Leaderboard

***New Tutorial from Notso coming Soon!!!***

That more reads like "we don't want to see a problem here". Current behaviour with DCS is significantly different than those in the demonstrated videos, which even show a knife edge at high altitude and not even going to maximum rudder. In DCS you can't even hold a knife edge at low altitude, empty load out, yaw trim at maximum, rudder pedal fully pressed.

Nouvelle mise à jour du MOD OV10 Bronco qui passe maintenant en version 1.08!!!! Liste de Changements : -> Ajout de missions d'entrainements ainsi que d'actions instantanées. Merci à @rudel-chw pour ces superbes missions. -> Ajout de nouvelles livrées : TASS, NASA et bien d'autres. merci à LeonisMara, Scorch71, JP Gabobo, Wildserpant51 pour leurs livrées ajoutées dans le mod. -> Texture FIX. -> Optimisation du Code (LUA and C++). -> Optimisation du 3D (suppression de polygone). -> Optimisation des textures (PNG to DDS). Merci à @EightBall pour la conversion ainsi que pour les explications. -> Modification du modèle de vol : le vol dos stabilisé n'est plus possible et ajout d'inertie au roulis. -> Les Switchs sont assignables. -> Controles au clavier implémentés. New update for the MOD OV10 BRONCO. It is now in 2.8 version!!! Change log : -> Adding training mission and instant action. Special thank to @rudel-chw for all of this perfect missions. -> Adding new liveries : TASS, NASA and so much. thank to LeonisMara, Scorch71, JP Gabobo, Wildserpant51 for your beutifful liveries. -> Texture FIX. -> Code optimisation (LUA and C++). -> 3D optimisation (suppressing dead polygone). -> Texture optimisation (PNG to DDS) Spécial thank to @EightBall for the conversion and explication. -> Flight model tuning : Stabilised inverted flight is not longer possible and roll has been modify. -> Switches are now bindable. -> Keybord control are now implemented. The link stay the same for download the new version!!!! https://splitair.gumroad.com/l/fwzxn Thank to all of you, i see a lot of people enjoying the mod and help other, stay as you are!!!! (modifié) Discord SplitAir https://discord.gg/xrNhbETp5q

Just my 2 cents. As long as we know that the jet we are seeing in the videos is our block 50 Viper, no matter what configuration the real jet has, and wether we know the configuration or not: There should be a configuration we should be able to find in game to recreate the edge pass. If we cant, the DCS F16 simply cant perform how the real jet performs shown in the videos under no conditions. Do we need to be able to do a knife edge pass in game? Is it a problem? I dont know. But logic tells me, if it was hard to achieve in real life, or only possible under certain conditions, it would not have been included for an air show performance.

The AIM-120 is still very vulnerable to barrel roll manoeuvres at higher altitudes. A well timed barrel roll defeats the missile every single time. 120_barrelroll_BVR.trk 120_barrelroll_HALFRANGE.trk 120_barrelroll_NEZ.trk 120_barrelroll_BVR.acmi 120_barrelroll_HALFRANGE.acmi 120_barrelroll_NEZ.acmi

Oh yes!

24 more days, If they plan on releasing a preorder for even 2 weeks, we should be seeing it within 10 days. Maybe they plan on just dropping it without all the hype they used for the 14? Who knows....I feel glued to the forums hoping for just ANY news regarding it

Need the plane go with the tutorial, don't we?

I have asked the team to take a look

Enjoy!

I would love to have a multiplayer F/A-18D Hornet in the game. I would SO pay for this module! Honestly, I am surprised we do not have it yet. Hey @NineLine, can you make this happen?

The M2000C has a nice option for selecting empty external fuel tanks on the mission editor. It's useful for simulating on air starting ''realistic'' BFM training setups, where the engaged aircrafts are positioned in close distance with the assumption that they have already consumed the external fuel flying to the training range and have the restriction to keep the tanks onboard as in real life (for cost reasons), so the pilots have to deal with that extra drag. Have heard that this can be done for other aircrafts by editing the respective lua files, but it would be cool to have that option already in game for more aircrafts, like for the 16 and the 18.

This is fixed internally, and should be in the next update or following one. Thanks all.

Well i don't know if that particular picture is edited or not, however as said there is quite lot of other pics and relics left to show brown version so personally i have no reason to not to believe that brown version of rlm 81 existed. But yes, always intersting topic to discuss and compare opinions about. Yep, wings were often built by different subcontractor so they used what colours they had in hands so result is often interesting combo. Grays 75 or 76 combined to 81 or 82, etc etc. Sometimes good old 74/75 combo too. Unfortunately i don't own that wing fairing but i have saved pics from other forums (large scale planes iirc), however there was couple of more pics from it:

VF-11 and VF-31 transitioned to F-14Ds in 1992, with only a few others doing so later like VF-2 and VF-213 after their sister squadrons shut down, and 11 eventually going to Bs in the late 90s. DCS is supposed to be a "rivet counter" type sim to at least some degree, but more importantly Heatblur themselves have stated they don't want to half-bake any version or component/system. They said the same with all of the PTID questions, because little exists mapping out and showing all of the different displays and pages for the systems that were integrated, or the different piggy-back systems eventually added later for JDAMs and GPS. And yes, Bs got JDAM too. Part of the B upgrades included a digital BUS, iirc it was the As that needed a digital to analog converter for LANTIRN. VF-11 and VF-143 did the operational testing and 11 deployed with them in 2002, performing the first combat JDAM drops from a Tomcat. The guy that wrote up the F-14 JDAM article/story/whitepaper deployed with VF-11 on that cruise as he was the program officer on it. But JDAM required additional piggyback equipment to work. DFCS also didn't come until later, and was rolled out to all operational Tomcats at that time whether A, B, or D. The D didn't have DFCS from the start. DFCS testing was in 1995 with rollout to fleet As starting around 1998. Adding DFCS alone would be quite an undertaking in DCS, having to model how it interceded and did control coordination or spin recovery, we'd need details on all of that whether A, B or D. F-14Ds didn't get PTIDs until the As and Bs started decomissioning, and the PTIDs were moved across as the D's TID was digital and newer. After VF-103's testing and cruise with LANTIRN in '96 VF-154, 211, 41, and 14 received LANTIRN as well, with there being transitions from 96-99 of some jets having LANTIRN but not the PTID yet. The D also had a different jamming suite, altered external model features that would need to be done, cockpit remodeling, pilot would need changes to some of the equipment as the D had OBOGS and used different regulators. There's a lot to even just an old D, and Heatblur still don't want to cut corners. Docs have to not only be available but releasable/usable by HB without someone going to the Fed for breaching ITAR and espionage charges. Also, PTID had been a separate project due to old TIDs burning out and wasn't originally linked with LANTIRN, it just happened to enhance the capability. That's part of why As got them initially as their TIDs were the oldest and needed replacing the most from what I've seen.

and you'll get to battle with the ECS system overheating as the blk I had the inefficient vent system, lol There's no plans by ED to do a Super Hornet, so I dont know where that assumption the last few pages came from.

after 90 minutes of playing Campaign ,no crash so i thing and hope i solve it - thank you guys 1 more mission went also fine ,so i guess its solved .

The picture in my post is from "Real colors of ww2 aircraft", latest research results of Maciej Góralczyk, Gerald T. Högl, Jürgen Kiroff, Nicholas Millman and Mikhail V. Orlov. Released by AK interactive, really well done book for anyone interested in topic. I have to disagree about lack of evidence of brown rlm 81, there is actually quite many color pics and parts left from aircraft, here is couple of examples from other forums: Fw 190 stab fairing Nice pic of Do-335 That's true, rlm 83 was indeed dark blue and was never used in late-war fighters. I would also add rlm 70 and rlm 74 to list of possible colors as even those were cancelled officially the avaiable stocks was used so even some quite late machines could wear them (but more commonly on 109's than FW's). No official paint diagram is found for D9 so far, but for there is one for Ta 152 from nov. 1944 and colors listed there are indeed "farbton 81/82/76" So in a nutshell, colors to use for accurate late-war scheme: RLM 76 (two versions, official light blue/grey and green/yellow late variant) RLM 81 (three versions as mentioned above posts) RLM 82 (also at least three versions known but all are clearly green unlike rlm81, main difference being brightness of the color)

On few available graphs where relation between thrust forces at SL and altitude is given, it can be seen that differential is not constant. Of course I understand this 7% is unification but just to be mentioned. Increase is more rapid between 0 and 10km because function p f(H) is such as well, on higher altitudes atmosphere pressure values are more equalized. And this 7% is fine but it is important to place each individual motor on it's place in this graph. As we can see, there are motors with expansion under 1 bar and also over one 1 bar This is one more nice motor in 380mm, well known Kh-29 Just from curiosity, what could be pressure at nozzle exit on this motor. This equatation is very useful, with chamber pressure and ratio of areas (Exit vs throat) ''pe'' will show it's value. To get ''pk'' and ''A'' there should be some work but without work nothing can be done...(F tot 23300 kg, t=4,5s, mg=110kg, probably VIK-2, Isp 225s (40:1), Ief=207 T=2820K, k=1,2, dk=80mm, de=210mm, pk=6,5MPa, A=7 ... etc ... etc ... -> pe=0,13 Mpa So it can be said, this motor, this rocket, is with thrust of 50800 N at SL and at 5km it could be 53430 N or +5%, at 10km 54380 N or +7% etc

My thoughts exactly. So i dont try to linger around the exact shades of a certain color too much. If i know that pattern is RLM 82, then thats fine. Im gonna add variations to it. Even on the same plane cause spare parts. Whats more critical is the overall colorscheme and what colors have been used. Eg with the mimetall doras one does get tons of info and interpretations about how the front section of the wing underside was painted. RLM 75, 66, 81 or RLM 83 (dark green? ). But even the top side of the wings is debated. The color charts of eduard basically imply that mimetall doras were painted on RLM 75 with RLM 81 applied as breakup pattern. With a splotch of RLM 83 on the tail section. Others say thats only on the fuselage and wings were painted RLM 83 and 76. Most accurate would be any kind of "official" docs from back in the day on how parts were to be cammed. Ive not come across these yet. So the whole discussion is basically a bottomles pit imho. However, havin read about jg26 a bit and on LW procedures it renderes quiet a vast array of color pattern. Merely dependin on production date, how often it was flown, or if incorporated from another jg. Eg doras of the stab were more pristine in condition since they had to fly less than the lower ranks and were generally painted in rlm 82 83 and whole bottom painted 75. Indicates older production runs. Dortemanns dora was a jg 54 machine that was incorporated into IV./jg26 and basically all stabs doras wore same colors as his. Götzs dora bein an anomaly but it basically started in the usual mimetall pattern before it was camed up. Lower ranks dora were patched up frankenwulfs. Most appealing to the modellers eye as there so much to see and go hog wild. Guess this is the JaPo book.

Yeah, i always keep 'em on as part of the challenge.

prccowboy, Thank you for the wonderful high quality model of the O-2A Skymaster. Detail is super and it flys great. I agree with Geschirre that the radios in the back are a nice touch. Thanks again for all your work. RustyGunner

ED dont adversiting F-15E on your "2022 and Beyond" video as a "RAZBAM F-15E comming on 2022" as dont adversiting ED Ka-50-3, AH-64D, WW2 Marianas, Mig-29A, HB A-6 or Ugra Media Normandy 2.0 , only "Coming to DCS on a future".... as F-4E and the C-130 module or Afganistan map on poscredits images... RAZBAM has none make any adversiting of a "2022 release", meanwhile Heatblur put a video about a 2022 release of your F-4E, and surely need to delayed to 2023. Surelly on "2023 and Beyond" more coming about.... About F-15E Super "basic project".....Someone has missing the continue pics, interviews, youtuve videos, twiter post, system review, videos by builder creators and more about RAZBAM F-15E on the last years, weeks and days. Recomend check the "Unofficial roadmap" post... when I and others, post all info about ED and 3rd party projets. ED never put a limit date on any 3rd party about your projects from 10 years ago when ED open DCS to 3rd parties. That is not a "release project run" where someone need build a project on a limited time (remember the problem by ED on the early F-16C release by the comunity rush to "release now")... all ED / 3rd parties projects take your time and release when is done (remember the continuous "where are my F/A-18C, F-16C, Hind, Apache", "I fly that modules when retired" by a someone on the comunity.

The video was called 2022 and Beyond, that should answer all your concerns. Thanks.

Uhh, I think that picture is a joke haha

The oscar deuce is now available. link is in the first post. Enjoy the holidays

RAZBAM F-15E developing

F-111 for Cold War.

From Polychop Discord

I thought I'd create a separate thread so it doesn't get lost among other subjects. You will need to run Simappro to set it up and activate. Once you activate you can close it as the detent values get written to the device. You also need multiple entries if you fly more than one aircraft. When you change aircraft you will have to open Simappro and change activations. IMPORTANT - Ensure you calibrate the throttle and the afterburner prior to doing this.. * Throttle is calibrated from idle through the A/B detent to max * Afterburner is calibrated from idle to the A/B detent * Also ensure that Afterburner detent is off in DCS settings 1. Move throttle until AB deploys - in game (enter DCS, do a quick flight, sit behind the A/C in external view (or check in cockpit) and move your throttle until the A/B lights? Alt tab out and do the maths below) 2. In Simappro write down the value of RX and RY (They should be pretty close to the same) 3. Calculate 1-(Rx / 65535) .....you can use Ry if you like 4. Click "Set Afterburner Ratio" 5. "Add" the aircraft, eg F-18 or F-16 (call them what you like) and set the percentage to the number from 3. 6. Hit "Activate"

All of Baltics and Nordics. It would be big 4.4 million km2.

Oh man, after watching the latest NAV/FLIR video from RAZBAM, the F-15E is definitely going to be my Space Shuttle of Death. Lots of cool night vision and MFDs. And with the GBU-28... "beeg badaboom!" I think the rest of the planes in my stable will be neglected for a long while when this thing comes out.

I think anyone that's been apart of this community long enough could make some reasonable extrapolations as to why there is no FF F-15C. Like how much has it been requested just to be shot down? Between the data that makes up systems in the FF -18 -16, and it being practically impossible for a quality Razbam -15E without systems data that would obviously be applicable to the -15C, it's little outrageous something so requested and possible continues to go ignored. It probably has a lot to do with a supposed large single player use of the sim, and the fact various things about A-A AI being very broken throughout. Strike missions are just easier to make even with ground unit AI being broken/limited in it's own ways. A-A is explicitly more exciting in MP, if that is all you reduce the jet to. I guess they lack the imagination for SP content for a single role fighter. Besides the improvements to AI BFM/BVR, they need a mechanism to allow you to do an intercept, redirect and escort AI aircraft without the intent of a shoot down. One of the F-14 missions is basically broken due to the lack of that logic. That also plays into Guard actually being used realistically, in SP or MP. I used to occasionally pull up on enemy Su-25s/A-10s in MP, and give them the option to turn around and go home. In text though. You should be able to radio the enemy. On Guard Radio menu to enemy, with probability of compliance based on range of it's own CAP/escort and/or armament. Smarter use of a dice-roll than just countermeasures. HVAAs need some kind of logic to extend away from a threat, instead of maintaining an orbit just to do last second evasive maneuvers. Besides reducing the ability to pluck them out of the sky at range, it lets your own help you to help them in escorts. A FF Air Superiority fighter can be made to make sense in ways that make the sim better as a whole. Or just keep leaving that money on the table. That said, the E would lose potential sales if the C was on the horizon.

I like the way you think

Thank you so much. That was it. -Not as spectacular, but still!

I really like how our Viper has progressed over the development period and I'm eager to see the upcoming additions to the module, at first Viper looked like an empty shell then after some time the shell started filling up with interesting stuff, but as I scroll through the pages on the MFDs I see lots of stuff still missing and not functional. I know some of the pages there are not accessible for us and that is completely fine. Therefore I wanted to find out what can we get? Test page - Nothing is functional here. BIT1 - ? FCR - ? SMS - ? RSU - ? MFDS - ? RALT - ? TPG - ? FLIR - No, only for Lantrin Pod F-16. TFR - No, only for Lantrin Pod F-16. DTE page MPD - ? COMM - ? INV - ? PROF - ? MSMD - ? CLSD - ? LOAD - ? FCR - ? ELINT - ? IDM - ? LINK 16 - ? NCTR - ? DTE page2 GPS - ? COLR - ? FLCS page? I guess we have all that we can get with the Fire Control Radar. I was listening to a recent podcast, where some former F-16 pilot said that when you start up the plane you get FCR in mode1 which was basic mode, then for mode2 they had to enter a 4 digit password and that mode sounds like something we have in the Viper atm, and mode3 was apparently a wartime mode and they didn't ever get the password for that mode. I'm grateful for all the DED pages that we have to play with now and I'm really enjoying that a lot. Hope we can get some answers on my questions. Thanks.

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2FCQ7YvO1d5t0&data=05%7C01%7C%7C710b9f0946ac4edcca8608dad7d0cfd1%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638059589096195904%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sBR81qLrBYz9F7lkLMDRueI5pSQ7u%2FL%2B84JoNPoU%2F9M%3D&reserved=0

"Res. of cockpit displays" also controls the quality of mirrors in DCS options > system. Check it out.

Yes we don't know the AC config in videos but in DCS the lightest config cannot do it.

Hi, 3rd week into using my VPC MongoosT-50CM3 Base and I noticed an issue related to calibration. My in-cockpit LAT & LONG arrows on the cyclic base do not align with the actual logical values on the Control Indicators in DCS or the VPC Configuration Tool. When I set the cyclic in "perfect centre" according to the config tools mentioned above and enter the simulation, the arrows are off as seen in the screenshot below: When I actually align the cyclic to match the arrows in pit, the value readouts are incorrect in both DCS and VPC: I have recalibrated the CM3 Base using the up-to-date software. I have also reloaded the firmware, reset it to defaults under Windows and finally calibrated with VPC having it as the only plugged-in USB device at the time. Min and Max deflections as well as the centre points have been calculated and entered after the calibration to "clean up" any imperfections. Deadzones and Smoothing have been disabled. I am pretty confident that the cyclic is set up correctly. The misalignment is small (between 1 and 2%) and with 60k points both in X & Y axis it probably doesn't affect flying too much but it's one of those things that could keep me up at night... Has anybody encountered a similar issue? Any ideas on how to resolve it? I'd be grateful for your help. - Belphe

the jag would be awesome.

Would be great to see the animated pilots looking up or down and lean forward or to the side when the player makes those movements. Like in the F14. And i need an optional mustache for the pilots..........oh, and sunglases, like seen in the first promotional video for the Hind.

Apg-66, AAM-3, ASM-2. Interestingly non-slated. Hud is a modified Alpha jet

Well, while this is another video, here is one on the knife edge pass. Seems like it's able to do it

HUD Modes Reticle Night/Day RShift + 8 not cycling also.

Wow, great work @Flappie! Can't wait to get my hands on your mod. Again, if you need help, please tell me. Amitiés à Migow de la part de Zip

Not true. Speed matters, of which the Phantom admittedly has plenty of. In fact, the only thing 3rd gen fighters have that makes them useful today is their speed. However, the avionics overhaul to bring them up to date is far more significant than going from something like the C model to the E. In the end, an updated Phantom would only be good for two things: BVR-only interception and air to ground. Good enough for a nation to keep their old F-4s running, but in DCS, we have more effective platforms for that. I don't think we need a Phantom with Hornet's computers when we have the Hornet. That said, they'd be cool to have as AI aircraft for use in modern scenarios.

Well, it's known by a lot of players, yes. It's been raised many times on the forum, only to be ignored. Then a community mod, while locking a thread, told us all that if we had bugs like this we should report them. This problem in particular has been reported SO many times. It just continues to be ignored.