Leaderboard

DCS: Tornado Introduction DCS: Tornado is the epitome of the multirole aircraft jointly developed by Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom. This two-seater, twin-engine, swing-wing multirole fighter was built in three variants, one of which is the Interdiction/Strike (IDS) variant. Powered by 2 RB-199 MK103 engines, the IDS was developed to meet the then NATO doctrine of low-level attacks against enemy airfields and fixed-positions, in any weather, and at any time of day. AviaStorm's goal is to develop the best simulation of a 1989 German IDS Tornado for DCS. Their team has decades of experience in the simulation & gaming industry, and it boasts secured access to many resources (engineers, pilots, WSO, technicians and museums) that will provide them the necessary information.

As we have already stated the reason for the recent news is here. In the past we generally waited until a 3rd party module was quite far along in development; however, this has resulted in duplicated efforts and inefficiencies. Instead, once a 3rd party module has a completed license agreement, we will now announce it to allow the 3rd party to “plant a flag” and avoid duplicated efforts. Once a 3rd party project is roughly six months away from release based on an internal evaluation, more news and updates will be made available. Because we have several 3rd party projects in development, and the change in announcement policy, we have had a flurry of announcement activity.

DCS: Kola Map Introduction In collaboration with Orbx Simulation Systems, we are excited to announce the development of a new terrain module: the Kola Peninsula. Orbx has over 15 years of experience creating highly detailed scenery and airports for flight simulation platforms. For Russia, the mostly ice-free ports of the Murmansk area, home of the Northern Fleet, are of immense strategic importance. Thus, the narrow land corridor from the Kola Peninsula to central Russia has evolved into dense clusters of military airfields and bases. Similarly, the northern areas of Norway, Sweden, and Finland mirror the military and economic importance of this peninsula, with significant bases for all branches of the respective armed forces and extensive training ranges hosting key exercises for western alliances. The Kola map will cover more than 550,000 square kilometers of land across northern Scandinavia and northwestern Russia, plus large sections of the Norwegian Sea and Barents Sea for naval operations. Detailed airbases, included with the initial release of the Kola Map, will be Bodø, Bardufoss, Evenes, Rovaniemi, Luleå, Vidsel, Monchegorsk, Olenya, Severomorsk-1 and -3, and others. They will be modeled in their contemporary configuration. Beyond airfields, many of the important army and naval bases, test ranges, radar and storage sites will be added, as well as the entire road and railroad network. Civilian POIs will also be represented, including key buildings, bridges, hydro dams, power plants, port facilities, and vertical obstructions. Dramatic fjords and glaciers, with the many islands, creates an interesting coastline. The lake-studded taiga forests and arctic tundra complete the natural beauty of this region. Both Summer and Winter versions of the Kola map are planned. The Orbx team is collaborating with experienced DCS campaign creators Baltic Dragon and Reflected Simulations to create engaging F/A-18C and F-16C campaigns at launch.

BEST NEWS EVER

Ооо, "Торнадо" подъехал) А у "красных" наверное БАНО чуть подкрутят)

DCS World Newsletter, AviaStorm Tornado GR.1 AviaStorm Webpage https://aviastorm.com/

We are announcing when we sign a third party agreement, its exciting news for sure. Each third party will give their own progress updates in-between the announcement and release. Close to release is when we ( Eagle Dynamics ) will share more news about a project, so I dont think it is overhype. I can guarantee people will want constant news whatever happens and we will get people saying we are not sharing enough.

I think everybody can understand and agree that things here work differently, but sometimes it gets to a point where things are ultimately questionable and, quite frankly, sometimes borderline distasteful. Development on Vulkan engine for performance improvements was (AFAIK) announced nearly five years ago (in 28 November 2017). Five years. During this time period, performance hasn't improved, it actually has become even worse. Noone asked for 2.7 higher performance impact, when 2.5 was already severe enough on hardware. For those unwilling to accept it, there used to be 1.58 and 2.56 (legacy) versions available. They're gone. But even if available... great, if using that, then I'm blocked from the updates for the modules that I've paid for, and noone to play online... And I don't care about the few people defending ED with "I play fine on 2.7 with six plus year old hardware", because that's just having far lower standards and accepting mediocre performance. Paying customers, who have thrown quite significant ammounts into this flight/combat simulation, are forced to throw even bigger ammounts into hardware just to keep up with increasing resource demands, to get updates on purchased modules and play with others online. It's just not right. Meanwhile, five years on, little to absolutely no news on the Vulkan subject, while we keep having announcements upon announcements on new modules... which may (or not) have even bigger impact on performance than those that we currently have (did anyone even stop to think about this possibility?). I think my point here is, the lack of perspective and the desproportion on how different areas seem to be focused on (IMO). Talking to people online, reading this and other forums, what I get is that there seems to be far more interest in "a better DCS" rather than in "more content in DCS". Performance improvements on DCS should be the #1 priority, and sharing info on Vulkan development - no matter how small those news would be - would go a long way, and maybe should be considered as important as the constant "WIP" screens on new fancy announced modules (taking years to see a release) that are pumped weekly.

At risk of stating the obvious, I just hope they don't do something stupid like release a 'modern' version of the map! It absolutely has to be conflict relevant (unlike South Atlantic, Kola and Sinai).

DCS: C-130J Announcement Although the C-130 first entered service nearly 70 years ago, the airframe has been continually updated, culminating with the delivery of the J model in 1999. Watch the teaser. The ‘J’ is a modernized variant that features a glass cockpit, air-to-ground radar, FMS, and computerized airdrop capabilities designed to reduce crew workload. Exciting additional variants are planned in the near future, including the KC versions. This will offer player to player aerial refueling, another first in DCS.

Removed. Sorry.

FlyingIron Simulations Introduces the Corsair II A-7E Corsair II A Supercarrier compatible module We welcome FlyingIron Simulations aboard and are excited to announce that the A-7E Corsair II by FlyingIron Simulations is coming to DCS World. FlyingIron is an experienced and very talented Australian developer that has an impressive pedigree of quality flight simulations. The A-7E will add a new carrier-aviation fighter to DCS world that includes impressive ground-attack capabilities, advanced sensors and weapons, and will take advantage of DCS: Supercarrier features.

correct, the change was to give potential new third parties heads up on projects that have already been taken, it saves them time and money if they know what is already being produced.

Exactly, Cold War era Fulda Gap 1980s variant = penetrating enemy airspace at low altitude at night or bad weather, with terrain following radar still operable and mechanical map with INS, avoiding Soviet interceptors, evading SAMs and aiming iron bombs to the target inside AAA fire or trying to allign for very low altitude non-pop up attack with BL755 cluster munition dispensers over Soviet armor protected by Shilkas, then trying to lose the pursuers inside some dark valleys cooperating with navigator on a way back. Very much what you see in a Gulf War Tornado pilots memories and mission descriptions. Not 2000s era last Tornadoes with disabled radars, releasing very long range automatically guided cruise missile from 100-300nm from the target with zero risk, cruising at 30,000tf and RTB.

The Tornado announcement just induced fainting spells upon all the throngs begging for it on the Heatblur board. Not gonna lie, its a first day buy for me 100%, but I'm wary of this recent upchuck of module announcements. Here's to hoping these projects are well into their developement and testing regimes. Or is this a way for module makers to get a place holder for the aircraft they want to make? Looking forward to the new modules with excitement, though.

DCS: F-100D Super Sabre Introducing the Hun The F-100D is an advanced version of the Super Sabre that features improved avionics, landing flaps, and larger wings and tail fin. The upgraded avionics include the AN/AJB-1B low-altitude bombing system and an AN/APR-25 radar homing and warning system. The F-100D has four 20 mm Pontiac M39A1 cannons, and it has six hardpoints capable of carrying AIM-9 Sidewinders, LAU-3/A unguided rocket pods, and conventional bombs. The Super Sabre fighter bomber flew extensively over Vietnam as the United States Air Force's primary close air support jet. The F-100 was in service for 17 years and flew over 360,000 combat sorties before it was retired in 1971. DCS: F-100D Super Sabre aspires to be the most faithful re-creation of the Hun ever produced for flight simulation. Working with veteran Hun pilots, the Grinnelli team is dedicated to simulating the avionics systems, weapons, performance, and unique flight model in high fidelity.

Thanks for your advice. We made this post because our MB-339 is ready to be released awaiting for green light by ED. Although we have another project for DCS World, the time is mature to define what is the next as the process to get licenses and data is very long. Inviato dal mio ASUS_I005D utilizzando Tapatalk

Many thanks for your report. I can confirm the bug. We'll investigate where's the problem.

Not meaning to be blunt, but it will take the amount of time it needs to take. Again, I am not trying to be rude, but we have no reason to slow down or sit on these improvements. I dont know to what end it would help us by deliberately stalling any improvements of any kind. The last 3-4 years up till even today have been history making events that have turned the lives of many people upside down, and this all continues today and into tomorrow and the foreseeable future. On top of all that look at what we are trying to do, taking a very complex game and updating it on the fly with new tech that the game was never written to support, all the while adding new content and value for users to enoy AND trying to keep up with hardware demands. So long story short, we are doing our best. These changes are now being tested internally but even this will take time. I HIGHLY disagree with your second line, unless you have not bought one single improvement for your computer in 5 years, then maybe things have become worse. Thanks.

The MiG-21's RSBN uses the radio beacons to correct a dead-reckoning system, which in turn tells you your location (as far as it knows) with regards to the selected beacon. So for example, when you lose line of sight to an RSBN station, the aircraft should still know within reason where it is and how far away you are from it, with drift building over time and then being corrected once signal is regained. Theoretically you could undertake an entire flight with little to no actual RSBN beacon capture and still have a fairly accurate idea of where you are. This system is already implemented in the L-39 as far as I know, but the 21's nav system in DCS is piggybacked off the old FC3 nav system which uses airfields as waypoints and is quite limited. The way it acts as a dollar store TACAN knockoff ingame really belies what navigation capability the jet actually has, around this era it would be very uncommon for a non-export (ie F-5) type to lack some kind of dead-reckoning, be it radio, visual fix, or doppler corrected (for example the Viggen's is a mix of the latter two - not an INS as commonly believed), or a genuine early INS. The auto-approach feature also has some issues at the moment and so is usually more harm than good, and there are also some inaccuracies with how ARK works, though I don't usually use that system as much so I don't remember the specifics. I think it's something like the sector setup is really simplified and the channel buttons don't do what they're supposed to. As for the autopilot - stabilisation mode currently puts an awful damper filter on all control inputs so it makes the jet handle like trash. What it should actually do is act as an always-on attitude hold. The control stick itself has a little play between it and the extension, and there are 8 (4 sets of 2) microswitches that press against the inside cup of the stick extension when the pilot exerts pressure on the stick. These are there to disconnect the autopilot when the stick is moved deliberately, and then reengage it when pressure is released. You're flying along in attitude hold, you move the stick, the jet responds how you would expect it to, you release the stick, the jet now stays where you've pointed it (though the system loses accuracy with extreme pitch or bank angles). It will also roll the wings level if you are within a couple of degrees of the horizon when you release the stick. From the verbal description in the manuals, it's about as close as you're getting to autotrim in that era, though I don't know if it has a means of coping with things like asymmetrical loadouts or not as the way the AP is currently modelled does not even in recovery mode. Currently the aircraft does have an attitude hold modelled, but you have to engage stab mode and then press an additional bind (this does not exist on the real aircraft) to engage it. It then needs to be disconnected manually, it can't be done by stick movement nor regain control after it like the similar systems on Viggen or Mirage 2000.

Yes lots of fun to be had in the meantime. Enjoy

This is how we were doing it, a third party would approach us with a project, but as mentioned some teams already had made progress on projects, and it was leading to duplicates. Having the third party's announced in public as soon as we sign an agreement is the best way going forward. Thanks

Simply doing things, seeing the enemy, seeing our bombs explosions all around, dodging AAA, just feel the adrenaline rush, actually risking of being shoot down to be able to hit the target, being forced to fly inside enemy territory, maneuvering at very low altitude with aid of TFR which was still operable during Cold War and Gulf War era, counting on speed and low altitude maneuvering to avoid interceptors of the era which had limited capabilities without very advanced radars or long range missiles. GR4 would be takeoff, release Storm Shadows 300nm from the target at high altitude without any risk, land. And even if you would get intercepted somehow 300nm from the target 1 in 10 missions you would just receive missile warning when advanced doppler radar guide AMRAAM/ski and you are dead. I just have a feeling variant they are doing is going to rock.

Here: The fix will be in the next OB patch.

Предложение: избавиться от несовершенной логики включения КГС (ILS) в зависимости от ветра, относительной влажности, курса доллара и прочих условий. Сделать все КГС постоянно работающими (как это на протяжении десятилетий происходит во всех без исключения гражданских симах), и добавить в редактор возможность их выборочного отключения-включения, в т.ч. по триггерам.

@Gunfreak As Max wrote above, with custom mods not intended to go into Saved Games, you can just copy the files to your DCS install. Remember however, that each time the game updates, the updater will move Barthek's modded files to "_backup" folder, download and install all the stock textures back, and then you will have to move the modded files to the main game folder once again. Mod managers are there exactly to avoid dealing with that mess - you just disable and enable mods at will with a couple of mouse clicks.

Nothing of M346 is classified. The truth is that there is no public documentation available but with a good agreement with the Manufacturer is possible to get many data. Inviato dal mio ASUS_I005D utilizzando Tapatalk

I hope we got a helicopter at least

The fact that the extinguisher advisory lights dont come on after pressing either button also indicates its very much wip.

DCS: Kfir by AVIRON Introduction to the Lion Cub The Kfir is a single engine, single seat multirole, all-weather combat aircraft based on the Nesher Mirage 5 aircraft. but it is powered by the GE-J79E engine. To accommodate the engine, extensive changes to the fuselage, cooling, wing, and canards were required to retain its excellent performance. It was given the designation KFIR (Lion Cub in Hebrew). The Kfir received various upgrades and special modifications throughout its service. The Kfir entered Israeli Air Force service in the mid 70’s, and it was used until the late 90’s. It took part in the 1982 Peace for Galilee Lebanon where it carried out unescorted strike missions and received credit for shooting down a MiG-21 in a mixed-dogfight with F-15As. An early version of the Kfir without the modified wing and canards (Kfir-C1) was leased to the US Navy and Marine Corps with the designation F-21A. It was used as an aggressor in various locations. The Kfir was also exported to Ecuador, Colombia, and Sri Lanka, and it is actively in use by the private US Aggressor company, ATAC. Aviron aims to bring the Kfir to DCS in the most realistic fashion possible. The DCS Kfir will simulate the external and internal systems and state-of-the-art flight dynamics based on aerodynamic research, CFD modeling, and wind tunnel data.

Super Étendard

Wow Tornado ist so awesome news!!! The announcement will make lot‘s of Germans here, like me, so happy

The development of the DCS AH-64D has never stopped since release in March, and will continue for quite some time. The module is in early access, and every major patch has included bug fixes for the AH-64D and some have included additional features. Early access will be a marathon, not a sprint, so patience will be required. New features are also in progress, such as the Image Auto Tracker, among others. The C-130, F-100, and the recently announced A-1 are all being developed by 3rd party teams, not Eagle Dynamics, and therefore have no impact on ED's projects such as the AH-64D. Further, ED has many teams with their own responsibities, so when the F-16 gets new features, this does not mean that the AH-64D is collecting dust. There are many, many parallel lines of effort happening within ED for various modules and the core DCS World software. But there are also many, many 3rd parties developing aircraft, maps and DLC campaigns for DCS as well.

We appreciate you came forward to us, although at the moment we look like an angry mob. As a SW developer I usually renew my personal devices at period of at least 4 years. This means I can pretty much afford to buy PC which offers the decent performance. Sizable part of customer base can afford this over prolonged periods of time, and some do it actually every year. However, many of your customers can not afford frequent hardware updates at the frequency the professionals do, far less than developers in gaming company. This means that a number of these users are affected heavily when ever you decide to leverage additional features ( generally desired) vs Moor's law (results in higher costs). I would say I am quite low average at owning 1 map, FC3, Mig-21, F-16 and Ka-50. Notice how little the software costs compared to the needed hardware to run this thing. I would like to point out that investing in performance is not a wasted effort, it lets your user base be more elastic in terms of hardware ranges. Better performance with aged hardware means, that these people will remain with DCS the longer time. At the same time they may spend more money on your products than on expensive hardware updates. Please consider using this arguments when encountering Sales&Marketing people. In short: the more we spend on NVIDIA/Intel/AMD, the less we spend on your products.

Luc> the point here is that we know things are underway and comments like yours are not going to make any difference to the speed of delivery. The only real effect is to waste yours and others time reading and responding to this and similar threads, whilst also potentially raising the blood pressure of some. Wouldn’t your time be more enjoyably spent actually flying?

Not familiar with the VIRPIL but using an image Esac_mirmidon posted eons ago…

Delete or stop all "Fancy announced modules" never change nothing about improve a simulator engine develop, when the 3rd parties or the ED module studios has none about improve a graphic engine or dedicated personal with help them. You need specialized personal, Engine programmer trained on game engine depeloping with understand the problems to implement Vulkan enginer into DCS engine, no a Sound, VFX, AI or database enginer or a 3D modeler or a module builder. Use other resourse to improve them without training, has a waste of resourses, time and personal. 3rd party developers company studios, outside ED, and none to do with the ED core engine team?.

Nobody implements sensors like that in video games, it makes no sense for many reasons including performance. You already know where all the aircrafts are, you just have to design rules which dictate whether an object is flagged as "visible" or not which would take into account for instance LOS, distance, some kind of visibility factor which could be static, could be assigned per object, or could be a function of aspect, throttle position and type of aircraft, maybe actual temperatures with some delay if you're feeling fancy. By the way targeting pods and Mavericks aren't using image recognition either, they just magically lock onto any object flagged as alive, and its fine for DCS purposes

Size #1 would need a big pillow to sit on.

Who or what is preventing you from using it? Perhaps you may find life better when you stop to bother about what other people are doing in their cockpit that has no consequence for you. Startup procs won't vanish from DCS, because they are a major showing-off opportunity for the accuracy of the sim, hence a selling point. Another selling point is that it's entirely optional, so win-win.

930mb is a pretty normal minimum pressure setting on western Altimeters.

CF 105 Arrow

Heatblur has its plate full for the next 7-8 years. First to finish Tomcat, then F-4E Phantom, then F-4 Naval Phantom, then particulary complicated Eurofighter, then A-6 Intruder, then include every module takes significantly more time than originally expected. It would mean having Tornado after some 10 years.

Fantastic news. I couldn't be happier with the 1989 IDS. For me this is what the Tornado stands for. As far as I know, Marineflieger IDS used HARM as anti-ship missile. According to the SIPRI arms transfer database, Germany received a batch of 944 AGM-88 between 1987 and 1992. So I guess HARM is on the table.

A bit of progress, some work on the seat and other bits and bobs. Most of it is a combination of 3d printed parts, some on a Lulzbot Mini, some on an Anycubic Photon Mono X. The major work with these was the post print surface prep, in order to hide the very visible layers on the FDM printed parts, but once done they look the part. Painting will follow once I'm happy with the finish. For the seat itself, the bolsters on the seat back will be filled with car filler and sanded to the correct contour using the MDF formers as a guide. The undercarriage lever assembly was virtually a drop fit and is a vast improvement on the first one, and I was able to recycle the old one for duty as the refuelling door lever. I have started using magnets to give some feel to some of the parts, which helps them feel less toy like in their action. It's quite surprising how much difference a couple of tiny magnets make. I'm still waiting on some Ebay parts to arrive to complete a number of the left console panels, OLED panels and some rotary encoders are still in the post

Tornado fans right now:

Build 04 of the SU-57 EFM will include mainly fixes.

As soon as a third party feels they are ready for a forum section we will be happy to create one.