Leaderboard

Added MB-339A to Steam database. The launch should be later this week. https://steamdb.info/app/2147490/

Hello everyone, I'd like to provide an update regarding the F-16C manual's status. The F-16C manual has been under review and revision since the first week of August, with a lot of effort devoted to not only new sections for features that have come to the DCS: F-16C in the past year, but to improve the existing sections to the quality expected of DCS Manuals. As such, here is one such example of an improvement: Existing EXT Lighting Control Panel section Updated EXT Lighting Control Panel section Additionally, the intent is to not just explain how to operate a panel, but to explain (when appropriate) how these systems function within the simulated tactical environment of DCS World. Here is an excerpt from the new ECM section. Throughout this process, it has been necessary to review the existing text to: Identify any shortcomings of the existing manual content. Identify any inaccuracies of the existing manual with regards to the current functionality in game. Test the procedures and explanations within the new/revised manual content to ensure it reflects the current state of the DCS: F-16C. This manual revision is intended to be as thorough as possible; but at the same time, we recognize the need to push new and up-to-date information as soon as possible is an important aspect for the players. As such, the plan will be to release these updates in stages, so that completed chapters or sub-sections are released when able. Currently the plan is to release the following completed sections in the first edition of updates: Updated DCS: World Fundamentals and F-16C Weapons chapters. Updated Cockpit Overview chapter. This chapter alone has grown from 16 pages to 40. With thorough descriptions for every switch, button or analog gauge functionality. Updated Hands-On Controls (HOTAS) section to reflect new capabilities and logic. More thorough explanations of contextual HOTAS commands and logic will still be needed in each individual sensor or weapon chapter of course. Updated HUD and HUD Control Panel section. Updated and expanded Defensive Systems chapter to include additions for the ECM pods and more thorough and accurate explanation of the countermeasures logic with regard to the CMS commands on the control stick and the CMDS panel settings (The explanation of the CMDS Modes logic alone is now 1.5 pages to capture all the aspects of its logic, with the Defensive Systems chapter grown from 6 pages to 16). Updated and expanded Appendices to include updated ALIC codes, RWR abbreviations, HAS tables, and HAD threat classes, among others. Additional sections that are currently works-in-progress at varying states of completion, but are also intended to be released in the first edition of updates: New chapter covering the HARM Targeting System (HTS pod). Updated and expanded section explaining the ICP and various DED pages (this one in particular is quite the task). Updated section covering the basics of MFD operation, specifically the Horizontal Situation Display (HSD) MFD format. This final list is not all-encompassing of everything that is WIP, but rather the most crucial highlights that are being actively worked on for completion. After the first update edition is finalized, other sections such as the FCR, TGP, and various weapons will be undertaken as well. Ultimately, this is a labor of passion that will hopefully be worth the wait to all of you fellow virtual Viper pilots out there. Respectfully, Raptor

Guys, can't you take this alt+enter discussion into a separate thread. There have been pages on it and dozens of emails pinging through to everyone. I don't mean to be rude, but I think it would be more appropriate outside of this main Patch Notes thread.

Magnitude 3 FB

From Magnitude3 Facebook page.

Implementing DTM as a Mission Editor only thing would be a complete catastrophe. Anytime you want to change your loadout from anything that isn’t preplanned in your DTM (so basically everytime you play on a multiplayer server) would require you to manual enter what stores you have loaded on each pylon, with the exception of missiles and some GPS munitions. Thats a lot of clicking for the minimal benefit of watching a DTM insertion animation. Jf-17 does it pretty well. Whenever you rearm in game or you input preplanned points (via F10 map), the ground crew will update the DTM for you on the spot. This aught to be how it is done for every plane, maybe just tweak the F-10 functionality a bit to have a separate PP input rather than making and naming markpoints.

The Paris area hosted most of Luftflotte 3's main operating bases. The 8th and 9th US Air Forces made multiple raids on Paris, its surrounds and the airfields in the region, bombing out marshalling yards, striking reinforcements headed for thr Normandy front and sweeping the area for the Luftwaffe. I find it odd that you say you're interested in the history of the region (whether or not covered by the new map) and then show a lack of knowledge about it. With my multiplayer mission designer's hat on I'm looking forward to having the Paris area as it adds so much more potential for bomber escort sorties, deep strikes and fighter scrambles woth a realistic timeframe to get airborne and up to altitude.

If you think it is unrealistic, find a source on the AIM-54 that proves the current implementation is incorrect and send it to heatblur. Saying you feel this or you feel that will not change anything without something to prove your assertion. Every change or implementation they have done has matched all available data about the missile quite well. Since the initial thrust reduction patch in september there was another patch that has broken the lofting algorithm, this is known about and is being worked on. At this moment, today in Open Beta the missile is underperforming compared to as intended in many situations because the lofting algorithm is broken. Everything else is as intended.The AIM-54 is one of the most complex missiles out there with a lot of limitations and issues. The AWG-9 is one of the most powerful but also weakest computationally radars out there. All of the issues you are running into are realistic to the extent of hard quantifiable data that is available about either system. If you have a source to disprove this then do so.

You're taking 30 mile shots; as has been repeatedly mentioned, there's a "hold" region from the mid-30s down to 20 miles as expressed by RL pilots previously. This range is forcing the missile to take a loft in a region that is too short for it to maintain valid acquisition at the top of its arc. Compounding matters is the relative "floor" three of those MiG-23s descend to; net 15,000' elevation at 30 miles range and closing is too wide an elevation band for the AWG-9 to maintain all of these targets in TWS Auto. And as these are AIM-54As, there's no recovery of the shot if the track is dropped- because the missile doesn't know when to go active independently. Again, ~30 mile shots. Only two out of six missiles had enough time and space to just get above Mach 3 because the range is too short; they're all respectively arriving at 5 miles range below Mach 2, and two of them were negated prior to going active at ten miles (your shots on Aerial 3-2 and 4-1) because they were turned behind the AWG-9 gimbal in your turn away. Those two Floggers don't even so much as have to flinch because you've let their respective rounds arrive DOA. Throw in the magic AI half loop on the other four to cut bait and run, and it's a geometry kill on all six shots. The simulation has resemblance to real life; that's why employment technique is critical. You don't want to use it in accordance with real life terms, you're going to get similar results to real life with regards to out of parameter shots.

@fapador you have given your feedback please dont start with the back and forth in the thread. Ladies and gentlemen treat each other with respect or we will hand warnings out. Thank you

Yep it is the scalpers. Long as they have a market of willing people to pay those high prices to get a card sooner they will always exist. I would gladly go without before I ever supported them by buying a card from them. Screw them.

Читал уже 100 раз и даже писал. Ответ Чижа - купите 80-ти дюймовый экран или очки VR. Да и вообще, проблема уже неактуальна - по словам Чижа сейчас полно мониторов 8К и шлемов VR - покупай и наслаждайся реалистичной видимостью. Вы нищеброд, играете на маленьком мониторчике и не можете позволить себе огромный экран в 8К (и заодно RTX 4090, чтобы тянула 8K)? Не беда, купите монитор с низким разрешением, чтобы пиксель был размером с кулак, тогда и контакты будут нормально видны. У вас маленький монитор с большим разрешением? Вот вам зум и ярлыки, это же так реалистично - слепой пилот, выискивающий противника через подзорную трубу и ярлыки, просвечивающие через облака и кабину (к слову, в самом первом Lock On ярлыки не просвечивали через кабину).

I think the F1-EE is the next one to come but there is also a F1-BE (2 seats) to come. The F1M will come at the end. F1M improvement F1-EE are supposed to be: - modernised cockpit (late 90') with LCD display, NVG improved support for night operation - Improved RWR: AN/ALR-300V2R - improved Radar: Cyrano-IVMR with improved air-ground target designation (something similar you can see on F16/F18 with ground target designated on the HUD), sea mode with the capability to fire AM-39 Exocet - Improved air-ground capabilities: CCIP/CCRP/LOFT (LOFT = similar to F18 for ballistic HARM missile delivery) - Improved INS gyro-laser system: SAGEM ULISS 47 - GPS navigation system - Improved IFF: cryptographic mode (not simulated in DCS) - Improved Radio communications: cryptographic mode (not simulated in DCS)

Thanks! I've split the zip again and ran tests on it, and now I'm re-uploading them. Hopefully this will remediate the issue.

There is. Bourbon.

The AI is not the brightest bulb in the pack, but it is functional aight_bet.zip.acmiaight_bet_2.zip.acmi This is sadly a DCSism. In real life the rotor blades create a pretty massive doppler return that a radar (depends on the radar) interpret as a steady contact. IRL the first air to air kill of the F-15E was against a Hind they hit with a 2,000lb laser guided bomb, but they _found_ it using the air to air radar. In DCS the rotors return is ignored, and it only considers the speed of the fuselage which is usually within the doppler notch of most PD radars.

I think HB has said this mission doesn't really work within the current state of things, and suggested editing it and turning down the skill level of the AI. There's also some issue with the bandits being vertically stacked too close together. I think they are going to revisit all the instant action missions, so I wouldn't feel too bad about it. I've only completed the Jeff one once or twice out of MANY attempts. Yeah, but the Jeff didn't exist in those times either. I think they were cranking by the time Flankers and Flanker variants appeared.

Playability is subjective. Some people say the F-14 is unplayable because it doesn't have a pilot model for VR. Others say it's unplayable because it doesn't display air speed in the HUD. Others still because the AIM-54 is no longer a missile for all targets, in all seasons. You're shooting the oldest version of the missile with the least robust guidance capabilities in a situation where the greatest limiting factor (the radar) is going to struggle most and create the greatest potential for the missile to do a stupid. Lo, the missiles are doing a stupid. I can't find a real life example where an AIM-54 was used in such a situation, so I can't say with 100% confidence whether the sim is following reality or not. Given what I know about the AIM-54A, it looks about right. At that range, I'd opt for STT, or better yet, a Sparrow. Maybe even try the -54C On the other hand, examples of the missile matching actual test shots have been provided somewhere beforehand. This is what DCS is supposed to do. You match the sim to performance you can prove, and refine if and when new information becomes available.

Was able to run around 10000x5000 total resolution with msaa x4 -> 12ms frametime on the GPU, Reverb G2. Still limited to reprojection in multiplayer due to CPU

This Mod is now being reviewed by the GR .. yeah, I know they may not be your favorite DCS youtuber, but it undoubtedly makes this Mod more well known:

That would make the prices a little more balanced, my point about the cockwombles in No.10 still stands though

Alas, quite a few planes are equipped with them but not in DCS. Hopefully, one day .

He's a usual troll around here, his first post (in the wrong forum, of course, as he tried to stand out playing dumb like he didn't know there's a specific subforum) was surprisingly "well mannered" knowing his usual behaviour. But he can't help it and showed up as soon as you replied him, but it's no news for a known troll/kid/kidtroll user. It's better just to ignore him and his "claims", his many "friends" with his same opinion, are probably only in his imagination, and so on. Don't bother yourself trying to argue with logic points with him, he won't see anything further than his own twisted weird self centred already shown "opinion".

My thoughts exactly. I must say I’m a bit annoyed at OCUK. I bought a PC from the recently that I had to send back yesterday as it was damaged in transit. So I emailed them this morning to see if they could keep it till they have a 4090 to put in there (very unlikely I know, but worth a shot). Got an email back at 10:55 saying they have no idea when they will have any more stock. At 12:20 I got a stock alert, sold out by 12:25. Did they really not know they were about to get 10x GPUs an hour and a half latter? Thats the last thing I’ll say on the matter as it’s just pointless venting. I’ve prescribed my self 2 pints of stress relief at my local pub

Dear DCS community, After almost 40 years of active flight simulation (my father had the first MS Flight Simulator back then), I have now fulfilled a big dream at almost 50. It started with the change to VR-glasses a few years ago. Anyone who uses VR knows what I'm talking about - there's no way back. VR has already brought the flying experience very close to reality. However, as an enthusiast and a big fan of DCS, I wanted more and started looking into motion platforms. My dream was to also be able to feel the movements of the plane in the VR immersion. I saw a lot of great DYI projects from motion platforms on YouTube, but I didn't see any chance of realising something like that myself. I just don't have the time or the technical background. I needed a plug-and-play solution - so I researched as best I could all the platforms that could be purchased and obtained the missing information from the manufacturers. After all, such platforms cost a fortune - others buy a great motorbike with that money... 1. Decision for Motionsystems After completing research, MotionSystems (MoSy) was at the top of my list. This had 3 reasons: A) Highly professional web presence with a variety of different platform solutions. Among other things, they are also the manufacturer of the V3 platforms distributed by NextLevelRacing, so they also offer a mass product with corresponding quality assurance and customer support. B) Provides VR Motion Compensation, more on this later. C) MoSy is headquartered in beautiful Wroclaw, Poland, which is only 7 hours away from my home and offered me the opportunity to test the product before purchase. After more than 2 years of email exchange (as you can see, it wasn't a quick decision), I got in the car and went to Wroclaw. I tested a 3-DOF and my current 6-DOF platform (PS-6TM-150) on site. It became clear to me then that their hardware was of outstanding quality, but that the software and adaptation to DCS would still mean (joint) work. I decided to go for the somewhat more complex and expensive variant of a 6 DOF system, in line with the motto "all or nothing". I simply wanted to have every movement of the aircraft / helicopter transmitted as realistically as possible. The software respectively the implementation of DCS on the platform was still in its infancy at that time, some movements were missing, others were simply wrong. However, given the trusting and sympathetic contact with the MoSy staff, I was confident that we would manage to get the maximum performance out of the platform in combination with DCS. So at the end of 2020, the platform was ordered and the adventure took its course... In February 2021 the platform was delivered, the biggest challenge was to get the more than 300 kg into my basement. But that's another story... We then worked permanently for about half a year on improving the software profile for DCS. The result is (at least from my humble point of view) quite well done. The support from MoSy is really fantastic, it is not a big company, you feel very well taken care of as a customer... 2. Motionsystems Software solution The basis is the ForceSeat PM software of MoSy, which you obtain by purchasing a platform. The software offers profiles for a variety of games (flight and mainly racing simulations). Within the profiles, the user can adjust an incredible number of settings for the behaviour of the axes, special effects and, of course, the strength of the movements. You have a very flexible set-up. The big advantage is the plug-and-play solution. Switch on the platform, start the software, select the profile of the game and off you go! A special plus, however, is the VR motion compensation called VR Head Way. For those who don't know what this is: when the plane accelerates, the platform pitches backwards to simulate the acceleration. However, the VR glasses interpret this movement as leaning back in the seat. Without compensation, I would sink into the pilot's seat during take-offs or turns, or hang out of the cockpit when the platform rolls left or right. The VR Motion Compensation calculates the movements of the head caused by the platform and transmits this to the software of the glasses (all common VR glasses are supported). As a result, I remain 1:1 stable in the cockpit, no matter what the platform does. If I move in the seat, i.e. if I lean forward or to the side, then this is of course also transmitted by the VR glasses, as it goes beyond the movements of the platform. In the meantime, MoSy has significantly improved the calibration of the seating position. In the past, you still had to set the approximate sitting position with millimetres. Now the software calibrates itself automatically by having the platform take up 3 different positions and measuring how much the head moves in the room. This works really well and without any mistakes and once again showed me, that MoSy never stops developing and improving their products / software. 3. Cockpit Setup Only the platform is delivered with a stable steel plate as a basis for a cockpit, which you have to build yourself. MoSy was happy to adjust the position of the screw holes for my cockpit for me. I used the MTX Flight Rig from Monstertech as a basis for my cockpit on top of the platform. I mounted it on 160mm profiles, because otherwise the movement profile of the platform would have led to collisions with the cockpit frame. By the way, the conversion to a racing cockpit with steering wheel takes less than 5 minutes, which is very comfortable. But we are flying here... 4. Implementation in DCS Now that the fine-tuning of the MoSy profile for DCS is completed, the performance of the platform is simply indescribable. The movements and also the strength of the accelerations are breathtaking. This leads to the point that you really start sweating in aerial combat for fear of being shot down. Because the rollercoaster ride during the spin towards the ground is sometimes so strong that I press the emergency stop button in panic. The bottom line is that the platform has led to the same result as the VR glasses - there is no way back. Flying without the platform now feels as wrong as flying on the monitor when the VR glasses are next to you. 5. Summary I hope I have given you a small overview of my big dream. Maybe there is someone out there who has the same thoughts and dreams as me... More than a year ago, I would have been more than happy if there had been anyone who had already tested all this and written such a review. So I took a bit of a risk, but it was more than worth it. Pictures speak more than a thousand words, so I have created a few videos to show you what the platform can do. Please forgive me - I'm neither a Youtuber nor a product tester, so everything doesn't look quite as shiny as it does from other testers, but it should give you a good impression of the platform. All the best, MadMonty Links: Motionsystems - https://motionsystems.eu/ Plattform - https://motionsystems.eu/product/motion-platforms/ps-6tm-150/ Cockpit Rig - https://www.monster.tech/ (My MTX has been revised, the actual version is MTS)

F1-EE improvement over F1-CE should be: - improved HUD: Thomson-CSF VE120 - Improved RWR: AN/ALR-300 - Integrated flare an chaff dispenser : AN/ALE-40 - INS system - Refuelling probe - IFF interrogator - Improved Radar: Cyrano-IVM with ECM Jamming capability and improved air-ground capability (radar telemetry, radar cartography), Super 530F air-air missile guidance - Improved air-ground capabilities: not clear as it seems that F1-EE never received CCRP/CCIP in the contrary to F1-CR

А чем вызвано ваше принципиальное нежелание увеличивать LODы объектов вдалеке? Так сделано в Falcon BMS, вроде бы в Ил-2 ну и в аркадах часто применяется. Эту опцию можно сделать отключаемой.

A nice comms switch with 4 clear position plus press would be awesome and an instant purchase. Also an analog, spring-centered radar elevation as an attachment is too much to ask for?

I would say, the CPU and the GPU are waiting for DCS ... ED, Multithreading now!!

I think its extremely disappointing that this has not been addressed by this late stage in the Spits release! Me personally, have bought modules that I had no serious intentions of ever really utilising other than for a bit of fun on rare occasions and more importantly, as a way helping ED fund further development of current and future modules. In fact, the very reason I first got into DCS was for the Spit (and F16) which was my very first purchase and after all of my voluntary unnecessary extra support, here I am still waiting to be able to enjoy the very thing I got into this extremely expensive hobby of mine for! I even gifted a friend (no regrets) quite a few modules to help him develop a love for this sim because the entry price would've been a show stopper for him without having had the chance to get the bug first. I have parted with over USD $1350 since 2019 as my order history attached will attest to and you ED are making it very hard to stay in the mindset of spending anymore on DCS going forward. Your failure to take this issue as seriously as it should be taken is a stain on my relationship with ED and DCS.

More than a year later: issue reproduced and reported.

Texture works that I've been working on for a long time. Thanks to Roughmaster and Wolfthrower for help.

Indeed. And how I came to download this. Thanks for making this for us!

Let's get back on topic, shall we?

Taxes in the U.S. are different depending in which state you live. They add taxes at checkout after you confirm you address.

no

Have you used both FSR and DLSS in titles that are similar to DCS in that they require god detail reconstruction (spotting targets, reading isntruments etc.)? I could only compare the two in youtube videos, which is bad in itself, but it was with some generic action titles, where micro detail is less important and it's more about a temporarly stable and clean image. My biggest concern with FSR is that it might be worse than DLSS when it comes to those fine details... I would be interested in hearing your opinion on this. Or anyone's opinion who has already compared the two technologies in preferably sim-type-titles...

Yep, you've got three axises to bind and you've bound them. That's it. Check that you don't need to invert any of the axises by watching the pedals in the cockpit. If you can brake and steer then it's all working.

I bought Normandy 1 and I don't feel Normandy 2 is unfair. The announcement of Normandy 2 was obviously kerfuddled, that much is clear. And the diagram of the map with boxes on boxes in boxes was just silly from a marketing standpoint. Might as well try and sell me a car by showing me a schematic of the steering wheel. But as London and Paris are included in the new map, as well as the lovely discount I am going to receive, I can't complain about the end result. I will get a very good looking and enjoyable map for $10. That works for me. Then be there if that makes you happy. You have freedom of choice. Fly however and wherever it makes you happy.

Yes (I need to ask a badge) And you do nothing wrong! FBW (should) take(s) cares of the rudder for turns. Pedals are used mostly for crosswinds landing and take off. They can be sometimes useful for finely adjusting A/G gun aim and for BFM (stall turn)

"A data transfer module (DTM) set provided pre-programmed information that customized the jet to fly the route the pilot had planned using mission planning computers." https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-15-upgrades.htm

I call h0rsesh1t …. the cpu can easily manage 120 fps+ in a barebone caucasus mission. I assume something else is bottlenecking there. Or the drivers are still borked.

FSR 2.0 is about par with DLSS2.0 and works on AMD, Intel or nVidia, and is easily added to Vulkan, as is any GPUOpen function.

There was a Hunter showcased on Facebook - looked and sounded good, but haven’t heard anything much more about it… Would be a great addition to DCS

Multithreading will be first, then vulkan, both in progress, we will share more news when we are ready thanks

DCS: F-16C Viper | Non-Cooperative Target Recognition (COMING SOON) In this DCS: F-16C Viper video, we’ll talk about the Non-Cooperative Target Recognition, NCTR, that can be used to identify the aircraft type. As many of you are probably aware, this system compares turbine blade signatures of different engines to a database of associated aircraft types. This can be a useful system to identify the aircraft at beyond visual range of up to around 25 nm. Because NCTR requires the radar to see the engine blades, there some important requirements: First, the target nose or tail must be within 30-degrees in azimuth and elevation of your nose. Second, the target must be within about 25 nm. Third, you must be in Single Target Track mode. To interrogate with IFF and NCTR at the same time, press and hold Target Management Switch Left for greater than one second. (Left Control + Left Arrow) Let’s look at this in action. We are STT on a high-aspect target at around 30 nm. To perform an NCTR print, hold the Target Management Switch to the left for greater than one second. When you do so, it will both perform an NCTR print on the target and perform an Identify Friend or Foe interrogation along the line of sight of the STT target. If the target is outside the range and angle constraints, an INVL, or Invalid, message will appear on the Fire Control Radar, FCR, page. Now that we are 24 nm, we will perform another TMS Left Long press and we can see that the target has been identified as SU27, meaning an Su-27 fighter. It’s important to note that because we both performed and IFF interrogation and an NCTR print, we now have two identification sources that allow the Rules of Engagement tree to identify the target as hostile, indicated as red. Meaning you will be able to identify hostile targets with only ownship systems.

You were rude first, by dropping an off-topic video with a false assertion it answers the question. I'll be more civil when people start begin writing actual answers out instead of dropping a link that wastes 12 minutes of my time on not actually answering the question. FYI, the OP didn't ask for a description of the control schemes. He asked for an explanation for why they are like they are. This video did not answer the question. I consider posting a video link without explanation rude because it wastes everyone's time, doubly so if it's not actually relevant to the thread. People are looking for a straight answer, not 12 minutes of rambling. A video is a source or an illustration, never the answer (unless the question specifically asks for a video). If the answer is in the video, type out the good bits for those who don't want to watch, or at least have the decency to link to the precise moment in which the answer is said. If you can't find such a moment, close the video and forget about it.