Leaderboard

Dear all, In the next Open Beta, we will be addressing several fixes with the TSD threat rings. Threat rings can be displayed by selecting the TSD on one of the MPDs, then selecting SHOW (T3), THRT SHOW (T5), and then enabling THREATS (R5). When enabled, threat rings are displayed around any Threat points on the TSD, with a yellow ring indicating estimated detection range, and a red ring indicating estimating engagement range. With the next Open Beta, the TSD will now properly display threat rings even if the Threat point itself is not within the TSD viewing area. In addition, any Threat points added during the mission using the TSD POINT sub-page will also show threat rings, in addition to pre-planned Threat points. Due to the large number of available Threat point types within the DCS: AH-64D database, and the variety of DCS World air defense units that can be placed in a mission, we thought it would be a good idea to list exactly what threats were associated with certain point types. This will ensure the player has the correct threat rings displayed on their TSD based on what air defense unit they encounter during gameplay. POINT IDENT POINT NAME DCS WORLD AIR DEFENSE UNIT 2 SA-2 SAM System SAM SA-2 S-75 battery 3 SA-3 SAM System SAM SA-3 S-125 battery 5 SA-5 SAM System SAM SA-5 S-200 battery 6 SA-6 SAM System SAM SA-6 Kub battery 8 SA-8 SAM System SAM SA-8 Osa battery 9 SA-9 SAM System SAM SA-9 Strela-1 TEL 10 SA-10 SAM System SAM SA-10 S-300 battery 11 SA-11 SAM System SAM SA-11 Buk battery 13 SA-13 SAM System SAM SA-13 Strela-10 TEL 15 SA-15 SAM System SAM SA-15 Tor TEL 16 SA-16 SAM System MANPADS SA-18 Igla S6 2S6/SA-19 Air Defense Unit SAM SA-19 Tunguska ZU ZSU-23-4 Air Defense Gun SPAAA ZSU-23-4 Gun Dish GT Towed Air Defense Gun AAA ZU-23-2 based units GS Self-Propelled Air Defense Gun SPAAA ZSU-57-2 AA Air Defense Gun AAA Fire Can SON-9 [detection] & AAA S-60 57mm [engagement] TR Target Acquisition Radar MCC-SR Sborka [yellow detection ring] SR Battlefield Surveillance Radar Early Warning Radar [100 km radius yellow detection ring] CT Crotale SAM System SAM HQ-7 STR [detection] & SAM HQ-7 LN [engagement] CH Chaparral SAM System SAM Chaparral M48 GP Gepard Air Defense Gun SPAAA Gepard HK Hawk SAM System SAM Hawk battery PT Patriot SAM System SAM Patriot battery RA Rapier SAM System SAM Rapier LN RO Roland SAM System SAM Roland ADS SA Towed SAM System SAM NASAMS battery ST Stinger SAM System SAM Avenger/MANPADS Stinger VU Vulcan Air Defense Gun SPAAA M163 U Unknown Air Defense Unit SPAAA HL ZU-23 (technical truck) G1 Growth 1 [1 km radius red engagement ring] G2 Growth 2 [2 km radius red engagement ring] G3 Growth 3 [3 km radius red engagement ring] G4 Growth 4 [4 km radius red engagement ring] GU Generic Air Defense Unit [5 km radius red engagement ring] AD Friendly Air Defense Unit [8 km radius red engagement ring] TG Target Point [3 km radius red engagement ring] Note that while not every DCS World unit has a direct corresponding point type within the DCS: AH-64D database, we have selected the closest point that would correspond with such a unit. The best example of this is using the "Crotale" Threat point to display threat rings for the HQ-7, which is a Chinese-made system based on the French Crotale SAM system. We've also elected to provide a number of additional generic threat points via "un-used" air defense points within the DCS: AH-64D database, with various radius values that will permit players to adapt to various situations that may occur during gameplay, which may not always correspond to a specific air defense unit. We hope that these will prove useful for those unpredictable situations that players may find themselves in. Kind regards, Wags

Hey @ShinyMikey - I was just about to post something. Sadly and very unfortunately, our changes for this patch have not shipped this time around due to an unfortunate series of smaller mishaps in the publishing process and miscommunication. Not to be repeated and lesson learned. This patch was to see, amongst other things, the next larger overhaul in the AIM-54 as well as various other medium and minor features and fixes making it to the F-14 and Viggen. Instead, these improvements will ship in September together with the next series of features we'll get done by then. We'll detail the AIM-54 changes in a post on the forums to give you a preview until then. Apologies for the non-existent showing. We set our sights on September and beyond and hope to make it a major, wrinkle-free update for both aircraft. [edited to explain it a bit more in detail and more accurately.]

Flying Iron A-7E Corsair @Dan NORM ATTACK & CCRP modes progressing very well

Think we can move on from this thread now, thanks for your extreme patience on this overly long wait all.

DCS 2.7.17.29140 DCS: Mirage F1 by Aerges Input and cockpit controls fixes: Fixed keyboard/joystick operation for the following cockpit clickable axes and multi-position switches: Chaff and flares dispenser ALE 40 control unit: Program selector switch Sight system and recording camera: Reticle intensity rheostat Moving and Target Reticles intensity rheostat Attitude Reticle intensity rheostat Exposure time repeater Overrun select thumbwheel IFF: All "Mode 1A..." selectors All "Mode 3A ..." selectors Mode 4 selector switch Function selector switch IFF fault light Radar indicator scope control box: Indicator lights brightness Strobe brightness Distance markers brightness Horizon and radial velocity marker brightness Horizon symbol vertical position Radar detector indicator: Indicator lights intensity adjusting switch Cabin lighting: Map light rheostat Miscellaneous instrument integral lighting rheostat Lighting control unit: Light and panel lighting rheostat Ultraviolet lighting rheostat Dual instrument panel lighting rheostat (Floodlights) Dual instrument panel lighting rheostat (Integral) Dual console and pedestal lighting rheostat (Floodlights) Dual console and pedestal lighting rheostat (Integral) TACAN control box: TACAN mode selector Omnibearing and VOR/ILS-TAC selector box: VOR/ILS-OFF-TACAN selector Air conditioning system: Temperature control rheostat Warning lights intensity: Combat flaps light Nose wheel steering light Airbrake light Standby receptacle light Jammer detection light (animation is absent now) (C + M or SW) R light Cannons too hot light Incidence indicator lighting rheostat Air data instrument controls: Mach/Airspeed indicator reference airspeed knob Slaved altimeter barometric pressure setting knob Standby altimeter barometric pressure setting knob Heading control unit: Heading and vertical reference system control switch Radio selector unit: MISS potentiometer TAC potentiometer VOR potentiometer U + V potentiometer U potentiometer RAP + CME potentiometer MKR + TP potentiometer V/UHF control unit - TRAP 136: All "Frequency select thumbwheel" Frequency selector switch Channel selector Fixed clickability of the following clickable controls: IFF: All "Mode 1A..." selectors All "Mode 3A ..." selectors Pedal toe brakes now animated. Keyboard/joystick controlled independent left and right toe brakes now operational. TRAP136 KHz can now be set correctly Fixed flaps input commands toggle option (F key). Removed radar control stick keyboard default assignments. Fixed “U/C light” that was erroneously named as “Combat flaps light” in inputs. “Horizon framing” command was renamed to “Horizon symbol vertical position” (to make it consistent with the name of the clickable control). Fixed RWR “Indicator lights intensity adjusting switch” spelling. Fixed seat height adjustment controls that were reversed. Removed delay in the preset channels counter animation of both radios. Fixed TACAN and VOR/ILS channel selectors animation direction when set with keyboard/joystick. Changed cannon 300-600 m and missile lock/unlock button default binding. Armament panel buttons operate now as on/off buttons when using keyboard/joystick bindings. Added VOIP PTT ("custom") keyboard command, as an alternative for standard VOIP commands. Flight model, aircraft systems and weapons: Adjusted engine thrust with AB on. Added an option (Special Options menu) to automatically reset the countermeasures and fuel (detotalizer) counters upon rearm or refuel. Fixed alternator failing outside intended failure regimes. Alternator failures are now recoverable, adjustments are still being made. Permanent destruction of the alternators is possible again. BIP trim directions switched. Brake light now on when the brakes activate during retraction of the gear. Adjusted oil failure, warning doesn’t appear so easily with negative G forces. Corrected problems with the calculation of weight of the CLB4. It is now possible to load the Mk-83 bomb. Pylons damage is WIP. Сommunications: TRAP-137B radio is now functional in the radio menu. Volume controls are now enabled on the Radio Selector Unit panel. Radio Selector Unit panel “Green” and “Red” lights are functional now. “Alternate PTT” now serves as the ‘VOIP PTT’ button. Missions: Fixed typo in startup mission (Sdes should read Sdef Fs). Fixed Marianas landing single mission briefing, should read ILS RWY 06L instead of 06R. Added Quick Start Caucasus dogfight practice mission. Textures: Cockpit dark panel is being worked on, there is a provisional fix for now. Fixed Iran and Iraq Liveries. Deleted Libyan old skin version. Some fixes made to the cockpit textures. Updated texture of French liveries. Other fixes: Corrected AI thrust tables. The engine now uses the correct ATAR sound again, instead of Su-25 and Su-27 engine sounds. Added padlock controls. Special options tooltips added. Warning: due to changes in input commands some user local assignments may have disappeared.

Облака плывущие по ветру уже сделаны. Скоро будут в ОБ.

Unfortunately not at the moment as a living document, a public bug tracker takes a lot of time simply to maintain. Currently I do not think that there is a bug we are not aware of, we keep checking the bug section, forums and also other social media frequently, plus our fairly large test team serves us a bridge in case we miss something. In terms of reporting there is no need to pre-occupy yourselves: rather have a bug reported twice than not at all, so if you feel like you want something reported simply do so please. Thank you! Soon.

SU-57 EFM Build 03 is Here! SU-57 EFM Thrust Vectoring is Finally Here (WIP). What's included in build 03: #1 AL41 Engines: Acceleration updated; Super cruise Added, Response time Added from 0% to full mil power. #2 FM: Low speed and High speed CFD Studies added on each control surface, Such as Lev cons, these are noted without the use of TVC. #3 Lights: Added Two Stages for Navigation and Taxy Lights. #4 Nozzles Animation: Updated movement and rotation of the TVC Nozzles to form a V (More will come and fixed). #5 Thrust Vectoring key binds: ( F ) : Triggers Stage 1 Thrust Vectoring, mostly more affective during extremely low speeds where Stall is imminent. ( B) : Triggers Stage 2 Thrust Vectoring, mostly affective during High speeds, meant to Force Drag and Slow you down Quick and Also gives you the ability to pull harder. TVC Notes: Stage 1 and 2 can be used together, Stage 1 Triggers Pitch, Roll and Yaw while Stage 2 triggers only Pitch Axis. BUGs: TVC and Fm Known to Produce Extra Momentum, the aircraft will accelerate on its own while banking or coming out of a tvc maneuver (Will be Fixed). SU-57 Fm Build 03 Download https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t4PRNeyB6gaq0E2BCHx6x71GhpBZg-y_/view?usp=sharing CubanAce Discord link: https://discord.gg/erWqmQK CubanAce FaceBook: Cubanace | Facebook

Three new airfields have been added in DCS 2.7.17.29140 Open Beta - 24.08.2022: - El Calafate, Argentina - Puerto Natales, Chile - Puerto Williams, Chile No other changes, no new unmarked airstrips. Updated map and miz file in the first post.

Hey everyone, sadly and very unfortunately, our changes for this patch have not shipped this time around due to an unfortunate series of smaller mishaps in the publishing process and miscommunication. Not to be repeated and lesson learned. This patch was to see, amongst other things, the next larger overhaul in the AIM-54 as well as various other medium and minor features and fixes making it to the F-14 and Viggen. Instead, these improvements will ship in September together with the next series of features we'll get done by then. We'll detail the AIM-54 changes in a post on the forums to give you a preview until then. Apologies for the non-existent showing. We set our sights on September and beyond and hope to make it a major, wrinkle-free update for both aircraft.

Oversweep on ground spawn is universal now, and unsweeping your wings prior take off is a checklist item. This is unfortunately due to the fact that you can only set one wingstate for all ground spawns, unlike the carrier. It is necessary to avoid wing sweep 20° fwd spawns in hangars, as we find unsweeping the wings is nothing outrageous (or even abnormal irl to do and) to ask from the player, while ofc having them spawn with wings damaged and stuck in a hangar is. Hope that makes sense.

They will indeed. We will have an update about the aim54 changes ahead of the next patch.

TL;DR Airquake servers have been spared one more month. Next month there will be rending of garments, wearing of sack-cloths, and the lamentations of their women will drown out all. Phoenix will blot out the sun, and there will be no fighting in the shade.

New update (v4.6) of the mod, this time with two new "ambulance" tones. Due to some new information I received there are now two different tones: one for CW signals, and one for high PRF (>5600Hz). The CW tone alternates at 3Hz between 1200Hz and 1900Hz The HPRF tone alternates at 4Hz between 1000Hz and 2000Hz

The gun in the F-13 is useless - it not only has a limited supply of 60 rounds, but the sight will easily topple and wave the white flag when you're trying to do any kind of tracking. The radar is just providing the gunsight with enough ranging-info to be useless in itself. You don't even get to have a scope. That's a "PF and onwards" thing. The F-13 will be a lot of fun to fly, but it will be severely limited in combat. The PFM should benefit of the Monsoon double-launchers later on. At the cost of a royal duckton of drag. But it has a better intake-design and supposedly slightly better area-ruling, so it should have better transonic/ supersonic performance.

There are some subtleties to the language regarding F-16 locations that's not quite right. In an A-G preplanned mode with direct aimpoint sighting the steerpoint and target are coincident. The steerpoint does and should move. What's confusing is that HUD (HMCS) symbols are layered with occlusion priority so sometimes the diamond can't be seen because it's "under" or occluded by the TD box. The situation we get in DCS where you can see the "diamond in the box with dot" should never happen because if TD and diamond are together then diamond is not visible. No diamonds are displayed in preplanned modes except when they denote the RP (VRP) and is not a steerpoint or when it denotes IP (VIP) when it is a steerpoint. In VIP case the diamond will be steerpoint but TD box won't be so they can co-exist. The TD box will still occlude IP/STPT diamond if they overlap in the HUD. If you are in an A-G preplanned mode and don't have VIP or VRP enabled and see a diamond in your HUD/HMCS it is a bug. Because DCS has an error where you see the diamond in the wrong spot in CCRP I'm using CCRP VIP to demonstrate symbol occlusion. I have placed TGT (TD box) between me and the diamond (1nm closer) but since it is at 0' and I have altitude diamond and TD are not overlapping. Next I will raise up the target by a few hundred feet so it overlaps (lies along same LOS) and you'll see TD occlude diamond. Note that it doesn't matter which symbol is physically closer. Even if TD is physically farther away than diamond it will have higher priority. null Raised 150', half of diamond occluded Raised 300', all of diamond occluded. This is what should happen at all times when TD and diamond are in the same place. Now I'll show how normal CCRP is wrong by slewing TD box around and seeing that diamond remains in one place (it should move and always be "under" the TD box). It does occlude correctly though. See how slewing steerpoint doesn't move diamond? This is wrong behavior. In CCRP you are absolutely moving the steerpoint (well you're not actually moving it but you're adding cursor corrections and the diamond is placed at steerpoint plus cursor correction, same result) and thus the diamond. Because in direct sighting the TGT is the STPT the TD box will be where the steerpoint is so TD box and diamond will always perfectly align and diamond will never be visible. Anyway, look at HARM symbology. First we look at normal HARM POS (EOM) HUD which is designated without HAD (simply current STPT) Steerpoint = target so TD box is right over steerpoint ahead, perfectly normal. You should be able to slew the STPT/TD using HUD SOI or FCR SOI just like CCRP and we can't in this version. Now we try designating using HAD... This is nonsense. Diamond doesn't belong on HUD at all here in any position (well, it should be under TD box thus invisible). Steerpoint has been moved by HAD/HTS in a similar way that it would be moved by TGP/Litening with normal bombs. Notice how designating with HAD will change the bearing to NAV destination on HSI between your knees, again because it is moving the steerpoint so make sure to CZ after using HARMs in this way.

On modern air shows they're pretty gentle since it's a museum aircraft, so they don't use the wheel brakes that much. The flight manual procedures for the real aircraft also note that in most cases heavy wheel braking is not necessary when using the thrust reverser and short landing procedures. However, it also explicitly permits going absolutely balls to the wall with both thrust reverser and wheel brakes, if the situation so requires (imagine for example a slippery 800m strip with a bomb crater near one end). There are several flight manual pages of caveats attached to this, however. I'll attempt to summarize the section on short runway landing procedures below. Most of this is probably in the DCS flight manual too, but I enjoy nerding out. Prerequisites The 15,5° alpha no-flare approach must be used. With a heavy aircraft in warm weather this might not be possible because of restrictions on how much of a thrust margin you need to safely be able to go around from a high alpha/low speed approach. Aircraft weight < 14 tons (<80% fuel with a clean aircraft) Crosswind component < 30 km/h Must not be carrying rb 04, rb 15 or Sidewinders on the wing pylons Runway width >= 17 m. Procedure Arm thrust reverser after gear is down and locked (three green lights) On final, the aircraft must be trimmed out neutral in pitch If using AFK, disengage it when passing the runway threshold Reduce throttle to flight idle when the main wheels touch down Ensure alignment with runway heading before the nose wheel touches down Pull gently back on the stick after the nose wheel touches down; the higher the throttle setting the harder you need to pull Increase throttle as required no earlier than 1,5 seconds after nose wheel touches down; however, if the actual engine RPM is at flight idle or lower the throttle may be increased to mil power immediately on nose wheel touchdown Wait until two seconds after touchdown before using the wheel brakes Reduce throttle to flight idle no later than when the REV AVDR/TRANSONIC light illuminates; the rpm should be at ground idle by the time the aircraft comes to a stop. Notes and caveats By far the greatest danger during a short landing is the risk of losing yaw control. Although the aircraft has good yaw stability under ordinary circumstances, the thrust reverser disturbs the airflow over the tailfin, which significantly degrades the aircraft's yaw stability. These yaw disturbances become increasingly severe with higher speed and higher reverse thrust settings. At very high speeds, engaging the thrust reverser degrades yaw stability to an unacceptable degree, even with the throttle at flight idle. Hence, arming the thrust reverser at speeds above the normal 15,5° glideslope approach speed is strictly prohibited, even in an emergency situation. Setting the throttle to full reverse (mil power with the reverser engaged) must not be done before the speed has dropped below 250 km/h. The autopilot's SPAK mode automatically uses a special yaw damping mode while the thrust reverser is engaged, which helps mitigate the yaw stability issues to a significant extent, but does not eliminate them. If SPAK mode is not available (e.g. due to an autopilot fault condition), the thrust reverser must not be used at speeds above 200 km/h, and once deployed the throttle setting must not exceed flight idle, except in an emergency. Do not push the stick forward while reversing at high throttle settings. The resulting reduced weight on the main gear severely degrades the yaw stability, and in extreme cases the main gear may leave the runway entirely. Avoid using asymmetric wheel braking if possible; using only the rudder for yaw control yields higher precision. In case of abnormal yaw disturbances during thrust reversal, immediately reduce throttle to ground idle. Using the thrust reverser on snow or ice may reduce the runway friction coefficient.

Cheers, the Sidewinders (all of them) are placed too far aft. They need to be placed a good deal forward. Compare the screenshots with some photos.

When's the re-test? I hope this doesn't affect your final grade. [Runs out the door, ducking tomatoes being flung in his direction]

The request in itself imo is totally fine. We do so in many things, like snapping a hook. Now, snapping a hook and getting your flaps stuck ofc are events of a very different intensity, that is one part of it. But the other is also: in this case letting you know the flaps got stuck say through a "snap sound", won't change or add anything to the gameplay. To the contrary imo - arguing now outside the fact that it is fairly unrealistic - it would help virtual pilots to be more complacent. This goes against the idea of cockpit awareness and following procedures. There is one excellent indicator for this: 225kts indicated. It's much better in this case, imo - given the fact that you get warning lights - to compell the player to look out for the airspeed indicator than to listen to whether the flaps broke or not, as it would be too late by then anyway. So the moment of hearing it teaches you little. Of course, in the hook's case it is also too late. But that's when you really need to know that it is too late, aka usually unforeseen emergency, vs keeping an eye out to not let it get too late when observing your airspeed during take off or landing operations.

So much salt these days (I sort of get it because I'm about to let loose my own salt bags)... we get you prefer something else, that's fine and the USN birds are great. But you don't really have to poop on everyone else's parade just because you're not getting exactly what you want as if its an affront to civilized society. But screw it, this is annoying, I'm projecting and I don't care so I'll bite. Here are some facts: F-4B kills: 12 confirmed during the Vietnam War. Flown by the US. F-4J kills: 20 confirmed during the Vietnam War. Flown by the US and UK Awesome stuff, worthy aircraft. However: F-4D: 45 kills confirmed during the Vietnam War. Further unknown amount with Iran. Flown by the US, Spain, Iran, RoK (South Korea). F-4E: 23 kills confirmed during the Vietnam War. 116 or so confirmed kills during the War of Attrition, October/Yom Kippur War and 1982 Lebanon War.. Further unknown amount with Iran. Flown US, Israel, Iran, RoK (South Korea), Greece, Turkey. Most numerous version made. Counterarguments: 1) Keep in mind not everyone on DCS is from the US. The F-4E was the original/only model for a lot of these countries. If this isn't war-proven, I don't know what is. 2) Just because it can drop LGB's somehow makes it the same experience as an F-16CJ? Go fly Korea or WW2 if you want something completely different. The Vietnam jets are inherently going to be more like modern jets than those planes. An honest look at the F-4E's smart weapon capabilities shows that it is literally the in-between evolutionary step in weapons employment between the Korean-war era jets and the modern whizz-bang auto tracking targeting system-equipped modern fighters. That's an untouched sector in flight simulation. The F-4B delivery systems were almost the same from the end-user perspective as the F-86's, MiG-21bis or F-5's we have now... New experiences, you said? 3) If you want the original for immersion, I get it. I'd prefer a 1980s F-15A instead of the F-15E but it just makes sense that a version more countries have flown is being made. It appeals to more people and can always be restricted in many ways. You can't upgrade a variant in the game.. So take one second and see above why the F-4E makes sense. It's not the RIGHT choice, it's just a logical one. The F-4B, J and S are also cool choices and they're not wrong but you have to be fooling yourself if you don't see the merit as to why the E was chosen first. The saddest part is that the Navy versions are planned and people will STILL be unhappy. Rant over. Have at me.

Those things happen. What about a deal? Post just one WIP picture of the Heatblur DCS F-4 and all is forgiven.

Sadly, no change today. There was no update to the Syria map, which I presume is what @Maestro meant by the 'next update'. I'll try messaging him again.

They all sound interessting to me but for now my focus is going to move towards Mirage F1CT for a moment. In the meantime, the ATAC Mirage F1CR pack is officially out ! DOWNLOAD HERE

@Flappie Thank You very much for educating me and finding the information to help me understand this, I know from your past involvement with other Items I put out about the Huey how helpful you are in our communities outreach to E.D. with our concerns and need for help with any Model and this one. Thank you for all you do. I hope to see official News statement of some fix and bug patches for our Huey community. Patience of waiting for things is what we do best. Thank You for all you are doing.

ЭВУ в жизни изменяют конфигурацию ИК сигнатуры борта. Если без ЭВУ сигнатура имела вид "пчелиных крыльев", то с ЭВУ приобретает яйцеобразный вид, где вертолет примерно в центре "яйца". При этом радиус (средний) этого яйца меньше примерно вполовину от длины "пчелиных крыльев". Но, как выше упоминалось, вертолет становится в центре яйца. И при определенных условиях с передней полусферы ГСН ИК ракеты видит цель, оснащенную ЭВУ (от 2.5..2км и менее). ЭВУ в DCS работает упрощенно (потоки газов не размываются, потому что потоков просто нету), однако примерно схоже с реальностью - сигнатура имеет просто уменьшенный примерно на 50 % размер площади. При этом, если дальность невелика, то ракета безусловно увидит цель! Т.к. ИК сигнатура не что иное как область воздуха смешанного с горячими газами от двигателей ЛА (в основном, если не брать в расчет нагрев элементов конструкции о воздух от скорости полета или работы систем), то согласно закону сохранения энергии количество горячих газов (молекул СО2 и Н2О, которые приобрели новую энергию от сгорания топлива) хоть с ЭВУ, хоть без них - одно и тоже, т.к нужно "нести" эту массу ЛА в воздухе)). Единственное, что может ЭВУ, так это изменить общую конфигурацию сигнатуры и ее "плотность" (сделать ее более равномерной, менее разной по азимуту от центра ЛА). *Если бы ЭВУ были "панацеей", то не нужны были бы никакие системы обороны... применение ЭВУ и отстрел ИК-патронов в наилучших условиях для вертолета (в реальности, согласно исследованиям, которые проводили в ЧР) снижает общую вероятность поражения от 25 до 50% ( в смысле уменьшает на столько, т.е. была например 0.8, станет 0.6 - на 1/4 снизит). В DCS реализация связки - ИКГСН --- ИК-помехи в форме горящей "ловушки" - сделана больше в угоду игрокам, т.е. спасает их в большей степени, чем должно быть (это субъективно).

@DishDoggie Back in June 2018: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/248262-weekend-newsletters-2018/?do=findComment&comment=3517055

Your best realistic option is going to be for multiple variants. That way you can chose the variant that's your particular cup of tea for the mission at hand. With the the new Mirage F1 plans of there being future variants, it should prove to be a very interesting strategy that might be popular enough to show that its worth doing multiple variants for the developers if the variants are not too drastically different.

Hey Guys, After watching the FAC-A Tomcast they mention using an IZLID (Infared Zoom Laser Illuminator Device) at 50:28 mark. Other jets (AV8B) have an IR illuminator and I would love to see Jester shining his 1W IZLID out the canopy down at ground targets so that folks with NVGs could see what we are designating. Speaking naively, but I would figure it would work in that if Jester can visually see the target on the ground out of the canopy, then he could potentially illuminate it automatically if the LANTIRN is designated on it (no need for a jester menu option). Kind of a fun concept that would make the Tomcat even more unique than it already is!

F-15E

>> Download

Over my DCS career AAR has been the most difficult element for me to tackle - by FAR. Like most things in life, it takes practice, dedication and repetition to get it right. That answer isn't what most people want to hear, I know. This is one of those tasks that you have to "do" to get right. It doesn't matter how many youtube videos you watch ... none of them are going to make you a better aviator on the stick/throttle/pedals. For YEARS (10+), I used a side stick with no extension. I'd fiddle with the curves and eventually got decent enough to catch the basket and then hang on for dear life. It never felt natural. I never got comfortable and AAR remained something that I dreaded doing. I'd practice, but never really saw much improvement. I often lost contact and would have to re-engage the basket. That was until I invested in a stick extension and mounting brackets for my HOTAS. I now run with ZERO curves on my stick and AAR feels great. I no longer tense up and can AAR like I've been doing it for years. I have found a new lease on all those campaigns that require AAR to fully enjoy. So this is just MY experience. Lots of practice AND better equipment is what worked for me. Lastly, as a wannabe fighter pilot that will never get any closer to the experience outside of DCS, the AAR milestone remains one of the most rewarding of my "career". My words of encouragement are - "Don't give up!"

You're welcome! I feel pretty lucky that I have the opportunity to work on her, plus the ground equipment to keep her operational. I get out to the hangar about once a week, and I plan to have the camera with me as we do more work. I definitely want to see her in the air again! Another video will be out tommorow... I also am looking forward to Heatblur's release of the Phantom. They did an outstanding job on the Tomcat, and I absolutely enjoy flying backseat in that as a crew of two humans. I have a feeling I am going to enjoy riding backseat in the Phantom as well!

Just keep in mind that both the Viggen and the F-14 are still in EA. The latter has been out for almost 3.5 years, the former for longer. I think the Typhoon will be released in EA before 2025, but definitely not be feature complete by then. maybe i'm alone on this but i'd prefer anything early over nothing until a couple of years later but then everything. to me it seems more enjoyable to see the progress from the cockpit and to try it myself rather than getting some pictures every now and then

New update (v4.6) of the mod, this time with two new "ambulance" tones. Due to some new information I received there are now two different tones: one for CW signals, and one for high PRF (>5600Hz). The CW tone alternates at 3Hz between 1200Hz and 1900Hz The HPRF tone alternates at 4Hz between 1000Hz and 2000Hz Download link updated in OP.

What does this mean? And still no fix on the American .50 belts?

When I saw this topic I thought it was going to be a list of ways to improve the damage model. My wish list there. Damage components- Obviously things like radar antennae would be up here. but here is what else should be The hull and armor- The hull should be divided into segments, which have their own hit points based on whether or not they are armored. If we get battleships it would take a bunch of anti-ship missiles hitting the same spot to break through the armor. Rudder, screws and lower hull- a weakness of any ship is the lower hull, if a shot should have broken the keel that should be modeled. Also the rudder and screws need to get damaged. It would be awesome to have a torpedo hit a ships rudder and have it stuck doing doughnuts like the Bismarck. Internal components, the right (or wrong hit) can really mess up a ship. For example the HMS Sheffield had her fire suppression system taken out I wouldn't be surprised if that didn't happen to the Moscow as well. Also exploding magazines can destroy ships, which was the case with both the Hood and Arizona. I'd love to see flooding modeled as well, ideally flooding should be based on the size of the holes with the chance the ship will capsize and the crew will get it under control.

Well that will do the job ! Should make it much better. Looking forward to hearing how you get on with it.

apparently 1 year later than before you asked (running discord joke)

Hi, We recently updated the engine to be much more realistic in performance as well as failure and damage modeling. What you are explaining doesn't sound right, there is something wrong with your aircraft. Could you provide us with more information ? In order to help you we would need to know: Internal/External fuel and loadout at the time you did the pattern. Speed and bank angle used in the pattern and AoA on final. Warning and cautions on the alarm panel. A video or a track would be even better. I'm suspecting that your engine switched to the secondary FADEC (CALC SEC) and you didn't rearm it. Thanks.

null null

I'm more concerned that the sidewinder rail doesn't seem to have been modelled at all. I did a quick image search on the internet, sidewinder and magic doesn't seem to share the same launch rail. I've yet been able to identify the exact types but they do have dissimilar geometry at least. The one on our in game model resembles magic rail more than the sidewinder's rail: Magic rails: Magic rail on left wing tip, sidewinder rail right for acmi pod or something alik Sidewinder rail:

Only once an item is in testing and close to release will we talk about dates, generally in the form of a mini-update and/or video. Thanks!

Meh, I for one really dislike that "ugly middle child" generation of MiG-21. Gimme the F-13 and a late J-7/or even a very late upgrade for novelty. But mostly the F-13 first They'd be the right version for DCS Vietnam, yes. But then, I'm also staunchly against the idea of DCS Vietnam anyway At least for now. Yes, they've served in Vietnam, many of the Middle Eastern wars etc. But no matter from where I look at it, their characteristics and/or capabilities etc don't seem interesting enough to me compared either to MiG-21F generation or the Bis we have. And personally I'm in DCS more for the individual aircraft itself rather than history of conflicts it may have been in. But that's just me I guess F-13 tho: sleekest to look at, allegedly among the nicest to fly, still served in 'Nam anyway, still has limitations of two pylons with crap missiles to challenge oneself with, but at least has an internal glorious 30mm gun too, just not with with a meaningful amount of ammo but hey, challenge! Besides it has that glorious (by MiG-21 standards anyway) canopy to see around, including to the back, unlike later ones. Best of aaaallll the worlds!

These Vs are one of the things I love about the AV8B!

Hello after quite a long break. I've recently made some adjustments to some of the textures in the Caucasus map. Not sure if the project will evolve to a full package mod one day but if it will, I will surely let you guys know. For now, I'm just playing and testing different solutions using Taz's "Better Trees for Caucasus". Boy, they are better, indeed!

Is it though? Or is it completely inline with the stated scope of the module, which more often than not, is exactly the case? If the stated scope is aircraft version x, as operated by y, circa z timeframe and a wishlist thread comes up asking for a feature that is outside that scope, then the answer is no for precisely the reason that "the real thing doesn't have it". There's no cop-out about it - saying something isn't accurate for the module your making when it isn't is absolutely true and valid. Now I will say that ED should be more straight forward about what they're planning to deliver on the store page where you buy the module, instead of being just a wikipedia-ish overview of the aircraft in general. That way it's clearer to customers exactly what they're buying and what they can expect. So, you're okay with the answer, you just take issue when you're told why. I mean, you do you, but seems a little odd. Yeah, but that's not what that argument implies.

A few ....Look forward to your in depth post