All Activity

Over the past 10 years, DCS has turned from a game-changing fantastic sim to an abomination of unfixed bugs, broken promises, completely empty and abandonware (NTTR) maps, incomplete modules, 2-3-4 year "early access releases" (F/A-18, I'm looking at you!), and (literally) a 30 year old code base from Flanker 2.0 and Lock-On. the "C" in DCS has been pathetic for about a decade due to AI and weapons issues that ED refuses to fix. I, for one am not spending one more dime on a module or map until ED fixes the BASE software. When I spend HOURS scripting, tweaking and "work-arounding" just trying to get a mission to function properly BEFORE ACTUALLY FLYING, or spend an hour or so flying only to experience a bug at IP and ruins the whole mission. Forget a moderately complex, multi-unit mission. I can't tell you how many FULL days I've wasted trying to get a single DCS mission or scenario to function even halfway decently, only to give up in frustration and go fly M$FS. DCS 3.0*, when??? Dynamic campaign and updated mission editor when? Updated AI when? Legacy core bug fixes, when? Populated airspaces when? And finally, updates that don't break everything previously mentioned in the last sentence. Time to step up to the plate, ED. Judging from the activity and posts on this forum, the posters in this thread are not the only ones frustrated and ready to give up.

Hi. Very nice Mod I'm eager to test. But I don't have JF-17 yet and, sorry but... ...should not be a FAQ you check in case of an issue, it's a Requirement that should appear above Liveries, Thanks and Features.

Bei 3:37 könnte deine Frage beantworten!

Thank you!

Wow, I'm surprised that no one else has spoken up about the ControlsIndicator breaking IC.

Just some feedback from de dev's about their view on his bug would be nice. Until then it remains griping in a vacuum.

If you click on one of the links in the first post you'll see some example images of what objects come along with it. It contains much more than just paper targets.

@-Rudel-, your thoughts on adding this detail to the ControlsIndicator overlay? Also note the lack of an indicator for the wheel brakes.

There's the 476th target range mod that has some practise targets. There's also some practise range scripts that tell you how far off you were and how many hits/misses you did.

@-Rudel-, could you please add this request to the list of bugs to address?

I don't know how this is implemented in DCS but If you apply all this to a real aircraft, then all your conclusions are wrong. For starters: when performing a combat sortie, the FRIEND-FOE ( свой-чужой )switch MUST be set to FOE ( чужой ) . You will never see the letter «C», you simply will not be able to lock on your own target. You cannot select FOX1 in TP scan mode because the missile indicator on 1 and 2 hardpoints will be absent. The IFF function does not work in any KOLS modes, even if the target is in the lock, regardless of which channel is primary. Any manipulation of the modes in the lock will only lead to a failure of the lock. The IFF function only works in the RL mode.

if there is a mod that has range target silhouette, please let me know. if there is a way to also make the range target silhouette asset have some kind of hit detection or show round impacts, even better...

Bumping the thread for increased visibility. The ICS Mode Switch UP/DOWN keybinds work. However, the discrete HOT MIC, PTT, and VOX keybinds do not work. They are animated but have zero functional effect.

Yeah the action on the throttle is a bit stickier than my last one. Time to look at something more current. The Virpil CDT line has the best form factor and value for me I think.

The next question is which would you like to fly? In my view when it comes to adding missing AI assets the main focus should be equipment that have had longest service lives then just enough variants that you can get a reasonable career highlight reel.For example there might be 3 or 4 Hueys depending on how visually differnt they are since you could divide into 3 or 4 generations Using the 3-generation count Classic Vietnam era- the last one is the H, which is flyable The Twin Hueys - 1970s/80s/90s Super Hueys- which would be the modern ones.

Either my idea sucks the south end of a northbound horse or it needs more visibility. What does the community say?

Does anyone else like to have this feature added? If the answer is "YES", then please chime in. More users speak up directly relates to incorporation of features. Are there any ideas for another term for "DESIG AGAIN"? How about "VERIFY RANGE" or keep the "NOT LASING" / "LASING" terms?

is there a range target silhouette in the mod pack? just plain paper target, i would like to make mission employing M60, M134 and Kord

Not necessarily. You have to visuallize the radar beam going out of the SAM station pointing at for example your aircraft. The Shrike needs to ride that beam down, more or less. If you fly elsewhere, the SAM will keep the radar beam on you and your shrike will stop being able to "ride it down" as it now does not sit on the line between you and the SAM anymore. Same happens when the SAM decides to do business with another aircraft that isnt right next to you. Or when it decides to switch to optical tracking, turning off its radar. Or when it sees the shrike and rather turns off their radar last minute to stay alive. There are many cases that result in your missile hitting the dirt.

ED has confirmed, on a future, use the Supercarrier carrier crew technology to make propper ground crew on bases (as CAG on base Towers). No dates . The actual APA-5D missing all "features" and animations arguments to a propper mobile ground power unit and no animations implemented on the modelviewer . Not bad If ED can build a "APU" funtionality on a vehicle and make the propper "plug-in/unplugin" feature (on fact cables will be a extension on actual sling ropes) to make more inmersive bases and other. Other poing has add the propper connectors and plugs on aircrats and others with open pannels (power, fuel, air, etc).

Engine / AC performance is not listed on the bug tracker, which implies Magnitude is in "the flight model is correct" camp. I disagree. This kind of testing isn't difficult, but it also shouldn't be the responsibility of the player base to validate. And the lack of feedback means the community inevitably will resort to incessantly fighting over it. It's one thing to ask your player base to be your partner assisting test and development. It's another thing entirely to ask them to do it in an information vacuum, and to let the arguing just rage on, often untethered to reality. We're to the point people are explaining away the F.M. problems with gobbledegook. No offense to Rudel but "it does 280 mph on this race:" is gobbledegook. It's irrelevant that the plane flies "faster than 200mph" if it doesn't achieve historically accurate speeds. Which it doesn't. Period. Post a video and prove me wrong. The Prop RPM explanation - pure un-adulterated gobbledegook. 'You just aren't flying it right' - a serious contender for the gaslighting gobbledegook award. We have the performance charts, so where is the track file demonstrating the F4u is correct? It's broken at sea level, and that's as much as I'm willing to test in a vacuum.

Hi, sorry you feel like you are being ignored, we have no plans for a single push button ejection for home cockpits. You could consider using a macro, my own cockpit setup is unique and I have a second logitech mouse and use a macro for single press ejection. This may not suit your needs however. best regards bignewy

2 Kitbases left.

From Heatblur Discord. (last update on July 2025) Remember F-14B(U) was show on "2025 and beyond" video, with a Sparrowhawk HUD.