All Activity

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.

More DCS Necessity. Am starting a Taiwan Omni Map built on the Marianas map. Carrier Strike Group Eleven, Anderson AFB, 60 A/C on either side, fighter and attack mission routes. And now, ChiCom ships and land equipment. Out-standing! Bowie

Yes. That was it. After i switched to combat mod laser started workin and i was able to finally hit a target. Many thanks for your tip!

thanks, can you attach your dcs log, we are unable to reproduce the issue. thank you

Not According to AGO, BMW and Fw. See report. Two new access panels were required and the oxygen tanks were to be fitted differently (iaw Ta 152 design). Those designs were to be introduced into AGO serial production with the yet to be awarded contract. You're turning in circles. A motor with nozzles in place, yet no piping and no tank cannot provide GM1 injection. That's not an internet argument. That's common sense And without the tank and piping, there's no NOS.

The right side you’re pointing at is the Fwd Aft indicator, not elevation. According to that tutorial, the indicator is green and turns red when you’re out of limits. Again I can see the red light in your screenshot, so how is that hard to see in the game? That’s certainly worth adding. The only nighttime AAR I’ve done with the boom was in the A-10C which doesn’t use the belly lights. Those flood lights would be very welcome in that situation.

No, it's not. You're basing your point on "it could be done". I'm basing my point on "there's no evidence for the use of GM1". None. Your "proof" furthermore specifies there's no spec for the GM1 tank ("nicht gefordert" doesn't translate into "not normally done") in the A-8. Meaning there's no Rüstsatz that covers GM1 installation and any deviation would be a field mod, as the R4 had been cancelled. No tank means no GM1. No mention of GM1 use for II/JG 301 in the JG301/302 unit History or with Jochen Priesn's "Jagdfliegerverbände". The GM1 injection-nozzles are there, but the whole upstream-affair (plumbing, piping, tank) is to be fitted by the airframer. You - again, conveniently - cut that away. The only airframer earmarked for production was AGO for 200 airframes (some modifications were required, see report below). The R4 spec was cancelled, however. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/Fw_190_A-8_Besprechungs-Niederschrift_4-4-44.pdf Some (eleven known in total acc. Rodeike) R4s supposedly at 10./JG11 in winter 44/45, but no mention of GM1 there either. Neither in Prien's JG1/JG11 unit history, nor in Jagdfliegerverbände. AGO WNr. blocks with known "R4s" are: 732 001 - 732 310 (built August '44) 733 670 - 733 790 (built September '44) 733 960 - 733 999 (same) 734 350 - 734 400 (same) 738 100 - 738 400 (built October '44) The GM1 requirement had been dropped by late July 1944. Most likely as Erhöhte Notleistung had been put into serial production (June 44) and field-modifications. As acc. Rodeike many of those WNrs were built to R2 or R6 specs, there is a possibility of mix-ups or typos in unit-docs. It had the nozzles in place. You conclude acc. the report it had no tank, I conclude they're not specifying which tank was installed. As they're not mentioning any difference to the common A-8 (see "later intelligence" portion), it's highly likely it had a standard 115l tank. The wrong tank for NOS'ing. No. They concluded it had "provisions".

I was launching Limas at radar returns from the back seat last night. I don't think anything has changed with that regard.

I'm getting this error when attempting to update my dedicated server. The user account has full control permissions for the eagle dynamics folder.

At least give us the F/A-18D. More planes, and more for the carrier.

I you don't own any you're late to the party.

【Part.1】Since the entire file exceeds 100MB, but the forum rules prohibit uploading files larger than 50MB, I will reply to you in two parts. There will be two compressed files. Please download both of them and place them in the same folder. Then, click to unzip the first file, and it will automatically unzip both files together. After that, you can use them. DCS MIZ Compiler 1.1.5.7z.001 【Part.2】Since the entire file exceeds 100MB, but the forum rules prohibit uploading files larger than 50MB, I will reply to you in two parts. There will be two compressed files. Please download both of them and place them in the same folder. Then, click to unzip the first file, and it will automatically unzip both files together. After that, you can use them. DCS MIZ Compiler 1.1.5.7z.002

Sounds like a lot of money and time to replace modules that we already have. I don't think any other developer can replicate the mirage let alone it's flight model. Razbam had constant feedback from active mirage pilots that were using the dcs for training before the C model was retired from France. It's the closest 1:1 aircraft in DCS.

Sure it wasn't the Sea Harrier FRS.51 or Sea Harrier F(A).2 I know in 2019 or so there were screenshots of a WIP Sea Harrier . The FRS1 used the Blue Fox and the F(a).2 used the Blue Vixen which was further developed into the Typhoon's radar The FRS.51 used the Euroradar Captor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euroradar_CAPTOR

Absolutely... Out-standing! And perfect timing. Am finishing up an SEA Omni Map, built on the new Mariaias II map. TF77/CarDiv 2, Chu Lai (SATS), and 60 A/C on each side with fighter and attack mission routes. Lamenting the Arleigh Burke/Ticonderoga Class ship contingency, and have been hunting for a Sumner Class. No more. Tomorrow. Bowie.

You need to have faith, because it seems ED will not reveal what modules are inside the file sharing policy since 2018.

Any scraps off the table to update us with ?.....Very keen for the release of the MiG-17F.

no osb display for AAQ-33.trk i hope this is enough

Are they? That's good to know. So where can I get them?

Sorry i can't but can you please point me to the word "promise" in my post you just quoted? I just can't find it.

LOL It takes less time to fit the 85liter GM-1 tank than it does to equip a P47 with rockets. Either you are just flat out lying to try to win an internet discussion for some reason or not reading the full instructions. FW-190A8/R11's had production priority for the BMW801Q/TU series engines. Without that engine, it wasn't produced.

The elevation(up & down PDL) has a red light that adjusts based on your position. At night it's very hard to see, unaided or under nods. In my image that I shared above, the arrow is pointing where the red light is. The real KC-135 also had white flood lights that light up the fuselage so you can see the airframe instead of just a dark void against a dark sky

I mean pay fairly for work done. Some unrelated party making new modules would have nothing to do with the previous modules. It would only make sense to pay for work done. No one buying the modules caused the problems, that's true. That doesn't mean we're entitled to free things.

VFA-22 skin now available, linky posted above

More images of the F1 here: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/376870-291812722-hud-is-unreadable/#comment-5675251 , it's a night/dimming issue. Add the JF-17 to the bold list. options.lua