All Activity

Quick patch v1.1.1 that wasn't included in yesterday's update by mistake. Includes fix to one wrongly exported model and addition of better cockpit lights.

You can just create a radio menu in F10 radio menu to command them fire when you need it.

Yes. of course I'm unaware. Thanks for the input. So, 50% work on DCS core and 50% are split between terrains and modules? ...or am I getting even more confused?

Its the only answer I have for you, the track replay system needs to be redone, its something for the future but I do not know when. I will add however that if you want to add a track replay showing the Spitfire issue we will show it to the team. thank you

Even a mark on the windscreen would suffice.

Maybe you are unaware but we have many teams, more than 50% of our team work on the core of DCS, we have modules teams, and terrain teams. Everyone is working as fast as they can on the tasks they have been given. We do not share timelines until we are close to release. We share our plans and our work shows in our change logs and newsletters. thank you

With all due respect BN, calling that a solution when you're basically telling us to go pound sand is a bit of a stretch.

Part of the problem with determining what the specs should be is it's unclear what configuration the Navy evaluations were performed under. The F4U-1A with ADI was able to hit about 420mph TAS at critical altitude with a combat-condition bird. A specially-prepared, stripped, and sealed 1A (tail hook removed and its compartment faired over for maximum drag reduction) was able to hit closer to 430. However, there's a question Rudel pointed out about what being flown "clean" meant for the F4U-1D. The 1D normally retained the knuckle pylons even when not carrying ordinance, with an aerodynamic cap fitted over the bomb/tank shackles. What we don't know is whether those pylons were removed when the Navy ran performance evaluations on 1D (or -4, for that matter) airframes. So if the Navy clocked the 1D at 410mph at critical altitude, is that with or without the pylons in place? That's an important distinction, because if that's without the pylons that could potentially knock another 10mph off top level speed once they're put back on (the 1D was heavier than the 1A at the same fuel and ammunition load which would add some induced drag).

My issue with this whole thing is that we in community that support ED really have no way of knowing that our requests are even being considered or implemented until ... they are. ED never says. "We hear you. We will be implementing these features by this date." We only here the dreaded "maybe" and "in the future". This community provides a lot of insight and experience not only to ourselves, but to ED as well and we all do it in support of making DCS better. I would just like to see definitive timelines and a better interaction with us in the community.

NTTR is one of my favorite maps ever. Why? Because it's where Airforce and Navy train... And I.

Maybe Black Diamonds Aerobatic Team. In DCS we have L-39C from Black Diamonds, so Lim-6 from this team can looks nice

Okay. ED may do this already, but I would suggest having sub-teams for R&M (Revision and Maintenance) and others for New Development.

My guess it's simply "every frame" or not, as it is already.

Is there a function to slave the seeker onto a radar-lock as well?

Will that be explained for those of us who don’t have a degree in computer graphics? Does that mean we’ll have depth perception when looking in the mirrors?

Personally, I wouldn't mind paying for it (discounted for F-14 owners, naturally) as it's quite a lot of extra work that was never mentioned on the roadmap, but that's up to HB to decide, of course. Though, I would really love to have the F-14D as well (even without IRST if that's the major issue with it). It's a shame it got canned from the start, basically; it would have been so cool with the A2G SAR modes (as on the F-15E), AMRAAMs, etc.

I hope Eagle Dynamics can clarify where they found evidence in the first place. Don't trust source from wartime mig-29 in 1999. As those were not maintained, nor updated as they were supposed to be in 1996 !

No, I have not tried a newer version. The reason is that the release after the one I got broke using Mbucchias external quadviews and Tallymouse Quadviews companion app. Fortuneatly I read about this before doing any update. Then after that they released a new version that fixed this issue, but I held back - letting others do the beta testing And then they released the newest Pimax Play version yesterday that seem to give people this swirls issue in the center of the display. So for me - if it is working - I wait... but.. the newest features with scaling and sharpening would be nice - for example in No Man's Sky VR which I plan to pick up again after not playing it for a long time. No Man's Sky doesn't support OpenXR even, and no dynamic foveated rendering either it seems.

I will second that recommendation. Very useful tool for the Apache.

this might help if you have issues with joystick ID's changing and you loose your bindings

Any clue about this ?

The schedule, for what I can say, is: F-18/F-16 MiG-29A AH-64D (maybe) The best solution for the meanwhile is using tool like CoordinateConverter by FalcoGer

Yes I had the free option

Did you try the newer Pimax Play versions? Did you get tracking issues with them which are not present in 1.40? Maybe I should try 1.40 too. 1.41 and 1.42 both give me jittering in DCS. I only play DCS so I don't mind losing the most recent features of 1.41+. I guess you can't downgrade the HMD firmware. I'm on 1.08.

Was it a free upgrade? I assume you have a licensed copy of W10 as I do.