All Activity

Hi, the "SAM Sites Asset Pack" mod is an add on to any ground to air mods like HDS or CurrentHill's Russian/USA/China... pack. It adds 4 functioning early warnings radars and some objects to add to your SAM Sites (bunkers, protections...) to enhance the simulation...like this:null

The SA-11 in some situations is able to fire in an optical guidance mode which does not use radar, and hence you wouldn't get an RWR alert. This typically only occurs at relatively close range where the launcher could see you visually. Not sure if DCS models visual limitations with weather/clouds though.

Close ups....

The entire software & hardware industry has been making innovations along the way. @bfr named a few, but there are many more examples, like decoupling the soft- and hardware ever more. It used to be that you ran one program at a time on a computer, so if that program didn't need all the power of the computer, the rest of the capacity would be wasted, even if you had something useful for the PC to do. You couldn't run multiple things at once. Then they developed multi-tasking, which in turn opened the way to having different users share a computer. And nowadays we have the cloud where you simply request resources and you don't even know or care anymore which real hardware your code runs on. Note that some of these innovations that were intended for servers, actually benefit consumers today, since DOS, Windows 3.1 and Windows 95/98 (and the old MacOS) were unstable messes that didn't properly prevent software from damaging the system or other software on the computer. In servers where people share the system, that is not just a crash or data corruption risk, but a security risk. Both MS and Apple abandoned their consumer OS in favor of a new OS designed for servers, and thanks to that we have way more stable systems. Another example is that in the past, we would set up servers manually, so we would never know exactly what was done to a server over the years, or where the files are that we added. So if a rebuild or migration or upgrade of a server was needed, it was always a pain to know how to set the new server up or how to keep things working. Nowadays we package server-software with a layered system, so we can see exactly what layers we have and what is in each layer. For example, you may have a OS layer that is maintained by one group, and then another group adds a Java runtime layer on top of that, and then you add your own software on top of those layers. All of that is created based on a sort of recipe, similar to how you can bake a cake by following a recipe. That way you can fairly easily do an OS or Java Runtime upgrade, since you just change the layers in the recipe, and rebake that software cake. This is much quicker, safer and easier than to have to manually upgrade things. On Windows and in gaming that is not yet copied, although for regular software on Linux, a light version of that solution is often used. Now, to you it might seem that people are just changing things up for no reason, but there is actually a lot of innovation going on. That's why nowadays we try to build software in more maintainable, smaller chunks, so we can replace chunks, rather than all of it. And you don't actually get it. The choice that customers/bosses have is not to have the exact same software, but with prettier source code, but to either have a system where changes cost immense effort (and thus lots of money), and run a big risk of causing problems, that programmers cannot prevent. Or alternatively, to make an investment that will pay itself back since you can then add new features at much lower cost and with much less risk of incidents. You're like the old guy who is telling the builder that he is just trying to scam him for unnecessary work, when the old guy is living in a house with a hole in the roof, a rotten foundation and a DIY electricity system that can short-circuit and burn down the house at any moment. Only at very high cost, and by limiting the functionality of the software. In most cases that is simply not worth the cost, especially since you are wrong, and at most you can prevent some forms of hacking. One of the most successful forms of hacking is social engineering, where they hack the human, not the software. So no software is truly unhackable unless there is no human involves, but then what is the use of the software? Yet those games are not actually build with old technology. They are just made to look retro. They also support high resolution displays. And typically they also use modern gaming innovations that you don't tend to notice until you go back to the old games. I remember going back to Dune II, and my great memories were dashed a bit by how clunky the interface is, compared to newer RTS games. There is a reason why fans made an enhanced version (Dune Dynasty). So even that classic game suffers from software rot in the sense that people's expectations have moved on.

This morning I got an email saying its now in done with production and into final inspection. The first email said they expected the HMD to be done with production that week which was the friday the 25th. So apparently it's made it through the assembly line and at least functions well enough to be sent off for final testing. This testing phase has no ETA but they threatened to send an email once completed where they will verify my shipping address.. I'm curious how long this will be.

It's still your answer, because it's WHY you're not getting the MP you're expecting. At full forward throttle on the real Corsair ADI kicks in, which is what boosts MAP into the 59in range. Since currently injection is NOT being activated by throttle position in the M3 Corsair, it's not going to reach that pressure UNLESS you hit the "Water Injection On" button. Throttle alone isn't enough.

The difficulty of handling the Corsair has been GROSSLY exaggerated by popular culture. In reality, it was found to be not much more difficult to fly than any other high-powered fighter under most conditions. Flown in a clean configuration (no or combat flaps, landing gear up) it was stable and relatively benign, and gave ample warning of a developing stall. It was also not unique when it came to spins: The P-51 had wicked spin behavior, and was notoriously unstable if maneuvering while the fuselage fuel tank was full. Its low-speed "dirty" stall (full flaps and gear out) was a unique situation.

This issue reminds me of something that might be before a lot of people's time. In 2018, ED changed the wheel friction for a lot of warbirds to make them slide across the ground. The move wasn't made to increase realism or improve FM's but to improve accessibility to the module, "The ground handling was changed along with Spitfire ground handling improvements, it does feel 'easier', but the wing tipping was pretty easy before. Its felt this is a better representation taking into account that you lose a lot of that feeling you would have as a real pilot to prevent such issues." Nineline, Aug 9, 2018. DCS does have an issue with rudders. A lot of people in this day and age don't even have rudder pedals, let alone good ones, and modules need to be sold to keep the lights on. Aligning a plane on a runway with rudder is important, and if you do it wrong in a real aircraft you get a screech and a big kick in the pants and several words from any nearby CFI. But it is hard to do in sim so they make the planes slide around the ground without biting into the concrete to make this task more doable. Same thing with engine torque, and spins, and basically overall ruder use, which plays an outsized role in warbirds. There has to be a balance that works commercially, and I know I will always be in the minority on these things. I liked the K9 better back when it tipped over and smashed a wing if you weren't lined up on touchdown. If you make the skill ceiling too low these things get boring quickly. Too high and no one wants to play. I don't know what the right answer is to these questions.

If I pause DCS, I see a black dot. Unpaused,this MiG-21 is a translucent greasy stain. -Ryan

DCS 2.9.18.12899 Bye Phant

Gun camera box(?) and the cowlings as well. The cowl flaps in particular if fully opened will completely disappear at the first LOD level. It's hard to get any decent screenshots/videos since the holes appear at such a short LOD distance:

Any such head restriction must be an option so the players can choose to fly without it. If servers have issues with cheating then they can enable or disable as they please.

ahh. I have to say, he still sounds drunk, lol

Twitchy, responsive, difficult to handle ≠ good or correct FM. This would be like comparing the Spitfire's FM to the Mustang's and claiming the Mustang's FM isn't good enough.

That's not my question. My question is if the throttle range is okay, as I am not getting the manifold pressure I should be getting according to the throttle setting.

I splurged for the new rig. Big monitor. 5080. 150+fps. DCS is absolutely beautiful with all the settings maxed. Only problem: I can't see the bandits at all. Two miles away? Nothing .The bandits just get swallowed by the antialiasing. They're just a greasy streak until they disappear into the nothing. I've tried forcing the K-preset. What else is there to do? I'm back to where I was with my old computer. Thanks. -Ryan

I just finished building a force feedback flight stick with this DIY kit. The craftsmanship and quality are excellent. The kit was shipped within a week and arrived to the U.S. within two weeks. rafalg78 always answered my email questions by the following day. The kit has several important key features: It has threaded inserts and can be disassembled/reassembled indefinitely without concern for threads stripping The gimbal is printed in carbon fiber (PETG CF) The rest of the components are glass reinforced PETG Almost all screws are grade 5 allen head The parts have very tight tolerance control so be careful to crisscross tighten the screws and you will hear a pleasing click as the parts snap into place. Overall assembly is easy and the parts fit very snugly. All electrical connectors are already installed. I used this power supply. You will also need a USB b to USB a cable, the VPForce DIY kit and a flight grip. I used a Virpil Alpha Constellation. Support has been great from rafalg78 and VPForce. I use this with X-plane, MSFS 2020 and MSFS 2024.

Excellent report, thanks! The ARC-210 isn't used a whole lot in the campaign; the presets come from the legacy A-10C version where only the ARC-164 would have been able to dial in those freqs, and these presets should all be correct for it; but you're right of course that the ARC-210 presets should also be set. Shouldn't be too much hassle to also name them. Will take a look at that!

just because software can be updated doesnt make it financially viable. This isnt GTA5, it doesnt get the billions of shark card revenues like R* gets.

A-10C Basic Course Start! - Starting July 31st @1800 UTC - Learn all the essential you need in taming the Warthog to put warheads on foreheads! https://discord.gg/takeflightdcs F/A-18C Basic Course! - Starting August 1st @2000 UTC - Learn all the essential you need to pester your enemies in the Hornet! 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!

It is this. The first iteration of the Corsair was unlike any of the other warbirds, responsive and dangerous to fly, required a lot of attention. It even had wild stall/spin characteristics, unlike all the other warbirds which end a spin obediently with any application of opposite pedal. The new version of the FM is like a 2000hp general aviation aircraft. Old FM required good technique and I think would have been quite difficult without good peripherals. The new FM probably works just fine with a couple hours experience and a twist grip joystick. I would pay for the module again several times over to get the old FM back.

Those locomotives are really no different to the ancient games and software that people keep running on either preserved hardware, or emulators that mimic that hardware, including its many flaws. That evades exactly one of the issues I named, a changing environment. But no one balances their sheets on Excel 1.0 and most gamers are not into the old games. Note that no one uses those century+ old locomotives for their historic purpose, but they are only used for tourism and museums. It's really no different with old software. This is just due to supply and demand. There are programmers who love to do the same kind of programming that John Carmack did early on, where games were written in assembly, which is very close to the raw hardware (or at least the abstraction layer over the hardware). But aside from some rare exceptions, no one is willing to have programmers spend a ton of effort on relatively little functionality, nor do people nowadays tend to accept the limitations of the software of yesterday. So it's as useful to blame programmers for not sticking with that old software, as it is to blame railroad engineers for moving to electric trains, with wifi, charge ports, etc.

It's improved. Before the Corsair was especially suffering from excessive yaw instability. And I'm not talking about the rudder inputs, it's like the tail was just sliding out from under it in any sort of maneuver, which the historical aircraft didn't experience and was actually noted to be very stable.