Leaderboard

This is not the Kola Map, it is the Caucasus as stated in the video.

Razbam MiG-23MLA

As there is no "official" Thread for this topic, and very few independent mods available, Presenting, The Insurgent and Terrorist mod thread! Please feel free to add your own! To get things started, Coming soon, Model from sketch fab and models bought from cg trader. The insurgent Outpost! In a few flavors! Farp included! Much more in store. WIP screens While you wait for the above, try these! These fortifications may have no collision shell. The Helicopters do! Enjoy! https://www.dropbox.com/s/pjroqbdwqq56swr/Insurgent Tent V1.0.zip?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/doqjawt36cb03o9/Insurgents-Taliban-ISIS Camp.zip?dl=0 No guns https://www.dropbox.com/s/p1jwyb4x6asa33t/Insurgent AW-109 2.7.9.3.zip?dl=0 Guns https://www.dropbox.com/s/w51pihyeqjr5b6o/Insurgent Helicopter 2.7.9.zip?dl=0 Oh Crap! They stole a Coast Guard Helicopter! Insurgent/Terrorist version included as a livery! Now Go get EM!

Bombing modes rotary since update 24.08.2022 has been wrongly implemented. The current rotary order is CCIP -> CCRP -> DTOS. This is wrong and does not faciliate popup attacks that rely on steering info from CCRP and switch to CCIP for final visual targetting. CCIP is always one HOTAS press away from CCRP and is a core F-16 feature as seen in many HUD videos old and new over the years. Correct rotary order is (depending on starting mode when entering A/G and stepping via NWS MSL STEP): CCIP→DTOS→CCRP→CCIP (repeats) DTOS→CCRP→CCIP→DTOS (repeats) CCRP→CCIP→DTOS→CCRP (repeats) if starting from a manual selection of LADD/MAN on the SMS page then pressing NWS switches to CCIP→DTOS→CCRP→CCIP.

Blick durch das HUD eines Luftwaffen-Eurofighters über Singapur:

On the Magnitud3 3rd party FB page, show some follow projects. (sorry to put them on Spanish) Enviado desde mi RNE-L21 mediante Tapatalk

DCS World 2.7.17.29140 New and updated 3D models.

Hi guys, You may download the Mirage F1 template here (copy paste the link in your web browser): www.alasrojas.com/Upload/Mirage_F1_Template.rar

I play DCS often. So if something bothers you, it's probably bothering others, including me and other members of ED. If it matters to you, it matters to us as well. But I also see how much work the devs put into the product every day, and it really drives home the phrase of "battle of priorities vs time/resources". As such, I've gained an appreciation of priorities. We'll get there.

EDIT : Fixed on 02/09/2022 Give me a heads up if the issue comes back. Cheers Hello Ladies and Gentlemen, It seems that last update brought quite an annoying bug to the AV8B. It seems it is now impossible to create new waypoints in the DATA EHSD subpage by inputing not yet affected waypoint numbers. This is only for waypoints, TGTpoints and MKpoints are working as they should. A good workaround is to use the TOO function to create a new waypoint and then to edit its coords in the DATA page. Sorry for the inconvenience, we're working on fixing it ASAP. Cheers, A.J. P.S. : If you find other bugs don't hesitate to report them in the bugs and problems subforum.

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

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.

RWR kneeboard updated once again >>> Download

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]

Edit - slight change to the campaign title Introducing First in Weasels Over Syria - an in development Wild Weasel campaign for DCS F-16C Viper! Set during the 'Operation Cerberus North' story-line, FIWOS will put you into the shoes of a Wild Weasel pilot with the 79th Fighter Squadron as they deploy to support the efforts of the Joint Syrian Task Force in establishing air dominance over northern Syria. As with all campaigns by Ground Pounder Sims, this campaign will feature a custom built ATC system, a complex and engaging story, extensive campaign documentation and highly immersive mission design that will react to your approach and allow multiple ways of completing missions. The completed campaign will also feature the 'Weasel System' - a comprehensive air defense network built into every mission, this system covers dozens of fixed and mobile SAM sites and hundreds of pieces of AAA , all tied into a reactive network that brings units online as you enter their area of responsibility. The Weasel system also includes an electronic attack capability to offer jamming support to the Weasels and many SAM sites have weaknesses built in to every mission, that can be learned and exploited. The Weasel system will allow a blending of complex story led missions with dynamic threat behavior, and will push DCS Viper pilots to the limit as they learn to adapt, improvise and overcome in a high threat environment. YGBSM!

Could we get some notes on the changes of the FM? The plane feels different after the patch. There is a greater tendency for the nose to wobble around after aileron rolls. The effectiveness of the rudder in the high AoA regime seems to have been decreased. I only had a short flight. Maybe it's just me. What do you guys think? Have you noticed that too?

1450 km/h for top speed clean at sea level is plausible, after all other fast fighters of the era had speed limits around that (MiG-23, JA 37). However 1620 km/h surpasses that by a fair amount. Also, the 1984 Soviet intelligence technical report places the Mirage F1 top speed with two Magics at around 1300 km/h at sea level, as drag limited, a bit higher up is where it becomes dynamic pressure limited (10,000 kgf/m^2) and then Mach limited. It's not about the mass, but about removing those external components and sealing/fairing over the fuselage and wing leading edge which would present a significant drag reduction. Even if these components are retractable, tolerances aren't perfect so you will always have seam lines causing some level of drag. It was a very cleaned up plane In regards to the modifications same as what I said above. About area rule, it helps reduce the drag of a given design, but then it's speed will be the result of the interaction of it's total drag (including lift induced drag) and engine thrust. MiG fighters weren't area ruled yet they still were among the fastest fighters of their times, the MiG-21 reaching Mach 2, the MiG-23 being able to reach up to Mach 2.6, the MiG-25 being able to surpass Mach 3. A plane being area ruled or not without further analysis shouldn't be indicative of it's speed characteristics. Also you can see in that second photo of the RB F-104, the F-104 does seem to be area ruled, the fuselage decreases it's diameter at the mid point where the wings are present. And here in this photo you can see the intake duct volume decreasing as it reaches the mid point of the wings too.

I think this conversation is somewhat pointless until Aerges weighs in with what their long term plan is for these changes. It seems pretty clear to me that these changes were merged unintentionally considering there are several very significant differences completely absent from the patch notes. I personally don't think a stock F1 should be able to set an IAS speed record. But, I'll wait to argue about it until Aerges says it's intentional. They very well could be in the middle of re-working failure conditions and whatnot

See? Substantial unrealism already exists in DCS, given the Kuz can run flank into the wind reliably- we don't need to double down with the chocks. Deck runs it is!

What If's and Alternate Universes don't mean anything, DCS is Programmed and designed in this one. So you're complaining that when you do things that are outside the simulation's scope that things go wrong? Stop doing un-realistic things, the sim isn't programmed to recognize or allow tomcats off the Netz, that's the only reason it doesnt work, and that will never change. The collision model will see it when it lands, but the code behind the holdback chocks does not recognize the tomcat as it's programmed to interact with a catapult. It has nothing to do with it being hypothetically possible in a alternate universe, and has everything to do with the Module was not programmed to interact with it. It's not a holywar on CATO vs STO, it's simply the answer. The Tomcat Module is not programmed to interact with the STO System the Kunetzov uses, point blank, period, and it's not going to change, because it's never been done in this reality and likely any other as the aircraft itself is too big to even fit behind the hold backs with the elevator up.

RAZBAM F-15E

These issues have been acknowledged in previous threads, and unfortunately I cannot provide any details as to when they will be resolved. I have brought up the issue of the long Saturation tone to the team in particular as that can obviously interfere with other audio happening during the mission, whether it be radios or RWR alerts. This is among a number of behaviors that is already being worked on by the dev team regarding the flight model. Since it all intertwines with one another (flight controls, Flight Management Computer, the rotor aerodynamics) this is a very complex task that the team has been working on for some time. As a DCS player myself, I eagerly anticipate these fixes right along with you. However, we need to be patient, as hard as that can be sometimes.

The 14 CANNOT, DOES NOT, WILL NOT take off from a kuz, Heres a link on catobar https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CATOBAR If you dont understand the systems we can help you learn but you need to understand, what you are asking/moaning about: Is IMPOSSIBLE

This will be implemented in the next OB if testing goes well. Thanks!

This is already fixed internally. For this OFP it should be and will be CCIP --> DTOS --> CCRP --> CCIP. Thanks

Gameism Personally I'd love for the sake of realism if it was changed so it is set on the ground, same as how the F16 module does it.

I have the cheapest thrustmaster pedals with no curves... I also have 0 issues taxing with the A-4 in a carrier or airfield... What I have issues with, is the entitlement of some people... This mod is free, done by people using their free time to pursue their own goals and they graciously share their work with us, even if they have no obligation to. It is fine and understandable that somebody might not agree or like those goals but calling them "stupid" is crossing the line. This entitlement might end up killing the desire of sharing one's work. I'm personally in this situation, even that what I've shared with this community is not remotely close to what the A-4 team has shared. I'm sure the dev team, any mod dev team, can take constructive feedback and apply it if it fits their goals. Let's respect those, be grateful and if we do not like a mod for whatever reason, just let's move on. We are here to have fun after all... In whatever way each one of us define "fun".

I fly the F-14 in multiplayer almost everyday (PVP on the 104th and some PVE on Tactical Panda or Grayflag). The Aim-54 is in no way useless. I get at least 60~70% of my kills with it, sometimes at 80 miles...and sometimes inside 10mile shots with the ACM cover up. I would suggest that the problem may be the shots that you are taking and not the missile itself. Getting the most out of the Aim-54 requires good SA and understanding the parameters you need to be in for a high PK shot. I think if anyone is not flying the Tomcat because they are waiting for some magical update that will make all their missiles score, then you will be waiting a long time and missing out on a lot of enjoyment you could be having.

It's already fixed internally. Missile will better track target in such conditions(and even will hit target in q4 and q3 tracks).

Wings? The canopy would melt under that speed. Mirage 2000C is limited due to canopy mainly and antenas and stuuf, it will melt away.

Он просто подыскивает нужные слова, чтобы выразить свою фразу. От этого теряет много времени))) А ещё на аглицкий в уме переводит.

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.]

reported one month ago. this issue is still reproducible in the latest build. the original topic was closed before the fix. the issue is of trivial complexity (most probably) but has a very serious impact on entire userbase of warthog drivers. textbook "low hanging fruit" task when prioritizing a sprint. did the reported bug felt through the cracks?

I fly rather okay, but since about a week I have annoying sound of SAS SATURATION message too often to stand the game. It appears very often except perhaps straight flying. Even small adjustment of throttle causes it. Tried to turn off various channels in A/C utils page, but to no avail. I see a green bar of throttle input slowly creeping up or down the limits (on the controls preview). I have deadzones set to about 3 in each axis. Stick is saitek X56. Anyone else has this problem? It is very annoying during the hover attempts or during the combat. No way to turn the sound off. Perhaps there is a way to change a sound file to avoid hearing it every several seconds?

FLCS bit implemented appears to be the analogue FLCS bit blk 32 and prior.

>All YOU have is a magazine excerpt says the man who has contributed absolutely nothing to the argument

Yes, that should be on the way.

The FM and Data Files for the Tomcat are coded to the CATOBAR system, so STOBAR on Kunetzov is simply ignored by the Aircraft as it's not coded to use that system. No Tomcat ever took off form a STOBAR Carrier, nor was it ever tested with ramps, so asking the developer to even entertain this, I'll save everyone's time, its not going to happen.

I found the problem. I was using a mod called "Mirage F1CE Weapons Mod". Once I remove this mod, all of the French variants of the Mirage F1 were available in the mission editor. Thank you for the help.

Otherwise, we're gonna get instances where clear weather fools people into carrying LGBs only to find their targets covered in fog and low clouds. forcasting data will need to be provided to allow people to properly plan around the changing weather. Edit: And perhaps an option to switch between "perfect" weather prediction and "realistic" weather prediction. One being a perfect prediction of the weather over time, and another having a realistic degree of error.

It's a massive gaping hole of an omission that drastically limits your options. Both selecting a parking spot out of a pre-determined list and being able to just spawn wherever you like are solved problems for airbases - an aircraft carrier isn't really all that different in terms of the basic fundamentals, apart from the fact that it moves (which considering we can land on moving carriers with more-or-less no issues), I don't really see what the issue is. And yeah, the file you're after is the RunwaysAndRoutes.lua for whatever ship you want to edit. Aside from replacing some of the values (say, swapping slot 1 with slot 4) you can't change the order, but you can change how many there are and where they are. Unfortunately though, you can't reload this file within a mission (which would allow for something more akin to cyclic ops), so you're stuck with a single configuration for the entire mission. It would be useful to have at least a takeoff configuration (allowing aircraft to be parked over the landing area) and one suitable for landing, with the landing area cleared, with parking perhaps over the bow catapults. Absolutely and as it stands none of the carriers support cyclic operations and you're severely limited in terms of how many useable aircraft you can have up on deck, especially if you're going to have an AI BARCAP flight, AEW aircraft and a tanker. On the Forrestal, if said AI BARCAP flight is a 2-ship, then that already cuts the useable aircraft in half. It also means it's impossible to replicate what a more realistic deck would look like, which I can only do with static objects, which are eye-candy only and unuseable. Another compounding problem is the lack of pushback functionality - yes this is not something a pilot would do, but who says I can't pretend to be an aircraft handler before pretending to step into the aircraft?

Hi, we had a tecnical issue that prevented a merge for this item, it should be in the next open beta. thank you

Only coming in September, unless there is a hotfix

w/o trackIR (or VR) you're screwed anyway in this cockpit.... God bless the engineers of the Viper!

Hi, We are currently working to update the sounds but it's something that takes some time so it will not be ready soon. Thanks.

There's a collective issue with the SCAS servo: Current workaround is to disable it from the FLT -> UTIL page and disable the COLL option under FMC. That will give you direct collective control.

В данной теме вроде не про современные аппараты. Соответственно и требования другие.

F-15E