All Activity

Never trust a YouTuber that has no idea about PCs. Do not disable E cores and don't use lasso. DCS uses E cores for less important tasks. If you disable them, DCS uses more valuable cores for the same tasks. That's a downside.

Кстати вот в этом видео от "Wags" они не крутятся, хотя вооружение применяется. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUHbn9UcBeg

I stand corrected. Didn't imply that. Hence my comment regarding the DC, where I assume MT will be extracbeneficial both for AI logic with multiple assets, pathfinding and the new GFM coming.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160304062329/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12035522/Syria-air-strikes-Typhoons-and-Tornados-to-pair-up-in-attempt-to-avoid-clashes-with-Russia.html Interesting on the state of the Typhoon’s weapons integration in 2015 for the RAF.

ED treats sensitive documentation from both sides the same way. I had some documents that I wanted to post on the RU-side some one year ago, maybe less, and after contacting Chizh about it specifically, was recommended against it for the exact reason of ITAR. ED doesn't care about whether the document is found anywhere. As you post it, you are also obliged to show either a stamp along with the document allowing for public distribution, or eventually, make sure that it is not confidential. In addition to this, you need to make sure that the document is not newer than 1980s. 1.16 is fairly strictly enforced on both sides.

Hey everyone, I was editing my AN_ALR_SymbolsBase.lua to update the RWR symbol for my modded aircraft and accidentally deleted the line for the new high fidelity Fulcrum. Can someone look in their AN_ALR_SymbolsBase.lua and tell me what the name for it is in there, pls?

Максим, возможно дело в недавнем обновлении от 24.09, где было сделано: Настроить же задержки можно в редакторе миссии или вызвав меню перевооружения в игре, далее выбрать нужную бомбу и кликнуть по оранжевому треуголнику: Но не факт

That's not completely true. They've said that the server is ST and that moving it to MT is low priority since there would be little gain for it being MT. So they haven't said it's never coming, but they did indicate server MT isn't coming soon.

I liked that. Bit of a trailer feel to it. A little too hard on the very-close-in-action for my taste, but it's nice work.

Приветствую. Проблема такая - кабина с надписями на русском (то бишь "по умолчанию"), а индикация на ИЛС на английском? Как исправить, подскажите пожалуйста. P. S. В этой ветке уже задавали этот вопрос выше но почему-то ответа так и нет. Может просто затерялся в обсуждении

Конечно можно, если модуль дает в экспорте ффб данные о том что механизм загрузки отключен - то и ффб не должен давать усилия кроме вязкости перемещения ручки. На кайове это работает, на апаче не пробовал.

Yeah, not for the server version though. Don't remember when they removed ST to be honest. Was it when they dropped 2.9? I thought it was after, not important. The text is now bluish-grey in the Dark Theme, but readable. Trick is to set it to auto.

Thanks. I realized I was putting everything into the wrong folder. Once I figured that out and created a folder for Open Mod Manager, everything works.

Thanks MAXsenna, changed the Colour. Funny thing is, 2.9 was said to be MT and they removed the ST all together.

If you put the new textures in Core this is the correct file structure, works fine for me.

@OutLord The MT server version has not been released yet. There has been no info or news about it, ever, only comments about it being ST. To my knowledge, the ST version of the client supported audio on a second thread, which makes the answer to most of your questions, single core only. This might, (hopefully), change later when the Dynamic Campaign supports MP in some distant future. Cheers! PS: Your text is black, kinda hard on the eyes for us darksiders.

I tried expanding the core zip textures file and copying in the files from the mod, then re-zipped the file and replaced it in the core files texture folder. When I entered the F-16 cockpit it was all green squares so clearly something is missing or I did something wrong. @fagulha Any suggestions or pointers on how to do this?

The thread below yours has that information:

Hi everyone,I'm seeking clarification on the CPU threading behavior of the DCS World 2.9 Dedicated Server. I've read mixed information about whether the dedicated server primarily uses a single CPU core for its core simulation workload or if it takes advantage of multiple cores through multi-threading.For context: I understand the DCS 2.9 client has some multi-threading support (e.g., for rendering and certain tasks), but I'm specifically asking about the dedicated server used for hosting multiplayer missions. I'm planning to optimize my server hardware and want to know if prioritizing high single-core performance is critical or if a multi-core CPU would be better utilized. Could anyone confirm: Is the DCS 2.9 Dedicated Server primarily single-threaded for its main simulation loop (e.g., AI, physics, mission logic)? Are there any specific tasks (e.g., networking, I/O) that leverage additional CPU cores? Any insights from server admins, technical users, or Eagle Dynamics staff would be greatly appreciated! If there are recent changes or planned updates for server threading in future patches, that info would also be helpful. Thanks in advance for your help!

Джентельмены, позвольте вопрос. Я тут нахожусь в полном замешетельстве относительного, как в моём симуляторе прицел считает точку падения АБ. Кого угодно на ютубе открываю и вижу, что люди делают абсолютно то же самое, а бомбы летят как полагается, достаточно точно. У меня очень заметный недалёт даже при штилевых условиях и знасительных углах пикирования и скоростях выше 800. А как сбросить с задержкой вообще не понятно, бомбы просто сходят, при задержанной гашетке. Короче творится странное не похоже ни на что, что я сумел найти в ютубе. Мануал по боевому применению не помог ибо делаю все также, а бомбы летят "как попало". Может секрет какой есть?

What one thinks and wants migth not align with reality. ED took over all development and support of all weapons as soon as they are deployed from/leave the aircraft. If this has not been implemented in the F1 yet, I would assume like you, that something needs to be done by Aerges. This might be a case of "trapped between two chairs". The fuzes settings in the ME/rearming might be Aerges task, while having the fuzes actually work is definitely up to ED. You might have luck asking Heatblur how they go about it. So I'm gonna ping @Zabuzard for you. You might consider making a wish/request in the Wishlist section here though. Cheers!

Well, ITAR probably doesn't apply to documents from soviet times as its a US/NATO thing. Plus almost all of these are sitting in a library somewhere. But yeah probably run it by the mods if you aren't sure.

That was a quick sale. Just a few days. But I bought the NS 430 for my wonderful L-39. Good fun and love how it sits in the dash. Cost $4. You may thank me for financing the next big module.

Hey everyone! I just put together this DCS Movie. I hope you enjoy!

I cannot check this right now, as I'm on Mi-24P documentation. Let it be said though; don't get top frisky with posting documents, or else, you'll quickly learn of ITAR! At best, if someone wants to contribute specific information, unless you know that you are NOT violating ITAR, then reference document number and page. No pictures or extracts. Also, I've said before on the Mi-24/Mi-8 forums, people forget that there are discrepancies between manuals and real world operation/outfit. This is not unique to the Soviet Union. Not long ago, I had it confirmed by a SME (former OH-58 pilot) that US army had lower MTOW than what the manual specifically stated, and that limitation was only circulated by complementary internal documents. Hence, it is not enough to point to the manual - you actually want an SME or former pilot to confirm or not, what was actually going on in the cockpit. This is especially true, if you understand the history behind MiG-29 pilot training. There were no unified manuals. Rather, IP were trained at Mikoyan, and then got certified to teach military pilots. The manuals were literally written individually by pilots themselves, as they went through the course of training. That already poses challenges. That said, a more elaborate answer will come, I'm sure. I'll look for any info. in my docs.