All Activity

How DARE the AI use actual air combat tactics by employing their aircraft's advantages. Maybe, I dunno, try using the Corsair's strengths.

Thank you guys. Good to see that something is in the making. All I know is that when we have a human ATC which knows what he is doing even the most boring practice sessions feel so much better and also more challenging due to the fact that you have to spend more attention on the communication while following your task and flying the plane. So if there would be an affordable fee to pay for our MP Servers, I´m pretty sure we would spend some money for this.

We haven't heard anything official about the dynamic campaign for a while. I'd be interested to know when ED is planning to release it.

I've been an avid supporter of the module. I bought it on Day 1 and flew it on every map I own, including multiplayer missions, obviously with all the plane's limitations. I forgave the months of waiting for everything to work properly, but honestly, four years after the module's release, more than a year was wasted with the plane exploding while taxiing and no one understood why, rendering it unusable. Even today, calibrating the depressurizer on the collimator to use weapons is a lottery. I'm sorry to say it, but they really disappointed me. I know IFE is a capable software house, I can see it from the success of their modules on Flight Simulator, but evidently their interest in DCS is very low, so I don't think I'll buy any more of their modules. Sorry for the outburst, but anyway, I believed, I invested money in a product that then sadly ended up abandoned.

Que maravilla! Pa la saca!

Swiss Air Force J-5017 100 Years Edition Fliegerstaffel 17 1925-2025

No,The Kneeboard is not implemented... I will look if I can do it ...

Sorry, I always use my rudder device rather than using keyboard. However, the following keybindings are no longer to work (in F-14 as example)?

Probably a C-130J, but I might be wrong. Edit: I just saw some photos of a C-130H with a cockpit a lot like in those videos, so might have been a later or upgraded C-130H as well. /Edit Great videos! I guess that means the race is on for epic landing spots on the South Atlantic map as soon as the module gets released. Well, and all other maps as well obviously.

A UH-60 module was talked by Wags on the January Q&A (17:39). But by now, the Helicopter teams has centred on the AH-64F, CH-47F and a third helo (no revealed). If they start to work on a Blackhawk module, has many info to build a UH-60L version.

You can actually bind it immediately after purchase- so it activates the license on your ED account. The discord FAQ has instructions, i already bound mine to my account of course it can't be accessed until release, but the wording there is a little confusing since it gives the impression that you have to wait until release to redeem the code, which is not the case..

That's somewhat doubtful. Feet above Mean Sea Level? Feet Above Ground? Feet slant range? Yards slant range? As far as I can tell, Mavericks fly a mostly direct trajectory, and in the A-10C we have no way to force a high or low trajectory (unlike, say, Hellfires launched from an Apache or Kiowa Warrior). I'm not even sure if an obscured line of sight will lead to loss of target acquisition after a weapon has been launched. If we had a track of your failed attempts, we could try without clouds and confirm or reject your theory with some solid data. What I can say is that the Maverick seeker on its gimbal can acquire and track targets that the missile can't actually reach (without losing track after launch). As a rule of thumb, there's this imaginary keyhole that pilots should always consider when launching Mavericks - make sure the seeker (pointing cross) is within this imaginary keyhole and the missile should be able to hit its target. Of course it's possible your missile missed because of going into clouds, but it's more likely you were simply launching outside of the keyhole constraints. With a track, this could be cleared up.

Thats the most you can do atm unfortunatelly. Just put the ILS lines at the end of the beacon.lua file, and send the file to others. Don't forget to make a backup copy of the original file copy as well. Modifying that file will surely break IC in most of the other servers, but you can set your own server up without the IC. It's not a hard task to do.

I have a Intel 14th Gen Processor with RTX 4090 GPU and 64Gb RAM... Caucassus map runs at 90FPS, Cold War Germany runs at 45-50FPS. Is that a similar experience for others or is there something wrong with my machine and/or the Cold War Map.

There’s already a thread on this one here:

I'm a little confused by these different versions. Why not combine the two into a single mod?

Stuff like BeyondATC is very cool indeed. You’ll notice they are paid add-ons though or even require subscriptions. I don’t think the user base in DCS is sufficient to fund something like this. We can dream though.

Here it is all explained.

The Supercarrier ATC IA has a first steep to add more plausible ATC to bases on a future, that has separated by the old "common" ATC. About Improments, Wags has talk about them on the January 2025 Q&A (21:20 to 22:38)

No fail. It just was not there.. Do you mean I should install again? null

уже (пока) ни как . Между ЕД и разбамом какие то терки и вся продукция снята с продаж.

AI is just a placebo, it doesn't reach that level, and no, AI has horrendous problems generating code or doing anything creative, because it doesn't "reason," but copies and pastes its predefined patterns, and when you review them you find that it's absolute crap... The fact that people have dedicated themselves to switching from the creator's chip to "let an AI do it for me" shows the level we're going to (and yes, I've seen it in schools and in my sector, with programmers writing code via AI, and then when an application breaks down, the one who made it doesn't even know where to start).... And I understand that AI has evolved, but the same thing happens, they create a 3D model, and when you put that in 3DS Max and try to add arguments, textures, and animations, you'll have to sacrifice 20 souls to some dark god for it to be coherent... You've hit the nail on the head. For a while I tried to create an alternate history with GPT Chat / Gemini. The level of frustration it generated due to its repetitiveness, disjointedness, forgetting previous lines, and doing whatever it wanted without breaking a sweat was such that I gave up on it, no matter how hard I tried to "shepherd" it...

Or make us an entirely-new high-fidelity air combat simulation? For free. With an 'add new aircraft' button so nobody has to wait for pesky developers to make stuff. You want a XB-70 Valkyrie, but can't find it in the mission editor? No problem. ChatGPT will have it ready for you in a few minutes. Yeah, that'll happen... Meanwhile, in the real world, ChatGPT is still struggling with basic concepts like the difference between looking something up in a cited source and inventing fictitious but plausible-sounding citations.

Cool I did not notice that. Do you have any sources for me? Would be really interested in how they plan to implement this. A little update from NineLine or BIGNEWIE would be appreceated too.

IA ATC has planned by ED and take time.