All Activity

Yes, no such option but we can wish for it

Thanks for your help! I tried , was definitely better, around 50-80 FPS , very unstable though. Whereas around 200 in SP .. As an example , on the contention server , I play with a friend he has a little better CPU but lesser GPU and he runs a lot better than me

I would prefer first completely functional basic 9.12a. As for Mig-29MU1/MU2, I am kind of skeptical, since cockpit looks exactly the same and it appears they have used "hacked" avionics to place those missiles in place of R-27P. Over the years UKR did offer lot's of upgrade marketing material for soviet stuff (ewr radars, missile seekers, SAM upgrades), but we so very little substance of those upgrades in reality. Given the level of corruption in ex-Soviet republics (including Russia), doubts arise over actual scope of work. All things I found so far mostly pointed out to improving reliability of avionics (e.g. radar) + adding limited multi-role capabilities, similar to Russian upgrade packages offered around 1996 minus the R-77. Around that time they may have been even collaborating together on this. Maybe the existing software got some improvements over the soviet one, but if this is MU2, then we are not talking about large functional differences, hence it may be a low hanging fruit once the 9.12a is completed. Also, ED might decide to offer this as paid upgrade to a basic module.

Unfortunately, DCS is transitioning from a "cockpit simulator" to a "bug simulator." Let's hope it doesn't become a "fraud simulator." I don't understand how is it possible to discuss about Dynamic Campaign in the forum if users don't even care about the current bugs. I'm moving to Falcon BMS, even if I'll miss the graphics.

На Су-33 на особом режиме вроде за 100% заходят.

Like I said, I'm not criticizing your choice. I'm just talking about the reality that quite a few people are looking for a bargain, and those people are susceptible to overly rosy descriptions of products, which can result in them making poor buying decisions. So we should be careful not to overhype a product that doesn't deserve it.

Thanks @HFXLegion - the new setup works well for me so far. Pictures to come! Thank you also for adding Iron Dome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Need Houthi weapons Credible sources: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/houthi-arsenal https://www.dia.mil/Portals/110/Documents/News/Military_Power_Publications/Iran_Houthi_Final2.pdf

Yes, and considering ED is also deeply simulating the avionics, getting to -29MU2 will be difficult. I'm also certain the US and Ukraine won't be terribly happy with leakers of details vs. informed guesstimates. Heckfire, they've been able to keep the contractor for HARM integration secret. Says the guy who thinks the MiG-29MU2 Wild Weasel mission is FUN with the mod pack!

You will be constantly tweaking as you learn more. Welcome to the bottomless pit of VR. There is no return.

Hi, I have a problem with the trim that I will describe below. I have 2 GBU-24s, one on each wing. When I release one of them, the plane obviously goes unlevel. My problem is that I try to compensate with the trim and it is impossible. No matter how much I activate it, the plane remains unlevel. If at that moment I release the other GBU, the plane goes unlevel uncontrollably towards the place where I activated the trim and then the trim starts to work and I can level it by activating the trim. Greetings and thank you.

That won't cut it. It seems you need 1 page of "TOP10 best helpful tips" to learn anything these days.

No. I had private messages with Maestro. I've also added a mission with a flight in the proximity of the airports. Aircraft is in the air and radios have been set to contact three different airports in the zone (mainly: HighHalden and HeadCorn. Wind is set so the a user can quickly test calling different airports and check responses. IMHO this is better than a track to check ATC messages. Please, stop defending all these craps behind "sending a track". If u have those modules try yourself. If not avoid answering! Simply there are unresolved bugs for years. I'm not asking ATC (that's not part of this DCS cockpit simulator, don't know how to call it so far) but at least I would like to have proper radio interaction for what has been declared as released by ED. I don't want to wait 5 more years. "Directions to final" is not a whish list item!

This is an answer to a question that was never asked. I´m sorry but where is the problem to tell if the Taxi Bug has a high priority or not? When I have a look at your list its obvious that you have to prioritize the bugs. Again, no pressure, when you say its a less important thing, because it only effects a few people thats an proper answer and we as your customers can apply our expectations. And your word document is well-intentioned but a little further information about the status as a bug or a user fault or whatever would make it much more usefull. Just a matter of communication I think.

I wasn't looking into your private life, I was just surprised to see someone put work above life in their list of priorities. And I did say in the first message that "I guess this is kinda neither here nor there in this thread tho..." So yeah we can end it there.

Ugra did respond to your thread and you refusing to provide a track are not helping either.

Hi...another small bug,minor detail. ABRIS RMI2 pointer (Red pointer on ACR and HSI page)can show "TO STP" "FROM STP" and "RADIO" information depending on setting. It's default to "RADIO" which shows information from AKR-22 ADF When no ADF signal is received,it will not showing up of course. It works fine if u change the setting with ADF signal being received. Also if u are already in "TO STP' or "FROM STP" mode,and then the ADF signal is gone,the RIM2 pointer will continue working fine. But if u change it's setting from "RADIO" to "TO STP' or "FROM STP" when no ADF signal is received,the RIM2 pointer will not show up,until u have ADF signal being received and got the setting cycled back through "RADIO". RIM2 not showing up.trk Just a minor detail,hope for a fix when free,thanks.

That's your reason? That's possible devs' problem and I proposed that any such event should be written into debriefing to easily find out what happened. Realistically you should check it after the mission of course.

Hi guys, as you know we’re still working on our upcoming Alphajet mod, and we don’t necessarily have the time to work on the Bronco. One of the recurring issues with it was the jittering wheels. A guy named Moran found a way to fix the problem while waiting for a future patch. I’m sharing here a screenshot of what needs to be done. Thanks to him ! Enjoy it

the dim light control knob also the damage model doesn't get effected when you hover into the radar dishes.

I see it the same way. we need selectable pylons!

The DCS: F-16C Viper is based on the United States F-16CM Block 50, roughly M4.2+, which operated in the 2007 timeframe. The DCS: F/A-18C Lot 20 is based on the United States Navy / US Marine Corps F/A-18C in the 2002(ish) time frame. This is from modules' subforum descriptions and FAQ. And you're right. Yeah, no. Only on paper.

Lessay & Stoney Cross are 6,000ft, I think.

Do you have random failures enabled in settings? Maybe this caused the loss of airspeed. Not flown on Afghan map in icy condition but did a lot on kola map up to -15 degree Celsius and never realized a loss of airspeed on the IHADDS.