All Activity

This makes zero sense. How does ED telling customers what the agreement says about maintenance and development of the Razbam planes, show a lack of good faith and that ED planned for the settlement to fail? By telling people this information, customers would then be partially empowered to hold ED accountable for upholding their part of the agreement, which would just increase the pressure on ED to follow that agreement. So telling people can reasonably be seen as a sign that they are not afraid of this scrutiny, which is true if they acted in good faith. The only way that telling people could have legal repercussions would be if they violated a part of the contract that says that they have to keep things secret, but it seems almost certain that the party who insisted on this extreme secrecy is ED, not Razbam. Is it really correct to leave customers in the dark for 8 months about an agreement, while selling these modules with zero information on the sales page of what customers can expect in the future, and while leaving those who already bought the modules frustrated and in the dark? And is it really correct to make the DCS customers suffer for a dispute over on the military side of ED, in the first place? And was it correct to immediately escalate the situation by withholding payments from Razbam, rather than first attempt to come to an agreement, so the impact on innocent developers/sub-contractors of Razbam would be minimized, as well as the impact on DCS customers? And Razbam has apparently made a bunch of claims that if true, paint ED in a very poor light. I do find it peculiar that ED is not even willing to go on the record to dispel (or validate) these statements in ways that do not use dodgy language, but that do not divulge any competitive secrets. For example, while the payment amounts are a competitive secret, the fact that ED is paying third party developers like Razbam based on module sales is not at all a secret. So ED could state that they either have made all the required payments (so far) as part of the settlement agreement, or state that they haven't, without ever having to divulge any actual secrets. That way they would show accountability for their own actions, by opening themselves up to a major reputation loss if they would lie to the public about their actions.

Double crosswind correction. After first break, you are obviously too close or too far. By applying one crosswind correction, you'll fly the correct track, if you double it you'll fly further outward/inward, giving you more space for the second turn. Or simply adjust your bank angle depending on your needs/wind direction.

Take Flight Event: Nuclear Scramble Come fly with us during our next event "Nuclear Scramble" this Sunday August 3rd at 20:30 UTC / 16:30 EST In this event, two teams will go against each other, with the aim of dropping a "nuclear bomb" (Biggest bomb your jet can carry basically) into the opposing team's airbase! Details and sign-ups are on the Take Flight Discord. https://discord.gg/takeflightdcs Please note that this group is led by a group of flight enthusiasts, and none of us claim to be experts!

unzip and click install. USAAF Stencil : https://resourceboy.com/fonts/usaaf-stencil-font/ USN Stencil : USN Stencil Font Family Download for Desktop & WebFont | CDNFonts.com round stencil : https://www.dafont.com/din-schablonierschr.font A tilt to the left and right is achieved using the scaling tool in PS (tilt).

It's a very interesting and long mission. It lasts approximately 1:40 hours. Everyone returned to the base except QP-A. Perhaps he fell during an attack on an enemy airfield. Unfortunately, near Kenley Airfield, right before landing, there was a crash on the desktop. In screenshot 334, COBWEB returns over Freestone. And crash log. dcs.log-20250731-222414.zip

I'm surprised no one has mentioned adding this beauty! Devs, can we get the AGM-114R9X, also known as the "Flying Ginsu"? Pretty please with sugar on top! I believe every MANPAD should be taken out with the Flying Ginsu. Let me head off the excuse generator. Here's a brief video overview of it working. If you can develop the F-35 from white papers, then this should be viable!

Here's a hot take: don't brake. Stick in your lap, throttle to idle, and just keep it going down the runway. If you did a nice three pointer, you won't need to touch the brakes until you get to taxi speed. Warbirds slow down pretty well on their own, especially on grass.

Если вы так любите цифры, то стоит вспомнить МиГ-15бис от Белсимтек. Когда говорят "первый красный", то подразумевают первый FF-модуль красного истребителя от Eagle Dynamics. И да, МиГ-29 первый. Поделки от Лизернек и Разбам не дотягивают до современных стандартов. Ни по графике, ни по реализации.

I have a recommendation with all of the new GeorgeAI features incorporated in the Jul 23 update: I noticed the ability of GeorgeAI to lase a target when de-WASed by short press right on the GeorgeAI panel. Again, that is while the CPG has nothing WASed. Would it be possible to add the same "lase" command while the RF missile is selected? See my screenshot as an example. In this example, the "DESIG AGAIN (Designate Again)" function would be similar to the "Laser On" function when the AI is de-WASed. This would force the CPG to lase the target and send target data to the RF Hellfire before a launch. A short press to the right would allow the CPG to momentarily lase the target again for a firing solution. For those who need a graphical reference, this is the option that I mentioned above. When flying in a multi-crew cockpit, I would often ask my human CPG to redesignate a target to ensure the AGM-114L Hellfire has accurate data. This is very helpful after evading incoming missiles or negotiating terrain to a different location. Cross-referenced from this thread: GeorgeAI and AGM-114L Lasing and Fail to Fire Problems

I’ve also noticed this on left wing

We will check both RATO and LG, thank you for the info.

Как верно заметили в разделе Razbam, мы не знаем, когда на модули были подписаны документы. Если до заявления о коде, то увы.

Would love a response from ED on this past Newy's initial response of blowing us off about this at the beginning of the thread. This issue isn't about "people's preferences" as he said, the meatball is literally unusable in VR until you get in close.

https://www.airplanesimulations.com Da scheint sich was zu tun...

i know these campaigns are pretty ancient.. but i was running through the basic practice for the startup mission.. and the talk through is pretty fast.. and new players would struggle to find the proper switches quickly.. getting the switches talked about highlighted would help alot, at least for practice versions.. so that during quals you can do it from memory. I dont expect any kind of update.. but just sayin

Please make HEMTT TFFT drivable in CA. It would help with increasing immersion on airbases.

Guys, i made this ultimate compilation of your work with lots of improvements and bug fixes: https://github.com/HFXLegion/HighDigitSAMs-Ultimate-Compilation

Guys, check this: https://github.com/HFXLegion/HighDigitSAMs-Ultimate-Compilation

"Unplayable with meta quest 3 controllers in VR" Yes. It is. Unfortunately you still need a HOTAS etc.

As far as I know, none of the 3rd party developers have suppor for VR controllers. Only the ED made ones have.

Unter dem Balken stehen die Daten zum Download (also was tatsächlich durch die Leitung muss), oben steht der Fortschritt beim Entpacken und "installieren" austauschen der Dateien. Je nach Blockgröße deines Datenträgers können viele kleine Dateien eine ganze Menge mehr "Größe auf der Festplatte" haben, als ihre reine Datengröße. Und da DCS extrem viele Textbasierte Dateien hat, die sich extrem gut komprimieren lassen, ist das tatsächlich der größte Download mit 101 GB, nicht 180 GB.

Try reading the first page, and the first page of every time this situation has produced a new thread, you haven't been kept in the dark, you just choose to have your head burried in the sand, instead of actually accepting what's been told to you repeatedly now.

What you're asking for is not reasonable when there are legal proceedings going on regarding this. If it was a hypothetical situation where all the ED F-18 devs quit, then yes, it would be reasonable for ED to be more forthcoming, because that would be a strictly internal matter that they have total control over. In this case on the other hand, while I'm sure ED has a pretty good idea what their plan is if ultimately this does go south (it would be business malpractice if they don't), they would be ill advised to share anything about their plans publicly because Razbam could use every bit of that as ammunition against ED legally ("oh they were telling their customers they had plans x, y and z and not to worry. Clearly they planned for this to fail and weren't negotiating in good faith"). The whole situation is very frustrating for customers, but that doesn't mean that ED isn't handling it "correctly" on most levels.

Situation: 8 kts lateral wind, I wanna do overhead break airfield landing. I start with the overhead break itself with 350 kts, pulling 1% of airspeed rolling out on the downwind, at about 1 nm from the runway (I actually tried 1.2nm), establishing on-speed AoA initiating 30 deg left turn, maintaining vertical speed at about 100-200 at 90 deg I'm looking at the runway and realizing that my turn radius is WAY too large to make the runway on course upon rolling out again, 8 kts lateral wind, blowing to the left relative to the downwind How to deal in such conditions?