All Activity

What was FPS at the low-level fly v.s. the FPS in air? My experience for both are different.

Hello, one question please. There are Meta Quest 3 128 & 512 headsets and Meta Quest 3 headsets! What is this headset model? Thank you for your help. Have a good flight.

How'd you get the MH-47 mod working? I tried it this week and many of the textures wouldn't load anymore. I tried doing a line by line comparison between the mod CH-47F LUA and the default one. While noticing some differences and updating the mod with the new LUA, it wouldn't load. Hopefully you can share. Thanks

Can you rephrase that?

Is my quote in like Chinese to anyone else or is that just me and I'm having a stroke?

It has been some month since I played this campaign and some points I can approve like there are much more complex campaigns outside with more focus on real life procedures. But this is not what RotPL wanted to be. I realy enjoyed this campaign and the following two (RotPL2 and OGL). I like them espacially because they are somewhat less complex. When I have not much time on the evening but whant to get a nice ride in the hornet I love to pick on of Badgers campaigns. I read the briefing, get a time estimation and then sit in the cockpit and do what my players says he is doing. No hours of reading through PDFs no complex procedures to be followed. Allways an interresting and sometimes challanging task, some nice plot twists and sometimes a roge bogey catches up on your way home and lets you get rid of the extra weight of your Air to Air ordonance. I realy love the staging and lighting. Very much atmosphere and the campaign helped me learn the hornet very much. I think its a beginner friendly, quite immersive and beautifull campaign, that is not and does not want to be a study level hardcore campaign. Allthough I realy like such hardcore campaigns, I love to fly this more casual ones from time to time.

Sounds interesting. Just so we understand, do you have personal experience in this area?

Thank you - will try tonight...

Tne answer is a little technical ...

Vielen Dank!

Amen to that

I recently tried a Quest 3 as a potential replacement for the trusty G2. Although the cockpit was clearer I found the overall image quality outside worse plus I couldn’t get the same level of smoothness be it wired or with virtual desktop even with a dedicated wired access point after several weeks of tweaking. So I have returned to the G2. VR can be subjective, I know others opinions will differ but I am very happy the Oasis driver extends the life of my preferred headset. All working fine here with the Oasis driver and I have successfully upgraded to 24H2 without issues so it also feels good to be on the latest Windows. Again maybe against the flow I have always found using SteamVR as the OpenXR runtime smoother, so using SteamVR for the Oasis driver is a benefit for me .

Будет модуль, покажу )), даже с реальными переговорами с техником , так как запуск не выполняется молча , есть контрольная карта которая выполняется по памяти и вслух в процессе всего запуска .

Hi all, I'm launching a new virtual squadron project focused on realism in fast jet flying training, inspired by publicly available RAF and NATO training materials. The idea is to replicate core elements of the military flying training pipeline—from foundational techniques to advanced tactical skills—without the use of virtual ranks, fictional hierarchies, or unnecessary structure. The goal is to provide a realistic and immersive flying experience, built around progressive training phases: Phase 1 – Core Flying Skills Platform: T-45 (free mod) Focus: Flying techniques and precision handling Stalls, turns, circuits, unusual attitudes IFR and VFR navigation Timed dead reckoning and low-level nav Instrument flying and recovery procedure Phase 2 – Tactical Phase Platform: T-45 (representing the Hawk T2) Focus: Tactical training Air-to-air combat (BVR, BFM) Basic weapons employment Tactical formations and comms Surface attack and range profiles Phase 3 – OCU (Operational Conversion Unit) After completing the training phases, pilots will progress onto frontline platforms. Our initial focus will be on the F-4 Phantom and F/A-18 Hornet(waiting for typhoon and f35 ), but other airframes are welcome depending on pilot preference and availability. The OCU will bridge training into operational flying, focusing on type-specific tactics, procedures, and combat operations. This is a new initiative, so I’m looking for fellow enthusiasts, instructors, or mission builders who’d like to help shape and develop this into something meaningful. Whether you’re a student pilot, a seasoned DCS flyer, or just passionate about realism and structure, your input is welcome. If you’re interested in helping build or fly within this realistic training-focused community, please reach out by sending me a message or just responding to this post. We have already started work on it—it just needs continuing. Thanks! PS: We don’t use any Hawk mod; it is the T-45.

Карта Мариан нужна для прохождения?

I have tried to reproduce this, but all seems ok here, are you sure you are waiting long enough for the application to close? Please repeat and add the dcs log from the session we can look for clues. thank you

Hi CH! There are some inaccuracies in the Tu-95 model (mod and core) The propellers are not positioned correctly now. They should be in the center of the air intakes. Please fix it as you can.

Nice, thanks!

They have to be in one group so you can select formation for them and move as a group. While driving a vehicle you can hold G key and order the group to move wherever you click.

@omnijinx You do not just have Aim9X if you check you also have one 120C. Although there are 4 F5’s your wing will deal with two of them. You will note from the radio calls you are to engage the two on the right so make sure you do that and leave the two on the left to your wing. If you use your radar correctly you can locate and take out one with the 120C. You can then engage the remaining F5 with your Aim9X missiles which when used with your head mounted display will allow you to fire at almost 90 degrees. This together with the better F18 performance will give you a massive advantage over the F4. It should also be noted that the F5s are armed with Aim9ps so rear aspect only compared to your 9Xs which are all aspect.

Yeah DCS has been like this for over 2 years now. It just kind of exits half way. I just figured it was one of those low priority things they won't fix so I ignore it and just task manager.. too hard to report every thing so I just report the major problems.

The only thing that would make sense now would be for Reflected and Baltic to team up again, and this time invite others like Ground Pounder, Sandman, or Badger633 to join forces in creating the ultimate Operation Desert Storm. Based on real life missions with shared scenarios and voice actors, each with a different module and their own individual style, yet always building on one another.

Please keep me posted after the remote support session.

Tracks are, by definition, not an accurate recreation of the mission. Why? It's because when you play a track you run the mission again with your controller inputs. It means everything that is statistical or random (AI behaviours, flare effectiveness, the effectiveness of evasive manoeuvres, the point in time in which AI shoots at you) is calculated again. Your controller input was recorded in the original mission, which means it does no longer apply to the replay, as it's a completely new mission running again. For example: let's say that at some point in time in the mission you get shot at, and try to avoid getting hit. In the track, nothing guarantees that you will be shot at, since the AI treats it as a completely new mission. The AI might shoot at you a second earlier, a second later or never shoot you at all, which makes whatever attempt you make to avoid futile. There was never a point in which an air to air engagement track (vs AI) for example, worked fine. Some people claim that the server's track is more accurate, but I beg the differ. It might be called a replay in the main menu, but it was made to reproduce bugs in a controlled environment (short tracks, recorded in SP, to be sent to the devs).

I recently got back into the seat of the Su-25A and wondered if JTAC's could guide KH-25 missiles like with a hellfire. It makes getting rid of pesky SHORADS and AAA much easier. So, I set up a mission with a JTAC script and kept getting the same disappointing result. Call in JTAC, acquire target, launch override, launch, missile miss by either self-terminating (as seen in the "Su-25A" video) or by flying into the sky the last few seconds before impact. Tried it in a Su-25T and it worked just fine. If I had to guess what the issue is, it is that when launching laser guided missiles on the Su-25A the laser automatically turns on. This in turn causes the seeker to ignore the JTAC's laser entirely and freak out when the Su-25A breaks contact. Meanwhile on the Su-25T the laser does not automatically turn on causing the Kh-25ML to follow the JTAC's laser. Would there be a way to make it so that launching missiles on the Su-25A does not automatically turn on the laser? The Su-25T does not do it and I do not understand why the "A" variant would either.