All Activity

Несоотвествие индикация нашлемки описанной в публично доступных документах работы бортовых систем Миг29а и Миг29б. В фрагментах документов описано, что отображение на прицельном приборе состоит из сплошных двух концентрических сплошных колец и сплошной сигнальный крест, и основные доступные режимы: - прицельное кольцо постояного свечения, сигнальное отключено - прицельное мигающее кольцо (2гц+-0.5гц), сигнальное отключено - постоянное свечение прицельного кольца и сигнального креста - попеременное мигание прицельного и сигнального при команде НОП. В модуле вместо сплошного мигающего прицельного кольца отображаются преривистые мигающие прицельное кольца, а также приривистый сигнальный крест, вместо сплошных в соответствующих режимах. Вопрос больше не о режимах, а о отображении индикации.

After landing at Krasnodar Center in a MiG-29, there is an instant 15-20 fps drop as soon as the wheels touch the ground. Takeoff, flyover in the 29 or landing with other aircraft will not case any issue. I have attached two tracks: one with a MiG-29, one with a MiG-21. MIG29_krasnodarcenter_30Sept2025.trk MIG21_krasnodarcenter_30Sept2025.trk

I'm much more impressed by properly modeled systems, realistic operations and a good flight model. The trinkets and physics on the aux cord are neat and sweet to see, but def shouldn't be priority. it is good to set some realistic expectations with modules, cause some things like a pilot model shaking around or bouncing around has 0 effect on delivering a high quality simulation. Maybe some shakiness on the sun-shades at most would be neat (if it isn't there already).

If the base was still under construction, then why include it? There are other airfields in the PG map that are imaged as terrain. For example, there is an airfield south of Fujairah that can be seen as an image. IMHO, this is evident of a larger problem: the arbitrary & capricious method of updating a module (terrain, aircraft, etc) and allowing things to "drop off". Case in point: I once reported a bug about ground units unable to follow certain roads in Kerman and Jiroft in 2022. In 2025, the problem was partially fixed. Kerman was kind of fixed but Jiroft was not. No additional explanation given, just Kerman was fixed to some extend while Jiroft was not fixed. Here's the link to that old thread. File attachments were removed because of age and the need to make room for more file space. Ground Unit Bugs As we can see in this instance of Qusahwire Air Base, it was modeled with parking slots assigned. One can "click" on it in the F10 map to pull generic data. However, in the ME, one cannot set a coalition or warehouse assets to this airfield. One could drop invisible FARP points along the airfield to add life but will be limited to the use of the Dynamic Slot system (for Helos & VSTOL aircraft). Perhaps someone could prove me wrong that you can spawn a fixed-wing aircraft at an invisible FARP? I must admit that I have not tested dynamic slots on FARPs with fixed-wing aircraft. As time marches on, I grow more tired and frustrated of tolerating the arbitrary & capricious nature of bug reporting/fixing bugs/module support. IMHO, this is one of many thousands of cuts that is either intentionally or unintentionally left to grow.

There's some rattling there before the pov changes. And like mentioned above, get some transducers/bassshakers/buttkickers etc. It really is a must.

The optimistic answer would be, that radios are still WIP. The realistic answer would be, that radios are still WIP but will be so for the coming years...

Maybe we'll get a look at the Rafale in the 2026 and beyond video

Ok, wanted to help, but it seems you are trying to make a „me-problem“ a general problem. I put it bluntly. Your hardware isn’t up to the task.

Dear, ED! I need some help and attention because I paid money for new module and even had been flying it for a week! But it doesn't work now and I'm getting a message every time while DCS starting - "Next DLC modules couldn't be authorize and will be turned off - MiG-29 9-12". I tried to repair DCS - no result! I tried to delete this module but strange thing happened - module refused to delete and continue to be visible in the list of installed modules! I assume the reason on your side! I definitely need help!

I bet I can fixed all issues in DCS after buying 5090 how about that? Speaking of 'game-only machine' why are you running yours on 1440p? The only add thing is that the AH-64D is the single module in DCS which requires all 8GB VRAM and stutters. So yeah it's called optimization and for few months is the only scream I make on this forum that no ones cares and everyone chant 'buy new hardware'. Thanks, but no thanks!

I have included a track replay. As short as possible. It is easily reproducible.

Hello everyone, I'm a bit disapointed, The description said : "The NS 430 for the MiG-29A module integrates the NS 430 panel directly into the MiG-29A cockpit (not as a pop-up display). The NS 430 is fully wired into the electrical and radio systems of the MiG-29A. For work of this module, you must also own the DCS: NS 430 and DCS: MiG-29A modules. The NS 430 GPS navigation system, is an optional add-on module for DCS World aircraft. It provides powerful, yet intuitive, navigation and radio communications options to supplement the navigation and radio systems already integrated into our aircraft. The NS 430 is particularly useful for older aircraft with less sophisticated navigation and communication systems." So maybe I'm idiot and don't understand yet how radios are working, or maybe I blindly bought a product trusting what I read. Now after searching I mostly read that those radios aren't working for any module. Can anyone prove me that I'm wrong? I would be really happy to use them correctly rather than believe that I was trapped. Pouga

@Ramius007 You're getting off topic. The topic is in tbe header. What would bring us SP guys over to MP, not why you guys prefer MP. That we already know. Cheers!

HI @Tengah. This issue has been fixed internally this summer. Now we must wait for the next big Kola update.

Is it missing from the hook? Pretty sure there is a bit of dash wobble. Get yourself some transducers and bring a bit of life in. Works well. I expect the herc will have a constant hum through the seat. The hook is a great module for transducers...

L-39 принимает сигнал от штатных, и немногочисленных РСБН на Кавказе. Миг-29 их сигналы то же принимает. У Миг-21 - своя байда! На Кавказе, МИг-29 должен принимать сигналы всех АРК маяков и приводов. На других картах, в своих миссиях, можешь нафтыкать своих маяков РСБН и ПРМГ.

Please accept my apology, because I see now that you were clear in your first response saying that it would be revisited and improved. It seems the combination of me responding before having my morning coffee, and my memory of previous discussion of this topic, led me to not read and comprehend what you plainly stated above. As far as how long it takes, I’m content to wait until you guys can devote the time needed to the issue. HB has a long history of continuously improving their modules, so I’m confident it will eventually be addressed.

It's a tough call. When I see how you get thrown around in a GA in MSFS, even in moderate turbulences.... a middle ground would be nice. The Air in DCS could be more lively. But I think that is more an issue of the atmospheric model in DCS and less an aircraft specific issue.

I split my time betwean pve and pvp, SP pve is usually played on "hardcore" settings, but people who claim that AI planes can offer higher or even similar level of challange as human players are dellusional.It's possible against begginers of course, but even semi advanced player will be stronger than AI. Similar level of detachment from reality are claims about cheating being part of pvp, it's practically non existent. Dream come true would be server that offers realistic scenario based on realistic order of battle, with many MOVING AI ground units, but with human players in air as opponents.

The P4000 can't run complex games, better if you use it only for your professional software and buy a game-only machine.

You can have spawning of units controlled by flags. So F10 would set some flags which would then be used to determine which units to spawn. Be aware that all the group activations should happen after the player set those flags, otherwise you would need to deactivate units, which is less straight forward i believe... I don't think there is a way to manipulate units skill setting with the ME tools though. *edit* Easiest way (but limited in many ways) would just be to spawn a limited set of groups for the "easy" experience and just "late activate" more groups for higher difficulty if flags are set appropriately. Would only need a few triggers.

Баг! Писали-не писали? При переключении на щитке настроек ИЛС на сетку и обратно на день, ИЛС переключается на ночь и обратно в день уже не возвращается

You could be right about the Gazelle though I can't remember for the Kiowa. I find the Kiowa is the easiest of them all actually. The Gazelle for sure had some "sticky" issues a while back. It was like one of the skids was glued to the ground. Especially sand in the PG. Tought me a neat trick though. Whenever I take off in the Gazelle, I'll apply right pedal torque, (I pretty much know how much about now), push cyclic forward and pull the collective in a firm steady motion, like you say, and off I go.

I know what you mean. The tendency to tip over sideways due to "sticky" skids. The best way to deal with that (imHo) is to actually know (roughly) where you need to position the cyclic for a hover, hold it there right from the start and then carefully add collective until it starts moving. Of course you need to counteract any tipping moment immedietly (but measured, not erratic). "Jumping" up to overcome the critical phase is a workaround, but I think it reinforces problematic habbits and should be avoided if possible. (I always imagine I have an accident victim with a spinal injury on board....)