All Activity

Что нового появилось в обновлении пака России 8 июня?

Pod jettison issue is already reported:

BUMP! Now with Streamdeck v 7.0.0.22005 MSI installed it's still the same ... the bug is still there, but Thomas T from support stated that the win keys work in a macro when Techsupport tested it. I don't get it, even just tried a fresh installed Win11 PRO with Streamdeck. NoGo as with windows 10 and 11 LTSC. My guess is something like windows anti macroing protection blocks win key incorporated macros, which is not bypassed by the Egato drivers, and Razer etc has it worked out OK.

It won't clear waypoint and shouldn't. I asked about this like 3 years ago,it's intended. If training mission suggests other things I guess it's outdated.

I observed that the the Radar Elevation Zoom function does not work with the Litening Pod if the HOTAS control is bound to an Axis. It does work if it the HOTAS control is bound to a button press. The HOTAS axis zoom function does work with the ATFLIR pod if bound to an Axis. If the Emergency Jettison is used the center mounted Litening Pod appears to be ejected in the 2D view but the Pod still functions on the jet for targeting, etc. Can anyone confirm these observations? Thx!

Dynamic campaign is supposed to address issues with ground units apparently. So let's cross our fingers. We only have to wait .... TWO WEEKS! ... side note ... Proximity fusing needs to be seriously looked at. Growling Sidewinder's recent video shows why. A missile close enuf that its engine illuminated the underside of his plane, yet it didn't trigger. I've seen lots of missiles that should have triggered fail to do so, in online videos. I'm also disappointed that they don't have legit warheads i.e. expanding ring, only generic "shrapnel and explosion."

ED has already made it's mind about that. You can see it at the tags they gave the topic: They have to decide at some point which features to implement and which not, otherwise it could be dragged into infinity. 1) If we would get the GBU-54, we probably would have gotten a 2012 F-18 and not a 2005 one, right? 2) Having a 2005 plane in 1989 is just as unrealistic as having a 2012 introduced weapon in 2005. This argument goes both ways. 3) While technically correct, if you don't want it don't use it, I find it a very bad argument. If you want the GBU-54, just get the A-10C2. If you want the GBU-54 on the F-18, just play a different game. You don't have to use DCS. It's just such a ridiculous argument to make in my opinion. It's the same as with the Swiss single AIM-120 launcher. It doesn't hurt anyone having it. The F-18 can carry it but it's the wrong version of what ED is trying to simulate, just like the LJDAM is the wrong weapon/period for the simulated F-18.

yes, this aircraft does not have support for keyboard control of the flight surfaces nor throttle. If you don’t have a joystick, you can connect an x-box controller which is not ideal but it is less expensive.

For single player, I have a button on my HOTAS assigned to bring up the DCS comms menu (i.e. press F1 for Flight, F2 for ATC, etc menu)... New to multiplayer, using SRS, have the same button as my "PTT" button. Went into a multiplayer server yesterday and when using the PTT button, the DCS comms menu doesn't show (which is good....) Went into the same multiplayer server today with SRS also running... my PTT button does transmit on SRS, but annoyingly also brings up the DCS comms menu, so I have to press the PTT button twice to make it go away. Any way to set it so that in multiplayer my PTT button will not toggle the comms menu? Would prefer not to have to manually change control allocations when switching between multi and single player, if possible... thanks

Ive been using the G2 and DCS has been running reliably. about 4 days ago I setup a new crystal super and it seems to be progressively crashing more and more often. My lizard brain says its a broken cable that is disconnecting with head movement. I have no proof of this and it seems to not do it in menus or "test" environments so its probably something else but it feels like a bad cable. Sometimes I get 20 to 40 min sometimes I get just a few min sometimes straight away. usually crashes making large head movements usually looking down and then back up. The display will freeze on the last good frame it sounds like the core and background stuff is still working. I can hear the jet respond to inputs but display output is frozen. Ive attached a log from Syria free flight f14 take off from Lebanon ( I think the one just before sunrise) I saw nothing of value in the log but I might not be looking in the right spot. Any clues?? Thanks! dcs.log

Thanks again for adding IDF SAMS in new 1.4.0. version. Fantastic!

Thx @Dangerzone for this thread! I´m sure I don´t have my rig fully optimized but it´s playable, (i get 70fps stable in Mp servers over syria map tho im using msaa x4). correct me if im wrong, but IMHO dcs fps limiter is a great idea (max FPS slider), i´m using it at 70, so my GPU works betwen 65/95% load depending on flight situation. but it´s constant 70fps. my specs: Ryzen 9 5950X - RX7900XTX- 64GB RAM DDR4- 1TB M.2 SSD - Quest2 (using oculus cable link + OXRTK + OTT fov at .75) i´ll have to get back w you with specific dcs settings but key thing is MSAAx4 PD 1.3, terrain, water, shadows at high

Если у тебя претензии к кабине Мига, только в малой затёртости РУСа и рычага тормоза (ну и подобные вещи, с которыми пилот взаимодействует постоянно). То я соглашусь. Но мой посыл был в целом к тем, кто защищает ободранные кабины, которые так любит хитблюр. Да и Миг-21 тоже в ту же кассу.

I know there was a thread about this wishlist but and since that thread is now locked and I would really like to add my 2 cents about the subject which I believe are sound and somehow backs up this wish (GBU-54 Laser/GPS fitted to DCS F/A-18C), I took the "liberty" of creating this one. The other thread was locked because ED (backed up by a few members) believe this to be unrealistic because the F/C-18C modeled in DCS is from 2005 while the GBU-54 was introduced/integrated on the F/A-18C in 2012 (some sources indicates sooner but lets stick with 2012) but I fully disagree and here's why: The weapon (GBU-54) was introduced in 2012 which is only 7 years from the service date of 2005 of the F/A-18C modeled in DCS. As such it's not far fetched that 2005 F/A-18C's could or did have been fitted with the GBU-54 seven (7) years later, this without the same F/A-18C's having received any meaningful upgrades in the meanwhile. Which is far more realistic having a 2005 F/A-18 carrying GBU-54s OR having the same 2005 F/A-18C flying in a 1989 campaign (Task Force Challenger), the campaign that comes with DCS F/A-18C? This is obviously a rhetorical question because the answer is clear: It's impossible for a 2005 F/A-18C to fly in 1989 (unless someone invents time travel) but again it's not impossible for a 2005 F/A-18C to be fitted with a weapon that entered in service with the US Navy Hornets circa 2012 (or 7 years later). Yet, ED accepts the scenario of a 2005 Hornet flying in 1989 but not the one that the same Hornet uses a weapon (GBU-54) that came a few years after. Puzzling, I must say! Some users have backed up this ED decision because of the reason above (Hornet being from 2005 while GBU-54 from 2012) but the truth is that if the GBU-54 was integrated in DCS F/A-18C then these same users would still have the CHOICE of not using the weapon. The same applies to mission/campaign builders that have this same opinion. However, having the GBU-54 in DCS F/A-18C CATERS to everyone! Who wants to use the weapon will/could use and who don't, won't use it. Simple as that.

I think it worked for some time against the SA-2 Dvina in Vietnam, but the modifications were introduced to prevent the missile from hitting the ground.

Thanks. It was kinda fun firing like 300 rounds at the thing while chasing it around a small German hamlet. And yes quite a few rounds hit the chassis. But I saw dozens hit the rocket "pod" I look forward to a new and improved duel later on.

Any noticeable improvement in image quality?

Sorry - I thought I'd responded to this. I uninstalled Reshade so don't have the .ini file. I'll try this again in *two weeks* and report back on issues.

I have tried the D9 a few times but have not bought it. I just couldn't get to grips with it. The K4 is my favorite warbird. I'm not sure why but I got the hang of it really quickly. I love flying it. I struggle with the A8 and the p47. I'm enjoying the F4U but not there yet. I might give the D9 another go.

Currently, there are no plans for these as it's not correct for an unmodified 9.12A, sorry.

Probably this has been asked a lot, but the missile guidance logic needs to be improved. I don´t think (SAM) missiles should be so easily fooled by driving them into the ground, i.e. using their lead pursuit logic against them until they hit the ground.

Yes, East Afghanistan

Unfortunately you can't "preset" the cirrus clouds. ED would need to add the framework for that (I wish they would!). The game engine only calls 2 of the 4 cirrus texture files per mission run, so you can see up to 10 different cirrus cloud types in one mission. They change every 10 minutes. Each cirrus texture file has 5 cirrus textures baked into it for a total of 20. The game may appear stuck on the same 10 cirrus clouds until you change the date/time or restart the game. I can't see what logic it's using to select which cirrus texture files it uses so there's no way for me change that. Each time you start or restart a mission, a new texture out of the 10 available will be rendered at start. This prevents seeing the same cirrus clouds repeatedly. I'd really like them to add a simple framework to select a cirrus cloud preset similar to the current cloud presets. That way I could continue to create more cirrus clouds and it would be more efficient than what I'm doing now. I could create an external app to swap files around but that just seems clunky.

They both use the same file to hook into DCS, so to have them working simultaneously, you need to move the reshade files to the bin/plugins folder. The easiest way is to create a "mod" for reshade to quickly install/uninstall using a mod manager, since you need to do this after DCS updates First we need to start with a clean DCS install: If you already use a mod manager, remove all installed mods from the game install directory Search "Repair" in Windows start menu to repair DCS Select the "slow" and "search extra files" options Now that we have a vanilla DCS install, download, install and setup ReShade to your liking Now run DCS repair again, but with "fast" and "search extra files" options This will find all the reshade files and give you the option to Delete/Move/Keep those files Select Move and the tool will move all the reshade files to the .../DCS World/backupXX/ folder (the folder with the highest no.) Create a ReShade_vXXXX/bin/plugins folder in your mod manager's library folder Copy the contents of .../DCS World/backupXX/bin folder to ReShade_vXXXX/bin/plugins folder Run DCS repair again, with "fast" and "search extra files" options to clean out ReShade Install OptiScaler according to their wiki instructions Now run DCS repair again, but with "fast" and "search extra files" options This will find all the OptiScaler files and give you the option to Delete/Move/Keep those files Select Move and the tool will move all the reshade files to the .../DCS World/backupXX/ folder (the folder with the highest no.) Create a OptiScaler_vXXXX folder in your mod manager's library folder Copy the contents of .../DCS World/backupXX/folder to OptiScaler_vXXXX/ folder So now you have "mods" for both ReShade and OptiScaler. Since OptiScaler is already installed, install the ReShade mod, and it will get installed to .../DCS World/bin/plugins

I agree that these kind of vehicles can be a challenge when it comes to the damage model. But the current damage implementation, even though it's based on hitpoints, can be more granular then before and make different zones absorb these points differently. The TOS-1A has 16 different damage zones implemented.