Leaderboard

Weird, almost like I work for ED or something. Your disappointment in their choice will not do much, as Wags stated, the teams location and knowledge made sense for them to do this as their first map, and even if they wanted to do Vietnam or Korea or whatever else you might have preferred, it might very well all ready be taken and not announced. You need to look at the bigger picture, and at the end of the day, as even Wags said, this might not be a map for you, and you might not buy it, and that is ok. You can put your two cents in, but ease up on them, you don't like their choice, great, then you don't have to buy it, but you don't need to wish poor sales on them or whatever else negative thoughts you have. The best way to react to something you don't like is to not pay it any mind. I would watch the tone as well, as I said, you made your point leave them be now. You paid for a lot of products sure, but that doesnt buy you the right to be rude. Read and understand what Wags wrote as well, even if a team comes about and wants to do a Vietnam or Korea map, it doesnt mean it is open to do, and for their first venture into map making, doing something they are more familiar with and have better access to makes sense. Vietnam and Korea are obviously a popular place, they are also complex and key maps, its more of a matter of when than if.

MIG-23 MLA

great response, I got a big laugh from it

Dear all, We hear your concerns, and I’ll try to help explain. Check Six Simulations is an Australian group of DCS enthusiasts that want nothing more than an Australia map in DCS to fly over. Because Check Six Simulations is a first-time map developer, this map is an ideal choice to learn the Terrain Development Kit (TDK) and the quite complex process of creating a map. As with any 3rd party that has first demonstrated to us the required skillset, we will not forbid them from creating a map of their dreams if it does not conflict with existing map plans. Creating this map in no way impacts the creation of other maps. Will this map be your cup of tea? Perhaps not, but it may be for some and will not impact your enjoyment of DCS. Eagle Dynamics wishes the Check Six Simulations every success. Kind regards, Wags

RWS Scan Centering is has been added internally and should be included in the October OB. This will be done with a short TDC depress. Kind regards, Wags

Australia map is OK, guys write about prefering Cold War Fulda Gap, Vietnam or 1950 Korea, but some people forget about one basic thing bashing Australia map: It's not ED who is using its resurces to make Australia map, but Australian 3rd party which WANT to make this map, because they are from Australia and ED just allows them an access to DCS enviromet. I guess even if this map would sell mostly in Australia they are ok with that. Let them have fun. No matter if someone is going to buy this particular map or not - it doesn't hurt anyone.

I'm confused that NTTR and the Red Flag campaigns that take place on that map receive praise, yet people are seeming to write this terrain off as useless/pointless. While the area (bar Darwin) doesn't have much in the way of historical significance, it has contemporary significance. This area is essentially Australia's NTTR. This whole area sees small and large scale exercises with international allies that is basically the region's Exercise Red Flag: it's called Exercise Pitch Black. This year Australia is hosting (Pitch Black is currently underway): French Rafales, CASA 235s and MRTTs, German Typhoons, MRTTs and A400M Atlas, Indian Su-30MKIs, Indonesian F-16As, Japanese F-2s, South Korean KF-16Us and MRTTs, Singaporean F-15SG, F-16s and MRTTs, UK Typhoons and MRTTs, and US F-15Cs and F-35Bs In addition to Australia's own F-35As, EA-18Gs, E-7A and KC-30A MRTTs (interestingly, the F/A-18Fs did not participate according to the release I was reading). Other countries also send personnel in supporting roles: Canada, New Zealand, Thailand, the UAE, Malaysia and The Netherlands are all listed as participating (but not sending aircraft). That is not an insignificant collection of aircraft or international participation and this could all be replicated within DCS (with placeholders for aircraft we don't yet have in DCS, obviously). While it may not offer the suggestion of a fictional war between Indonesia and Australia (flight time to Indonesian territory is about the same distance as Falklands to Argentina - maybe slightly longer), the map has plenty of potential for other scenarios. It's not what I had expected, given the aircraft coming and/or being developed but I'm still looking forward to it.

For me, every new map is a big value for DCS and the most interesting news of today‘s newsletter is the fact that there are enthusiasts who make a new map and the we have a new 3rd party joining DCS. So please let us give them a chance and let us be surprised what these guys will be able to offer us.

Besides the lack of historical interest that this map represents, I am especially worried about the graphic quality of the realisation. And this is a bit the case for all the maps announced lately. We had the Syrian map which is for me the most beautiful map of DCS. This was followed by the Marianas map which is a magnificent achievement and a standard of modelling that is expected for new productions. These two maps are a real pleasure to fly in helicopters. And it is fair to say that in recent years helicopters have been well developed by ED following the arrival of the Hind and Apache. Others like BSIII, BO-105, who knows OH-58 (one can always dream) should follow. But to enjoy flying helicopters, you need good terrain modelling, which is currently only available on the Syria, Marianas and to a lesser extent in the Caucasus map. The recent release of the South Atlantic map by Razbam is clearly inferior in terms of terrain quality. To give you an idea, I fly in a virtual 100% helicopter unit and out of our 20 pilots, only one bought the map (out of curiosity). In view of the quality of the terrain at low altitude, none of us wanted to make this purchase. So if I have a wish to express here towards ED, apart from the discussion on the fact of modelling an X or Y map, it is above all to be able to have a quality product at least equivalent to the standard of the Syria or Marianas map. We are in 2022, very quickly in 2023 and we expect an even better quality compared to the past achievements...but currently when we see the map of Razbam we can have serious doubts. DCS is not only planes flying at 9,000ft, it is also helicopters doing tactical flight (NOE) and the quality of the environment is therefore a primordial thing to have a maximum immersion. Thank you for thinking of us... We are obviously impatient to discover the next screenshots and if the interest for the Australian map is to be relativized, it would obviously be a very nice surprise to see a very high quality ground modeling.

You have made your point, good enough. You can speak for yourself and let that team do what they plan to do. Wags made it pretty clear the reasoning I dont see why we need to harp on it any more. Thanks.

DCS F-100D FAQ: Subject to Change: The content of this FAQ is subject to change as a result of experience, new information, changes in process requirements and the availability of resources. General Questions: What version of the F-100 are you developing? We are developing a “Project High Wire” F-100D Super Sabre. What did “Project High Wire” add to the F-100s? The major “Project High Wire” upgrades include; instrument modifications and relocations, the addition of RHAW (Radar Homing and Warning) equipment and combat documentation cameras, upgraded IFF, TACAN and ADF systems along with upgraded weapons control and release panels. Will the infamous “Sabre Dance” be implemented? Yes, the F-100D was fitted with a larger wing and taller tail fin that eased the “Sabre Dance” handling characteristics but did not completely eliminate the issue. Any possibility for an earlier F-100D to be made after the current variant? While it’s not off the table, an earlier version isn’t currently a part of our plan. However, it is something to circle back to when we get further into development, and can gauge the community’s interest in it. Are you planning on doing other variants of the F-100? At this time we are completely focused on delivering the “High Wire” F-100D. Due to major differences between the F-100 variants, development of an F model for example would be an entirely new project, including changes in art, code, and systems. How in depth will the damage model be? The damage model will feature levels of destruction as well as system failures. We can speak more on individual systems as we progress further into development. Will there be an option to remove the refueling probe? Yes, we will provide an option in the mission editor to remove the refueling probe. Will there be an option to remove the RHAW gear? Yes, we will provide an option in the mission editor to remove the radar homing and warning equipment. Are you planning on modeling the tail hook for the F-100D? Yes, the F-100D did indeed have a tail hook and it will be modeled. Do you plan on recording the engine sounds from an airworthy F-100? Yes, we are working on getting access to a civilian owned F-100F. Weapon Questions: Can you provide a list of planned weapons for the F-100D? Any new weapons added to DCS World must either be created by Eagle Dynamics or reviewed by them to ensure quality and weapon consistency across DCS World. Until this is accomplished, it is too early to discuss new weapons. Will the AGM-12 Bullpup be available? No, unfortunately only 65 F-100’s were outfitted to fire the Bullpup. “Project High Wire” upgrades also removed the AGM-12 control panel to make room for the upgraded armament panel. Hun pilots also reported it was very difficult and dangerous to use, limiting its use in the field. We need to gather more data on the weapon before implementation can be considered. Was the F-100D equipped with the AGM-45 Shrike? No, our documents show the AGM-45 was only used on the F-100F models. Will you model any limitations like pylon g limits? Yes, all stores will have accurate airspeed limits. How advanced are the avionics in terms of bombing? The F-100D is equipped with the same A-4 Gunsight used in the F-86 Sabre. The sight features radar ranging and manual modes to implement bombs, rockets, missiles and guns. Any plans to include an AN/ALQ-71 or ECM pod? At this time no, however some F-100D’s were equipped with QRC-160 electronic countermeasure pods. We will have to work with Eagle Dynamics to see if an ECM pod feature can be implemented. Aspirational Item Questions: Are you planning on including the Zero Length Launch System? While we would love to include it as a feature, currently we do not have enough data on the rocket motors, launch platform and internal cockpit implementation at this time. Do we have any chance to get an AI KC-97 with F-100D module? It was not planned at this time. Having said that, it is a valid request, something to consider in the future. What are the chances of implementing Buddy Refueling? A buddy refueling feature would not be unique to the F-100 but rather a global feature added to DCS that all 3rd parties and Eagle Dynamics would have to work together to implement. All we can say is we will do our best to make this a reality for everyone one day. Release Questions: What year do you expect to release the module? At this time of development it is impossible to speculate on a release date. We are working hard every day to bring the Super Saber to DCS World as soon as possible, and will provide updates, and possibly estimates, when we are closer to launch. Will it be early access or do you intend to release the module feature complete? The plan is to release the module as complete as possible. Aspirational items such as the zero length launch that are not guaranteed will not delay the release of the module. source

And they are from this area, so they know it better than most, it makes sense. Like I keep saying, big picture

I truly wish the team all the best with their debut, but this is how I see this map:

This issue has happened a lot of time with all previous modules. It is an early access like many modules. Lot of times devs suffers pressure to integrate changes before one day in order to publish the OB patch. Devs work is just make the module better and more completed in successive patches. So please. Leave devs do it their job. They already have the fix, are waiting next update to repair this. I also work with a lot of devs in my job and Im in charge of testing all new software and hardware updates. If you know something about code programming you know this kind of things can happen from time to time. Enviado desde mi SM-G981B mediante Tapatalk

I see it differently. I have nothing against an Australia map and do not necessarily need the context of a conflict. I also like pure "sight seeing" maps to fly around and I m happy about this announcement. BUT for me the quality of the product is crucial. I don't care if it's the first map of the developers or the 10th. If the quality meets my expectations then I buy it - if not then not.

If this is the map. The part I've coloured in,will give us the most jungle/rainforest in DCS to day. Until we get a proper jungle map/Vietnam/south east Asia. This will probably be the best stand in for WW2 Pacific jungle stuff and Vientam.

Its very likely that SAM would trigger a lock warning in the enemy jet IMO. (SAM is simply a narrow search interleaved with a short STT every so often) (I think the STT duration lasts for more than 1 sec) In DCS no lock tone occurs when U SAM bug a target. But I think it should. At the end of the day, DCS is suggesting that the RWRs could not detect a STT / lock within a 1.5 sec timeframe. If there was absolute realism in this game, I think TWS would be more stealthy than SAM. Since TWS never STTs the target. [What is STT? STT is when the radar stop scanning and focuses all its energy onto the target. The targets RWR can identify an STT bc the emitter it sees goes from an intermittent tone that comes in and out every few seconds to a static/constant tone]

and there’s the issue. you’re assuming that people don’t want this map? Which people exactly? Chances are that it’ll sell well to any Aussie and a good number of other people too. I get that you wish to have a Vietnam map, me too. Doesn’t mean that another group can’t do a Vietnam map whilst these chaps deliver what they want. Suggesting this is bad is like saying that no one can have a soft top car, just because you don’t want one.

No. This is a misconception many RL pilots have. The energy from two separate sweeps (seconds apart) is not combined (summed) in A/A radars. (Though many Surface Search radars do this. The technique is called "scan to scan integration") --- Back ground --- Some Pilots are told that they can detect targets at longer ranges if they use a smaller scan. The reasoning usually given is 'more energy on target'. While the outcome of this statement is true, the reasoning is not. As I stated previously, the 'increased detection range' is due to radar getting many more 'looks' at a target. You know how difficult and seemly weird it can be to get a good cellular signal connection when ur far from the tower. And how sometimes, for example, moving 1 foot to the right boosts your connection by 2 bars? What's happening is that the signal is bouncing all over the place (multipath), creating a complex web of standing waves. Now imagine both you and the tower are flying at 300 knots. bringing it back to the radar example, the pulse of light (RF is just lower freq of visible and infrared light) reflects off multiple point of the target. At some angles, the reflections will met each other again out of phase. Creating an RCS null. However, some moments later, as the geometries shift, the reflections may met together in phase, allowing for a strong radar return. --- When do pulses get to integrate --- Separate radar pulse do integrate in AA radar. Just not on the time scale of separate sweeps (at least in AA radar). Typical pulse integration occurs within the time it takes a single beam-width of the radar to cross a point target out in space. (this value is known as time on target or TOT, and is on the order of tens of milliseconds) If one were to integrate pulses/energy of a longer period, they'd inadvertently increase their beam width and dramatically reduce their angular resolution. --- Scan to Scan integration with surface search radars --- This technique is applied to a circular spinning naval radar with a fast scan speed. Pulses down a single bearing are saved and added to pulses down the same bearing on the next sweep. This is distinctly different from "pulse to pulse integration". The benefit surface search radars have in doing this has to do with ocean waves. If a radar does normal pulse to pulse integration, a given ocean wave wont move far enough between pulses to cancel out in phase (the wave doesnt move very far in ~10 msec). It thus adds constructively in the receiver. However, when using scan to scan integration, the wave has enough speed to move in and out of phase between sweeps of the radar (order of .5 - 3 sec) which allows for some deconstructive interference to occur with ocean wave returns. Thus, it helps reduce noise from the ocean, allowing a clearer display of boats and land. Though it does reduce angular resolution.

The B-2 might be over 40 years old but its still the main US stealth bomber and so it remains top classified. To give you a impression how classified it is, the first pictures of its cockpit where declassfied in 2019. If the cockpit was that classified, you can imagine how classified the rest of its systems are. The following video shows everything the public knows about its displays.

IMHO is not fair to compare ED and Ugra latest maps with new third parties. The former had years of experience in map making. Normandy or old Caucasus are not in the same league as Syria, Marianas or the Channel. New third parties will get there eventually. They need time, practice, and our support.

Hello, Just go to DCS World OpenBeta\Mods\aircraft\AH-64D\Cockpit\Scripts\Computers\CIU\device edit CIU_Messages.lua and comment the line in yellow (put -- in front of it) => no more continuous SAS tone for me !

Looking forward to see it in action for the first time since I was a kid in the 80's

Personally, if I were ED right now I'd either remove the SAS saturation tone, or at least tell the user base which of the encrypted sound files it is so we can delete it! I've just flown a fairly uncomplicated gunnery range pattern and had (from counting on my screen recording) an average of one saturation tone every 18 seconds for a solid 5 minutes. It's beyond annoying at this points. I don't understand why the warning tone for a system that isn't finished has been implemented before the logic that correctly drives it. It's a few-lines-of-code job to temporarily remove it until the SAS is sorted out, and then an equally simple edit to put it back.

DCS: Top End Australia Introduction We are excited to announce the DCS: Top End Australia map by third party developer, Check Six Simulations. This unique map will cover large swaths of northern and western Australia. It promises to be exceptionally beautiful and exotic. The Top End Australia map covers 1,400 × 800km's of Australia's mainland including the Western and the Northern Territories. With a mixture of civilian and military airfields, aviators will experience a map that includes a rich red outback landscape complemented by the lakes and rivers, floodplains, coastline, and city centre of Darwin. Infrastructure for major landmarks have been carefully detailed to provide the highest fidelity and includes Mindil Beach, Darwin, Broome, Tindal, Curtin, and the Delamere Weapons Range. The Top End Australia Map will give DCS players a unique experience to hone their skills across air, land, and sea domains allowing simulations of real-world exercises such as Pitch Black. Check out the Development Screenshots and stay tuned for future news as we look towards a report on their progress soon. Bye Phant

There is a need for switch commands that automatically opens the corresponding guard, this is especially true for Armement master. In the current state, binding a key or HOTAS button/switch to enable Master Arm is pretty useless since you need to open guard before. Same logic can be applyed to other buttons or switches that have guard or safety cover.

+1 fully agree … some users forget that a prime ingredient for any DCS module, be it aircraft, terrain or campaign, is a developer passion for it .. if a developer is not passionate about Vietnam or corea, why want to force him into it? … It is indeed selfishness, not having any care for the developer’s passion.

I’d like to see some of the islands to the north, but otherwise, it’s an interestingly different choice, and if it brings onboard more players, then great stuff. I’ve never understood the negativity regarding new modules, 3rd party or not. We as the customers are not obliged to buy them. If it doesn’t float your boat, don’t buy it, but I it does come across as rather selfish to try to deny someone else’s map desire.

Just having some fun... Swedish SF using an improvised fighting vehicle. null

Теоретически голос Петровича должен регулироваться ручкой громкости СПУ. Я не пробовал и сейчас нет возможности проверить. Скоро сделают выбор озвучки в особых настройках модуля и тогда будет добавлен прекрасный русский голос. Будете делать его погромче

Yup, well known quirk of the Viper IRL. Taxi slow, turn very slow. One airframe had the bad luck to get tipped over twice, not sure what the first one was (pilot error, maybe?), but the second time is a well known incident with being blown over by a B-1's jetwash. This is something to keep in mind when taxiing the Viper.

I haven't read this manual, but in another Viper sim, it says do not do turns over 10 knots. Keep at 7-8 and I can pretty much sling it around. What are you using for rudders?

You mean the target diamond flashing after you fire the gun in A/A mode right? If so, that's an intended feature as the RTGS also calculates where the bullets actually are in relation to the target when at target range which is called the bullet position at target range or BATR. Its kinda a neat feature and the Mirage 2000 kinda has something similar with the dots along the snake. HB Manual as a source btw

A whole world map is planned and is currently in active development according to Wags (over half a year year a year and a half at the time and that was nearly a year ago). Personally, I would've thought that a world map would probably have a more low-detail mesh and textures (perhaps using lower resolution satellite textures and relying on autogen and landclass just with aerodromes in maybe the correct layout but only generic structures) with our current maps overwriting the areas they cover for those who own them. However, right now DCS treats the Earth as if it's flat, though there is a shader to provide the illusion of it be spherical at higher altitudes and radars employ a workaround so they have the LOS limitations you'd expect. Now I would've thought (at least I'm going to be pretty disappointed if it doesn't), that a world map would be shaped like a sphere. However, all the maps are currently flat which results in inevitable distortion and a pretty much meaningless true north (which doesn't follow the meridians) among other issues (like the fact you can't fly great circle routes as well as the lack of realistic visual LOS), the more flat maps that get added, the more work is being made should these maps be converted to fit on the surface of a sphere. Unfortunagely though there aren't many details about what a world map will entail, apart from a new dynamic calling system allowing for much more units to be present without the overhead.

By default every detection is multiple returns integrated in these cases. Scan rates are determined by a requirement to have a certain number of pulses hit the target as the sweep goes past. These pulses are then integrated to determine if a detection occured. So in a very straightforward system 2/3 pulses that return = a target = displayed on the scope. If only 1/3 show a return, then it is assumed noise. If you slow the scan rate down (or increase the pulse rate) you increase the number of pulses getting integrated, thus increasing your SnR. This is why STT minirasters can acquire at longer range than search, instead of a search sweep only getting say 3 pulses on target as the beam sweeps past, in STT it sweeps back and forth inside its beam width, so in a second 50-100 pulses illuminate the target. Getting 30/100 pulses returning may well be enough to establish and hold a track, whereas in sweep you may have only had 1/3 returning. The other advantage here is that in STT your cursor placement and a previous hit (if one exists) pre-sets the range, velocity, and azimuth gates and helps the radar solve ambiguities (start in the PRF without a blind zone at the cursors range, ignore ambiguous returns that are at the incorrect range or velocity from the cursors position etc...) Spotlight is an inbetween, and the specifics may vary jet to jet, the highlight is it very quickly illuminates (think many quick re-rolls on the probability of detection dice) an area of interest, if you just do the math, with every single pulse being even on detection. In a normal RWS or TWS sweep where the target is illuminated every few seconds, that means for example if you are at a range where the Probability of Detection is .3, then you are getting a single return every third sweep. THat may result in an intermittent contact that fades before it can update, or you just arent getting enough hits as the beam revisits to even make a contact show on the radar. In spotlight in the same amount of time you will have many revisits, this is really the primary purpose of spotlight, you have a cued search, which you can center around an intermittent or weak return, and then very quickly potentially get several hits which you can then transition into a track (STT) mode.

I was thinking of one of the newer R-73 variants some are R-73L/EL, R-73 (RMD-2), RVV-MD (R-74/73M??? I'm unsure of this designation). R-73L/EL: Laser proximity fuse. Same Performance with new fuse. R-73 (RMD-2), RVV-MD (Upgraded RMD-2): Launch range increased to 40km while still using same motor (some sources say) to save pilots time of switching from medium to short range weapons. The development of the GOS was carried out by the Kiev PA "Arsenal" (chief designer - A.V. Molody) on a competitive basis with the NPO "Geophysics" (Moscow). PA "Arsenal" was developed a compact and all-angle seeker "Mayak" / OGS MK-80 (RMD-2). The Mayak GOS also implements new effective measures to combat natural and artificial interference. Along with the appropriate choice of the sensitivity range of the photodetector, pulse-time signal modulation was used in the GOS equipment, a digital signal processing unit with several independent channels was introduced. To increase efficiency by hitting more vulnerable and important elements of the target, guidance was applied to a point shifted forward in relation to the nozzle of the engine of the target aircraft. Under this seeker, the original version of the K-73 missile was redesigned. The homing head of the RMD-2 missile variant has increased noise immunity against IR counteraction and is built on a digital element base, which makes it easy to reprogram tracking and interception algorithms. Improved attack capabilities for low-flying targets. It is with the R-73 RMD-2 missile that a maneuver is possible with the launch of the missile into the rear hemisphere of the carrier, and it is possible to attack the enemy's air-to-air missiles (ignore rear launch bits, just wanted to post full thing) The RVV-MD short-range air-to-air guided missile | Rosoboronexport Catalogue (roe.ru) Р-73 / РВВ-МД - АA-11 ARCHER | MilitaryRussia.Ru — отечественная военная техника (после 1945г.) Please correct me with articles and sources of your own if you find any wrong information guys.

IRL Spotlight is used to rapidly acquire a target when the direction or relative position of the target is known, but your radar is not currently detecting the target. ie via data link track or bogey dope call. IRL radar detection ranges are probabilistic (typical advertised detection range is based on a 50% detection probability). Thus, getting more sweeps across the target simply means that your radar gets to 'roll the dice' as it were, many more times in a given period. (its probabilistic bc targets RCS fluctuates rapidly in real time; due to reflection geometries and interference) DCS does not use probability in its radar detection ranges... Its 100% or 0%. Spotlight mode is not used to lock up a target that already has a trackfile on your scope. In that case it is useless. It's too bad that the video showing spotlight has them simply use it on a target the radar already sees.... smh

You know NineLine, I'm not the only one that has noticed you have a tendency to constantly white knight for the devs at every turn and stifle any meaningful criticism that comes their way. Now, I wasn't trying to rag on Check Six Simulations or any other devs for that matter. Obviously, the more content and content creators, the better. What I'm trying to do is explain why I for one won't be purchasing yet another WW3/War Game scenario map, so that when decisions to make the next terrain come up, they can be better informed. And as I've mentioned, I've been playing this game since I had to load it on a floppy through DOS and I have spent enough money on ED products to buy a bloody super bike by now. And that's besides the fact I have created a massive amount of free content for this game at my own expense, so I would appreciate being allowed to put my two cents in without being reprimanded by the likes of you... Thanks!

I'm excited for this map, we have a huge contingent of Australians flying with the Kiwis at TFK so for us it would be really cool. For those that cant envision usable scenarios for this map I would put that down to a lack of imagination, same with the NTTR map. I build a new MP mission for 20~ pilots every week and I can think up a bazillion mission ideas on this map. Looking forward to it! Will need Kangaroos to go with the cows though to put in the LSO position

You're not really missing anything per se. The AH-64 is a high performance aircraft, so it handles like a fighter plane, but the flight model of the DCS: AH-64D is still Work-In-Progress, to include its overall stability. I know that a lot of you are probably tired of hearing me say that, but it really is the truth. I can assure you the devs have never stopped working on the flight model since even before initial release. The complexities of what they are doing cannot be overstated. I will tell you there is noticeable progress, but nothing quantifiable to share at the moment. But based on the quality of other helos in DCS like the Ka-50 and Mi-24, I'm not worried. We'll get there.

That's not a given. I've seen many users praise NTTR for small disc size and high FPS. I love big maps, but it seems the current NTTR has its niche, and to be fair it's a pretty complete map. The one solid point against it is a lack of place for carrier, in my opinion. DCS's map list is expanding significantly. We're at the point where we don't have to try to please everyone with every map. That's a good thing, and I think it needs to be kept in mind moving forward.

Valuable rosources of a 3rd party building on a active war zone with a large temporal sceneries from WW2 to today?. (WW2 combat, Indonesian Independence, Tymor East, Chinesse Crysis, etc). If someone like build your dream maps, modules and assets packs, start to get people team, make your investigation, talk with ED to get the 3rd party status, start to learn the SKD / TDK, and build them... but I find it funny that there is an obligation for a 3rd party to do what someone wants.

Next empty map

Dear all, There is a bug in the current OB that prevents yaw dampening to activate regardless of the yaw/anti-slip or pitch dampers switches position. We have it fixed internally and it will be corrected in the next update. We apologise for the inconvenience.

Use the GAIN rocker switch to lower the map brightness. You can also switch to Night mode with the top left switch and then manually adjust the contrast as well, with the lower right switch. Those will help a lot.

I recommend you slightly reduce your mask's oxygen flow, and things should return to normal

DCS Newsletter discussion August 26th 2022 - DCS Top end Australia | Open beta updates | Enigma server

Fast and Furious? Anyone?

МиГ-21 - это от Ф, Ф-13 до Бис. Я бы лично купил "вьетнамский" ПМФ или М но это так мечты ...