killing the strikers, then hightailing it home at supersonic speeds. In any case, "unload and bugout" is only good when you can afford to do so. In most cases, it'll mean you just abandoned your mission objective. If you can accomplish your objective while leveraging Phantom's advantages over the MiG, great, but there's only a handful of fighter missions which would allow you to do that.

A slew of the paring spots cannot be used/addressed. In the ME you see the spot numbers on the ground, but if you try to assign air aircraft to them, the numbers are not in the pull-down list. You can also not drag an aircraft on to them.

I'm going to assume that this is not exclusively on my end and I intend for this to be a general repository of reports in English on this topic. OpenBeta F-18C INS is non-functional in the sense that I cannot get the alignment to remain consistent or stay aligned in IFA mode across the same mission with the same procedure and same settings two times in a row. HUD drifts over time by inconsistent margins, HUD symbology fails to appear at times or go away at times, especially with CCIP symbology. Without any weather effects and without much effort, the INS will lose true alignment very easily.

Auch sehr cool! Wobei ich die kurze Anleitung eine sehr gute Idee finde, so kann sich das jeder selbst bauen und ein bisschen damit beschäftigen, wie man DCS hacken kann (im positiven Sinn) und einen Blick hinter die Kulissen bekommt. Vermutlich sind Leute, die sich beacons.lua aus den Userfiles runterladen und sie per Diff mit der Datei aus dem Spiel vergleichen nicht die Zielgruppe von Flo's Post.

First and foremost, thanks for the amazing and pro-bono work you do, Currenthill! To talk about the attention to detail, or overall fidelity of the units doesn't even begin to cover it. This is by all means, art! The pedant in me can claim that you have much to be proud of, don't take that lightly either! I'm not sure what plans you have in store for the future, obviously the units you present on your www. are a fine work, and implementing more of them into DCS natively, would be a dream. However, I do also look at this from the perspective of a mission designer (when not in the air). It would of course be awesome to have the Ka-52 AI implemented, as well as simply more of the units that you bring. Even more civilian, with different color palettes on each unit. It allows for creating more vivid and realistic scenarios. A place where I see an immediate deficit in unit choice, asumming it could be of interest to you, is the department of soldiers/civilians. We currently have very few models of soldiers, and even fewer if you consider the new high-quality ones, that are properly animated. I am wondering if you would be interested in widening this aspect of the simulation. Have more soldiers, from different countries, with variations of weapons/apparel/camo patterns/colors/ranks? As an example, even adding a basic model of a recognizable officer (prestige uniform), would already open the doors to creating missions where a pilot might need to verify/engage or verify/protect a high-ranking persona. With the addition of more transport modules (Huey, Mi-8, Mi-24, CH-47F, C-130J (soon), +++), this would not only bring more authentic feel to the transport mission, but also allow to create more varied combat environments. I hope this could be of interest to you, appreciate your work again, and do keep the models coming. Uploading some WIP missions that show just how a creative mission designer can untilize such units! You give us the tools, and this is the effect (not complete)

To hell with realism, just for a photo...

I've had this happen without mods.

The I-beam is not a CCIP indicator, it is a steering cursor based on the currently selected sight source to point the nose of the helicopter to where the sight source is looking. Rocket employment is described in the manual starting on page 500.

Just remove ALL mods and retest. That's what ED will tell you to do. Helpful or not, it rules out a major cause of DCS "issues". If you replicate in a clean environment it points more towards a base issue vs a mod conflict (which happens all the time).

That's not really helpful.

Please no, HIP has mixed shots of Arma 3/Reforger, no DCS.... He has using them to get more views / dramatic content.... "facepalm". And no, ED has none confirm a FPS mode.... only a "experimental" testing on the mig-29A video. Remember, the C-130 has none "legs".

Possibly...

Are there known mods that are known to break it? I should mention that the deck taxi routes are clear of obstructions as well. This track file is smaller as the one from the multiplayer folder wouldn't upload.

In the aviation world, the magnetic heading is different from the True heading depending on where you are in the world. The HSI would show, or be set, to True North and that's how navigation is done. Where I live the difference is -10 degrees between them.

We're getting the F-35 that not many people seem to have asked for, but 8 pages of wishlist just on NV alone, makes it seem that they aren't listening much. Makes me sad. Just the area already included in this map have so many airfield left out, and the textures, man, baked in shadows, it's not aging well. Is it just too much to ask for them to develop a little for this area? Edwards AFB? China Lake? For crying out loud, we have an F18 texture for China Lake, but it's homeless. Having this area at all with what was missed or ignored seems like such a tease. Is this the remnant of the Harrier flight Sim someone was developing back in 2017 or so? Did DCS buy these out from the developer with an agreement to abandon it?

humidity isnt modeled in DCS afaik. it "should" be though, and no idea why it hasnt been yet. it effects everything and anything aircraft related.

I suppose the quality that the DCS team will feel they need to maintain for Edward's and China Lake would be too far to go? Those both are in the map area, as well as Palmdale, and a few others. It seems they've forgotten about this map, or feel it's got enough to it already, I suppose. Too bad. There's a lot of history in this area, and could become a target-rich environment. There's a lot of bases that could be added, and scenery improved. The shadows are baked in, even. It's not bad, but it's already not at their current level of quality with the other areas they have now. Afghanistan is at a higher level than this, and has very low demand/use online. They could have done so much with this area. It seems rather disappointing to include it at all with how barren it is.

Just to clarify my initial post if it wasn't obvious (I guess that's why this topic was moved from DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum to the DCS Core Wish List section and not to the DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum->Wish List section it was supposed to be) I meant effects for MiG-29 9.12A FF Fulcrum module specifically, not for other modules. Unless there are similar issues for other modules and it moved here for a reason, I think it worth moving this topic to the DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum->Wish List section to avoid possible duplicate posts there in a future.

Luckily, Russian aircraft more than make up for the lack of Yugo aircraft. That is even more true, when considering the latest AI units/structures added by CN and ED. We have enough variety to simulate this area. What speaks even more in our favour, is the sheer fact that any testimony from the wars in Balkans, will confirm that due to extremely similar uniforms, language and culture among the local populous, the theatre was a nightmare in terms of ROE and IFF. It would be refreshing to make IFFing and SA a major consideration again. You know, make you think twice before pulling the trigger. The mix of the terrain type, and close proximity to both Italy (NATO) as well as Adriatic and Ionian seas... Yes please! It would be important though, to have the map be from around 80s-90s for optical coherency and authenticity. Much of this aspect lies in real estate models, cars, and otherwise all the detailed objects. That's what e.g. makes the atmosphere to splendid on the other maps, and that's what would do here.

Yes, release in 2 weeks (TM)

Thankfully animation in the cockpit is something that has gotten attention over the years. The head movements now and salute are impressive in some modules. Hopefully this is something that will continue to be updated slowly over time to include other hand gestures. Who knows... we may even one day see Pale's "signature move"... no big deal.