Leaderboard

Heatblur Viggen update on Twitter:

RAZBAM Twitter

DCS WORLD: KA-50 Black Shark 3 || IGLA Air to Air Missile In this DCS world video we will be taking a look at the Igla Air to Air missile for the KA-50 Black Shark 3 which is releasing soon!

I have all the modules and most of the campaigns, and would have to look at the list to tell you which ones have never been used, or only used for seconds. Mostly because I can't remember what all of them are. It's less about 'gosh I want to fly that' and more about 'gosh I want to keep the DCS economy healthy'. My play time is limited, so I can take off and land most aircraft and totally suck in them, or I can pick one (generally the F/A-18, which is what got me into DCS when you could buy, but not fly it) and know what most the buttons do even if I still suck at it. At least I can bounce on a carrier, which is a lot of fun even if the LSOs hate me. Besides, it takes about an hour to map all the controls for each aircraft. It would be so nice if DCS had a better way to code that in a text file; I know all the controller and button IDs My simpit cost more than all the modules combined, so I can't complain about cost. I wanted one of those since I spent my time flying the arcade-like WWII sims in the 90s, and probably have more hours doing design and build work than flight time, for that matter.

All Mirage F1s should be capable of using the Super 530F. I can't imagine any changes done to the radar for the F1M would remove that functionality. You can even see in our F1CE cockpit a little switch for the altitude difference mode which is only functional for Super 530F missiles. Switch #19 in this photo

Some new small videos of the capabilities of the A/G and A/A radar: https://twitter.com/RAZBAM/status/1599411023093452800 https://twitter.com/RAZBAM/status/1599411273124323328

Heatblur, I'd pay full price, and then some, for this. It's the one thing I always wanted as a Tomcat flyer. Don't need carriers, or anything else. Just the plane. Now my new most anticipated module. Love you guys' work! Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

For me, honestly I’d rather get an all new aircraft like the A-6, rather than another version of an already existing aircraft.

I stopped reading your post when I saw the underlined words, italics, and arrows.

The only one who can answer all this questions is Panthir who flew the CG's. Rapid gun wouldn't select the Sidewinders on the CG's, but commanded only a boresight close combat radar mode. The missile needed to be selected through the respective button on the armament control panel. Source = Regarding the Sidewinder prioritization, according to the listed article the local industry developed a system that selected automatically the Sidewinder that provided the best lock signal (accordingly to the position of the F1 and the bandit). https://defencereview.gr/hellenic-air-force-mirage-fleet-three-generations-of-modern-electronics-and-weapons/ Personally, i can dream that Aerges would develop the CG subvariant with the early radar scope (that could find also in the CZ).

That is how life goes. However you do understand the confusion when post come out in late 2020 saying that multicore is in the "final stages of testing" and will hopefully be available Q3 2021. It's now Q4 2022 and we are getting a update about "If testing goes well"... Haven't you been testing it for the last 2 years? I'm genuinely curious and NOT trying to throw shade. Updating people on your work doesn't seem to be the issue as much as the updates being misleading... purposeful for not.

Hello I wanted to make a post regarding the Super 530F in Spanish service since there seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding it. To begin let me state that no pictures/documents that currently exist show the S.530F being used on a Mirage F1M. However I believe that this missile could have realistically been used in a "what if" scenario. My first point is that the Spanish Air force purchased 12 Qatari Mirages in the 90's, with that deal came around 40-60 Matra Super 530s. Four of these aircraft would be included in the Mirage F1 upgrade Program. The rest of these aircraft were retired and used for spare parts. Despite this these missiles were not retired from service or sold and one would even end up in America in 2020 where Draken was sold 20 F1Ms. The cause for this missile being shipped to Draken is still unknown, but the fact that these weapons were so close to the Mirages leads me to believe that at the very least some of these aircraft can fire the missile. A missile also appeared in Italy in 2019 when the Mirage fleet was being sold off however this case is even more unclear than the American one. The Mirage F1M upgrade program included an improved Cyrano IVM radar which is very similar to the one used by the Mirage F1CT which can fire the S.530F, the S.530 also uses a rail similar to the R.530’s. In 2006 Spain deployed their Mirage F1Ms in support of NATO air policing in Lithuania. These aircraft were not seen with S.530Fs which may lead some to believe that these aircraft did not support the weapon. However this was peacetime air policing in a relatively low threat area, which means that the ROE required visual identification and therefore these BVR missiles would be basically useless compared to more loiter time with External fuel tanks. So what if NATO and Spain got into a desert storm like conflict with Syria/Iran/Whatever Nation in the 2000s? While I'm certainly not a Military expert or Airforce commander I am going to take an educated guess on the combat use of the Mirage F1M circa 2001-2013. Around half of the F1M fleet would probably be used as rear line interceptors tasked with scrambling and using their speed to engage any aircraft that snuck past the front line air defenses. These Interceptors would be armed with S.530Fs, and French Pilots could possibly be used to quickly train the Spanish ones with the weapons. The other half would most likely be used as "flying bomb racks" to provide more advanced aircraft/drones with more firepower. The un-upgraded CE and EE fleet would be kept in Spain for spare parts because of their lack of secure comms and IFF. So in summary I believe there is a good chance that the Super 530 would be used on the Mirage F1M in a conflict involving Spain, in fact it may have been planned by the Spanish Air Force incase of emergency. However I cannot confirm this but hopefully Aerges can shed some light on this with their development of this missile and the future Mirage F1M. Regardless I have been greatly enjoying the Mirage F1 module so far and am excited for It's future development. I have more than likely gotten some of this information wrong so feel free to correct me or share your thoughts.

DCS is an enigma. I am drawn by the air combat, other more famous non combat sims leave me cold, yet I spend most my time flitting between many aircraft doing cold starts , take offs and landings. To the extent I own all the aircraft and terrains but master none. That said I have destroyed an awful lot of relatively soft targets! I am happy to support the developers although that isn’t my primary motive, I have just found a natural partner that fits my hobby desires. Coming from a corporate IT world where “tin” (hardware) is relatively cheap compared with applications DCS seems quite good value compared with the costs of some decent flight sim gear, so I don’t fret about the modules that get used the least. I use JoyPro to manage the controls for a wide range of aircraft. It is invaluable IMHO.

Update du mod Miniguns : version 4.2_3 https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3321772/

Some more work on the diffuse mape whilest doing research.Amazing what one can find on ebay... Quite happy with the exhaust residue. Just need to do some touch ups and dirty the wing root more. UVW´s are a mess in places... particular area has definately some wonky seams i need to adress... Worked on the leading edge. Again.. seams, but this was the first pass... had to do some copy paste trickery that worked well... i just forgot i need brushes set up with the same values.. More seams and faulty colored areas (stabilizer wingroot) More seams.... ugh... And masks are the default ED ones.. not really touched them! Added more masking variety and more labels / markings. Paint layers have received an initial "scratch" mask, where only the paint chipped of. Subject to be adjusted. More wonky UV´s....it hurts.. An area (MG hood) i have to avoid regarding any detailin.

Thanks. Looks like the game is working and the install finished successfully. I’ll just leave it alone.

An F-14D "would be" an all new aircraft. Real HUD, IRST, PTID in the back for high resolution TGP work, modern radar, DFCS, JDAM. The flight mechanics would be "largely" the same but even then DFCS would smooth out the rough edges (where I like to hang out)

Hands raised in agreement.

Although I understand where you are coming from, I disagree. Great progress is being made towards this end. History suggests we will do incredible things and never need more than 640KB of RAM. The future of Moore's law is in scalability, not single core speeds. Industries will follow albeit slowly.

My vote for Jester's snarky comment about the kerosene smell There's no other real effect afaik.

GPU-5/A never entered service with the E model, and I’m pretty certain it was only ever slung on a test bed aircraft (which was actually a B model). So while the E model has been cleared to use the GPU-5/A, it was never actually integrated into the E model’s systems. AGM-65 on the other hand actually did get integrated into the E model’s systems, and was in service for a time with at least one air wing.

Just hope the developers of the me262(if it ever comes) hasn't watched that movie. People complain the 30mm is weak in DCS. In that move the main guy is hit like 20 times in the chest with 30mm and he bearly bleeds, then have like a 2 minute conversation before dying.

it's more of an incredibly annoying thing than it not being my first language. It looks like a 12 year old wrote it

As Christmas is getting closer, I have something important to add to the "wishlist". I'd like one of those please. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKSdYKmgmC4

To fix it I am going through all the campaign from start and improve other things while I am at it - doing a bit of face-lifting to the whole campaign. It will take some time but I would wait a month or so until the work is done. I’ll squash any bugs I encounter as well plus add some eye candy, update the load out etc - mind you, for the time being I am only working on the A-10C II version.

Cage the Bear seems to be fixed for me now. I finished the campaign. Operation Reforger BARCAP (Mission 2) froze for me on two attempts just after completing the intercept of the first transport aircraft. I9, RTX3080 Ti, 64 GB RAM, Winging Super Taurus, Super Libra, Takeoff Panel, Thrustmaster rudder pedals, Track IR5.

I agree with many of the items you have stated in your post skate, but unfortunately the definition of multi does not apply to multithreading which is actually one word. Although I don't develop games (should say by trade as I have and do develop games for fun), I have been building multithreaded applications almost as long as I've been coding in general (over 30 years). In this context, splitting logical pieces of codes (or their loops) into separate processes to run on separate processors is not multithreading. multithreading in the context of programming would be a single logical piece of code (the graphics loop as it was referred to for instance) being able to use multiple processors, allowing it to scale. What DCS is doing now and looks like this announcement is mentioning is multiprocessing. Separate logical process executing on separate processors. Very different than multithreading because obviously you cannot scale any of these independent processes past 1 processor. The worst offending process will always be your bottleneck. Multithreading does not have this problem. A multithreaded process or application does not have the same type of bottlenecks. It does introduce a crap ton of problems and other issues, but I digress. All of this is welcome, and noone is complaining from my end anyway, just discussing the difference and setting expectations. As I have mentioned earlier in this thread, sending the draw calls direct to GPU (bypassing the CPU) with DX12 or vulcan will probably see more gains than multithreading anyhow. That beings said, this was only an attempt to clear up the use of the word in this thread thus far. Reflected's campaign is the one I was thinking of. It will probably be the first campaign I will re-visit (I paused it after I think mission 5 because of the slideshow I was getting). So yes, this change will be welcome for this scenario.

I think you are misreading the temperature here. Multi-threading is important for many VR users as we are currently limited by the CPU. What is disappointing for us is not being able to buy more modern hardware and get any realistic performance boost in VR. Multi-threading (allowing these processes to scale with hardware) will fix that and allow us to get better hardware to fix this. Although the upgrade from a 2080ti to 3090 did see gains, the 3090 is not maxed out but rather the CPU at this point. The current graphics/logic split will not necessarily help the majority of the VR users who are CPU limited to gain much performance. It will be nice not dropping down to a slide show during the WWII campaigns when 50 bombers drop their loads, so that's nice and any improvement is welcome by all I believe, its just not multi-threading. Splitting a loop into two loops and putting it on two different cores may look like multi-threading to some, but it is not. Regardless of the performance gains by doing this first step (which don't get me wrong, is welcome. Not every time I express an opinion that is not "I love it' am I being negative towards ED or the community), regardless of these gains, we will immediately and quickly reach the same CPU limits until we are able to scale the largest bottleneck across multiple cores as needed and on demand, which is multi-threading. Although there is the odd more negative than neutral comment here, I don't think the vibe is booooo. Its just a discussion. You have to expect some disappointment from VR users who are currently limited by the software instead of their hardware.

Cowboy's tea with Aunt Tilly (a.k.a) the O-2A Skymaster (AI only) mod by prcCOWBOY v1.0.1204 ---------- Download link now available, see 1st post The O-2, known as the “Oscar Deuce” or “The Duck,” was a military version of the Cessna Model 337 Super Skymaster. It was distinguished by twin tail booms, tandem-mounted engines and a unique gear retraction sequence that evoked the nickname "The Duck." In late 1966, the USAF selected the O-2, to serve as a forward air controller (FAC) aircraft. This mod is dedicated to "Aunt Tilly's Boys" and all the other warriors who served as FAC in the Vietnam conflict. ------- included: early O-2A variant (with 67-21331 livery) -------- Notes: The plane will be alphabetically listed with the C's (Cowboy's Livery Pack O-2 Skymaster). As always, this is my artistic representation based on photos of the actual aircraft / my modeling skills, and not necessarily 100% accurate. known bugs: - This is an "early release" and may contain unfinished liveries and other flaws - Aft engine propellor blur is incorrect Changelog: v1.1.0123 (2023-01) - bug fixes, added texture and model details, new livery, gunsight, SUU-11a gunpod, and more v1.0.1204 - "early access" release ===== USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Installation: unzip the files and copy the entire contents of the 'Mods' folder in the zip file to your DCS user files folder, example: C:\Users\[YOURNAME]\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\ (You should end up with a "CLP_O2A" folder under Mods/aircraft, example: "C:\Users\[YOURNAME]\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Mods\aircraft\CLP_O2A\") ===== To UNINSTALL: simply delete the "CLP_O2A" folder from the above location (Do NOT delete the entire 'Mods' folder as this will remove any other mods you may have installed) tldr I considered opening a new thread for this but since it is an ISR plane albeit without fancy sensors I figured it fit here. This project started as a private tribute, but comments here have convinced me to release it. This is an "early access" release because I won't have much time to do any further development on it for the foreseeable near future; however, I think it is useable as is. I welcome any constructive feedback. In fact, please feedback. I haven't had much time to test, bug fix or clean up.

ED can't meet that standard with their own projects so I've no idea why you think they should impose that standard on 3rd party developers.

Up to 7 knots is acceptable (though of course they target as little as possible ideally) Anything above 7 knots requires approval from the ship's CO.

I would like some parking places for larger planes (for example KC-130) on Ramat David airbase.

And even if they figured out a way to show it off, there'd still be people griping that it's not being worked on, and that what we're seeing is fake. So there's a long road ahead for ED...

Have you tried rolling back the driver yet? I have issues since anything newer than 522. Remove it with DDU, to make sure, everything is clean an shiny and try 522 or an even older one.

Thanks to Kiwispirits tips on how to best use the LD-10 in active mode with a SPI placed using your AG radar and data from the SPJ pod I've managed to make a video. Check it out below.

The original DCS front, centre and back main texture files all had an alpha layer. The recent updated much improved and nicely weathered texture files do not. If you use those texture files without the alpha layers you get white solid fences, box shaped aerials and its apparent on all three texture files. You have to find copies of the originals, extract the alpha layers and apply them to the new texture files. Here is a copy of my alpha layers: f = front, c = centre and b = back. I have also included a copy of each of the main dds files WITH the alpha layer applied, but no numbers or names. https://www.dropbox.com/s/ibmng2vrpj8qvqe/alpha.zip?dl=0 You will have to create your own Liveries files from what I have given you, I have a different setup and textures arrangement which wont suit everyone.

Practically every country is getting shafted these days but I will pre-purchase the F-4 discount or not (I need my escapism). Sure hope that the pre-orders open soon as that is at least a sign of an pending release

Aside from the very obvious squadron coming up next, I wonder if anyone can spot something different about these Tomcat tails.

Don't mind to discuss it at all. Drag force ''Fd'' = Drag coefficient ''Cx'' * dynamic pressure ''q'' * Referent area ''Sref'' As you can see, I always try to specify together with Cx what is referent area for calculated drag coefficients, and mostly it is body cross section area instead of fixed values like square meter or something else. 0,8 for Sref 0,05307m2 is roughly 0,0424 for Sref 1m2. Roughly because it doesn't go that way exactly

BS3 is already in the Steam database. https://steamdb.info/app/2214600/

Time the Su-24 Fencer got some love...

That higher max speed is mostly an advantage on paper since its almost never reached and came from the perceived necessity of beating an overestimated Mig-25. Fighter designers agree, as no modern fighter is mach 2.5 capable, the tradeoffs to reach that are not worth it. The EF is faster in all aspects that matter. Take if from the test pilot that flew both. The greater range on the Eagle is nice, but even short legged planes like the F16 are used very successfully thanks to flying gas stations. And you are dead wrong regarding the Meteor or rather throttle-able ramjet missiles. Conventional missiles like the AMRAAM burn for the first few seconds after launch and then basically coast to the target, losing energy, especially if maneuvering is required. Being able to control burn rate of a missiles motor provides a lot of of options for increased lethality like adjusting for total flight time, negating the loss of energy when turning, increasing speed during the last few seconds to impact etc. This is a game-changer and calling the Meteor an AMRAAM is misinformed at best.

Some Beta 2.8 weather:

When it's stable. Preferaby after they figure out what screwed up performance. The whole point of stable is lacking major bugs.

There was a very true comment on managing expectation. Because in the end there is a technical limit, to the "want this", "must have that" and "we need those". A real life flight simulator for civilian pilot training cost more per day of operation, than the total of most of our combined PC, controls and periphery. It has a small Datacenter attached that powers the calculations and simulating the aircraft system, weather and effects on the aircraft. It does not calculate hundreds of units fighting, dozens of projectiles ballistically flying through the air, damage effects and AI for all the other planes and ground units... Despite easily 5-10 times the compute power of our average PC at home it does only(!) aircraft systems, Flight Model, weather and visuals. DCS, a Combat flight simulator for a single home PC, handles aircraft systems (often quite deep, with avionics, electrical system, hydraulics, fuel etc.) in an impressive detail. A pretty good flight model for most modules, weapons, ballistics, damage to your own aircraft, other aircraft, ground units and environment, the AI and interaction of all of these AND on top some pretty good weather effects, including basic turbulence, wind, moisture, temperature... and pushes the limit of the hardware most of the time, already. Of course it would be possible to improve the weather and atmospheric effects, but then we need to balance against something else. What could be removed? A combat flight simulator without combat? Or with a limit of 8 AI aircraft and 10 ground units? Or like in the early days, learn to live with single digit FPS? The real challenge for a good PC combat flight simulation is to manage a good balance of all these aspects in a way that it still performs on most customer's hardware. So the request to transform a combat flight simulator into a flight and weather simulator with thermals and up/downdrafts, I've only seen in a specific glider simulation, is maybe a case of excessive expectation on your side? Not that I think the weather/atmospheric effects simulation is perfect as it is. Of course not. There is a lot of room for improvement. But the current balance of all aspects relevant to DCS as a whole vs the compute power available is close to the best we can expect at the moment. And if your focus is on just flying and feeling the wind and weather like in a glider there are indeed other simulations that focus on these aspects and neglect the combat part. Last but not least, despite a focus on realism and simulation of aircraft in incredible detail, an important part of DCS is the "game", be it PvE or PvP, scripted campaigns. And at least for me DCS does a pretty good job at balancing all this into something I can enjoy at home, with a single PC.

VMC Approach to an IGE Hover The purpose of this maneuver is to transition from forward flight to a 5 foot stabilized hover. I begin the maneuver at 900 feet and 90 knots, during the base turn I descend to 700ft and 70 knots and work to maintain 70 knots and 700 feet until i've intercepted by desired approach angle. Once I intercept my desired approach angle I place my LOS on the intended point of touchdown and lower the collective to establish a rate of descent while also applying aft cyclic to prevent the nose from pitching down. I maintain an approximate 600 to 700 fpm rate of descent and gradually reduce it 500 FPM while smoothly decelerating the helicopter. At approximately 150 feet I transition from a decelerative attitude to a maintenance attitude and drive the aircraft "forward and down" at 24 knots (the top end of ETL). At 50 feet visibility with the intended point of landing is lost and side to side references are used to assist in maintaining the approach angle. The PNVS can also be used to "look through" the aircraft and assist with maintianing the approach angle. Hover torque is smoothly applied as the aircraft approaches 10 feet to assist in arresting the descent, because of inertia the helicopter will settle slightly and a slight amount of aft cyclic is applied to slow the aircraft. The combination of aft cyclic and increasing the collective assists in aerodynamically braking the helicopter. Things to think about: - The flight path vector is controlled vertically with collective and laterally with cyclic. - If the transition from a decelerating attitude to a maintenance attitude isn't made at approximately 150 feet, expect to terminate at a high OGE hover...however you likely won't have the proper power applied to support this and likely settle with power. Always think "forward and down".