All Activity

If they're not modelled then they're not modelled and it becomes another thing that needs doing. And if I remember right they already said they won't feature in the full fidelity F-15C as very few units ever used them on C models in real life.

The Charlie Eagle can carry them

LOL You literally see those access panels on EVERY FW190A8 ever built. One is on the Left side above fuselage access door. It doubles as the installation point for the auxiliary fuel tank fill port or GM-1 fill port. It is the same thing. The other is the big round hole in the bottom of the FW-190A8 right under the tank installation. It is not any harder to run that hose from the tank than to the intake fittings than it is to run a wire to launch rockets thru the wing of your P51, P47, P38, F4U... You actually run fewer hoses and shorter distances than you do wiring up the rockets, LOL. In fact, there are already at pathway thru the bulkheads for it on the FW-190A8. I guess they never fired rockets out of US airplanes either because they were not "fitted" for rockets by your reasoning.

Just did a short flight in the terrain, I wish they'd get some of the cities fleshed out. Anyway was going to bring up Iran as it needs some love too, given the closeness and the like. But I'm sure they're maybe working on it though, given the historical significance of the map. But yeah +1 for more Iranian airbases.

That's why I posted this thread. When the Hornet was first released it was basically the F-18 then they added the A-18 part over the years The CFT might not be modled in the Flaming Cliffs version but the C does carry them

Contrary to what you said earlier, the F-15C (which is itself not finished in FF form) isn't exactly the same radar as the F-15E and even if it were then they'd still have modes to model that the F-15C won't have as it doesn't need them. Then add integrating all the A-G weapons and other SE-specific avionics, adding the back seat plus tweaking the flight model for the CFTs and I doubt its as quick a job as you say to move from one to the other.

I'm sure people liked the hawk as well. Look how that turned out

Hi everyone, since the latest two patches my hud seems low res in normal FOV: When I zoom in it come back to normal res: Does anyone ghaving this problem? Anyone manged to solve or is reported already? my PC: -Ryzen 5600x -AMD 7700XT -32gb RAM DDR4 DCS config:

Correct fwd & aft. Made my correction

Thanks please remove custom mods Custom Mods Iron Dome,Hercules,A-4E-C,Military Aircraft Mod,Civil Aircraft Mod,Massun92-Asset Pack,LLH_Counter_Insurgency Then run a slow repair of DCS and retest thank you

Thanks to OP. I did just this, and it works like a charm. Excellent fit and connectivity. Just a tip: Undo those two screws you see in the pic from OP, lift up the loose part (still connected to the cable) so you can file/dremel away the lower part of those two peg thingies there.

Hasn't much changed? Nothing has changed, after almost a year and a half, nothing has changed... they just mentioned that modules might not work properly in a future version. Something that's been known for a much longer time.

This was dated 2019 and depics WIP shots of the Sea Harrier FRS 1. either these were intended to be AI or Razbam was working on a Sea Harrier module

Which trim - Yaw or Roll? One or two taps on the Roll trim usually does it. Bowie

knowing Rons ego... don't hold your breath. As I've said on that thread... this could've been settled months ago with the signing of one contract... and it apparently hasn't happened yet.

It would casually tell me whos going to be the next guy to kick the bucket...

I don't think that was the case. The Harrier would've benefitted from being the only full fidelity fast jet until the Hornet got released. The Mirage 2K was well thought of (especially once some of it got reworked) and i'm pretty sure the F15E sold in decent numbers before things went sour.

sure dcs.log

It would be. But let's not forget that outside of getting the Source Code for the existing modules, or getting RB back to work... there's only two options for ED: Replace them entirely or abandon them... and considering people LIKE those aircraft, it leaves them with just one: Replace them. Also, I think people need to understand that 95% of us will NEVER set foot in these pits outside of airshows or museums. So I think it's safe to say that "Good enough" should be the end goal of any module. Exact 1-1 is fine... but it's ultimately better to get something into our hands soon, and refine as time goes on. Think of it like Elite Dangerous vs Star Citizen. Elite was a functional title after about a year and a half of development, and was released to the public about a year later.... but Star Citizen? Still waiting. In DCS terms... there's the F-15E. RB sat on that thing for about a decade before they released it. And in that time, multiple third party developers cropped up, made something, and released it. Were those modules perfect on day one? No. But they were refined little by little until they got where they are now. Hence my statement about an F-15E replacement could be released to us inside 6 months, as ED has everything they need already to pull it off. It's just a matter of refining it until it's perfect after the fact. Which I personally would be fine with, especially if they come out and say "Hey, if you didn't request a refund for the RB F-15E, you get this for free or at a significant discount".

Hopefuly this discussion will become moot before too long. I don't know how long it will be before 3.0 comes out but hopefully we'll get a settlement before they get depricated

The AV8B had already been released in late 2017 I think, although I think mods were attempted for both marks of Sea Harrier based on the AV8B. From memory Razbam wanted to originally do a Falklands era Harrier, which would've been the FRS1.

You know what’s truly frustrating about this whole situation? That everything still seems to rely on just hoping things work out. People have asked repeatedly: what happens if the four modules stop functioning? Will ED simply say, “Well, go reinstall an old version where it still works”? That’s not a solution... it’s a shrug. The constant “for now the modules still work” and “we hope for a resolution” messaging isn’t enough. At some point, hope runs out... and customers deserve to know: what is the actual plan if that happens? Is there even one? Will you prevent the fire from breaking out, or will you try to put it out once it breaks out? Let’s not forget... the VEAO Hawk was one module. This time, it’s four, and the proposed “solution” seems even weaker. That won't be progress... it’ll regression.

I can confirm that i see the same issue, no mods installed. I can see the pylons of my own ka50 but not in the others ka50 of players. dcs.log

So the recent ED statement doesn't change much. Modules still work and will work for now but still no updates. What I don't like is threatening customers that their modules may not work in future DCS versions. I wait for that day before raising hell. Keeping 2 DCS versions would be a silly workaround and have a major flaw. Hypothetically: What good is Iraq South released potentially in 3.0 when my F-15E no longer works with it? You'll be losing customers and sales, ED, big time.