All Activity

I JUST got this stick (the WW ViperAce EX) but haven't yet installed the little attachment with extra hats and rumble activation. But, if I understand you correctly, you have the same stick and kept the force sensing options on in the Special menu, but put the dead zones to zero? Then used the regular pitch/roll axis tuning popup to add the deadzones back in? Do you know why this behaves differently? I've been flying this jet for a while but want to ensure I have the micro control to attempt AAR without crazy pitch changes...

No, I haven't. How does one do that?

I am unable to establish Contact with Texaco. The correct frequency on Aux 3 is set, but I am not receiving a response. This has always worked perfectly in previous missions. Are there currently any problems herein?

The issue is already reported.

I agree from a global perspective. Of course the Cuba 13-day crisis was a major issue in the german press too. However from a german perspective, the 80ies might be worse. At least this was the time when the public got awear of the nuclear threat armament and peace movement got a big boost. Seems like another universe now ...

It will if the problem is you using the button incorrectly. I think the issue is that the button doesn't do what you think it does. It switches between bore/slave while you hold it depressed. It does not lock targets, that's TMS up as you've been repeatedly told.

Wondering how CH is doing.... haven't seen any post of him lately..

https://github.com/Kurisu003/OpenFlightPanel There you go. Found a bit of time today

I hope I am doing this right. I started leaning A-10C several years ago and felt I was pretty successful. I took some time off and wanted to start playing it again. However, now when I do the start-up, the APU doesn't start. Specifically, after switching it on, the RPMs only reach about 60% and I don't hear the usual sound of it running. Has my program gotten corrupted? Any ideas on how to fix this? Thanks in advance.

I would argue that the "peak" of the cold war in terms of likelihood of it turning hot was the cuban missile crisis in the early 60s. I think you are right though when it comes to military buildup.

This has been known since the release of the module. It’s a work in process. AI usage of the bat is not yet ready. Also, if you end up flying MP, you’ll also see your friends’ bat bombs just fall and splash into the water, but they’ll be able to see their bombs track to the target. MP sync is also not yet implemented. M3/ED were up front about it not working yet when the EA module released. It’s still really fun to use on your own though! You can still use it in MP, and like I mentioned, you wont see your wingman’s bomb glide, but you will see the explosion on the ship when it hits. Just keep an eye on the future changelogs when updates hit.

More info that might help: Usually I run DCS on Quest 3 using the Meta Quest Link (open XR toolkit etc) in Oculus VR mode. Not Steam VR. It works for me, getting 80 fps on all aircraft except F4U. Today I ran DCS using Virtual Desktop (the version for Quest) on Quest 3 starting the program from there (not steam). Asking for 72 fps. On the Normandy map, I got a pretty steady 60 fps on the F4U (solid 72 on the P47). On the Mariana map I got about 60 fps, dropping to 30 on takeoff. I assume it's the scenery pointing in that direction that tanked the frame rate. With some altitude it went back up to 60 fps.

I recorded it. It's towards the end at about 13:50h (mission time 55 mins). FW 190 A-8 (lw11 #003). That bugger is flying in circle at about 3000 ft, on fire, trailing smoke. He's doing between 350 and 440 mph. As I said, I've seen this before, and as I recall pumping more lead into a plane that does that is useless. Tacview-20250811-193757-DCS.zip.acmi

Gotcha. Thank you. Weird how it deletes them Because what if someone else ever needs the file, but I guess it frees up space.

Hi @Robi Hobby, I am new in this thread, is it possible to tell me where I can download the mod? Thanks.

Yes, it will remove the attachments you deleted from the posts in which they were. As an alternative, you can also use external hosting websites. Imgur for pictures, Dropbox for other files, as an example.

Let me chime in with both. After a decade of playing (and scripting) ArmA followed by a 5 year milsim hiatus, I've jumped on the DCS train 2 years ago. Generally, I've had a pleasant experience playing the game (after upgrading to 64G of RAM to keep DCS from crashing). I didn't even know DCS is what I've always wanted, until I started playing it after getting sucked in by the Grim Reapers Youtube channel. Right now, nothing else compares to DCS, so until a superior alternative pops up – if ever, DCS will always be the benchmark for a good military aviation milsim experience. While I don't have DCS street cred, I'm a software engineer by trade and I do have 20+ years of coding experience (concurrent, multi-threaded C/C++ systems programming). Eventually, I couldn't resist DCS Lua scripting. At that point, however, my DCS experience changed drastically, as my perspective shifted from mere entertainment seeking to software engineering: The documentation – or better the lack thereof – is frankly embarrassing. Compared to ArmA – which I also cursed at times – and its comprehensive, official scripting docs, DCS is basically undocumented. That's an absolute no go for a product that depends largely on community content creation. The DCS scripting API with its plethora of different, undocumented Lua states and another separate a_do_script() environment is terribly convoluted and thus unnecessarily complicated to work with, obviously exacerbated by the lack of documentation. I implemented a browser-based Lua console as a learning project just to figure out how everything works. What makes matters worse, is the need to maintain this improper API to avoid breaking API compatibility and a lot of community content along with it, as the recent net.dostring_in() change illustrated. Such incisive, breaking API changes should not be released without prior discussion with community developers and advance warning. The scripting API is unnecessarily buggy, up to SEGFAULTS, due to an apparent lack of even basic testing [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. Modern coding practices, even rudimentary unit tests, and the use of appropriate tools like AddressSanitizer (possibly combined with a bit of fuzzing) should prevent introducing and releasing with such bugs. Although adhering to such practices may sound like overhead, it'll pay for itself multiple times over by obviating a lot of time otherwise wasted by inefficiently debugging code weeks/months after having modified it. The scripting API lacks very basic functions, e.g. Unit.setLife(), with ED hesitant to add it [1, 2, 3]. With the presumably dire state of the scripting system, I do however understand the reluctance to change anything. There seems to be a lack of understanding for the needs of community developers. According to %DCS_INSTALL_DIR%/API/Sim_ControlAPI.html the net.dostring_in() function is entirely obsolete: This is grossly wrong. Many missions, mods, admin scripts, Olympus, etc. would seize to work without that very function. The mission scripting engine is still vulnerable to arbitrary code execution via malicious mission files, despite a (temporary) mitigation being available. This matter deserves urgent attention. All Lua scripting appears to run in the main loop without runtime constraints, allowing a single script with an infinite loop to freeze a client/server. That's an obvious performance issue. The first ArmA already had scheduled script execution. The DCS core presumably relies on a global, locking, all-comprising, single-threaded event loop. Adding a (few) thousand units on the far side of the map (or planet), i.e., far outside of the visibility range, will slow the renderer to a crawl. Rendering is apparently not decoupled from the simulation (i.e., AI, pathfinding, logic, flight models, etc.), although it could and should be for obvious performance reasons. This is most likely owed to DCS' single-threaded legacy. I presume a lot of engineering effort will be required to fix this. The elusive brown crater texture bug and the on-again, off-again multiplayer scoreboard issue, and more importantly the time it took to fix either of them, point towards the DCS core being non-trivial to maintain. All of these issues indicate that there's a lot of technical debt within the DCS core. Eventually, dealing with the bugs and issues caused by such technical debt will crush feature development. I agree with the previous posters that argue for better prioritization of core development time. More time should be allotted to improving the DCS core, including the scripting system and its documentation. Obviously, a full feature moratorium on the DCS core would be too much, as that would interfere with its business model. If strictly required for module releases, features need to be added. However, IMHO, too much development time may have been spent on not strictly necessary features in the past, e.g., the aircraft radio integration of the voice chat system (everyone still uses SRS), the currently incomplete mission state save feature, the botched C-ares integration, and the recent net.dostring_in() mishap to name what's at the top of my head. I love DCS and I'm confident ED can turn the ship around. Take the necessary time to stabilize the DCS core (incl. documentation, pwees!) and postpone not strictly necessary feature work for the time being. I'm hopeful the community will understand. Ask the community for feedback early on before deciding on breaking changes (I feel like the scripting system will eventually need a complete, breaking overhaul). A publicly accessible bug tracker may be another improvement. Using the forum to file bug reports may be susceptible to oversight of straightforward bug reports [1].

Does anyone have the firmware for this, rel4y isn't responding to any of my communications. Cheers and Thanks!

Jagdbombergeschwader 35 Geschwaderabzeichen des JaBoG 35 Abzeichen der 1. Staffel Abzeichen der 2. Staffel Hallo, Mein Name ist Alex oder Rohrkrepierer und ich betreibe das Jagdbombergeschwader 35 als immersive Milsim Staffel für deutschsprachige DCS Pilotinnen. Unser Anspruch ist es dabei das reale JaBoG35 der 80er Jahre so genau abzubilden wie es uns in DCS möglich ist und nur dort mit dem Realismusanspruch zu sparen, wo es uns nicht möglich ist mit DCS glaubhaft nachzustellen was die Erfahrung der Piloten der Zeit war. Dies spiegelt sich in unseren SOPs, den Taktiken, dem Funksprechverkehr, den Limitierungen der F-4F und einigen anderen Aspekten wieder. Vom Fliegerhorst Pferdsfeld aus fliegend, absolvieren wir die meisten unserer Trainings in der südwestlichen Gegend der CW Germany map ab und nutzen dabei eine Vielzahl an realen Lokalitäten um uns ausführlich auf die größeren Events vorzubereiten, an denen wir gemeinsam mit anderen Milsim Staffeln teilnehmen werden. Dabei nutzen wir reale Anflugkarten wo immer es uns möglich ist. Hier ist uns vor kurzem ein großer Durchbruch gelungen bei dem uns einige sehr hilfreiche Mitglieder des Flugzeugforums gleich mehrere Tacan und VFR Charts zukommen haben lassen, die auch allesamt aus der richtigen Periode stammen, sodass wir mit der Dokumentation unseres Projekts hier einen riesen Schritt nach Vorne machen konnten. Gepaart mit einem ausführlichem Trainingsprogramm in den Bereichen A2A und A2G können wir sichergehen dass alle Pilotinnen unserer Staffel selbstbewusst in jede unserer Sessions treten können und sich vollkommen auf den immersiven Flugbetrieb einlassen können. Lange Rede, kurzer Sinn: Was erwartet dich im JaBoG 35? Ein inklusives, freundliches und respektvolles Staffelgefüge in dem du dich einbringen und mitgestalten kannst Eine immersive Abbildung des Day to Day Flugbetriebs des JaBoG35 der 80er Jahre auf dem Flugmuster F-4F Phantom nach der Peace Rhine Aufrüstung Ein holistisches Trainingsprogramm das sich auf die Schlüsselelemente der Jagdbomberei fokussiert und ein Tactical Combat Training Program (TCTP) welches alle Mitglieder auf dem aktuellen Stand haben um die Gewährleistung eines Trainingsstandards durchzusetzen und zu erhalten Die Nutzung einer gut präparierten Karte in Rücksichtnahme auf im Jahr 1989 bestehenden Lufträume (zur Verfügung gestellt von User File Nutzer JE78, hier zu finden). Diese wurde von mir um die POLYGONE EW Range erweitert, um die historischen Threat Emitter und Stellungen ergänzt. Regelmäßige Unterstützung unserer Flüge durch ATC und GCI Controller Regelmäßige Teilnahme an größeren Events mit anderen Milsim Gruppen Wenn dich diese kurze Zusammenfassung unserer Staffel anspricht, dann sieh bitte nach ob du folgende Bedingungen erfüllst! Was bringst du mit? Du bist mindestens 18 Jahre alt Deine Muttersprache ist Deutsch und du sprichst English auf relativ hohem Niveau Du besitzt das HB F-4E Phantom Modul Du besitzt die Ugra Media CW Germany Karte Du besitzt ein HOTAS und Head Tracking jeglicher Art Du hast SRS installiert Falls du Interesse hast, bitte ich dich mich hier oder auf unserem Discord Server zu kontaktieren! Vielen Dank und mit freundlichen Grüßen, Rohrkrepierer o7 Einige unserer Maschinen im Lineup vor dem Hangar westlich des Tower

I figured Jester would just be following IRL procedures like he does in the F-14. Appreciate the answer.

It's been well known that in recent times search lights have been used to look for aircraft. Baghdad 2003 for example. I'm fully aware there's the purchasable WWII asset pack with search lights but not everybody has or wants to purchase it. Can we just get the search light as a default ground unit that is reskinned or remodeled to fit/work for modern times?

Yes, it is modelled. The electric system is simulated down to volts, watts and individual wires. This is also why Jester specifically waits and asks if you are done with moving the generator switches around before he starts the INS alignment. A more indepth look (but still an approximation) will be available with the next Phantom build that features the EFB (more specifically its Electrics page) - details in the manual. Cheers

Прошу прощения, бывает увлекаюсь и ухожу в сторону от обсуждаемой темы.

Busy, busy, busy! Two orders shipped today, one will go out tomorrow and four are in the process of being built and are expected to ship this week! As always, all within our typical one- to two-week production schedule.

У AC-130, конечно, наполнение оборудованием очень плотное, дополнительные рабочие места операторов. Геркулес в сравнении с ним совсем простенький. Я бы в ближайшие пару лет точно не ждал бы.