All Activity

knowing Rons ego... don't hold your breath. As I've said on that thread... this could've been settled months ago with the signing of one contract... and it apparently hasn't happened yet.

It would casually tell me whos going to be the next guy to kick the bucket...

I don't think that was the case. The Harrier would've benefitted from being the only full fidelity fast jet until the Hornet got released. The Mirage 2K was well thought of (especially once some of it got reworked) and i'm pretty sure the F15E sold in decent numbers before things went sour.

sure dcs.log

It would be. But let's not forget that outside of getting the Source Code for the existing modules, or getting RB back to work... there's only two options for ED: Replace them entirely or abandon them... and considering people LIKE those aircraft, it leaves them with just one: Replace them. Also, I think people need to understand that 95% of us will NEVER set foot in these pits outside of airshows or museums. So I think it's safe to say that "Good enough" should be the end goal of any module. Exact 1-1 is fine... but it's ultimately better to get something into our hands soon, and refine as time goes on. Think of it like Elite Dangerous vs Star Citizen. Elite was a functional title after about a year and a half of development, and was released to the public about a year later.... but Star Citizen? Still waiting. In DCS terms... there's the F-15E. RB sat on that thing for about a decade before they released it. And in that time, multiple third party developers cropped up, made something, and released it. Were those modules perfect on day one? No. But they were refined little by little until they got where they are now. Hence my statement about an F-15E replacement could be released to us inside 6 months, as ED has everything they need already to pull it off. It's just a matter of refining it until it's perfect after the fact. Which I personally would be fine with, especially if they come out and say "Hey, if you didn't request a refund for the RB F-15E, you get this for free or at a significant discount".

Hopefuly this discussion will become moot before too long. I don't know how long it will be before 3.0 comes out but hopefully we'll get a settlement before they get depricated

The AV8B had already been released in late 2017 I think, although I think mods were attempted for both marks of Sea Harrier based on the AV8B. From memory Razbam wanted to originally do a Falklands era Harrier, which would've been the FRS1.

You know what’s truly frustrating about this whole situation? That everything still seems to rely on just hoping things work out. People have asked repeatedly: what happens if the four modules stop functioning? Will ED simply say, “Well, go reinstall an old version where it still works”? That’s not a solution... it’s a shrug. The constant “for now the modules still work” and “we hope for a resolution” messaging isn’t enough. At some point, hope runs out... and customers deserve to know: what is the actual plan if that happens? Is there even one? Will you prevent the fire from breaking out, or will you try to put it out once it breaks out? Let’s not forget... the VEAO Hawk was one module. This time, it’s four, and the proposed “solution” seems even weaker. That won't be progress... it’ll regression.

I can confirm that i see the same issue, no mods installed. I can see the pylons of my own ka50 but not in the others ka50 of players. dcs.log

So the recent ED statement doesn't change much. Modules still work and will work for now but still no updates. What I don't like is threatening customers that their modules may not work in future DCS versions. I wait for that day before raising hell. Keeping 2 DCS versions would be a silly workaround and have a major flaw. Hypothetically: What good is Iraq South released potentially in 3.0 when my F-15E no longer works with it? You'll be losing customers and sales, ED, big time.

More DCS Necessity. Am starting a Taiwan Omni Map built on the Marianas map. Carrier Strike Group Eleven, Anderson AFB, 60 A/C on either side, fighter and attack mission routes. And now, ChiCom ships and land equipment. Out-standing! Bowie

Yes. That was it. After i switched to combat mod laser started workin and i was able to finally hit a target. Many thanks for your tip!

thanks, can you attach your dcs log, we are unable to reproduce the issue. thank you

Not According to AGO, BMW and Fw. See report. Two new access panels were required and the oxygen tanks were to be fitted differently (iaw Ta 152 design). Those designs were to be introduced into AGO serial production with the yet to be awarded contract. You're turning in circles. A motor with nozzles in place, yet no piping and no tank cannot provide GM1 injection. That's not an internet argument. That's common sense And without the tank and piping, there's no NOS.

The right side you’re pointing at is the Fwd Aft indicator, not elevation. According to that tutorial, the indicator is green and turns red when you’re out of limits. Again I can see the red light in your screenshot, so how is that hard to see in the game? That’s certainly worth adding. The only nighttime AAR I’ve done with the boom was in the A-10C which doesn’t use the belly lights. Those flood lights would be very welcome in that situation.

No, it's not. You're basing your point on "it could be done". I'm basing my point on "there's no evidence for the use of GM1". None. Your "proof" furthermore specifies there's no spec for the GM1 tank ("nicht gefordert" doesn't translate into "not normally done") in the A-8. Meaning there's no Rüstsatz that covers GM1 installation and any deviation would be a field mod, as the R4 had been cancelled. No tank means no GM1. No mention of GM1 use for II/JG 301 in the JG301/302 unit History or with Jochen Priesn's "Jagdfliegerverbände". The GM1 injection-nozzles are there, but the whole upstream-affair (plumbing, piping, tank) is to be fitted by the airframer. You - again, conveniently - cut that away. The only airframer earmarked for production was AGO for 200 airframes (some modifications were required, see report below). The R4 spec was cancelled, however. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/Fw_190_A-8_Besprechungs-Niederschrift_4-4-44.pdf Some (eleven known in total acc. Rodeike) R4s supposedly at 10./JG11 in winter 44/45, but no mention of GM1 there either. Neither in Prien's JG1/JG11 unit history, nor in Jagdfliegerverbände. AGO WNr. blocks with known "R4s" are: 732 001 - 732 310 (built August '44) 733 670 - 733 790 (built September '44) 733 960 - 733 999 (same) 734 350 - 734 400 (same) 738 100 - 738 400 (built October '44) The GM1 requirement had been dropped by late July 1944. Most likely as Erhöhte Notleistung had been put into serial production (June 44) and field-modifications. As acc. Rodeike many of those WNrs were built to R2 or R6 specs, there is a possibility of mix-ups or typos in unit-docs. It had the nozzles in place. You conclude acc. the report it had no tank, I conclude they're not specifying which tank was installed. As they're not mentioning any difference to the common A-8 (see "later intelligence" portion), it's highly likely it had a standard 115l tank. The wrong tank for NOS'ing. No. They concluded it had "provisions".

I was launching Limas at radar returns from the back seat last night. I don't think anything has changed with that regard.

I'm getting this error when attempting to update my dedicated server. The user account has full control permissions for the eagle dynamics folder.

At least give us the F/A-18D. More planes, and more for the carrier.

I you don't own any you're late to the party.

【Part.1】Since the entire file exceeds 100MB, but the forum rules prohibit uploading files larger than 50MB, I will reply to you in two parts. There will be two compressed files. Please download both of them and place them in the same folder. Then, click to unzip the first file, and it will automatically unzip both files together. After that, you can use them. DCS MIZ Compiler 1.1.5.7z.001 【Part.2】Since the entire file exceeds 100MB, but the forum rules prohibit uploading files larger than 50MB, I will reply to you in two parts. There will be two compressed files. Please download both of them and place them in the same folder. Then, click to unzip the first file, and it will automatically unzip both files together. After that, you can use them. DCS MIZ Compiler 1.1.5.7z.002

Sounds like a lot of money and time to replace modules that we already have. I don't think any other developer can replicate the mirage let alone it's flight model. Razbam had constant feedback from active mirage pilots that were using the dcs for training before the C model was retired from France. It's the closest 1:1 aircraft in DCS.

Sure it wasn't the Sea Harrier FRS.51 or Sea Harrier F(A).2 I know in 2019 or so there were screenshots of a WIP Sea Harrier . The FRS1 used the Blue Fox and the F(a).2 used the Blue Vixen which was further developed into the Typhoon's radar The FRS.51 used the Euroradar Captor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euroradar_CAPTOR

Absolutely... Out-standing! And perfect timing. Am finishing up an SEA Omni Map, built on the new Mariaias II map. TF77/CarDiv 2, Chu Lai (SATS), and 60 A/C on each side with fighter and attack mission routes. Lamenting the Arleigh Burke/Ticonderoga Class ship contingency, and have been hunting for a Sumner Class. No more. Tomorrow. Bowie.

You need to have faith, because it seems ED will not reveal what modules are inside the file sharing policy since 2018.