All Activity

I happen to have both of them and my personal verdict is that I enjoyed the Mosquito more, but that may be in part because I am generally a ground attack enjoyer and find that dogfighting in the Spitfire often trips over some DCS core problems. Seriously, this. Quite frankly, I think the Mosquito wouldn't even need a George-style fancy AI. Something akin to what ol' Belsimtek did for the Huey would probably suffice. The option to have a 'pilot' keep it somewhat straight and level or maybe circle or at least hold attitude properly, while I work with the radios in the back. Skill issue? Maybe. But I find it awfully hard to do the entirety of the flying while also looking the exact other way and fiddling with the dials. It isn't even that doing a lot with the long range radio was always necessary, it just feels to me that they put a lot of work into modeling all that and then made it borderline impossible to use any of it.

As stated in the title the F-16s NCTR does not recognise newly released Mig-29 and instead classifies it as unknown. I tested it several times within optimal conditions for NCTR to function (under 25 nm, with enemy facing towards me, within 30 degree arc from the nose) only to get UNKN return from it. I later tested it against legacy Mig-29 which gave me correct return at 25 nnullm won the first try. Another issue I came across when testing is related to the quick action generator. When setting up altitudes for the enemy aircraft, the first time the mission is run they start in the correct altitude but the second time they go back to the default value which was generated by the game.

it seems that the binding Idle/off which i normally use, has absolute no effect... neither on the throttle nor on a keyboard binding

Only anti armor cluster munition can penetrate heavy armored vehicles. Standard cluster is of no use. Not sure if Mig-29 has anti armor ones. Haven't tried it yet.

Of course this is something we want...

Cluster bombs as a whole, in DCS, have an interesting tendency to alternate between 'completely useless' and 'ridiculously powerful' every few updates. Nobody knows why. This is not limited to the RBK-250.

I'll reconsider any purchase from DCS. I was disappointed.

It is enjoying to me for some strange reason. Makes me feel I am really in air. But it is not realistic and will be fixed soon.

I guess he's already working on it - or MiG-29 fulcrum?

Hello, I'd previously assumed that the ineffectiveness of RBK bombs was due to lack of fusing options (and my releasing them below 2000 metres altitude). However, with the release of the Mig-29 and fusing options it now appears that this wasn't the case. I've found that attacks against both soft-skinned and armoured targets are more effective using FAB than RBK. In many cases a FAB-100 will destroy more vehicles than an RBK-250 will! Furthermore, a cluster bomb effect is better achieved using the B8 rockets. There is literally no use case for the RBK. P.S. This suggests some issue with the simulation (as IRL they wouldn't have built RBK if this was the case)! I'm not sure what is going wrong, but I've done many tests and it isn't the fusing or the attack profile... so it has to be something with the bomblet simulation itself.

The Mig-29 is a really well-made module. I also really like how well it's designed. What bothers me the most are the autopilot oscillations. It's such a basic thing. Until it's fixed, I won't fly the Mig anymore. For me, it's something that unfortunately ruined my enjoyment of the new module.

It is used for ground crew to test ADF.

That is APU. To help with startup if startup is done without cables. But I was able to start engines without touching that switch and without ground power.

По факту там на локаторе боец сидит и на запрос , к примеру : Кедровый пеленг 321 му ПРИБОЙ , он отвечает : 321й ваш прибой … . То есть это и есть пеленг или курс на точку . В основном должен использоваться для восстановления ориентировки , но на самом деле не используется вообще .Только тренируют бойца во время разведки погоды, как стандартная процедура, в жизни сейчас он нафиг не нужен.

I really like it too. It is very detailed and realistic modelled with some minor issues for an EA release. The Artwork of the cockpit and the plane is amazing. The flight model feels very good and realistic from what Fulcrum pilots in videos told about the aircraft. Great work ! I hope that ED will do a full fidelity Flanker with the same amount of detail. That would be fantastic for the future

There are a lot of poles on the final approach of runway 15R at Melez Anullirport, Syria. SYRYA MELEZ.trk SYRYA MELEZ.miz

I was just asking because I would like to remove it for a right console snap camera view preset.

P.S. .... ich habs gefunden War nen älteres Tool dazu was einfach den Treiber bzgl. Anzeige überschrieben hatte! Thx für die flotten Rückmeldungen!!!

Brilliant! Btw: is there any possibility to combine CW Germany, The Channel and Normandy to one big map? It's different times, I know. But all historical buildings, land marks, and most bridges will be the same.

Есть на продажу педали ффб -10шт Редуктор -шестерёнка.

Perhaps when that rework that has been hinted at several times over the years happens. As for right now I figure it doesn't make a huge difference which language they use to tell me completely irrelevant stuff to ignore. Before somebody feels the need to ask, here my usual experience with the DCS AWACS in a busy mission: AWACS: «Pop-up group of two, 90 miles, 330.» AWACS: «Pop-up group, 150 miles, 025, hot.» AWACS: «Bogey four ship, somewhere over Western Australia, flanking.» AWACS: «Pop-up group, 75 miles, 347, cold.» AWACS: «MERGED!» Yea, thanks a lot...

No, there is not as of now. But you can look around it... Just move the head forward/aft/up/down as necessary (No TrackIR needed).

Next to the start engine switch

The title says it all: is there any way to remove/hide the right hand armrest in the Viper?

This is not true. The Take-off (in Russian: VZLOT) and Landing (in Russian: PASADKA) positions of buttons provide different configurations. This was also confirmed to me a moment ago by a pilot I know who flew the MiG-29 9-12A for 12 years in our military. The roll angle is different, even if it's not visible in the DCS. This has been confirmed here, there are basically 3 different configurations: This does not change the fact that I think we should still have a setting for the up and down buttons of flaps and that is what this request is about.