Leaderboard

Four more new 3rd party module announcements in the cue. What could they be?

Summer set of textures is finally finished. Switching to other seasons.

TBH, competitive is not the word I would expect in DCS. Make it realistic please.

DCS MB-339 - PROJECT UPDATE AND FLIGHT MANUAL *********************************************************** We are very pleased to announce that in the past few days we have completed a build of the DCS MB-339 which we believe it is good for release: we are submitting it to Eagle Dynamics for final testing. The testing and release process will take some time, so do not expect the module to be available in the next few days - but rest assured we'll keep you posted on the release date. As a teaser, and a final recap of the features of the package, here is the full product manual (no less than 272 pages!): we are very proud of the level of detail and realism of the package and we hope that the manual will help you appreciate it! https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YT_g9xSDHcAVRYIkeBKC_WN7wy8RG0tI/view?usp=sharing Inviato dal mio ASUS_I005D utilizzando Tapatalk

I'm working on the RBS 57, also known as the NLAW or MBT-LAW. null

Jesus Christ man. Are you not confortable with the idea of your costumers sleeping well at night?

I hope this will evolve into AC-130 one day.

Hmm, was wohl all die ganzen Leute im MSFS und Xplane so tun?

wrong.

IIRC it just took of from the runway. Probably just a money shot/„fan service“. The alarms in the cockpit that probably come with it are not shown here… Let‘s give them the benefit of doubt and start judging once it comes out.

Bogey Dope with more info on the C-130J

Was schon mit dem Anubis Mod hervorragend ging, war z.B. einen FARP mit Munition zu versorgen. Der FARP ist komplett leer (keine Munition, nur Treibstoff). Nun landest du eine C-130 auf der Wiese daneben und "entlädst" ein paar Paletten mit Hellfire, FFAR Rockets etc. und nun können AH-64D dort aufmunitionieren. Fängt jemand die C-130 ab, müssen die Apaches natürlich für Munition zum nächsten Flugplatz fliegen... Das hat eben ein sehr direktes taktisches Element. Ich hatte mit Yurgon mit dem Anubis Mod damals einen schönen Versorgungsflug von Incirlik nach Manbij geflogen. Etwas Wetter mit tiefer Wolkenbasis, eine umkämpfte Stadt, ein Stützpunkt der FSA etwas außerhalb, dazu ein paar Zsu-23 in den Dörfern die ISIS gehalten hat und das ganze wird zu einer spannenden 1,5 Std Mission , inklusive Adrenalinschub, als wir beim Abflug etwas Nahe an/über das Stadtgebiet von Manbij geraten sind und die Gegenmaßnahmen Feuerzauber in die beginnende Dämmerung gemalt haben... Das hat wie im wirklichen Leben alles seine Berechtigung.

interesting im ready, but my wallet is not

Did you try it extensively yet? Did you take the time to adjust to it? To take shots from favorable parameters? Like, don't get me wrong guys, we're here to help you adjust, etc. - but being disappointed or mad from just reading a post or maybe trying it for a couple of hours, or less even, and going "it is all meh now", while others already score successfully online, really leads to nowhere. Take yourselves the time to get used to it please. You can dislike it, and ofc feel free to express it, but it is not leading to something very constructive I may carefully suggest. It can't always be "give more realism" and then "this is not the realism we wanted"... The phoenix is and remains a strong missile and the longest stick in game. The C now is also a very deadly ARH missile on top. But firing it outside of what it gives you, and then going "it's crap", is not on the missile, nor on us. There sure are things that can improve, (the nozzle exhaust area btw will not be the life saving straw some may think it would), and we will improve on the valid items we find. But the fact is, the -mk60 was way off the mark. And we finally found the missing pieces of the puzzle to adjust it. To also make the A's guidance more realistic, as well as the C's, which finally gives a clear incentive to favor the C over the A, as it always should have been. I cannot repeat it often enough: more realism does not mean more or less range or performance for us, it means more realism, no matter where it places the missile in the end. Thank you for your kind understanding.

Jeez it’s a new content waterfall... A weekly newsletter without a new map and flyable aircraft announcement is going to feel like a serious disappointment

New C-130j video https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/986487489344720946/1013529479789949058/C-130_Reveal_Final.mp4

Hope Aegean Map.

Tested in dcs Realistic nozzle exit area would give about 10% more at 30k and even more at higher altitude as pressure diff is bigger It is clearly not the longuest stick anymore even with the sd10 fix this patch Why even talk about "scoring online" im not here to play counter dcs arena not everybody wants to play deathmatchs I get that mach 4.5 phoenix is probably an urban legend but mach 3 i dont get it either I ll let you define your "realism" with the documentation you have I ll go back to my mach 4.8 aim54 with 260ich isp you can encrypt luas ill find a way around it Good luck with the future api transition

Ja und nein. Lass doch mal kurz überlegen, was für Szenarien eine Hercules ermöglicht: Fracht- oder Personentransport (in Gefechtssituation; auf unbefestigte Außenlandepiste) Frachtabwurf oder Fallschirmspringer absetzen aus mittlerer bis großer Höhe; beides möglichst punktgenau Frachtabwurf aus geringer Höhe, möglichst punktgenau Ein paar davon habe ich schon mit dem kostenlosen Mod gemacht und finde das ausgesprochen spannend. Wenn die Fallschirmspringer nicht auf der großen Wiese sondern im benachbarten Wald landen, ist das halt echt doof, weil sie viel länger zum Einsatzort brauchen. Im Prinzip haben wir hier die gleichen grundlegenden Probleme wie beim Einsatz von Freifallbomben ohne CCIP/CCRP; das braucht also ordentliche Flugplanung, Fliegen nach Parametern, Erfahrung und ein wenig Können. In DCS konzentrieren sich viele von uns rein und allein auf den Luftkrieg, und da oftmals rein auf den Air-to-Air- oder den Air-to-Ground-Aspekt. Die Herc erweitert einfach die Optionen um den Logistik-Aspekt. Und wenn man sich manche Missionen anschaut, dann ist dieser Aspekt ja auch jetzt schon nachgefragt, wenn Huey Slicks beispielsweise Kisten schleppen, die dann am Ziel in eine Luftabwehrstellung umgewandelt werden, oder wenn Piloten mit dem Blackhawk-Mod Infil/Exfil fliegen, während die Apache Gunships und ein paar A-10er das Ganze absichern. Die Erweiterung von DCS um diesen Logistikaspekt finde ich absolut großartig, und ich kann mir gut vorstellen, dass ich mich auch ab und zu mal in die Herc schwingen werde und am Ende einer erfolgreichen Mission total zufrieden bin mit 0 Kills und gutem Teamwork.

Next week : Chinook + map Afghanistan ?

I'll be happy to be consulted regarding the loadmaster stuff...including why we are grumpy

How a C-130 flies at a speed far below a fighter jet. "The map will be twice as big for them." Flying from one point to another will take a lot of time. So I believe there will be plenty of room to fly a C-130 on the map of Syria.

Yes, of course, as proof you can see Frecce Tricolori Virtuali videos which already have access to our module Inviato dal mio ASUS_I005D utilizzando Tapatalk

DCS Screenshots

I wish we had generally more and better buildings

My wild take: X-wing (T-65B) USSR Space Shuttle Map: stratosphere Wright brothers first heavier-than-air plane No, on a second thought, a zeppelin would be better as the bombing is more "hands-on", and the damage model is more "explosive".

Added the asset to the first post.

Personally from my own testing. With the suggested nozzle_exit_area change in this thread, the missile performs as expected. Without it, it does seem a bit slow...

My crazy bids: By new 3rd Parties: - South Pakistan / Indian map. (a "pakistan / Indian" hypotetic 3rd party, fitting with Persian Gulf map). - Baltic Aproach / North German Plains (a "German" hypotetic 3rd party). - Modern Assets pack (I dont remember the team) - French Assets pack (by the old DCS French pack team) - UH-60 (from old UH-60 Mod team) - Lancaster (By Lancaster team) - Mig-17 (By Red Star Simulator) - F-104 / F-105 (hypotetic US team) - Air Defense Integration Module (I dont remember the team) - Sea / Land module? (UK / France carrier Pack) / UK / France driveable module. By actual 3rd parties: - Aernes (Resurrect "Iberian Peninsula / SCW map") - Deka (Harbin H-5 / Nancang Q-5) (South China sea map?) - Heatblur (Resurrect Baltic / North Sea Map fitting with Orbx North Scandinavia). - Octopus-G (Su-22M4 / La-7) - Magnitude 3 (Resurrect "Iwo Jima" Map Expanded, fitting with Marianas map) - A resurrecting VEAO with repair Hawk T.1 and start to build WW2 / Cold War aircrafts.

As long as one of them is the F-104G.

Let's get wild DCS: CF-105 DCS: F-CK-1 DCS: Yak-38 DCS: OV-102

Notice how many of them seem to have started out as mods. My bet is, UH-60 and A-4 are two of them, and the other two might be maps.

DCS: Su-22M4 DCS: Korea DCS: UH-60/SH-60 DCS: WWII fighter / Zero(?)

Four new 3rd party modules are incoming.

Fixed, I will include on next build 04, Left landing gear cords will also be fixed on AI.

Vielleicht begegnest du der Sache auch einfach nicht mit genug Phantasie. Es gibt ja auch noch andere Möglichkeiten: - SAR: Du musst über Wasser nach jemandem suchen, findest ihn und leitest die Rettungsaktion bei Scheißwetter - CSAR: Du musst an Land jemanden extrahieren (s. Yurgon's Post) und leitest die Aktion (Combat King), tankts Hubis auf, A-10 als Sandies - Frachter unter Einsatzaspekten wurde schon ebsprochen; unter Beschuss (s. Battle of Khe Sanh) - Tanker kann auch covert und low alt ops bedeuten - nachts in DCS in 500ft über dem Wasser zu tanken ist...anspruchsvoll - ich finde den 'Harvest Hawk' Ansatz auch recht interessant Es ist also deutlich mehr als "eine Kiste von A nch B fliegen".

With all due respect, that is not a demonstration of a deadly missile, it's a demonstration of abysmal AI. All three hits were well below sub sonic at impact.

I have a lot of fun in it. More hours in it than anything else in DCS. Some questions about the ASP and such, but the FM is pretty damn solid. Visually, the interior could use updating and that's in the cards. You just have to be patient; M3 is small and this isn't full time for them. This triggers a lot of angy-posting chock full of emotes and the like, so be prepared for that if you're searching through the forum for topics that could help. It's not at all hard to fly, but has a lot of character. Fly it like an idiot, it will snap back at you. Fly it as prescribed, and it's great.

Definitely a day one purchase for me. Hopefully one of the additional variants will be an older model. I love steam gauges.

She flies beautifully after the update. Wobbles gone. Nice coordinated turns. Easy to trim. Thank you Aerges!

There is a lot of talk about the British Spey powered Phantom on this thread but what has not been mentioned, unless I have missed it, is the Brits had 2 distinctly different Spey powered models of Phantom. The FG1 (aka F4K) did not have a battery so could not be operated unsupported, It also only had a mechanical Nav Computer so no INS (or INAS as it was called) thereby relying on a second Gyro backup attitude system. It also didn’t have a long range Comms Radio system but it did have a hydraulic wingfold. It’s extendable nose leg had been disabled by the time I got my hands on it in the RAF but the AOA traffic lights on the nose door still worked. The FGR2 (aka F4M) did have a battery so could operate unsupported in a limited fashion. It also had INAS and a HF radio for long range comms. Like the FG1 it had BLC flaps and slats but it did not have a slatted stab and it only had manual wing fold. This model had a standard Nose leg and no AOA traffic lights. It also didn't have the catapult bridle hooks on the underside unlike the FG1 that did. I cannot comment of the F4J(UK) as I never worked on it.

GRAZIE! GRAZIE! GRAZIE! I'll start to read it immediately.

Thank you! Reading now!!!

I'll just leave this here.....

...and licensing rights permission too... but yes, I agree with your post!