All Activity

It was a translator's error; I didn't say that there wasn't any balance, but rather that it's impossible. Both ED and third-party developers will always prioritize what brings them the most profit and where they have access to the best information (Bluefor), not a module that could land them in jail... That's the serious problem with the "red" (Russian and Chinese) modules. So, if anyone wants to make an Su-30MKI/MKK, Su-24, Su-35, etc., I recommend you create a third-party project and deal with the corresponding legal issues... and remember, it's not the first time someone has tried to do something "big" with the red forces, and they ended up abandoning the project due to "problems," like the Tu-22M3 project near 10 years ago... Besides, ED will require "authorization" to publish it, because they don't want to get into trouble. Regarding the MiG-21Bis 2.0, it's impossible for M3 to have access to the data of a Bison or a LancerR, due to security and data restrictions from the countries that operated them (M3 has very clear about them). Furthermore, we're talking about the first third-party module created for DCS World, back in 2015... and many people want an update and improvement for it (especially now that ED has finally created an RSBN system). As for the Su-17 from Octopus-G, that third-party developer posted screenshots, but it's normal for it to be a long-term project, not something that will be ready tomorrow. Regarding a MiG-23, the same applies as above: if someone wants it in DCS World, they know what to do—create a third-party project and try to get it done. ED has already made it clear that they will update the AI models from LOMAC/FC over time, but their modelers are focused on other projects. When they have time, they will announce it.

I hope we get the Naval version and some French ships.

Tatsächlich habe ich gerade Probleme verschiede Webseiten zu erreichen. Startpage.com z.B. Wahrscheinlich ist einer der großen DNS ausgefallen.

se vuoi poca spesa e massima resa, grazie a nuovi driver free Oasis su Steam per la VR ex-WMR, puoi pensare anche al Reverb G2. Ottimo e a meno di 150€ te lo prendi. Io uso il G1 con un a 3080 e va una bomba (sempre con i giusti compromessi)

У вас есть объяснение в графиках и формулах почему? Обеспечивается-не обеспечивается это не разговор.

The main reason for the chosen name was to distinguish it from the existing FC MiG-29 which is called "MiG-29" already, while the FF module is called "MiG-29A Fulcrum-A". Since they added "Fulcrum-A", they could have just called it "MiG-29 Fulcrum-A", I guess.

Hier geht's, lädt aber sehr langsam. Wahrscheinlich Provider- oder Routing-Probleme. Einfach abwarten.

Is this issue verified now?

А ещё может прийти дядя или скорее всего тётя из Министер дез Арми и сказать:-"Жё не ле пермепа!"

This?

Also note that the reason BS3's IGLA is so ineffective is because it uses the IGLA-1E (the same one used for the manpads in DCS), which is a fairly old IGLA. The KA-52 carries a much more modern IGLA-V. Why did ED choose to use an IGLA-1 and not an IGLA-5 when they made BS3? Probably to create a "what if" of the early 80s and not a "what if" of the later versions of the Kamov (which were the stepping stone to the production of the KA-52). If that were the case, then the IGLA-V would have been used (the IGLA-V was designed specifically for use on helicopters). I personally made an IGLA-V mod based on the IGLA-1 model but with an extended range of 5-6 km, a more sensitive seeker and better resistance to countermeasures, which makes it usable in a more interesting way (because the current IGLA 1E has no interest because it enters the same field of action as the cannon, which will always remain more effective)

It's all in the title: Currently, AIs can see through smoke. It would be interesting to be able to create smoke screens with smoke bombs. This would offer interesting tactical possibilities in CAS or ground assault missions. It would be easy to do. We would like smoke bombs that are capable of covering troops.

Je ne pense pas. Puisque à priori le nouveau Suoer Étendard ne devrait pas avoir besoin de FC3 pour fonctionner. Si j'ai bien tout suivi.

Update It’s not just multi player I can’t add one anytime I can add one to the Fw

Thankfully it was reported that its 3d shapes are not encrypted.

For those who haven't purchased the campaign, what is the answer on page 8?

Jetzt geht sie wieder nicht. Egal ob per WLAN oder mobile Daten, PC, Smartphone, nix geht mehr.

Well you probably fly head on first, so you know the direction he's coming from and then you can visually crank 90° using terrain features and heading. Maybe takes some practice to adjust into a slight curve while he's getting closer, but it's possible to hold a notch even without EWR/RWR/SPO or whatever. But I haven't tried this tactic with the new MIG-29, only with the FC3 variants. So I don't know if it still works. Especially without chaff...

I was going to write that. Also please add parking spacef for larger aircraft. These used to visit Wittstock with mail for example as seen in the video here:

Good morning, It is not possible to taxi the plane seriously. If I compare it with the p-47 or Spitfire it is a disaster. I waited for an update but even after the update the situation is the same. I would like to ask if the manufacturer of this great add-on is considering or working on a fix In its current form, it is not possible to operate the plane on the ground. It is a great shame about this degradation. Thank you Josef

Whilst I haven't tried this myself, I would consider the Quest 3 and use its pass-through feature that enables you to mix VR and the real world. For all other cockpit switches that you do not have physical switches for, use the Quest 3, HTCC and Slugmouse. As I said, I haven't tried this myself, so it would be prudent to seek the views of someone experienced with the Quest 3 and pass-through. Or ditch the Win Wing kit and go Quest 3, HTCC and Slugmouse - fully VR. As I like to fly a variety of airframes, I find that this is the best option.

It is really good advice to watch some videos on basic helicopter principles first, them some flying tutorials. Of course nothing keeps you from diving into the deep end and just hold-my-beer it in DCS. I mean, you can't really die. But I would recommend the first approach.

Там тесты без пилонов и с пилонами.Тесты скорее всего проводили без задушенных по T4 двигателями

Hi, I have been DCS F18 for about one year now with v large quality screen and Wing Wing HMD ,DDI' throttle and stick so all up normal high end set up. I am tempted by VR and want to know what is the best set up for the way forward. Quest 3 seems good but how do I utlise the wonderful DDI and instrument set up in front of me. Cutting face mask to look down nose seems not for me maybe and the look thru I am told is not great ( especially compared to the w/wing panels in front of me so I am asking for advice and have narrowed my choice to the following but am I right or wrong as there is good money at stake here. 1) Quest 3 and use look thru or try and get point control but I am retired so I may be dead by the time it arrive 2) Second hand Varjo Areo with "Slugmouse" but not sure what tracking programs I need to add to this. 3) Something else ??? Is the second option the best long-term as I may then sell on my existing set up if this option is future-proof for the next five years maybe

The main problem with different helicopters is that US/western helicopters have their main rotor turn in the opposite direction than eastern/some european models. In DCS that would be the Huey, Apache, Kiowa on one side and the Gazelle and Hip on the other. That's not a problem per se, but you need to apply anti-torque pedal to the opposite direction, which of course messes up your muscle memory (especially if you are not already proficient with helicopter flying). The basic stick and rudder (and collectice) skills you need for a helicopter are fundamentally different from fixed wing (well, before ETL or transition speeds - beyond that it becomes similar). You need to constantly balance the three inputs. There is no inherent stability.