All Activity

One could debate this for pages. When purchasing one or more models for use in games, it is a requirement for the providers of such models, such as TurboSquid, to then offer them encrypted in games, as stated in the turbosquid-3d-model-license. Excerpt: "Redistributing or otherwise making TurboSquid 3D Models available to end-users. If you are redistributing something that includes actual 3D Model files, the 3D Model files must be incorporated into a larger creation and not in an open format that others can be downloaded. Most game engines, such as Unity and Unreal, handle this automatically. In general, to prevent your end-users from obtaining TurboSquid 3D Models, you should use proprietary formats that cannot be extracted, exported, or decompiled without reverse engineering." which means that ED could have acquired such models itself, since the free use of such models in games for a commercial company is permitted under the above conditions. So it's to be expected that Currenthil's assets will also be encrypted. As for the descriptions of the individual models, I think ED could offer these so that liveries could be derived from them. You can then also view your work in ME. It's just a bit more complex.

In addition to all else, the video demonstrated that a qualitative comparison of energy performance between AI and human pilots (i.e., “who caught up or overtook whom”) can produce highly variable and non-repeatable results — even when the net energy gain at the end of the maneuver differs by no more than ±1%. As previously mentioned, maintaining position in close formation behind an AI lead is inherently problematic due to its constantly varying load factor. For this reason, it is more reasonable to move toward an analytical comparison of energy performance across three configurations: the default SFM, Curly's mod, and a minimal tweak that adjusts thrust at low speeds to match values from the reference documentation. Setting aside the entirely justified reduction in the maximum lift coefficient (CL or Cy, in Soviet notation), which only affects performance in non-steady maneuvers and may actually lead to slightly better energy retention, we can focus purely on the energy characteristics. We begin again with specific energy rate. The graphs show that both mods reduce energy rate at low speeds; however, Curly’s mod grants the AI an unjustified bonus in the 500–800 km/h range, and at altitudes from 0 to 5000 m — precisely where the aircraft is most efficient in gaining energy. These same modifications also lead to a slight overstatement of sustained turn performance. In both cases, the default SFM data remains a closer approximation of the flight characteristics documented in the reference material. Finally, we consider the graph of longitudinal acceleration vs. true airspeed. Unlike video comparisons, this type of plot could more effectively prompt developers to revisit the model data — since it clearly reveals a discrepancy from reference values at low speeds. One particularly interesting detail in the reference documentation is that the airspeed values on the graphs correspond to raw cockpit instrument readings, not corrected for compressibility effects. For example, at 5000 m altitude, a true airspeed of 1044 km/h would correspond to a corrected indicated airspeed of 809 km/h, while the graph shows 830 km/h — exactly matching the uncorrected table value. This means that deviations of the calculated curves from the acceleration graph at high Mach numbers should not be taken as significant. Returning to the observed change in AI behavior — specifically, when it stops climbing slowly at speeds around 350 km/h — this aligns well with the reduction in available thrust at low airspeeds, as reflected in the thrust curves. It is plausible that the AI logic recognizes the diminishing return of continuing such a maneuver and instead opts for a different course of action.

I understand the idea that players should try to stick it out — but this situation has gone on long enough that I personally have little hope for a positive resolution anytime soon. Even if someone wanted to stick it out, the module isn’t even available for purchase anymore — it was removed from both Steam and ED’s own store months ago. That alone shows how serious the situation is. Players deserve the option of a refund, even on Steam, especially under these circumstances. I fully understand Valve’s refund policy (within 14 days / under 2 hours of playtime), but Steam Support confirmed to me that an exception can be made — if ED explicitly authorizes it. If things ever truly get resolved and the F-15E returns to sale, I’d be willing to buy it again. So yes — it’s still technically possible, but it depends on ED. And I think it's only fair for them to take some responsibility here and help users who bought/supported the module in good faith.

Excellent! [emoji1303] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

When did you order please?

i comfirm. Lucipher is everytime killed on phase with GBU. Additional possible improvements in M07, The frequency of Lucifer is not mentioned anywhere in the documentation, not even in the kneeboards. BTW An excellent mission with interesting circumstances that weren’t directly related to my flight – I still really enjoyed it.

Thas correct, sorry.

Maybe it´s a "core related" bug instead of an A10C bug. Premise: only SADL/EPRLS units must be present in the TAD page. No L16 or L4 equipped aircraft. So in DCS only ground units EPRLS equipped and A10C/C2 must be present in the TAD. ERPLS is an Army system, so it´s not present on airplanes AFAIK. In the attached miz and track, if a unit with the "EPRLS" is ON in the "advanced waypoints", this unit appears in the TAD regardless the type of DL. In the mission, an IA Hornet can be seen in the TAD if the ERPLS is set to on. It seems that the "ERPLS on/off" code enable or disable the DL in general (L16/L4/SADL/ERPLS). If set to "ERPLS OFF", the Hornet is not present in the TAD. But the Hornet is prevented to use their DL. SADL HORNET EPRLS ON.mizSADL HORNET EPRLS OFF.miz EPRLS OFF Hornet NOT visible in SADL.trk EPRLS ON Horner visible in SADL.trk

It's "HeavyMetalCore".

You might want to edit the OP since we already have working radar and the fix was provided.

I've had a peek through everything and can't see anything related to the issue. Only other thing installed was SRS, but I had removed that for a fresh install months before the issue, and re installed last night. It's had no effect. Again, thank you for the help - it's such an odd one, I had no trouble - until I did! I made a little video showing the issue.

I have a same problem with the F16. I am curious to know the why. Best regard Christian

Hey guys. One STANDARD issue IS ready to Ship If anyone is interested.

Really appreciate the open-mindedness here. The blind sim community is small — but incredibly dedicated. What’s great is that **none of this requires changes to the DCS engine itself**. Everything I’m suggesting can be done using **existing public interfaces** like `DCS-BIOS` and `Export.lua`. We’re not asking ED to rewrite core systems or overhaul the sim — just to help expose cockpit data in a way that tools can turn into audio or tactile output. If I were a developer myself, I would’ve already built a full accessibility layer on top of DCS-BIOS. But my own background is more in **Linux systems, Proxmox, and backend admin work** — so I rely on collaboration with devs who know these tools inside out. Still, I’m ready to test, document, and support any progress in this area. The potential is all there — just waiting to be unlocked.

Not if you use autoexec option in DCS. Have you tested these settings?

No, I don’t know how to make the adjustments IC compliant. Would be nice seeing it’s only a tiny visual tweak inside the cockpit. Perhaps someone with better computer skills knows how.

Running Preset K for DLSS? Remember, it gets reset every Nvidia update..

Hi, Nice post ! I changed the values for the HUD Hornet (very nice btw;), but IC check is kicking me out of the server every time Any clue how to fix it ? Regards Scrat

Ouch. I wonder if there's been an update to the weapons effect. We'll check and update. Thanks for reporting it.

Hi I've been looking for a custom soviet ливеры, eighter from the 17 ИАП (Sutyagin's unit) or the 196 ИАП (Kramarenko's unit), from the Korean war, with blank bort numbers, red nose with square void for bort numbers, red tail / rudder and wing-root black paint stripes Nikolai Vasilyevich Sutyagin Sergei Makarovich Kramarenko I tried to make it myself, but I got stuck at the roughmet since I don't know how to manipulate the Red/Green/Blue channels independently on GIMP2 I know there are some similar liveries, but most of them have messed up aluminium textures Thank you! o7

It looks like we'll get Sniper today .

What is the drag impact of fuel tanks on the Viper in the tanks' different positions on the jet? How is it calculated?

That would really help move things forward with Steam. Thank you! You can try a support ticket and see if they can help you, but I don't think we have quite thrown in the towel yet on the F-15E, so while we understand some wanting to, we are hoping people will try and stick it out.

If anything, my belief is that attempting to engage US bombers over England would have finished off the Luftwaffe even faster, as they would have lost pilots much quicker. The 1000+ aircraft redeployed as a result of DDay weren’t just from France. On top of that, the Allies knew they were being sent and also which airfields they were going to, which made them easy pickings. Those 1000 made no significant difference.