All Activity

@diego999 Dude! Thank you so much for helping me figure this out - Here is my mission so I am 90% sure it's human error! Can you help me figure it out? Russia_Finnish_Conflict.miz

Yes

В реальности Х-66 применялись только с МиГ-21ПФМ. Там был сделан специальный режим БРЛС для применения этой ракеты.

SYRIAN INCIDENT - DYNAMIC CAMPAIGN SQUADS vs. SQUADS From the creators of SATAC and pioneers of the first-ever squad dynamic campaign and public server with integrated stats dating back to 2011, 51st MDT proudly presents Syrian Incident, a groundbreaking event designed to revive large-scale squads vs squads multiplayer dynamic combat in DCS. Syrian Incident is not another public mission. It’s a fully dynamic, squads-versus-squads battlefield where your actions shape the outcome of the war. This campaign demands precision planning, flawless coordination between the squads, and exceptional execution. Each participating squad will follow carefully planed flight plans, crafted by their faction’s generals and commanders, as both sides fight for dominance in a constantly evolving battlespace. The time has come to signup and take part in the testing phase, where we evaluate not only the mission itself but also the readiness of the squads who will fly the campaign. This is your opportunity to prove your squad's capability in A2A, A2G, MR or Logistics operations while paving the way for what will be the most immersive campaign DCS pilots have experienced. The Syrian Incident is entering its final phase of development, ready to showcase what DCS was truly meant to be: a demanding, highly tactical experience where skill, strategy, and teamwork define victory. 1. Structure The Syrian Incident is a squad vs squad multiplayer campaign based on the Fowl-Dynamic Campaign System, featuring strategic command options for participating coalitions. It offers an immersive and realistic combat experience set within a complex geopolitical military scenario. 1.1. The Syrian Incident consists of multiple events (referred to as “days”) in which squads participate. Assuming the role of one side of the conflict throughout the campaign, expected to run for several months. Each day is conducted once a week, with missions lasting approximately six hours. 1.2. Each coalition includes 8+ DCS squadrons specializing in both air-to-air and air-to-ground operations. 1.3. The Syrian Incident will feature major scripted events, introduced when tactically appropriate to enhance immersion. The timing of these events will be determined collaboratively by both campaign moderators and commanders, primarily for balancing purposes. 1.4. The Syrian Incident is subject to future updates and expansions under the Fowl-Dynamic Campaign System. 2. Basic Rules Each coalition must appoint two individuals to serve as Commanders (Generals). These appointments may be revised later in the campaign if the original Commanders (Generals) are unable to fulfill their duties. 2.1. The position should preferably be assigned to a high-ranking and responsible squad member, capable of strategic planning, coordinating ground and air assets, and managing the distribution of reinforcement resources. 2.2. Each week, the Generals make critical tactical decisions by planning and executing operations that can significantly alter the operational landscape in the following Syrian Incident day. Sound strategic judgment is essential to achieving combat success. 2.3. Each coalition may field a maximum of 25 participating pilots per mission day. Pilots are limited to one life per mission. A disconnect occurring after takeoff will be considered a loss of the aircraft. Reserve pilots may be used to replace those who have been eliminated. 2.4. Mission conditions, including weather effects, will change randomly each day of operations. Time will advance in six-hour increments per mission day. SIGNUP: Signup on the 51st PVO Regiment Discord - https://discord.gg/Xm3h99jz8x Syrian Incident - Standard Operation Procedures - https://www.51pvo.com/s-i SI_Stinger.mp4

Я подписан на итальянскую ветку самолета. Там точно такие же сомнения синхронно наблюдаются. Это нормально. Спокойно отношусь к рискам сторонних разработчиков, учитывая, что ED вряд-ли бы вообще когда-нибудь дошли до Геркулеса. С другой стороны, есть ведь транспортный Чинук от ED, до которого они дошли. Но тут уже вступает в силу тот факт, что у ED самая монопольно-правдоподобная симуляция вертолётов.

If you don't mind me hijacking the thread a little, there are also some issues with NDBs on the map. Many of the NDBs located at the middle/outer markers for various airports have the same operating frequency in both runway directions, but the markers and NDBs are not interlocked based on the active runway (which they would be IRL, just like ILS). This is not an issue for the markers (which are all at 75 MHz) since they radiate a narrow beam straight up, but the NDBs can be difficult to identify by their ident codes (as the morse code for the two NDBs overlap) at long range, and are unstanble at short range, since your ADF will show erratic bearings. This may or may not be fixed when ED release their new ATC, but until then, I propose adding a 1kHz offset to every duplicate in the list below (where it doesn't cause any other frequency conflicts). E.g.: 313000 airfield2_2 LG Altes Lager 314000 airfield2_4 BM Altes Lager 645000 airfield2_0 L Altes Lager 646000 airfield2_1 B Altes Lager The duplicate list: Freq. BeaconID ID Airfield Notes 205000 airfield1_0 G Wittstock 205000 airfield1_4 O Wittstock 421000 airfield1_1 GJ Wittstock 421000 airfield1_6 OR Wittstock 219000 airfield15_0 P Templin 219000 airfield15_8 I Templin 451000 airfield15_4 PG Templin 451000 airfield15_6 IK Templin 221000 airfield101_0 - Sperenberg Invalid ident 221000 airfield101_3 NZ Sperenberg 254000 airfield101_1 Ch Sperenberg 254000 airfield101_2 - Sperenberg Invalid ident 295000 airfield118_7 X Holzdorf 295000 airfield118_8 H Holzdorf 609500 airfield118_2 XH Holzdorf 609500 airfield118_4 HX Holzdorf 300000 airfield22_7 Z Mahlwinkel 300000 airfield22_8 Z Mahlwinkel 620000 airfield22_3 NU Mahlwinkel 620000 airfield22_6 ZW Mahlwinkel 313000 airfield2_2 LG Altes Lager 313000 airfield2_4 BM Altes Lager 645000 airfield2_0 L Altes Lager 645000 airfield2_1 B Altes Lager 325000 airfield10_1 NZ Damgarten 325000 airfield10_5 M Damgarten 668000 airfield10_0 MA Damgarten 668000 airfield10_7 NW Damgarten 330000 airfield13_3 G Garz 330000 airfield13_5 G Garz 679500 airfield13_0 GZ Garz 679500 airfield13_4 ZG Garz 345000 airfield4_1 Z Zerbst 345000 airfield4_5 K Zerbst 708000 airfield4_3 KJ Zerbst 708000 airfield4_6 ZB Zerbst 350000 airfield82_1 GX Kothen 350000 airfield82_2 RX Kothen 718000 airfield82_0 G Kothen 718000 airfield82_4 R Kothen 365000 airfield157_2 LU Allstedt 365000 airfield157_3 BZ Allstedt 376000 airfield84_0 UU Parchim 376000 airfield84_3 AS Parchim 398000 airfield169_1 DK Merseburg 398000 airfield169_7 KD Merseburg 412000 airfield24_2 W Neuruppin 412000 airfield24_3 G Neuruppin 842000 airfield24_0 GK Neuruppin 842000 airfield24_1 WO Neuruppin 423000 airfield25_3 NE Peenemunde 423000 airfield25_4 EN Peenemunde 425000 airfield171_3 M Leipzig 425000 airfield171_4 S Leipzig 426000 airfield236_1 G Mockau 426000 airfield236_2 L Mockau 430000 airfield26_2 M Schönefeld 430000 airfield26_8 S Schönefeld 442000 airfield12_1 OM Finow 442000 airfield12_2 RG Finow 460000 airfield23_2 T Neubrandenburg 460000 airfield23_3 DK Neubrandenburg 476000 airfield21_0 U Lerz 476000 airfield21_4 B Lerz For the WSL or mingw64 users, all frequencies in the beacon file can be listed using grep "frequency" beacons.lua | sort (There is probably also some unnecessarily convoluted powershell command that can do the same thing)

Soviet livery, North Korean, GDR, Vietnamese livery -

Well, in the next version 1.4.2, ME will act as the main command post. I disabled MC because I experimentally discovered that creating a huge brigade of several ME and 30+ PU increases the group's reaction time to 1-2 minutes (!!!). And this applies to any complexes in the game. I noticed that the more intermediaries there are between the detection radar and the TEL, the greater the implicit delay (not `reactionTime`). I assume this is caused by the iterative determination of virtual trackers by radars with the ability to detect and intercept multiple targets simultaneously. Simply put, the more `ws` in the SAM config, the more delay there is. I plan to refactor this part of the mod configuration in version 1.4.2.

Wow, beautiful. I found the original text here: https://www.vfp62.com/SR-71.html And the relevant paragraph by Brian Schul: "One moonless night, while flying a routine training mission over the Pacific, I wondered what the sky would look like from 84,000 feet if the cockpit lighting were dark. While heading home on a straight course, I slowly turned down all of the lighting, reducing the glare and revealing the night sky. Within seconds, I turned the lights back up, fearful that the jet would know and somehow punish me. But my desire to see the sky overruled my caution, I dimmed the lighting again. To my amazement, I saw a bright light outside my window. As my eyes adjusted to the view, I realized that the brilliance was the broad expanse of the Milky Way, now a gleaming stripe across the sky. Where dark spaces in the sky had usually existed, there were now dense clusters of sparkling stars Shooting stars flashed across the canvas every few seconds. It was like a fireworks display with no sound. I knew I had to get my eyes back on the instruments, and reluctantly I brought my attention back inside. To my surprise, with the cockpit lighting still off, I could see every gauge, lit by starlight. In the plane's mirrors, I could see the eerie shine of my gold spacesuit incandescently illuminated in a celestial glow. I stole one last glance out the window. Despite our speed, we seemed still before the heavens, humbled in the radiance of a much greater power. For those few moments, I felt a part of something far more significant than anything we were doing in the plane. The sharp sound of Walt's voice on the radio brought me back to the tasks at hand as I prepared for our descent." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Shul

Pure io preso tramite il sito dello sviluppatore e non vedo l'ora di poterlo provare.

The F-14 is such an iconic aircraft, and having a docu-campaign dedicated to it is a big win for the DCS community. I’m really excited to see how the storyline unfolds. Campaigns like this not only test flying skills but also bring a lot of immersion and history to the sim.

Was genau meinst du den? Es gibt nur eine F-15C, und die kann nur Luft-Luft, sie hat keine AG-Funktionalität.

Will the rest of tutorial videos from Wags start rolling out soon for MiG-29 ?

Hallo, ich hab die F15c von FC3 (Belsimtec) trotzdem wird mir die AA Variante nicht angezeigt, ich kann sie plazieren aber mehr nicht. Die AG funktioniert tadellos. Irgendwelche Ideen?

a canard is the little wings on the front of the main wings, sorry for my english, I french

Вы вторую миссию начинали? Всё так и задуманно . Это начало истории, пазл будет складываться с каждым новым вылетом. Замысел простирается дальше одной миссии. Он будет вести игрока — через каждый бой, каждый вылет и в небе и на земле — вплоть до финальной, 18-й "серии" этой кампании. Если есть сомнения куда лететь, откройте карту

Thanks to fellow member =GR= Jackal from the squadron, DML is working as a charm so CSAR is back on, along with DML persistence module, CSAR missions can be flown on another day if necessary! @cfrag Thanks for your efforts and support!

Please take a scan here;

ED struggles enough getting the Hornet finished as-is and that's after removing or not planning for features that are perfectly accurate for the stated scope, even for the exact timeframe, variant and operator. Hell, this even applies to modules that are missing trivial additions, where there's no research or technical hurdle, the features are perfectly accurate to the exact scope ED stated and they're features present on other ED modules and yet, despite all of that, we can't get them. It's not only unrealistic (in a couple of senses of the word) but something really wouldn't sit right with me if unrealistic features get implemented while perfectly realistic ones (like TAMMAC maps for instance) get snubbed. And what's even more realistic still? A 2005 Hornet with 2005-era weapons. And this is a false equivalency - DCS mission design is designed to be a sandbox and completely up to you - the aircraft often are not. This is by design - the idea is that the building blocks of the missions are supposed to be accurate, but the scenario you make out of them is up to you. I'd argue that restricting away fictional or hypothetical missions and only permitting accurate, historical ones is far more limiting in terms of gameplay, than having aircraft that's supposed to be accurate. The other thing when it comes to missions is that DCS more often than not lacks coherent, comprehensive assets on relevant theatres to make realistic missions and campaigns - it's always the same ship of theseus thing where far more units need to have stand-ins because the correct one doesn't exist. So in that sense, it would be impossible to make accurate, historical missions in the first place. Let's just take an example - aircraft carrier operations. Using the non tanker version of the S-3B? Well that's an aircraft variant from prior to 1998. Using CVNs 71-75 of the Supercarrier module? Well, what they're fitted with means they range from 2008 (CVN 73) to 2017 (CVN 72) at the absolute earliest and yet they're using a Sea Sparrow version from the mid 1980s. Using the E-2D? That didn't reach IOC until 2015 either, only it's defined with the wrong radar and the performance is wrong even to that radar. We've already got an incoherent mess and we've only gotten started. And let's say we get the GBU-54, okay great, we've made the already incoherent aircraft even more so, great! Are we going to get anything else a 2012 Hornet might have? AIM-120C-7 for instance? No? I mean, we can't get it for the F-16CM either, even though it's accurate there. It isn't puzzling - it's perfectly consistent with the design of the game, as stated previously. I mean, nothing is stopping me from having a Pakistan vs Sweden scenario, set on the Falkland Islands, set before the first manned aircraft took flight. It doesn't make a blind bit of difference to what weapons are available to the aircraft or what systems it has. Except this is utterly dreadful logic which taken to its ends permits basically anything so long players have the choice not to be affected by it: Let's make the Hornet's radar see things 400 nmi away, if players don't like it, simply choose not to set your radar scale so far out. Let's add the PL-15 and PL-17 or hell any other weapon ever, players still have CHOICE not to use these, so what's the issue? Let's make the aircraft fly at mach 5, don't like it? Choose not to fly so fast. Found a bug with a weapon? Choose not to use it, problem solved! Or how about, if you don't like the fact that the Hornet predates GBU-54 and doesn't have it, choose to fly something else that does have it. Clearly a line has to be drawn somewhere and again, given ED's issues with finishing their aircraft, even to very narrow scopes I don't see any good reason to have that line any further from where it is now. If that wasn't the case and the Hornet had all the relevant features it should, maybe I'd agree with you, but it doesn't, so I don't.

Absolutely. There’s a note about that in the mission description. In short, you’ll need to pull the script out of the .miz and modify the fuel tank capacity, save, reload into the .miz. The script is well-documented and you’ll see exactly what to do once you open it.

Ist im Moment schwierig, wei ich das Modul schon wieder deaktiviert habe und ich mich erst mal weiter mit anderen Baustellen beschäftige. Ich mache das aber später mal. Ich habe parallel aber bei auch schon mal bei Rudel nachgefragt. Scheint so zu sein, dass das Teil mit einem separaten Pedal wesentlich leichter steuerbar ist. Leider kann ich aus gesundheitlichen Gründen kein Pedal nutzen.

Any word on the VR performance, Afghanistan, GermanyCW, Kola, Mariana’s Normandy is horrible. Only mediocre VR performance in Caucuses. VR PiMax Crystal V1. OG.

ok, I use a pretty old VPC rudder pedals set and with that the OV-10 taxis pretty easily once a bit of practice, I can even turn it on itself inside a hangar, like this: perhaps you could purchase a used set online ( as they can be pretty expensive if purchased brand new) ? Eduardo