All Activity

Memory Integrity (virtualization-based kernel isolation) I tried some tests with HVCI - memory integrity on/off. Recommended OFF, but in my case ON gives better performance.

But in a game though, what is the "final combat aircraft?". Unless somebody is in some really rigid Milsim squad, I think most people who have already attained generic skills desire to fly a lot of different aircraft in DCS. Obviously they are going to be especially good in some planes, but if you have attained the generic skills, you really ought to be able to pick up any FF module and learn it. If I were trying to go down a simulated Western training pipeline, I'd probably do something like: C-101--->F-5 (transition training)--->Mirage F1 or F-4E or actually, whatever one chooses to fly after learning their initial skills. If you have the basic flying and navigational skills, and are ready to be a carrier pilot, there is no problem at all with something like the Tomcat/Hornet being the first time you land on a carrier, and I don't really see the need to get some free mod to do the T-45 or A-4 as some mandatory prep.

You need Helios and this: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BPMCTQQ8?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title&th=1 Its a touch screen display. Helios allows you to create a custom "panel" that will include all stanby gauges (including the exported RWR) and since its a touch panel you rotate knobs/encoders with your fingers. Pretty neat, clean, easy to implement. Here's a 3D enclosure for it (I only use the backplate) and leave the front exposed. https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6638268

Ahh! Of course!! I'll give it another go

Thank you all. And thanks for the link. I forgot to search before I started typing!!

Small correction, the Mav can actually be controlled by the WSO. So somewhere there is doubling of wires. Not sure if the WSO could theoretically control Bullpups (which wouldnt make much sense ofc). Otherwise I assume youre correct, the TGPs were pretty new and specifically wired for the WSO to be used. It also requires many buttons which are only available at the rear seat, so theres little point for the pilot being able to control the POD.

Although I don´t have the same issues I would support htat request. If someone feels uncomfortable in VR this can break the whole game.

Youre doing it right, boresight is the most useful and reliable way to lock in ACM. Afaik the intention behind the CAA mode is more to get a quick lock for the gun radar.

si ho capito che tu vorresti i controllers...ma non ne hanno mai parlato ...a differenza dell'atc ...percio' dovrai far senza ..Mi spiace...noi possiamo far poco

@Rick Mave I have changed the lua file which was taken from the Hawk missile system originally to the manpad missle lua which is much more realistic and changable to get the HMax and DMax right. It is also easier to get the smoke plume as correct as can be. The Smokey Sam only goes to 11k feet now, just need a bit more testing.

As Baltic mentioned, the laser code you see in the kneeboard should match what you see in the Re-arm and refuel menu. (Always good practice to check during start up) Are you setting the laser code on the ICP? If not, then your bombs wont track at all as the pod defaults to 1688 and you need to change it in the jet before dropping bombs.

If one goes the trainer path he should take into consideration their final combat aircraft. So for example for USN they better take T-45 or A-4, for USAF the F-5, for PVO/VVS the L-39.

Some of those question were answered on the HB discord, eg recently when SA-6/8 launch warnings got removed. The F4s RWRs launch warnings relied on detecting the launchers command guidance, but only in the C/D band. So the SA-6 isnt giving launch warnings anymore, because its command guidance is outside of those bands. Otherwise the F4 does 'rank' the threat of radars based on preprogrammed features, frequency, signal strength, etc. So its quite advanced in that regard. Seems to me like launch warnings itself however were more of a specialized feature of the ALR-46 and dedicated to the more prolific soviet SAMs in NV, specifically the SA-2 guidelines. A lock by fighters produces a change in PRF, which the RWR detects and notices you off, but without any further warning. Generic launch warnings and alerts based on frequency changes, like we see in our Viper or Hornet, dont seem to exist in the F4s RWR. SA-15 probably uses command guidance in the C/D bands, so it can be detected, so thats a happy accident for sure. An active Aim-120 or R-77 apparently is set to automatically create a launch warning whenever they are spotted. Because the RWR can identify the missile by its radar and... well, theres no further info require that you are being engaged.

Sempre quasi senza voce, ho messo insieme un versione italiana del video riguardo al toolset per planning e navigazione a bassa quota in Syria. Purtroppo non ci sono tools che riportano il dettaglio che volevo, quindi me ne sono fatto uno. Niente di troppo complesso, però funziona. Il flightplan é abbastanza banale e non sono andato troppo nel dettaglio. Ho dei video in inglese, con inputs di equipaggi di F-4E e Mirage. Se c'é interesse posso farne un sunto in lingua nostrana. Altrimenti torno alla geometria e A/A.

Well, updated to latest Nvidia GPU driver (581.80) and the good ol' sliding butt issue is back! Did a Full Repair and Clean, issue still there. Used NVCleanstall to go back to 581.57 and it's "fixed".. crazy.

Congratulations!

The chaff weakness is ridiculous. Wild maneuvers from chaff even if not beaming. I know from reading manuals that N-019 is resistant to chaff, idk about R-27R/ER but I can’t imagine it’s monopulse seeker is this weak when deformed in tandem when N-019. With this weakness to chaff, it’s almost 99% chance of decoying this missile as long as you know how to release chaff. Im not an expert on radar, but I expect this maybe from R-3R or AIM-7E, but 1980s R-27R/ER? The real kicker is all AIM-7 variants are still using original chaff modeling. They will not maneuver or swing wildly to the side from chaff. If you release chaff in the notch enough they decoy yes, but before that point chaff has 0 effect. AIM-7M/MH/P should have about equal accuracy to R-27R/ER, whatever is believed the missiles are comparable and I’m not sure it is completely known if one was weaker to chaff then the other, and definitly not to your average consumer. This is a game and a sim, and it feels wildly un fun right now and I’m not sure about this simulation of chaff. You could bring AIM-7M/MH/P to same level but then what, we just have almost 100% chance to decoy a 1980s fox 1 in 0 degree aspect straight and level flight? I am so confused. It’s been a few patches and many weeks since MiG-29 FF came out. And its really reduced the value of the module to be so gimped compared to AIM-7. I get that some weapons might get realistic things modeled before others, but this is too much when AIM-7E/R-3R is more accurate, it’s been over a month and a half with no end in sight, and we have no idea when or even if this module will have the value or parity of a blufor sparrow thrower in a 1980s environment. I am sorry but this is getting more serious to me then your average bug track when it seems we have no end in sight to this lop sided game of R-27R/ER being chaffed with no effort and a AIM-7E hitting fine. AIM-7chaff.trk R-27chaff6.trk aim-7chaff2.trk R-27chaff3.trk R-27chaff1.trk

OK e, di nuovo, ho capito. É ovvio che tutto ció dovrebbe essere nel gioco base. Detto questo, il punto della discussione era differente... Va beh, lasciamolo lí che altrimenti non finiamo piú.

Correct. However, when talked about a "Trainer" aircraft, usually a two seater like the C101 is meant. Of course in a simulator environment you don't need go through classical training. It can be advantageous though. @OP, if I had to pick one. The C-101 would be my pick. Because it is very lovely, well put together simulation.

I started playing flight sims in the late 90s, and about 10-15 years of those playing competitive though different games, now I find airquake terribly boring and limited. I won Right, jokes aside, I see your point but, if the MiG-29 does all of that, why would you accept the fight? Unload and bugout. Circle around and ask your GCI to monitor groups of interest and wait for an opening. If my aircraft were in a disadvantageous position, I would try to flip the situation or just avoid going there. You mentioned BS: it's airquake, and I didn't realise you were talking about arcade gameplay. There's no illusion to dissipate there, and you can safely throw realism out of the window. In a proper mission, the objective may be more important than losing an aircraft, and I'd accept the fight. The other things you mentioned are some of the reasons why I wouldn't touch airquake anymore. Like, everyone is low, where are the AAA/SHORAD/MANPADS (I just made a video about the lack of those in DCS servers)? Where's the escort? No one is sanitising and checking their low AoR? There's no early warning? What is my controller doing? Sure, threat calls are a thing, but in arcade are the norm. As I said, I would wait for an opening. It's not there? I don't go there. It depends on whether your virtual life is worth more than the cost of getting shot down. The F-4 is much older than the MiG-29, either go in with an advantage or don't. Keep in mind that the F-4E was the last Phantom variant (sine G, but that was very specific). There is a reason why it never got PD radar and other upgrades, but you can't effectively portray those differences in an arcade server where all of this doesn't matter.

Since this is a simulator, I don't necessarily think that a trainer in DCS needs to have 2 seats, even tho it "breaks the immersion" a bit. The F-5 is pretty damn close to the standard trainer T-38 Talon they use at Sheppard AFB, apart from the two seats on the T-38 and the gun in front of the F-5. So I would say the F-5 is a perfect trainer in DCS. With that said, the L-39, MB-339, C-101 and T-45 are all perfect trainers as well.

Totally agreed. And for windows itself I use an offline account. However for MSFS you ned an Xbox account (one and the same)....

It's implemented completely different than MSFS. You spawn into the cockpit everytime like any other module, just so happens you get to walkaround once you switch to loadmaster position. So i'd say very different than MSFS2024

Ok, since I don´t own this campaign, I can´t tell you the actual code either but I also would asume 1688 if nothing else is mentioned. But you can check this by using the LST button in the FLIR page. The image turns all green and there is a jumping crosshair in the display to indicate the search. You have to roughly point your nose, or the FLIR-pod to the area where the target is located (you mentioned a smoke indication). If the laser is sparkeling on 1688 the LST finds it. Now you can drop the GBU as you would without LST, using your own laser. This is especially necessary if the code of your GBUs and your FLIR is not 1688. There might be some missconception of what LST is. LST is not the same as buddylasing. LST is only a tool to point your FLIR to a location someone else is lasing on. Buddylasing is when you drop on someone elses laser. Therefore you can set two different laser codes in your FLIR. Your bomb allways has only one Laser Code and this can only be changed at the ground by the groundcrew (loadout menu). If both codes are the same and your buddy (Wingman, FAC, JTAC) continues lasing the whole time, you can combine both and find the location first by using LST and after that you drop your GBU without your own laser. But if the codes don´t match, your bomb goes dump. I hope that helps. To valid if 1688 is the right code of the JTAC as I said just use LST. If your FLIR finds something, 1688 is the correct code, but if not, there must be another one.

Unless I'm doing it wrong - when selecting and loading a weather preset from the list in the mission editor all the wind stuff changes but the cloud type does not. In the video I select 'Summer; Heavy Thunderstorm' but when entering the mission the sky is a lovely 'Scattered 2' with no rain. It is blowing a gale, though. Weatherbug.trk