Leaderboard

Dear all, Much of the work is focused on fixing bugs and tuning systems to first have a solid foundation to work from. However, IAT/MTT are in active development as is initial FCR/RF Hellfire and LB Net. Given the complexity of such tasks, we have no date estimates at this time. Once IAT/MTT are available, we plan to offer the -64 in the free trial program. Outside of those systems, much work is ongoing: - Performance Level of Detail (LOD) models - New pilot models and animations (SP and MC) - Updating the PERF page (quite a deep rabbit hole) - Continued tuning of the FCS / yaw offset - Ability to change seats in MC (in internal testing) - New voice overs for flight members (2, 3, and 4) - Continued George AI refinements - Tuning TSE/LMC behavior There are of course other items in work, but these are the primary focus. Kind regards, Wags

Well, it seems sooner will come earlier than expected... work in progress.

Well, I've done a fair amount of assets by this point, so I have developed a pretty efficient workflow by now. I've probably cut the time in half while increasing the quality if comparing the first couple of assets with the latest ones. You learn by doing, that's also why I have to back track and redo some stuff when I've learnt new things, or a better way of doing stuff. In regards to the modeling. I'm a one man show with the SMA pack. This means I (beside the mesh modeling) do the researching, configuring, rigging, animating, texturing, testing, documenting myself. I try to speed up the process by any means available. Making models can be very time consuming so my approach is to get the model ready in the most time efficient manner. This means that some models are created by me, some are bought as crude mesh frameworks and added on by me, some are bought as ready to use mesh models where I only have had to make small adjustments. One main advantage is that since I focus on the Swedish armed forces a lot of the models (or parts of them) can be reused between the assets, so it's some degree of modularization at this point.

There is a company which makes strategy games, they are famous of releasing tons of dlcs, but not a single dlc is required for multiplayer fun, only host is required to own dlcs, every other player can access content with base game only through MP, some ppl may say that this is big loose for company so many ppl will not buy dlcs, is it? I think no, it act as advert i think that this approach amplify dlcs buys. We can say that WW2 DCS MP is very small, but if no one will invest in it, it will remain that way. What about ppl who did buy asset pack, they can not enjoy it in MP because, lots of ppl who don't have this pack can not join their servers, so this limits full experience too, if we look that way. What i would suggest, is to change status of asset pack as a module, because right now situation looks like that, if i don't own DCS F-16 i can not join any server which has this plane in mission. Some how for ED it is ok to shoot down F-16 while you don't own it, but you can not shoot or bomb unit which is part of ww2 asset pack in MP. I don't agree with that all maps should be available in MP, but this asset pack really cut legs of ww2 experience and enjoyment.

I've been helping out with maintenance on the Collings F-4D, which is undergoing a maintenance check and inspection. We have a lot of the panels off, so I thought it would be a great opportunity to get the camera out and show what goes on underneath the panels. Not a lot of people outside of maintainers get to see the inner workings of the aircraft. In this video I do a top to bottom walk around and take a deep look inside the Phantom. So while we wait patiently for the release of Heatblur's F-4E, please enjoy!

null

WIP items of the Mirage F1 CE: Autopilot: o Implementation of R and G modes. o Fixing oscillations in some regimes. o Mode logic, failures and tests overhaul. Implementation of S530 F ‘supermatra’. o The S530 D used as a placeholder in some AI models will be replaced by the F variant. Full implementation of the intercom (will enable communication with JTAC). Adjust adverse yaw behaviour. Pedal toebrake and control stick animations will be added. Implementation of miscellaneous armament: o CC - 420 external cannons. o JL100. o Etc… Implementation of countermeasures and jamming pods: o BARAX. o PHIMAT. Radar: o BZ short range mode. o Different detection ranges and target visibility conditions in IC and HA modes. o Radar noise visual appearance in various modes. o Elevation control in V1 mode for 7 and 15 nm ranges. o Radar slaving of the IR missiles’ seekers. Optical Sight: o Radar related symbology logic - relative velocity, range, correct display sequence with the radar tracking a target. o Gun sight is not correctly fed by the radar measured target distance yet. RWR: o Addition of specific F1 RWR sounds. New pilot 3D model with new helmet, 3 variants. Improved external model textures. Cockpit panels texture overhaul (dark cockpit) due to game lighting. Option to adjust the speed of the fuel selection dial. The Flight Manual has to be completed. New missions will be added over time. Main known issues of the Mirage F1 CE: Wrong number of flares at mission start (14 instead of 15). Jettison of CLB4 bombs when infinite munitions are on does not stop bombs from respawning. R530 jettison should eject the pylon too. Clickable sounds for the shock-cones and high sensitivity nose wheel steering not audible. Control stick switches sounds not playing. First preset radio channel is tied in both radios in ME. Some liveries are inaccurate. AI flight model is underperforming. We are aware of other issues that we will solve over time.

Here's a fun trick for taking pilot/RIO selfies: While you're in the cockpit, use the pause function, and then switch seats with 1/2. You can then move the camera position around to take photos because the other body has not disappeared yet. I've used it to take some RIO style selfies like those Bio and co took.

I think the Whiskey Cobra would be best. It's an 80s helo, good counterpart to the Hind, not too advanced, but it would get Sidewinders, TOW and Hellfire. The problem with the AH-1G is the minigun turret, rifle caliber guns don't do a whole lot in DCS, and our infantry kind of sucks.

I took all these photos and thousands more. I will not post anything more here.

Thread cleaned, please remember to treat everyone with respect. SOW users, please remember the server owner closed his server, we did not, it was the server owners choice. Enjoy the WW2 content we have, there is more to come, the asset pack is here to stay but is optional, we look forward to the future. This thread has ran its course. Thank you

DCS doesn't model IFF transponders (the responding side of IFF) at all. This is THE biggest gripe I have with DCS and its simulation of military aircraft. The simulation of IFF transponders is totally non existent for no reason. Other military flight sims do a much better job at that. The only exception to this is the JF-17 as Deka did actually model the IFF transponder there, but of course it only works between JF-17s and not with other aircraft types. All other aircraft just pretend their IFF transponder is always ON and set up correctly. This even applies to aircraft that don't even have an IFF transponder or have one that is totally incompatible with todays interrogators (like the Christen Eagle and the WW2 warbirds). You can use your Viper/Hornet and successfully interrogate a Christen Eagle or a BF-109, which is kinda ridiculous if you ask me. Not having IFF transponders modeled takes a lot away from modern air warfare, as proper IFF procedures and the depending ROEs are a huge factor, as IFF systems can be set up incorrectly or not working at all (e.g. because of battle damage), making IFF less reliable IRL than it is in DCS. In DCS it is just always magically working, set up correctly and thus 100% reliable, which is not realistic. Sorry if this turned a bit into a rant, but it's a topic that is really frustrating me, which is why I createded a thread about this years ago (it's a bit outdated now), hoping for at least some kind of IFF transponder functionality, but nothing has changed so far:

In one post you say people should be paid for their work -- that they aren't animals -- yet in the previous you deride people for not continuing to work (for free) on their passion project and/or not relinquish the fruits of their hard labor to the community magnanimously. I will not say much more than that other than I find it to be extremely distasteful. To be clear, when I said "free" in regards to the asset pack/maps, I meant free access for online multiplayer. Nobody is expecting work to go unpaid. In fact, I suspect that a more popular online showing for the WW2 product would lead directly to increased sales of modules (and maps/asset packs for enjoyment offline or to author missions) and ultimately more return on investment. You can be either one of two minds: That a strong multiplayer community drives overall sales. That online enjoyment of the product is a small portion of overall sales. In either case, it makes sense from a business standpoint that owning the maps/asset packs should not be a requirement to play on an online server running them. Either this open access for online play is a driver of more sales, or it wouldn't have that much of an impact financially anyway. In both cases, being able to join these servers without a purchase of these items would be huge in helping to grow a stronger WW2 community. The alternative, as we can see plain as day by the current state of the online community, is a product that is struggling to grow and gain the traction it deserves.

Presenting, The DCS Tank mods! From modern to WWII, Tanks are essential to the War effort! We need MORE TANKS! We have fixed that for you! Your Welcome! All models from Cad Nav, Sketch Fab and Blend Swap and other free sites. Mods by Markindel and Myself. A re-post of older obsolete mods. We hope they help win the Battle! Please note, with all installed at once, I have seen DCS hang upon exit. Not found the reason yet. Perhaps DCS is so happy with all the new tanks, it does hot want to quit? Saved games install location. OnGME ready. Some are CA compatible! (CA needed for this to work) Enjoy! https://www.dropbox.com/s/c3i155mmmsuigzs/Tank Pack Set One.zip?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/tpirozo87da842g/Tank Pack Set Two.zip?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/iqhd2c2bl3nyxg3/Tank Pack Set Three.zip?dl=0 Thats a boat load of tanks!

1. Radio sound effects (clicks and radio filter). 2. Ability to talk to JTACs/Combined arms players. If we had that, i would switch our servers and squadron ops over to DCS voice and ditch SRS. I know these things are planned, i hope they are priorities. Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

+1 not sure why releasing anything without radio sounds was even considered. Anything on this?

Probably best to wait and see what they give us instead of fighting over guesses and whatnot.

Hey MAXsenna, just wanted to bring back in mind this interview with Polychop and Casmo from December 2020. From minute 11 they are talking about the flight model. Oh, I see the next hot posts coming up complaining, that it was 1 1/2 year ago and for that might not be true anymore . Also please see this quote from the very first post of this thread by Polychop from 2019: "Learning from the past and including subject matter expert input and testing right from the start, countless hours have been spent at coding a new and true to life flight model to a point where we can honestly say we’re proud of the result. We don’t take that statement lightly as we know the flight model of our previous module did not live up to expectations. That said, the SA-342 Gazelle module will be updated in time with the new technology developed for the Kiowa. The same amount of time has been spent on meticulously coding the implementation of all the systems, devices and weaponry available to the Kiowa’s crew."

To aid in binding the plethora of TEDAC controls to something simpler like a gamepad. Would we be allowed to have a few concession bindings such as: TADS FOV Increase/Decrease - a Two way binding to cycle through the 4 FOVs rather than discrete controls FCR FOV Increase/Decrease - Same as the TADS FLIR/TV Toggle - Toggles between FLIR and TV FCR Mode Cycle - Cycles through the FCR modes eg. GTM>RMAP>ARM>TPM FCR Scan Special - Long Press = C-SCAN Function, Short Press = S-SCAN Function STORE/UPDT Special - Long Press = UPDT, Short Press = STORE LST Mode Special - Short Press = Automatic/Off Toggle, Long Press = Manual IAT Polarity Special - Short Press = White/Black Toggle, Long Press = Auto

Absolutely agreed.

Hi, If you mean this one https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/upload/iblock/03a/jeiwl4sy48r6l33v65dkcha1ls5ek32w/dcs-world-flight-simulator-07-f-14b-operation-sandworm-campaign.jpg I think it was taken by moving from RIO position to look over pilot shoulder. When you are sitting on back seat you can see pilot body and vice versa. I don't remember exactly how but definitely you can't see those blurry legs while flying as pilot. When you are sitting on back seat you can see pilot body and vice versa. Actually I didn't even remember that screenshot was released. It was just one of couple dozen shots I submitted to ED. In my opinion pilot body in Hornet for example is nice but it is a bit difficult when you can't move your hand to see and use all the knobs.

I'd say, it's a great sim and a medicore (at best) game. The difference is not necessarily in degree realism, but in design philosophy. A game prioritizes gameplay, a sim prioritizes replicating the system being simulated, including things that are not fun to use (Harrier's HOTAS, for example, it's so confusing that it would never pass muster in a game, and that's even when it works right). To use DCS campaigns as an example, Rising Squall prioritizes action and as such, is light on difficult and tedious stuff like long enroute legs, AAR or carrier landings. It mostly drops you in the air, close to action and aims for good gameplay first. Zone V, meanwhile, gives you the same narration during the in-flight briefing, missions are somewhat repetitive, and you need to take off and land after each one. It's the simulation philosophy, in this case of a generic TOPGUN-like exercise. It's done really well, and if you're into doing things the way real pilots did it, it's great, but it's clearly focused on learning the Tomcat more than on pure fun. It's still fun, but that wasn't the primary design parameter.

Piper PA-18 Super Cub The Piper PA-18 Super Cub is a two-seat, single-engine monoplane. Introduced in 1949 by Piper Aircraft, it was developed from the Piper PA-11, and traces its lineage back through the J-3 to the Taylor E-2 Cub of the 1930s. In close to 40 years of production, over 10,000 [1] were built. Super Cubs are commonly found in roles such as bush flying, banner towing and glider towing. https://www.dropbox.com/s/e5k51wa5dmngyx6/Piper-PA-18 V 2.7.rar?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/tt7n1s98ok0egwy/Piper PA-18 Super Cub V1.0.rar?dl=0

The Gar8/aim-9B is bugged with regard to its uncage-lock/pre-firing behavior. Currently, you put the gun piper on the target until you get “tone” (~4 deg IFOV). Which automatically “locks” the target, and “uncages” the seeker head, and you can freely maneuver within the seeker gimbal limits (~25 deg). While this behavior or variations thereof may be found on later models of the aim-9 its not correct for the 9B since its seeker only uncages (locks) the target after being fired. Correct behavior would look like maneuver till you get tone on target. Then fire, and the firing process takes ~1 sec from depressing trigger to missile leaving the rail. The seeker gyro is uncaged with the firing command, never before. If the target maneuvers out of the 4 degree seeker FOV during this time you loose lock. Early versions of the sidewinder used a mechanical cage mechanism as described below. Later 9B versions used a magnetic cage mechanism which still mostly operated in similar fashion. Pg 71 Pg 115 sidewinder Magnetic caging and firing sequence, and 9B firing sequence from OP 2309 (3rd) page 2-2AIM-9B (https://archive.org/details/OP23093rdAIM9B) Declassed pre-1980. As stated above, only AFTER firing does the gyro uncage. And finally the first sidewinder to have uncage capability was the aim9E as mentioned in the Project CHECO report from Vietnam (pg10-11). https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA486826

The Jester menu squelch sound effects, radalt, and compressor stall warnings were making my ears bleed so I nerfed them. The Jester menu sound effects had to be edited in Audacity, but the radalt and stall warning volume can be tweaked in the sdef files. I lowered them to 0.2, so if anyone wants them louder or quieter they can open the sdef files in notepad and change that value to whatever. Default (I think) was 0.6 for the radalt and 1.0 for the stall horns. The mod is OvGME ready, or install manually by dragging and dropping the "Mods" folder into your DCS root directory. DL link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3325587/

I think it would make a great addition to DCS because: 1. Cold-War era is rising and the "C" or even "C II" isnt really fitting in. 2. It would be a "Back to the roots" Version. When setting up the Pavepenny-Pod was a thing and the Maverick was essential for Situational Awareness.

Those are not active radar homing heads though, but passive radar heads for the R-27P/EP and Kh-31P respectively. Edit. Sniped .

Since Burble effect was introduced, I've disabled Wake turbulence, thus limiting the Burble effect (in my humble opinion with too high values). In this way, however, the aircraft on which I fly (FA-18) is no longer affected by the wake turbulence of other aircrafts. I think it is a good idea to add in Options> Gameplay (additional settings), Burble Effect ON / OFF (as it's already for Wake turbulence), so as to allow greater flexibility of choice. This request affects both FA-18 and SC, so I post it in both threads. The moderator will then eventually merge the threads. Thanks in adavance.

I use my monitor for starting up Windows and performing two steps: First step: start Oculus Dash and Teamspeak (for meeting my buddies) Second: click DCS icon to start over in VR mode Never in 30 years of playing flying sims I had the feeling "I am there". In DCS using VR I have this feeling. That's all. I can forget about some graphic details as long I have 45 (or even 90) in my Rift CV1. One drawback, if any: If DCS starts stuttering (or even performing slideshows for seconds) in Buddyspike, I feel the need to switch over to the MiG-21 and throw nuclear weapons ...

True that. Yet, I keep looking for a cheap and old AMD laptop in order to help more. Some professionnal ED testers do have AMD GPU by the way. I'll ask one of them to test the latest tracks, as soon as I get back from holiday.

Easy fix for you: follow proper procedures! Don't taxi with your wings fully extended. If they don't come back after you've commanded them, your flaps are still down. If you can't raise the flaps, you broke them. Easiest way to "deduce" you've broken your flaps in flight? Just look over your shoulder. You can see if they're extended. If you can't raise them, chances are good they're stuck. Easy way to not break them: keep them up over 225 KIAS. The only time I've ever over sped the flaps was during an air start, when I forgot to adjust the wheel on my throttle from a previous flight in a different module (use the same wheel for radar elevation). Otherwise, never had that problem. In the end, it's your game, so play it any way you want to. But don't expect much sympathy around these parts for "bothering" HB to add features to accommodate your (unrealistic) playstyle, at the expense of much more pressing issues with regards to the F-14 (not to mention the multitude of other projects HB has to attend to). Also, I would argue that this particular issue is waaaaay down on the "nice to have priority list" for most customers.

DTC please.

New version of the Su-57 Felon in service version skin. Bort 01, 02, 52, 53, 54. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1X3ViZfqFPmex3lWduzICrR4B025gCG/view?usp=sharing

That might be indeed a bug. With power off, the starter toggle shouldn't do anything. Left of the ignition/starter switch, there is an "ABORT START SWITCH". With this toggled, starter sequence can be stopped. Pages 28 and 29 of the manual.

That is so cool She got you The HOTAS for your Birthday. Got to love that. Best of Luck with all the NEW GEAR happy happy joy joy. I LOVE flying the Huey I do that most of the time. lol

Hi, From what I understand, the ECLAIR box was mounted with the ECLAIR pod and was the only way to interact with it as it was not interfaced with the aircraft CM system. The first deployments of the ECLAIR pod were done in a hurry and sometimes the aircraft on which it was mounted didn't even have the SPIRALE system, so that's how they were able to use it. Later, the pod was integrated with the aircraft CM system and thus the box was removed.

Offsets generally aren’t used for CAS in the way you mean, but in real life they would have proper planning software to very precisely plot the offset for radar offset bombing. The offset range function should have a ‘feet’ option, but ED haven’t modelled it. Offsets are completely broken in the current OB anyway.

Just a remark: there is no need to delete the original "...press 3 times" command. As long as the new command has a different name, original and added commands coexist without a problem.

THX! I've been waiting for AH 64 since "Apache longbow" by Jane's So when it was announced, I immediately bought an Oculus quest 2 set, and the Apache module. I also love the A10. But this summer, F18, F16, Huey and the Gazelle were on sale, so I got those as well. I've got all terrain modules. And I'm currently learning all modules simoultaneously. PC meltdown occurred as I was about to bite into entering coordinates. I still haven't got my head around the different formats I get from JTAC or similar. (Started with "LM" or som letters if I remember correctly) I got the Thrustmaster warthog HOTAS set from my girl at my birthday late in june this year. I really don't have time for this intermission-pause-thing. I expect to be unpacking i seven hours time.

Did you test it? In the M2000C you have to turn it on (F-18 too, I think).

Static is loaded directly into the .miz. Typically for when you are distributing your mission or want to keep Moose totally contained in the mission. This is the typical for most users. If you are developing Moose code then Dynamic allows you to reference the Moose files from your mission but they are not contained in the mission file per say. This is mostly for advanced users or if you are development for the Moose framework.

If someone expects modern machines in DCS - I don't know, maybe F-22? F-35? B-2? For the latest versions of Grippen or Eurofighter, I personally prefer X-Wing or TIE Fighter because these two will be closer to reality than the F-22/35 modules etc in DCS ...

Thanks guys, I'll report this important information to devs. EDIT: Devs say a fix is coming with the next OB update. No need to install the A-4E mod (unless you want to fly this bird of course).

If we’re being honest here, the AI are just as quick to see, target, and engage us. I feel it levels out the playing field a bit. Do you really think a tank can spot, target, and shoot down a fast moving low altitude target in less than 5 seconds?

I would add the rework of the radar to that list

Until the WW2 asset pack and maps are free nothing will change. The way the system is set up now is a huge barrier to entry and has stunted the growth of the WW2 player base. The community has been very vocal about this for years, but ED has been stubborn and set in their ways. WW2 languishes as a result. All of this despite some amazing work with flight and sound modeling, and big improvements to damage modeling. It's really a bit of a travesty that they've stymied themselves with their sales model and done severe damage to the online community and the entire product as a result. Reasonable suggestion: Make the assets and ww2 maps free and available to play online -- this will help grow the small, stagnant community. Charge for SP and to be able to use them in the mission editor if costs need to be recouped. I feel that ED might ultimately see an increase in sales with this approach, as more people will end up interested in the product and the online community of players and servers is able to grow without any impediments.

Razbam and "actively making" is very subjective. By that standard, they're actively making about 20 aircraft. Yes, a 3D model has been mocked up. Beyond that, very little. I'd welcome a Jag. It would also fit the Persian Gulf map for Oman.

Unfortunately the Gazelle is objectively a very incomplete, inaccurate and at this point unsupported module. Be it from RL Gazelle pilots or data-driven analysis. See: The issue is that sharing anecdotical evidence that it is "fine" with changing joystick curves (makes no sense) will lead to very dissatisfied customers. So yeah, I think Tippis has a much more valuable point here than yours.

+1!