All Activity

Hi Currenthill, will this update be released before the end of this year, or do we have to wait until next year?

Im not sure, I will try asking in their discord about the BD campaigns

I'm still having performance issues with stuttering after reinstalling DCS completely from scratch. I've started testing, starting the SIM with nothing plugged in, no HOTAS, no displays, no extra modules, no mods of any kind other than DCS. In other words, bare-metal DCS. The version I currently have of the Nvidia drivers, with an Asus TUF RTX3080 OC, is 580.88. When I start the FA-18 in this configuration, it runs smoothly and perfectly without stuttering. The moment I connect the WINWING MIP, the full HOTAS and nothing else, the moment I take off onto the runway with the plane and begin to climb, the stuttering starts, making it impossible to fly, let alone complete a mission. I'm reinstalling everything in slow motion, due to work, absences, family, etc. After reading threads like this one: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/369884-choosing-the-right-nvidia-driver-is-the-latest-version-always-the-best/?_fromLogin=1 Could you give me your opinion on which are the best versions of the NVIDIA drivers for DCS? That thread is from earlier this year, and some changes may have occurred regarding the versions. dcs.logdcs.log.old Thank you very much.

Also have the feeling that the map isn't really alligned.

No one is asking for the contracts to be made public. People are asking about which products may have the clause about the source code. ED could handle this two ways. Say, "Hey, we hear this is a big issue for you guys. We will try and reach out to the 3rd parties to see if we can get this information to you". And they then talk to the 3rd parties and see if it is okay to reveal only that information. Or ED could do what they are doing now. Say nothing and do nothing. I'm not saying ED HAS to do anything. The user base seems to be waivering on some of these issues that are coming to light due to the circumstances, some more than others and some not at all, and people are asking for clarity on this from ED. You would think or hope ED would do what they can to help provide their customers with more clarity and alleviate their concerns. And maybe they are, maybe they are working on that in the background. But none of that is getting communicated and it comes across as talking to a wall at times. I'm not trying to be disrespectful to the CM's, I'm just being frank.

Tacview-20250808-095819-DCS.zip.acmi Here's one

I dont want to see the contracts. I want a new statement from ED saying: "As you all known about our new file sharing policy stated in 2018, all new contracts signed with all 3rd parties since that date are part of that policy" Thanks for your kind supportt Its no so hard to understand. If ED is unable to make such statement, me and i think other customers cant make an informed decisión about buying 3rd party modules, and so, a % of us are not willing to buy any under those conditions.

https://youtu.be/KpXol98UDeA?si=I9VAA9cZpqo2n82O Тут скорость 1.3М дальность 40 км , цель летит со скорость 945 км/ч Высота не известна Я думаю около 8-9км

Interesting stuff... keep it coming guys.

Many Thanks for this great Info! I will see today how things work.

Yes, you can clearly see that in action in Yoyo's Mi-24 campaign, for example: there it takes roughly 8 minutes for the wingman to take off once you're in the air. Basically AI helicopters think they are heavies, and taxi/take off like a C-5 Galaxy would. So much for "the year of the helicopter" ED promised us years ago, eh?

https://youtu.be/RvmHMgEPCQM?si=62fddx3-sA_Upx91

In most cases, the AI took off from the runway. The exception was when I was traveling slowly and the distance between the two helicopters was too small (obstacle?). In that situation, it took off, stopping behind me on the taxiway. A similar situation occurred when four helicopters were taxiing and the distance between them was too small. Three or four took off from the taxiway.

Here is the biggest concern one, 2 PL5s, 2 BRM pods (the weapon with the most drag on the JF17,) Same parameters, Syria, 35k, 20c 40nm Speed of mach 1.01 (0.09) slower than 2 SD10 & 2 PL5s

this has been reported thank you

I don't know why it is so hard to understand that NO ONE of us customers has the right to see even the smallest part of the contract between a 3rd party dev and ED. We are not involved in these contracts at all. It's not our business. The only contract we have the right to see is the contract WE sign. Means the contract between us and the seller of the module. I think many, many people here are extremely overrating their position as a customer of DCS modules. If i would be a 3rd Party Dev. and had released a module before this amendment of the contract to hand over the source code of my module and ED would publish this confidental information from our contract..... It also would have and impact on my sales numbers and as soon as i would realize a decreas in sales, i would be extremely pi**ed off and the whole DCS World community should better be prepared for the next dispute and the next abandoned module..... I'm happy that ED just stays professional and doesn't public any confidental contractual content just because some people here are claiming the right to get something which is absolutely none of their business....

Can you attach your dcs log please and have you disabled track replays in your autoexec by any chance?

You can ALMOST hit mach with 2 SD10s, 2 PL5s & 2 GB-6 SFWs (0.11 slow than the subject in question, 2x Dual rack SD10) Same parameters, Syria, 35k, 20c (40nm trip)

if someone could send me a package on how something like MSFS communicates with the PFP 3N, i could probably write a driver for it in C or C# with an interface for higher level languages to send arbitrary text to it. I unfortunatly cannot do this however, as i dont own MSFS and dont necessarily wanna buy it just to grab a packet

It is an internal file that you do not have in your installation but that goes into Saved Games. At least that was the case. When MT was new, one could fine-tune stuff in there, but that was for the developers, not for the general public. Now, MT is much more advanced and stable than it was in the beginning.

I tried just that, I saved tracks earlier, but it saves the same old track over and over again. One from last year... Don't know why. I am 7nm out.

More testing, Both of these test are something the JF17 can not do in full burner. Same parameters, Syria, 35k, 20c - Flight time of 222nm Mach 1.33) (0.22 mach faster than a 40nm flight) null Same parameters, Syria, 35k, 20C - Flight of 222nm Mach 1.11 (0.01 Mach faster than 40nm)

Mmh, didn´t notice that. Will have a closer look next time.

Yes, but sadly the IDF Mod Projects are on hold.

Hey @alboon2000 I will check it out. Could you send me the track file, it would be really useful.