All Activity

Yes, two Reisens hit with a bomb USS South Dakota and USS Minneapolis. It happened during the Battle of the Philippine Sea. (Ideally we need another machine - Tenzan or Judy)

DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum Introduction We are happy to release our first instruction video for our MiG-29A Fulcrum, or project 9-12A. This introduction video is based on a pre-release version, so some elements may change at or after release. The MiG-29A is a single-seat, dual engine, Soviet fighter that was designed in the 1970s as a light-fighter in parallel with development of the larger Su-27 Flanker. The Fulcrum entered service in 1983 with its primary role being point air defense for Soviet and several Warsaw Pact member countries. It’s a relatively small, twin-tail, blended-wing fighter with leading edge extensions, that is powered by two widely spaced, RD-33 engines, each capable of 18,300 pounds of force in afterburner. Air is fed into the engines from variable intake ramps below the fuselage. For unprepared field operations, the MiG-29 has the unique feature of being able to close the main intake ramps, and instead open intakes above the leading-edge extensions to avoid the intake of foreign objects. For enhanced maneuverability, the Fulcrum includes automatic leading-edge slats and an all-moving tail plane. Although it does not use a fly-by-wire flight control system, it does come equipped with hydraulic controls and a three-axis autopilot system. Between its impressive thrust-to-weight ratio and excellent high-alpha capability, the 9G-capable Fulcrum can be a very challenging opponent in a dogfight. Although the MiG-29A has G and angle of attack limiters, these can be overridden. Its impressive dogfight capabilities are further enhanced by the ability of Fulcrum pilots to cue AA-11 “Archer”, R-73, infrared-guided missiles with a Helmet Mounted Sight for deadly high off boresight attacks. Designed as a point defense fighter, the MiG-29A does not come equipped with aerial refueling capability and has a maximum ferry range of 930 miles clean, and 1,300 miles with an external fuel tank. In the nose of the aircraft is a NO19 Sapfir 29 look-down/shoot-down radar and digital computer. Mounted forward of the windscreen is the S-31E2 Infrared Search and Track sensor that can detect and track aerial targets solely based on their infrared signature. The MiG-29A was primarily designed as an air-to-air fighter armed with short- and medium-range air-to-air missiles and a GSh-30-1 30 mm cannon with 150 rounds. Although the AA-10 Alamo A (R-27R) and AA-10 Alamo B (R-27T) are the typical medium-range air-missiles arming the MiG-29A, it can also be technically armed with the extended range AA-10 Alamo C (R-27ER) and AA-10 Alamo D (R-27ET) versions. These medium-range missile options are in addition to the shorter-range, infrared-guided AA-11 Archer (R-73) and AA-6 Aphid (R-60 and R-60M) dogfight missiles. In addition to these air-to-air armaments, the MiG-29A also has limited air-to-ground attack options including unguided bombs, rockets, and strafe.

I am completely stumped with how the slots are acting in my mission, it's like it is broken halfway between singleplayer and multi. It's hard to describe via text, i shot a video of the anomalies - Mission attached if anyone wants to debug PGTALWAR3.miz

During the latest Mover&Gonky show, Wags said “definitely this year”.

I have tried it three times and each time the flir is nowhere near the target. But are you saying it is best to designate the "stock" waypoint 6 lat/long and not input the coordinates listed in the kneeboards? Each time I've tried is via the kneeboard info.

This used to work by flicking the lights on and off, now it seems to require a salute? Is this a bug or a change?

Thanks, I will try it today!

I think they mentioned "planned" in there somewhere. Which means it can be prolonged as it is not concretely set date. After pre order has been released, planned dates were prolonged 2 times.

100 points to the patch designer for creativity... for those who don't see it- squint your eyes and take a good look

1. https://htcc.fredemmott.com/faq.html#my-anti-virus-says-it-found-something-what-do-i-do 2. master is newer than the latest version, with the exception of the version number. If you're familiar with git you can easily confirm this yourself 3. (made an exception for those last two given how they look together, but):

Go racing, after a few laps crash into the wall. Thats a brainf*ck... But you'll soon be able to disconnect what you're eye's register and body experiences

ok, sorry I didn't catch this meaning, thanks for clarifying.

Non c'è bisogno di scusarsi di alcunché; d'altra parte non credo di avere poteri di preveggenza, semplicamente questi della Razbam non mi hanno mai convinto: soprattutto seguendo alcune critiche nelle pagine dedicate ai loro moduli mi hanno sempre trasmesso brutte sensazioni, ma di certo mai avrei pensato che sarebbe andata a finire stile Veao, moltiplicato per quattro. Acquistare oggi un modulo che non sia direttamente di ED mi sa un po' di lotteria, sebbene questo c-130 mi interessi molto; spero di poterlo considerare in futuro (molto dipenderà anche da come la ED gestirà la faccenda Razbam, nel momento in cui sarà chiaro a tutti che non avremo mai più i loro moduli).

Hi @Rudel_chw I am aware that English is not your first language. I do not intend to patronise, what follows is for clarity. I said: 'While I respect your statement one could argue that maps are a choice whereas as 'redundant' liveries are not.' The use of 'one' in this sentence refers to the speaker as a general person or in a detached manner, so as not to be confused as the person writing. Also, the speech marks around 'redundant' signify this is a quote from another contributor and not necessarily my opinion. So when you say: 'Liveries may be redundant to you, but please do not speak for everyone else:' You will understand that I am certainly not 'speaking for everyone else' nor stating that I necessarily think liveries are redundant. Thanks. I was not making a direct comparison between Microsoft's bloatware and ED's core liveries, I was suggesting that in both cases the proffered 'solution' was to buy more storage (rather that address the potential problem of increasing data size)

truth is, they have other abilities, than we have. e.G. B-52 low level flyby a carrier as seen in 2023 and beyond. Impossible to recreate, as the AI does not fly lower than 300 feet. As far as I could find out.

No i don't use this option. I removed the A4 mod, but no joice. I only have C130 and Military Aircraft Mod, will try without to test. I already did a full DCS repair : nothing to report. Will see after that to send my dcs.log. Next step would to to fully reinstall DCS, and clean my User settings (Olympus and retribution were put inside, but no confidence it would solve the issue).

Liveries may be redundant to you, but please do not speak for everyone else: For me, liveries add much for immersion on my own missions, as I strive to use the most appropiate liveries, so in addition to what ED gives us at CoreMods I also download extra liveries from User Files:

After the last update, I have the same problem. Ground handling is very difficult. It is almost impossible to make ground turns

This isn't related to the request or the post, but the way the save game feature works is it takes the mission file as it was originally, captures the unit placement at the time of saving, updates the route of the units as if they have been following their route (so you are in between wp 3 and 4 then your new waypoint on save is WP4 and your current position is WP0.) Wreckage is persisted (now). scripts and triggers and all ME settings are exactly the same as the original file, the only thing that changes is the positions and routes. However, this cant apply to anything you moved in combined arms or Game Master or Tacitical Commander, those routes are essentially lost and the unit will RTB if air or sit still if ground. I didnt test scenery, I wasnt aware if that persisted I woudlnt be surprised if buildigns and briudges are handled.

We usually circle back to the base and boresight on something at the airfield. On your way outbound, try to find something with the TGP. At 20-25 miles out, reverse and start trying to get the MAV's locked on to boresight as soon as the seeker will "grab" it. In the past, getting one missile per wing (so, two total) boresighted was all that it took to set up all 6 missiles. I haven't had a ton of experience with Mavericks since the latest patch fixed the issues that popped up with the ATP release. I still haven't had much luck with auto handoff, but I always use the TGP and a markpoint to get situated. -Ryan

Hello, This is the Vietnam War Vessels 2.0.1 update for Vietnam War Vessels 2.0.0. Only changed assets folders have been included. The following ships were updated: Kirk Gray Knox Bigelow Forrest Sherman Maddox Ti Laffey Sumner Mullany Enterprise 1966 CVA-31 New Jersey Some shell range settings were adjusted, recoil animations added to all major cannons - those were 100+ barrels, the issue with the twin barrel main armament firing only one barrel was fixed, and some short names of ships were fixed. Further the USS Maddox TI front FCS had a non proper rotation which was fixed, and the Knox class Destroyer Escorts hull was adjusted to reduce strange light and shadow. On the planes side the MiG-21MF saw the removal of some weird vertices below the nose cone. Enjoy, TeTeT https://github.com/tspindler-cms/tetet-vwv/releases Massive kudos to James for fixing the ship main armaments! His keen eye also spotted the vertices on the MiG-21MF. Note: In a future release we move the Maddox and The Sullivans to a new mod, Cold War Vessels, as they did not actively participate in the Vietnam War in the shown configurations.

主机情况： Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-9700 CPU @ 3.00GHz 3.00 GHz；48.0GB内存；NVIDIA GTX 1660显卡（6G内存）； 重装了Windows 10 专业版（版本号：22H2）； 故障现象：无论是训练还是自建任务，每次进入游戏后大概都能玩3分钟左右时间，然后就突然冻住死机了，只有断电重起，急死了。

So I received my Super earlier this week and all seems to be OK however I, for the life of me, cannot get sound to come out of the now installed DMAS speakers... I think this is because the headset itself is not being recognized as an "audio capable display". Question for you Super owners out there where things are working... are you seeing (2) distinct options in the windows "Audio Playback Device" options? I'm ONLY seeing the "Headphones (2- Pimax Crystal Super)" - when I select this, I do indeed get sound out of the headphone jack on the headset when I plug in earbuds, etc.. However I don't get any sound out of the DMAS speakers (which seems to make sense because I've selected the "headphones"). Should I be seeing ANOTHER Audio Playback device for the headset speakers itself in the list below? I believe this is the root of my problem but Pimax Support has been.... well...not super helpful so far. My understanding is that the DMAS speakers are driven through the DisplayPort connection whereas the headphone jack and microphone are driven through the USB connection (both of those appear to function properly) so I'm thinking there's something up with my 5090 and Super not playing well together. I've done a full DDU and nvidia driver install (latest drivers), I've installed, uninstalled, reinstalled Pimax Play multiple times, tried multiple combinations of USB and DisplayPorts and the Super's firmware was updated to the latest and greatest so I'm running out of ideas. I'd be interested in hearing from any folks where it's working fine if 1. You see more than one Pimax Crystal Super option in the Playback device selector? (screenshot above) 2. If you see the Pimax Crystal Super in the list of "Audio Capable Devices" in the nvidia digital audio section of the nvidia app.. because I don't (and I have mine plugged into DisplayPort #1 currently)

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/15qcVg4mXs/?mibextid=wwXIfr Let's get this on board the Hercules!

Why would you? It's an honest question and you wrote a super detailed report with all pertinent information available right away. The issue got squared away in no time, and if someone else happens to have the same question, chances are they find this thread when they search for similar reports. This is what forums are for.