All Activity

Just like you found a MH60K manual floating around online a UH60M manual is out there. think I saw one on coursehero. But yea I would agree that the mh60k despite being a older bird has more advanced features such as a multi mode radar and FlIR . Samewith firepower. Mh60,s Can mount m134 miniguns for the door gunners where uh60m only uses m60 or m240 machineguns. The only advantage that comes to mind with uh60m is the blueforce tracker integration for situational awareness and more power with GE-701D engines. But this isn't surprising the 160th soar had typically have more sophiticated variants of helicopters that regular army aviation uses. Ie compare features described in the aforementioned 1994 mh60k manual to uh60L manuals in the a similar timeframe. Limas are almost entirely analog.

Hi. I'm trying mission 4 in first in weasels over syria. When I get to the ip and turn on my tpod and have selected my laser guided bombs, my laser will not arm when I turn it on. (No L on my tpod screen or hud) I seem to get a T coming on where the L should be and also get a trng message instead of a cmbt on the tpod screen as well. It's driving me nuts. I have carried out training missions with laser guided bombs with no issues. Any ideas?

I have such a hard time understanding the military parlance. But I am an idiot. I wish there was sub-set of information available maybe on the kneeboard or your flight kind of clarifying what we are doing "OK Devil 32 let's look for that Fulcrum at bearing 270" - I know dumbing it down negates the verisimilitude but KNOWING what I am actually doing would really make this campaign more accessible. To be fair, I find a lot of campaigns have the same issue (Persian Lion 1 &2 are the exception)

Hi cfrag, My friends and I really enjoy your mission v1.8 — it’s so much fun! We’ve all had a great time playing it. We also run a training multiplayer server, and since the upper-right area of the Caucasus map is empty, we thought about inserting your mission there. That way, we could both train together and also enjoy the dynamic campaign at the same time. So far, we’ve completed the script integration and translation (our native language is Chinese), as well as unit duplication using ME templates. However, there are so many trigger zones, and they are tied to many things, that it has become very difficult to move. May I ask if you have a better method for porting your mission? Or perhaps is there a way to reduce the number of trigger zones so we could handle them manually? If you have any documentation or recommendations we could follow, we would greatly appreciate it. If you prefer to talk directly, you can contact me on Discord (text only): liyu0410. I’m not able to speak English verbally, but I can communicate in writing — Discord text messages are the quickest way to reach me. Thank you for your time and for creating such a great mission. Best regards, Liyu

Ok so I can fly it all alone but I had better have some good voice-overs to help over the rough spots. Its not like I can just jump in and automatically know W-T-FRICK Captain Kirk! Even he had a gang of 4 to handle the beast.

That would be an agreement between the team and ED. But what I'm hoping for too. [emoji1303] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Right, the resources might not be that much of an issue for making content, because then one can just use the resources one wants on the video, and making many clips is not that hard, if we had a working replay with diffent camera angles and rewind and fast forward functions. [emoji6] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Yes, I have read about it and I also mentioned in the original post, that I am aware of the purpose of the replay system. We got some additional camera options in the replays, so ED is well aware of what we use it for most of the time. It is been unchanged since lockon days, I'm hoping we'll get some improvements or completely new system made for creating videos or taking screenshots. I understand recording all of the units may take some resources and replays could be big. but just allow it to be switched on or off.

Common error in the log being experienced by other users as well. Renaming Saved Games\DCS to Saved Games\DCS.bak as mentioned above will achieve the same result as just renaming Saved Games\DCS\MissionEditor to MissionEditor.old which is the current workaround for this error. 2025-09-23 07:07:40.857 ALERT LUACOMMON (Main): Error: GUI Error: [string "./MissionEditor/modules/me_news.lua"]:146: bad argument #2 to 'date' (number expected, got string) GUI debug.traceback: stack traceback: [C]: ? [C]: in function 'date' [string "./MissionEditor/modules/me_news.lua"]:146: in function 'showNews' [string "./MissionEditor/modules/me_news.lua"]:259: in function 'funCallBack' [string "./MissionEditor/modules/me_waitDsbweb.lua"]:90: in function 'updater' [string "./Scripts/UpdateManager.lua"]:64: in function <[string "./Scripts/UpdateManager.lua"]:40> I believe directly deleting the `news.lua` file in that folder has also solved for folk (which would also be the same as renaming the MissionEditor folder). I've tested this myself and that file gets recreated on next startup so seems to be safe.

I agree and hope for a new reworked system. But if you have read the other threads, you must have understood that what we currently have is NOT a replay system. It's a debugging tool that have been made available to us, for better or for worse. It just records our inputs, not what happens in the "world". So, it's pretty useless in this state, because it just replays the mission as it is with our inputs. That's why AI can react differently with each "replay". I completely understand your frustration, but don't think what we have will ever get better. The tracks are great for the devs for the debugging, what what we need is a completely new recording appliance. But I guess that will be very taxing on the system recording 1000+ units in some cases. Oh, well! Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Okay, so it should be easy to present evidence to prove that the blanking circuit installed on SPO-15LM's for 9.21A mig-29's can handle the HPRF waveform then

In DCS version 2.9.20 .15010 , yes, the livery folder name for LAZ-695 is changed (I don't know the strict date and patch number it was done, though) . The current livery folder name is "laz bus". To solve it in users' side, Touching DCS install folder is not smart --- make a new folder under User Games tree maybe easier and compatible , until newer DCS patch will solve the problem. Temporary solution by users. Open two folders "DCS installed drive..../ DCS World/ Bazar/ Liveries/ laz-695/" and "your user name.../ Saved Games/ DCS/ Liveries". Add a new folder "laz bus" under your Saved Games/ DCS/ Liveries/ . Copy 12x subfolders in Bazar/ Liveries/ laz-695/ into Saved Games/ DCS/ Liveries/ laz bus/ . My testing is OK. After DCS future patch will fix the bug, erase the user folder Saved Games/ DCS/ Liveries/ laz bus/ .

I’m having trouble understanding how the trim system has been implemented for the sim. Flying above 60kts its flies like a dream. However, when hovering, I feel like I’m fighting the heading hold the entire time, unless I constantly click the trim release switch. Even holding the trim release switch doesn’t seem to disengage heading hold as it does in the real aircraft. So, is there a way to disengage the trim for just the pedals, the way the micro switches do in the real bird? I would like to bind the brake axis of my pedals to pedal trim release, so anytime my feet are touching the pedals, trim is released. Then when I pull my feet off the pedals (release brakes) it re-engages trim/heading hold. Is that possible, or am I asking too much? Really all I want is to be able to figure out why the aircraft fights me so much while doing a pedal turn during a hover.

Head position is recorded to some degree. If you save a track and replay it on flat screen, you'll see the view move around to follow your head movements, at least until you change views. So tracks are not irrelevant.

I mean, there is nothing particularly complex about making a blocking signal thats measured in khz in the 1970's. Like I could build one using 70's era components today for like 10 bucks. So that argument doesn't really sound realistic. Its a simple crystal oscillator and divider circuit. Maybe they have a circuit from something that isn't a mig29 tho. Since the SPO-15 was modular for many good reasons. The blanking circuits would certainly be modular depending on what platform it was installed on. If you are using a mig23 blanker on a mig29 I'm sure that doesn't work. But its pretty far from "rokit/elektronik" science to make a blanker circuit work at the desired PRF, be it LPRF/MPRF/HPRF from an electronics standpoint. There might some additional caveats synching it which might explain the various "abberant" behaviors tho. Also to address the "1 cable" thing that was brought up, thats like a non issue. Its a coax cable sending a timed signal, like ever other radio cable on earth, nothing "primitive or advanced about it"

W-3WA Sokół

I've decided to write this post since I didnt see anyone who reported this issue get enough attention, so I'll try myself As you may know, we - content creators are constantly working with DCS replay system. Anyone who worked with them knows how annoying can they be. Seems that with recent updates almost all replays have some sort of problems in them. Most commonly it is with how AI behaves while playing live and how it behaves on replay. It very often happens that AI enemy planes manouver differently which makes targeting them on radar impossible, since it recoded my input aiming the TDC cursor at somewhere the bandit is not anymore (despite it was there live), or similiar thing with vertical scan or HMD targeting - In F-16 if you are not in cockpit and moving your head to aim at the bandit the fox-2 wont get a lock, so how are you supposed to record it "from the outside"? The other problem with that is often times you not being able to shoot at nothing - because AI went the other way on replay - means the AI continues to do its thing, shoots you, and then you fly the plane wreck till the end of mission. The same happens with missile targeting, your radar can hold lock in live gameplay but can drop lock on replay - meaning fox1 that hit the bandit, wont hit on replay. Same with fox-2 and fox-3 missiles, they often dont hit their target on replay or even go for a different one. Why are their tracking and flypath being recalculated again on replay? Recently theres this bug where your plane will vibrate violently during flight - especially on fc3 planes and mods, happens by itself, when using autopilot or damper, or when the plane gets damaged - even seen on Wags fulcrum videos (which he claims is not a replay bug but rather something to do with the fulcrum, we all know its not, looks exactly the same as the replay bug thats been there for years). MiG-29A Fulcrum often does not retract the front landing gear, you probably know about this. I understand that replay feature is mainly for debugging but like c'mon, it works exactly like 10 years ago, records inputs as unreliable as 10 years ago, and almost nobody uses it for debugging but for screenshots and videos. Why cant it record position and state of every object on the map so there is no problems like mentioned above? We dont mind the replay being hundreds of megabytes in size - IL-2 Sturmovik already does that and noone is complaining since the replays do their job there. Especially when you can disable track recording which I'm sure you can In dcs. Some of the replays are straight up innaccessible. You either get "mission load fail" message, or when you load a mulitplayer replay theres no replay, rather just server mission started locally on your pc. It doesnt matter if you use mods or not, although modded dcs tends to have this issue more often which I kinda understand. As a person who was uploading dcs videos almost daily, I know how much pain in the a$$ it is to work with them, often having to replay and record the same mission over and over again until replay works fine. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one having problems with that, because Its been like that for years. Please do something with that, especially given the fact that without Youtubers and other content creators DCS wouldnt be as popular as it is, so at least give us, creators, a proper working tool. Have a nice evening

This problem was first noticed by another player who posted the attached video with the file name starting with "7b21a". I, ColdClaws, and another player named Zipper 1-1 have replicated this. In the attached track files and tacview the R-27R fails to start tracking at all in many engagements despite a solid radar lock. In what may be a separate bug, the R-27R appears to track but fails to explode in a near miss despite being within NEZ (no escape zone). This seems to only happen when the target makes a sudden turn right before the missile would impact. There are hits in these tracks but in a significant amount of the engagements the missiles miss when they should have hit or proxy fused. In the tacview, the R-27Rs don't match the position that they were in the track file while the Aim-7M's position was identical within the tacview and track files. Also, no chaff or notching was used during these tests, only cranking, which is why I have included a screenshot from the tacview to show that I was never in a notching position. The two track files are from the same mission. One is from my perspective and the other is from the other pilot's, Zipper 1-1, perspective. The trackfile named "1v1 miz3" was from the player Zipper 1-1, who was primarily in the Su-27 firing R-27Rs at me. The track file named server-20250923 was from me, ColdClaws, primarily defending in the F-15C. The track files are about ten minutes long but only these two planes are in the mission with no scripts or mods, just testing the R-27R. 7b21a7c828ec2b11962463fb47e79d4a.mp4 1v1 miz3-20250923-201636.trk server-20250923-201621.trk Tacview-20250923-201626-DCS-Host-1v1 miz3.zip.acmi

Must have been bad timing when I clicked on it. So Preschen was the only base with German Fulcrums? Sucks that we don't have that airbase on the Germany map.

Bye Phant

Is it possible to add AI to the DCS core?

No, you’re fine.

When starting the 29 i usually don't use ground power but instead turn on my apu like in the mi 24. I've seen other people just using battery power to start up the whole plane. Does the apu have any effect on how the plane actually starts up?

Ok, we figured it out, well Wags figured it out first. There is some issues in release that are already fixed on internal builds that he used for his video. I am hopeful that these fixes will make it into the next hotfix/patch. I will test the latest Release Candidate tonight and see. Thanks for your patience on this.