All Activity

Haha, good one, a "year or so"

Well, you're the manual, so it was time you made an "audio"/video book. [emoji6] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Hi, this is a known issue and already reported thanks

Yeah, this is normal in DCS and watching the stars from Earth's atmosphere can result in similar effect. Also some starts are unrealistically bigger (in pixel size) - this may be a feature to make the brighter stars stand out more but looks bad, esp. in VR.

just watched it. Great stuff. Please keep those videos coming.

Also thought the trees were a bit close to the taxiway… anything a bit beefier than a fighter ( looking at you c130) might have some issues

The same as other mods and modules do it, like A4 or L39. Basically when you apply brake with a rudder input together, rudder input is not interpreted as a rudder input but as differential braking. How much rudder is applied translates on how much difference of a braking is between axes. For example full brakes applied with full rudder the the left translates to left brake axis 100% while right brake axis 0%. With full brakes and 50% left rudder applied it translates to left brake axis 100% and right brake axis 50%, and so on.

Make sure the aircraft has a parking spot suited for it. Might be the size limit. Best to be specific next time.

This is your false assumption.

Never had problem with that. Whole idea of VR and proper objects in a game is to have them correctly scaled, exactly to not feel any difference at least on that part. IPD change works only for close objects because that small parallax is not gonna change your view on the distant ones. The quality of the simulated terrain though leaves much for improvement and with limited headset resolution I think it has the biggest impact on how you perceive the world in DCS.

Love the aircraft, big fan, buying it the moment it's on Steam. But those hands... If there's ever an update with a pair of gloves in it. Thank you in advance.

The New George can be instructed to select multiple targets and engage them sequentially. Also George can be instructed to Search TADS LoS, which saves time when you want to engage further targets in the same area. It would be great if we could equip our beloved Petrovich with the same abilities. Throw a bone to us Mi24 drivers already, ED.

Would it be better to use Windows Server 2025 as the operating system for the server? For comparison, when I launch the application on Windows 11, the frame rate seems limited to around 60 FPS, but it can directly reach 117 FPS on Windows Server 2025.

Some Fulcrum love

Ganz klar AMD x3d CPUs

Hi guys. Just to let you know, I wasn't complaining, I can manage my fuel just fine ... it was merely a question in case I had missed a setting, perhaps in the mission editor.

Thanks, this ways i knew already but just thought about asking if there is another ways. Seems like there isnt...no problem, thanks für the clarification

My apologies it is more a manual in video form!

I am having this exact problem: I stall the engine straight after having climbed to 90 degrees (at minimum speed). Then during the descent, after a stall.

Some are sure. But coop only works with MPRF! It works in any mode automatically all the time in flanker! And the HUD? The Flanker has 24 HUD improvements over the fulcrum! It’s mind blowing! Why is IRST vertical scan only 16 degrees up when they obviously know how to do vertical scan with radar mode? Why not show IFF when my radar is literally locked? The Soviets have inexplicable confusing design decisions on almost every product they make. It is practically a characteristic of the Soviet era. Especially for MiG products such as the 29 where the idea was to make a plane that was “just good enough” as cheap as possible. Why downgrade the IRST material from MiG-23, why not show target location within 8 km like MiG-23, I want to eat a rye bread sandwich while my plane flies itself to the GCI Target Like MiG-23

It happens in KA50III also even with the smaller KOMs. I think it is safer to shoot rockets in a short burst than at medium or long.

terrain teams do not work on the core, they work on terrains. Same for aircraft teams, they work on aircraft modules. We have more than 50% of our team members working on the core of DCS, you can see the work being done on each change log we publish. We also have to sell products, it enables us to keep development going, if we took your advice we would go out of business eventually.

The FAA Helicopter flying handbook is worth checking out. Not all of it is that relevant for sim flight, but there's a lot of good info there. And it's free! https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/helicopter_flying_handbook

So fire half the team or make them do other things in which they are not experts and refuse to work on new projects that brings money in the future. If only DCS users were the ED managers we would have bug free game, feature creep, all aircraft and units modeled... and "out of business sign" on the main site in months.

The FC3 MiG-29 is also given the incorrect MiG-29A designation (which again, is for a different aircraft - it's like calling the Su-27S the T-10 or the F/A-18C the YF-17, though at least both of those actually flew). They could use MiG-29 (9-12A) FF, similar to how the FC4 versions of the F86F, F-5E etc have FC appended on the end. As for NATO names, whether it's included or not doesn't really bother me but its presence would make the names more consistent with most Soviet/Russian missiles and ground-based air defences. Really, this is about: A naming system that calls things what they actually are and doesn't call things something they're not (like MiG-29A, Su-25A, the U-boat U-flak which obviously isn't a U-flak, the Chieftain not a Mk.3 and the HY-2 Silkworm/SS-N-2 Styx when its neither). Again, short of licensing issues it is not hard to call a spade a spade - wikipedia usually suffices and nearly nowhere else is this a problem. A naming system that's consistent.