Leaderboard

Hi, pilots Flora. We have updated the main types of trees. Fields and trees of England: In England, the trees are oak (lat. Quércus), pyramidal poplar (lat. Pópulus nígra), ash (lat. Fraxinus) and this is our habitat Fields and trees of France: For France trees - birch (lat. Bétula), maple (lat. Ácer) , beech (lat. Fágus) Video recorded on PC: i7 7700K, 32Gb RAM, 3060 8Gb

Final Adustments on the Bolts. null Adobe_Substance_3D_Painter_btEe6uT98P.mp4

I found a cool vid on YT that is full of some good footage of the first Tomcat deployment off the Enterprise.

Hi guys. If you are interested, there is going to be a "VSN flyable aircraft mods"-Discord Server where all the new toys, updates, patches and what not will be posted. So if you like Discord, may be you fancy hopping over to that one as well? https://discord.gg/Wk9hUnKcWz Cheers, PJ. P.S.: F-35A/B/C EFM Release is going to take place today (saturday 12.Nov.22 at 18:15h GMT+1) ATTENTION: Check out J.P.'s trailer for the mod at:

so I also tried the latest nVidia driver, no real substantive difference, but the numbers are here: FPS CPU(ms) GPU (ms) Notes 58.10 7.68 15.95 PD 1.0 Render Scale 100% 58.10 7.53 15.64 526.86 Driver there is a very slight improvement, but this is margin of error and it has no practical impact in anycase.

It will be included soon Inviato dal mio ASUS_I005D utilizzando Tapatalk

As someone who actually does project management as a job IRL you don't have a public test build, you have a primary public release that you are releasing as WIP, and a backup stable build that your community barely touches. There are a wide variety of methods used by software firms to keep their open betas and test builds from becoming the primary version their customer's are using, in order to avoid this very issue. ED does pretty much exactly the opposite of that and spends all of it's marketing promoting the open beta releases while barely mentioning the stable version. As an extremely predictable result the primary product your customer base is consuming is the open beta, and that customer base is going to have some expectations of a base level of functionality. And honestly, it really doesn't matter what you think about it, what you label things, or how much you argue about it. Your customers have developed expectations as the very predictable result of decisions you've made in how you position the product, and they're going to be upset if you don't meet them. Telling them they're not allowed to be upset is just going to make them more upset; this is marketing 101 stuff. Positioning it as a WIP/Open Beta buys you a lot of leeway to have glitches or temporary downtime in functionality, but tapping the open beta sign at your power users when they're upset it's just straight not working for them anymore is not going to get you anywhere productive.

12/16/22 Preface: In this Friday's OpenBeta update, the easy coding fixes have been added for the P-51, 190s, Spitfire, 109, and 47. However, the Mosquito has been missed. Additionally, the armor plates that are missing from DCS entirely haven't yet been included. Items that were fixed in the 12/16 OpenBeta update will be highlighted in green, and marked with the update date. TL;DR: Many warbirds have incorrect armor values, or are missing armor. If you open the x-ray.edm in the Modelviewer, and the individual aircraft's Lua, you can see the IDs from the Modelviewer and see what those objects' properties are. Please click on the photos here, as while I've minimized them in this post so it doesn't get cluttered, but if you click on them you will see them in better resolution. The P-51D (INCORRECT): [FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]The headrest and seat back armor (aka XArmor01 and XArmor00) - If we open Aircorps Library and look at the drawings for the late P-51D, like ours, we will see that these are two pieces of armor welded together. The headrest being 7/16", or 11mm...and the seat back being 5/16", or 8mm thick. Meanwhile in DCS, it is given a thickness of 22mm! For both plates! Almost three times the value of most of the area of the armor. I have an idea on how this value came to be, but I'll drop it into the spoiler below: [FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]The armored glass (aka XArmor02) - In DCS, it is given a thickness of 75mm. Using the schematics from Aircorps Library, we can again see that it is 1.5" thick, or 38mm. [FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]The instrument panel (aka XCockpitElement02) - In DCS, this is given a thickness of just 1mm! In truth, the instrument panel is a part that's for once, thicker in truth, coming out to 0.128", or 3.25mm. [FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]The firewall (aka XArmor03) - This is given a value of 12mm in DCS, or just a scratch under 1/2". For our 51D, it appears that a more possible value would've been 1/4", or 6.35mm. The P-51D (MISSING): The coolant header tank armor - This is a piece of armor that has been missing from the Mustang's damage model. It is 1/4" thick, or 6.35mm, and lies just forward of the coolant header tank within the engine nacelle, between the coolant header tank and the spinner. In summary for the P-51: -[FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]Change XArmor00 from 0.022 to 0.008 -[FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]Change XArmor01 from 0.022 to 0.011 -[FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]Change XArmor02 from 0.075 to 0.038 -[FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]Change XArmor03 from 0.012 to 0.00635 -[FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]Change XCockpitElement02 from 0.001 to 0.00325 -Add coolant header tank armor. Steel, 0.00635

Whilst the D-25 sub variant of the P-51 is correctly too late for the Normandy invasion period it has negligible difference in terms of performance to the P-51D-5/10 that were entering service during that period. The primary unprototypicality it allows is the use of HVARs. That said a P-51B would be awesome! +1,000,000,000 for Bf 109G-6/14

Ok so if it works for you I am really happy for you, but I can say it really doesn't work for me. In a normal test, with fixed head position, (its mounted so it doesn't move to minimise any impact on viewed objects etc...) ; these are my results, not I am not using steam but OpenXR so that might be a factor, but it never was before I moved from steam so I don't believe it will be now: FPS CPU GPU Notes 58.1 7.68 15.95 PD 1.0 Render Scale 100% 57.6 7.65 16.15 PD 0.5 Render Scale 400% frame times are in miliseconds. The test was conducted in a F/A-18, over the Caucuses, using a replay track (attached) to conduct each test after allowing the machine to cool and reloaded after each adjustment. Whilst there is a nominal loss of performance at PD0.5 and 400%; this is inside the margin of error for these kinds of tests, and I would have to run multiple tests against the same set to get a real sense of if its real or not, and honestly, I can't be bothered Conclusion This is still performance driven on the total number of pixels, and how you derive them PD or Render scale is totally irrelevant, it is the total number that is the determining factor. e.g. no magic. performance track 2.8.0.trk

Just in case there is someone that dont know about this podcast episode : https://redcircle.com/shows/air-combat-sim/episodes/39f06d89-293a-4ad8-bbff-7ce4fa704a17 Enjoy. P.S. Also available on Spotify.

Je vais voir ce que je peux faire. i think this one may be welcome too Ingame using the Frenchpack script which is provided with the pack, you'll be able to : - Deploy your tactical group with Leclerc platoon, recon,log, SAM and artillery. - Give them orders directly with radio menus, with automated recon, sitreps and all. - Request CAS or SEAD missions. - Get automated artillery support, same goes for opposing Ai btw. It'll even ask for arty support if an helo is spotted hovering very low for some time. Very fun surprise (Deactivable ingame) - ENI Armor will face the enemy or conduct random maneuvers to get more dynamic engagements. (Deactivable ingame) - Request artillery support in one single click (Same goes for other supports) - Deploy this little boy for recon purpose. (Once I'm done coding it lol) Many other things........ Which will be explained in the manual. Basically if i may dare this is what Combined Arms should allow right at the beginning

Hello! Today we will show you what we are currently working on. A lot of work has been done, and we can share with you the preliminary results.

after dropping 2 single CBU 105 (not BRU57), the pylons look empty and the sms page shows 0 bombs remaining. however upon pressing emergency jettison, you can see 2 CBU-105 falling off a empty pylon. i have tried to reproduce with all other types of cluster bombs, yet only the 105 shows this issue. Track and Tacview attached CBU105_jettison_ghost_bomb_.trk Tacview-ghost_CBU-105.acmi

Issue reported.

There is no pattern when you spotlight, the antenna will simply point where you put the antenna hand control azimuth and elevation. There are two modes for the spotlight which first requires a little explanation. For angle tracking the beam must be conically scanned (beam goes in a circular path around the antenna axis). This is achieved by nutating the antenna feedhorn at around 60 Hz. This is necessary for these old radars which use conical scanning as apposed to monopulse for steering their antenna when tracking a target. This effectively widens the beam on average to around 6.7 degrees compared to 3.7 degrees. Most of the modes have the radar nutating by default as this generally gives a wider search area at the cost of a lower average power per unit solid angle. The two spotlight modes are engaged with the action switch above AI ranges (100 nmi, 200 nmi): Half action - spotlight mode with nutation (6.7 degrees) Full action - spotlight mode without nutation (3.7 degrees) Technically you can use spotlight at AI ranges and below but this is just called acquisition and a full action will command an automatic track.

I did nothing. Just pointing out a common point of failure which didn’t apply here. But reminds me again to add export scripts to the „common culprits“ list. The real guardian angel here is Flappie!

Under 2.7 definitely affected were MiG-21 (all Slovakian default livery), F-14(all Jolly Rogers), F/A-18(not all liveries), E-2, and some others i can't recall.

во !) спасибо за обнаруженный баг!)) всё верно - этот тумблер и должен отключать САУ по направлению! я про него и забыл) и то, что Вы описали в нашей кабине - баг! записал!)

hi, there will be updates of the Bronco. We know that 2.8 causes loading problems and not only with the Bronco, the whole game has problems with that. We are working on a mix between png and DDS to optimize the loading without reducing the quality and visibility of textures. On our discord you can find channels dedicated to the Bronco. https://discord.gg/xrNhbETp5q At the moment we are working on our new mod and we have kidnapped Dikennek to get some help xD but the update is still in WIP! bests

Given the talent of some modders(like the Swedish asset pack) mabye get some kind souls with talent to add stuff. If planes are to hard go get just right. Let people make more ww2 infantry, flak and ship and make it part of the official asset pack after some quality control from ED.

This is Build 04 of the SU-57 EFM Thrust Vectoring Technology Demonstrator. Keep in mind this is more of Work in progress in regards it's FM and Thrust vectoring. There is no Oxigen system because it's only a demonstrator for testing EFM possibilities. Keybinds are F for stage 1 Thrust vectoring and B for stage 2. Stage one triggers All axis such as pitch, roll, rudder while second stage triggers only Pitch in a more aggressive manner. There are also bugs so remember it's all WIP. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t4PRNeyB6gaq0E2BCHx6x71GhpBZg-y_/view?usp=sharing

Since ED Going with Vulkan, You'll Likely see FSR3.0, as AMD Provides it license free and like FSR2.0, it'll be a module easily added to a Vulkan Rendering Pipeline, as well as work on AMD, nVidia and Intel GPUs. There's already other videos for DLSS3.0, inserting fake frames doesnt do anything but increase the FPS counter, cause input lag, and artifacts. and with regards to DCS, the FPS Drops aren't caused by resolution limits, they are caused by CPU Overhead on DX11, and Serial Threaded Core, lowing resolution and upsampling isnt going to fix those problems and when you drop 20 fr/ps, inserting AI Adjusted frames to fill the spot of 20 Frames isnt going to fix the problem either. Coming from someone that does programming, and graphics, DLSS is not the answer to DCS's Frame Rate situation. The Answer is MT + Vulkan, Removing both CPU Bottlenecks that have a large effect on GPU Utilization and FPS. Jay plays DCS.

Just was about to watch this. It's Anthony, so this mentioning doesn't surprise me that much anymore. It's been said by Linus at some point that he even is watching Growling Sidewinder's channel sometimes. But I always like when DCS gets mentioned on channels with a larger audience which also has been the case multiple times aready on the RTFM Show on JayzTwoCents' channel. He also had an A-10 wallpaper going for quite some time during the pandemic

I love it. The airport lights actually illuminate the aircraft. No more silhouettes. I can't wait to see this on other maps as well.

You can see in these comparison screenshots

Hello Viggen drivers! Since I'm not in the habit of making big speeches, let's get straight to the point: During the last months I spent a few minutes re-working the DCS-AJS-37 Viggen Manual RC2 which is delivered with the Viggen module. This was done: - For the community - In accordance with HB (POC IronMike) - For HeatBlur to be used on their purpose, e.g. to extend it further in case deemed necessary by HB authors/SMEs - For beeing used in a new Viggen training project (other story, details upcoming soon) What the manual RC2.1 currently is made of: - All original RC2 content - Hundreds of repairs of community bugs reported over the last 6 years by fellow pilots - Several bugs/issues repaired that came up during the re-working process - Changed/extended many headers in order to have a better and more detailed "Table of contents" - Added numbers to the "big" chapters (01 to 09) - Added bookmarks for all headers - Added "List of figures" at the end of the document - Changed the background picture to a single one (not mirrored like in the old manual) [currently not part of the document] - Changed numbers for better readability, like 1700km now reads 1,700 km - Changed number ranges for better readabilty, like 13,000 - 14,500 kg - Added captions for all figures with no exceptions - The typical "Caution:" text appears now in an amber box - Changed contrast and readability of nearly all pictures - Changed some pictures - Added some pictures - Added RB24 (AIM-9B) section in chapter 04 - Changed the background pictures of the "big" chapters to fit the whole page - Changed this & that here & there in terms of formatting - All additions in this thread >>> see all later posts within this thread with title "Manual Update / Revision". Here you find the link for direct download: DCS AJS-37 Viggen Manual RC2.1 Last change of document: Revision RC2.1.2503 as per March 19th, 2025 Note: This document hase become part of your DCS module in February 2024! Look into the folder DCS\Mods\Aircraft\AJS37\Doc and find the file "DCS_AJS37_Flight_Manual_EN_RC2.1.pdf". Thanks in advance & have fun with that one! Yours sincerely, TOViper

After updating to 2.8, every time I load into slot (SP or MP), textures load in very slowly. Attached image is about 3 seconds after loading into the slot. It takes about 10 seconds for all textures within visible range to load. I have cleared FXO and Metashaders2 folders, but no joy. EVGA Geforce 3080TI FTW3 AMD 5900X 64gb Corsair vengeance RGB pro 3600mhz

I sorted this out. It was because the script uses S_EVENT_PLAYER_ENTER_UNIT to track new players, but on a MULTIPLAYER server this never fires. I've changed the script to BIRTH - and my script works on MP servers, but it's annoying.

It is highly unlikely they have any specifics they can share with us, but Harker's contribution definitely deserves a closer look. Misinterpretations happen, and many sources need to be corroborated to come to an understanding of the big picture.

I see the issues with SA still not being addressed. In fact, it appears to be cast aside. How are we to believe the same wont happen to the F-15E? Trust is earned, not bought.

You're welcome. Renaming your "Export.lua" script disabled all your custom scripts, SRS among them. Now, we need to find which script cause havoc in DCS. Please attach your Export.lua.back file.

Es un bug de la nueva version 2.8, ya esta reportado: Como es bastante serio, espero que lo solucionen pronto.

Requested.

In my case it wasn't even 0.5s burst. I did at least 15 fights and Anton can be downed with 1s burst on average, get your aim better.

Wonderfull it works, Thank you....

Because it is NOT a 1942 Spitfire IX. The F Mk.IXc introduced in 1942 had a Merlin 61 rated at +12lb max boost The LF Lk.IXc with a Merlin 66 rated at +18lb was introduced in 1943 and was still in frontline service - at that boost rating - in January of 1945.

Mosquito FB.VI May 1943 (Merlin 25 prob. around August?) Spitfire IX July 1942 (our subvariant is a bit later 1943). Both the Mossie FB.VI and Spit IX served in large numbers to the end of the war, so they are not out of place in late 1944/45 scenarios, though a bit outdated. The Channel and Normandy maps however are a bit early for the P-51D, P47-D30, 109K4, and 190D9 - these fit the battle of the bulge. During the Normandy campaign (and before) the P-51 were “B” and P-47 were pre D25 Razorback models, and 109 were G6/G14. The FW190-A8, Spit IX, and Mossie are good for these maps. So, if we get 109G6 we have a good representation of the LW main fighters of the 1944 period. The G6 served in large numbers till the end of the war, the 109K4 never reached the numbers to be the “main” LW fighter.

I think we all are aware what simulators there is in the market, genre is not that big. Yes Il2 does have it pros and cons and pretty good FM but it's way more general and not even close when it comes to fidelity per plane and systems modelling etc. Not to even mention graphics and sounds. Thats why i hope and wish that more WW2 planes and maps will come to DCS eventually.

The Fw 190A-8 (INCORRECT): Photos: [FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]The headrest armor (XArmor01) - In DCS this armor is also 20mm thick. It appears that this is actually supposed to be 12mm. Considering the armor thickness of the previous two aircraft, even the P-47, don't have armor to that depth. [FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]The bullet-resistant glass windshield (XArmor02)- In DCS, this is also the now-familiar 75mm thick. But again, the A8 actually has some pretty heavy protection here, having a corrected glass thickness of 50mm...still a lot more than the P-51's and P-47's. Regarding the seat armor, back armor, and shoulder armor - It was hard for me to pinpoint what was going on here, specifically if the wider section of the armor covering the torso area was the shoulder armor plate, or the shoulder armor plate+back armor. The back armor (XArmor00") is set to 20mm in DCS as it is now. I see two options for fixing this one: 1) Try to approximate the armor thickness of three different plates into one. The seat back plate is 8mm, the shoulder plate is 5mm, and each of the two back plates are 5mm. Seeing how the the back plates somewhat overlap with the seat, and the shoulder armor is completely behind the seat, an argument could be made that the average armor value for the area as a whole may be closer to 10-11mm. 2) Remodel the armor in the x-ray.edm. The armor layout in the x-ray.edm appears like it's different enough from the realities of the armor placement that it may do better to just add new pieces. The current object for the armor behind the pilot could be resized to roughly simulate the shape of the combined shoulder and back plates, as one object. This would be pretty sensible considering the shoulder and back plate armor are the same thickness at 5mm. Then forwards of that, a brand new armor piece, XArmor03, to simulate the seat back armor at 8mm. Regarding the oil cooler and oil tank armor - If you look into the Lua, you'll find that there is already a sort of armor given to the cooler and tank...themselves! Both have a pretty happy value for their wall, and are assigned the steel material. The oil cooler, in reality, had a 6.5mm armor ring, and the oil tank behind it had a 5.5mm armor ring. 6mm is a good happy average. The issue however I see with these, isn't the skin value ("armor") itself, but the layout in the DCS DM. Maybe by accident, but it seems that the space taken by the oil tank does not wrap around the inside of the engine inlet. This is how the oil tank and oil cooler are in the DCS x-ray.edm currently: Ideally, either every other segment alternate between an "oil tank" and "oil cooler". This, or the whole ring be segmented along the circumference to more accurately portray the cooler and tank's layout. Such as, potentially: In summary: -[FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]Change XArmor01 from 0.02 to 0.012 -[FIXED: DEC 16, 2022]Change XArmor02 from 0.075 to 0.05 -Either A) Change XArmor00 from 0.02 to 0.01 or B) Change the model of XArmor00 into the shape of the combined shoulder and back plates and give them 0.005 meter thickness, and add the pilot's seat back armor and give it 0.008m thickness. -A change to the oil cooler and oil tank layout

You have to hit the right spot - engine/pilot. Also try deflection shooting, hitting your enemy from dead 6 o clock isn't the best. A single 1sec burst is enough to bring the Anton down - if you hit the vital parts.

Salut les aviateurs! Mesdames et Messieurs, today we are walking around Paris. In Paris, more than 20 original objects have been recreated on the Normandy 2 map, including: Eiffel Tower, Arc de Triomphe, Champs Elysees, Louvre, Notre Dame de Paris, as well as the main railway stations, the hippodrome, and the underground metro. We tried to do everything so that DCS users could plunge into the atmosphere of the world's cultural capital. Notre-Dame de Paris Hotel des Invalides Palais du Luxembourg Pont Alexandre III Gare-Saint-Lazare Paris Gare du Nord @Magic Zach @Fred901 @DD_Fenrir and everyone who cares about airfields. Thank you! We have added 5 airfields (Orly, Deadland, Friston, Poix, Triqueville) and they will be in early access. We will add 5 and continue this work so that the total number of airfields will be more than on the Syria map. Today we publish screenshots of two of them. Thanks for the support! Orly (original airfield) Friston (regular airfield)

I just bought it and completed the first mission. I'm really impressed. Few weeks ago I've completed my A-10C training and this campaign will be great to refresh and verify my knowledge and also to get used to the TK version. I guess it takes a special skill to make a 1h30m training mission (with 80% spent on the ground flipping switches) where the player is not bored. Great dialogues and voice acting. Hats off.

There is a supposed “white paper” they are working on but I haven’t heard any update on that for a while. Is this still being done?

I'm going to post my youtube comment on that video here, I encourage Phantom lovers to have a stiff drink on hand So much is wrong here. This video started off ok but then took a very strange nose dive after the 6:00 mark (no pun intended). 6:20: Initial F-4's delivered to the Navy and marines did not include laser bomb guidance systems. 7:03 The F-4N upgraded variant of the B pre-dated the J 7:20 What is "operational lock on capability?" Acquiring, locking, and FIRING on a target without a human in the loop? Is this a confused misinterpretation of the VTAS system? That's my best guess at what happened here in the research phase. Or are you referring to semi-active radar guidance for missiles? In which case, that was not pioneered on the F-4J, or even the F-4 in general, it pre-dates the F-4. 5 seconds of google will clarify what SARH is, (and the pilot still needs to pull the trigger or pickle it off, folks) 7:44 No, the F-4N is a further development of the F-4B, and pre-dates the J. The S is a post-Vietnam upgrade of the J 7:50 How specifically did smokeless engine improve the reliability and aerodynamic capability? The performance of the engine was better, but not necessarily because it was smokeless. This is confusing 8:20 The F-4S did not serve in Vietnam 9:03 No. Incorrect. Iran does not operate F-4J's. They received F-4D's, followed by F-4E's and R-F4E's. They have never operated an F-4J. 10:33 Easily outmaneuvering and outshooting the MiGs after improvements to the equipment and pilot training. The initial reputation wasn't that good, and that is an important part of the history of the Phantom that directly led to the creation of TOP GUN by Dan Pederson and the rest of the bros. Would have been a nice tie-in here 10:47 What specifically about the Phantom was modular? It wasn't any more modular than other fighters, upgrades like slats and radars required substantial re-fit, it wasn't like you could just snap things on and off like lego. 11:11 From birth the F-4 Phantom was fitted with a PULSE radar, not a DOPPLER radar. It did see a doppler radar in later variants, but it absolutely did not start life with a doppler radar, this is just plain disinformation 11:28 You said meters per second but the screen shows mph 11:47 EIGHT air to air missiles total, not twelve. 4 sparrows in recessed fuselage nacelles, and 2 pairs of sidewinders on the inboard pylons. The Navy variants had launchers on the inboard pylons as well that could fit one sparrow each as well, so a total of 6 sparrows, or 4 sparrows and 4 sidewinders. Unless you're referring to some modern frankenjet, there is no ordnance chart of a phantom with more than 8 A2A missiles 11:58 Initial production versions of the Phantom did not have a cannon. Initial prototypes did have colt cannons, but these were removed from the design. This is what was controversial - it was a fighter that went into production and hit the fleet without a gun. There are plenty of other sources that discuss this so I won't get into it here, but the way you present it in the video is incorrect. 12:10 Which historians? 12:29 Interesting that you mention this here, but you never once mention the F-4E anywhere else in the video up until this point, especially given that was the definitive export version and the backbone of the USAF until the Eagle came along 12:41 I am going to start a drinking game where every time someone says that their jet drivers coined the term "speed is life" I take a shot, as well as "one pass, haul ass". These did not originate in the Phantom community 12:45 in truth, it was true - Phantom drivers kept their speed up to both achieve their best rate speed, and out-energy their MiG counterparts with their thrust to weight gained from the J79's. Also, at 10:33 you literally said the exact opposite statement and you don't back it up either time lmfao 13:03 I think at this point my sanity is slipping away - THE F-4 PHANTOM IS NOT AND HAS NEVER BEEN THE PRIMARY TRAINER OF THE USAF OR NAVY 14:45 They weren't RE-designated the F-4G, the F-4G WAS the wild weasel. YGBSM! 15:23 ………. No. Just no. They retired it in 2004. Phantoms are going strong in Turkey and Greece however. I need a drink

I think first detention fires a short burst to get a momentary range. Second detent is continuous fire, so gives constant ranging and targeting. IRL there’s probably a good reason for burst mode, but not sure how useful it is in DCS, so can probably ignore it with no penalties.

Bizarre question? Why would I wind down my settings, when ALL the other maps I own, without exception, Caucasus, Normandy, Channel, Nevada and Persian Gulf all run perfectly smooth at 4K 60 FPS whit the very same settings, with any plane? I don't even slightly feel those 15 GB having a 4 TB SSD....