Leaderboard

Wait for it!!!! crypto.mp4

NOTE: The "unused switch" is another name for the "MTT Promote" switch. In this DCS: AH-64D video, we’ll look at the next, big new feature coming to the AH-64D: the Image Auto-Track, IAT; and its Multi-Target Tracker sub-mode, or MTT. Earlier, tracking a moving target through the TADS would be done with the Linear Motion Compensator, or LMC. However, using LMC effectively can take a lot of practice, and it can be quite difficult to use if you do not have a controller with a good mini stick. IAT will make target tracking super-easy and can be used with either the FLIR or Day TV cameras. Because IAT can only be used from the TADS, we’re in the CP/G seat using the TEDAC. Controls that we’ll use are the Manual Tracker and MTT track promote switch on the Right Handgrip and the Image Auto-Tracker (IAT) switch on the Left Handgrip. The Multi-Target Tracker is a sub-mode of the Image Auto Track, in that it allows you to maintain an image auto track on more than one target at a time. There are two types of MTT tracks: a primary track and up to two secondary tracks. Let’s first talk about the primary track. To designate a target as the Primary Target Track for MTT, simply use the Manual Tracker to place the TADS line of sight (LOS) reticle over a target (stationary or moving) and press the IAT switch up. Once tracking, the TADS LOS reticle and the IAT tracker gates will center on the target and the TADS LOS will follow it unless the line of sight is broken. When line-of-sight is broken, the IAT will switch from image auto tracking to inertial tracking, which will be seen by the IAT gates changing to four solid boxes. If the line of sight is broken for an extended period, the inertial tracking gates will change to low-confidence gates with each of the four boxes segmented into smaller boxes. When used in conjunction with LMC, this can be effective in maintaining the TADS on a target with intermittent obstructions within the line of sight, such as buildings in an urban area. If we slew the LOS reticle off the primary target, note that the IAT gates becomes thinner. To bring the LOS reticle back to the primary target, you can press aft on the IAT switch to the OFS, or Offset, position. Note that a small dot within the IAT tracking gates displays the precise aiming location that the TADS will slew back to when the Offset switch position is used. If you wish to change this aiming centroid within the IAT tracking gates, simply place the TADS LOS reticle at the desired location and press the IAT switch up. The aiming dot will update to the new centroid location, but this can only be done within the boundaries of the IAT track gates. The TADS will always try to maintain the primary track within the FOV of the sensor that it is maintaining the auto track. This means that if the target were to reach the edge of the TADS FOV, the TADS will begin to follow the target so the primary track can be maintained. However, if I were to initiate a track in FLIR Narrow FOV, but then switch to DTV, the TADS is now at a higher magnification, and the target is outside the FOV of the DTV. Note that the primary target, track 1, is clamped to the side of the TADS nearest the target with a solid tracking bar and a single bracket indicating that it is the primary track. To drop the track, press aft on the IAT switch to the Offset position any time the LOS reticle is within the boundaries of the primary track’s IAT gates, which is indicated by the gates themselves being bolded. As you can see, this can be a very helpful tool for engaging a single target on the move. Where MTT can become an even more powerful tool is the ability to create two secondary targets in addition to the primary target. With a primary track created, I can manually slew the LOS reticle over a different target and press forward on the IAT switch to designate it as the new primary target, track 2, and the previous primary target, track 1, becomes a secondary target. A secondary target will have a flag attached to it with the track number. It will be bold if the LOS reticle is over it, dashed if there is no LOS and using inertial tracking, or dotted if in a low confidence track. Just like a primary track, secondary tracks can also have inertial bars when outside the TADS field of view. However, unlike the primary track, the TADS will not attempt to maintain the secondary tracks within the TADS FOV and may slew the TADS to maintain the primary track at the expense of dropping any secondary tracks. In the top right of the TADS will be the total number of tracks. If I select OFS from the IAT switch, I can delete the current primary track and set the most recently created secondary track back as the primary track. Repeated Offset commands can clear out all track files, or I can hold the IAT switch to the Offset position for greater than 0.5 seconds to delete all tracks immediately, without needing to slew back to each target one at a time. To cycle the primary target between tracks, you can press Spare Switch forward and Spare Switch aft on the Right Handgrip.

RAZBAM F-15E

If it doesn't show up this year you can always blame Putin.

It would be very nice with a fix for this issue. When flying in a high threat environment, even when in both Priority and Target Separate mode like Furiz is in the original post, you often can't see what's actually nailing or spiking you. It would be less of an issue if we had the PRF Handoff where you can audibly hear which emitter is locking you, but at the moment the RWR doesn't really help much if you've got multiple emitters on the same bearing.

Hey! Here's the first version of my Caucasus raster chart mod: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AmalAqGbEduugvh54thylKRVLfeyiw?e=r6DdgT Download zip. Unzip into "/DCS World/" or "/DCS World OpenBeta/" (core game files). Accept overwrite. Enjoy. Raster charts are seen in the mission editor, in the kneeboard and in your aircraft MFDs/moving map system.

To be clear. No release of F-15E this year https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/zg0611/no_f15e_release_in_2022_razbam

This would be the perfect skin for them - fitting tailcode and stuff...

There is very little the -D can’t do better than a -B apart from pure airframe and engine limitations. The AN/APG-71 wasn’t an upgrade for the AN/AWG-9, it was a completely new radar. Basically everything in it outclassed the AWG-9, including doppler filters. The only valid way of saying it upgraded the AWG-9 would be because it replaced the radar part of it as the AWG-9 was more than the radar. But it was more or less a completely new radar.

Oh yes!

I doubt that the manual would be ready before the module, but you can study the manual of the real thing in the meantime .. not sure if I can place a link here, but search for "F-15E" on this website and you sure can find it: http://aviationarchives.blogspot.com/

Well color me irrational, but I am really happy with my purchase. Heck, over the years I have built 3 SLI rigs and DCS was one of the main reasons, lol! A mans gotta do what a mans gotta do!

Why was my post with the anniversary Eagles being deleted? I'd love to see them...

Sagte jemand Image Auto Track?

It has already been explained some/many of the things you're requesting ARE in the game. It has also been explained it's a game, and we mostly have realistic expectations. It's also been stated by you you believe these other games simulate everything better, which with the exception of MSFS' weather effects (which I feel safe in saying are developed to a higher level, at least at present), range from ''dubious'' to ''laughable''. Yes, we know, you think you're very hardcore. You've said that several times. That's got nothing to do with anything, though, so... good to see you are sufficiently limber to pat yourself on the back like that!

Ah, sieh an, muss ich mir für die Zukunft merken: Bei der Hornet ist nicht der GZD das Problem, sondern das Interface direkt aus der Hölle... Aus ziemlich unerfindlichen Gründen schickt der JTAC ein 8-Digit-Grid, das die Hornet gar nicht verarbeiten kann. Die Hornet braucht entweder ein 6-Digit-Grid (Standard) oder ein 10-Digit-Grid (PRECISE geboxed). Ist PRECISE geboxed und gibt man ein 8-Digit-Grid ein, werden die zwei fehlenden Stellen von links mit Nullen aufgefüllt. Das ist so unglaublich, wirklich komplett unfassbar dämlich, dass ich vermute, DCS modelliert es korrekt und der Fehler kommt von Boeing. Ich kann nur jedem Spieler moderner westlicher Muster in DCS empfehlen, sich mit MGRS zu beschäftigen. Eigentlich ist das System recht simpel - wenn man es einmal verstanden hat. Videoempfehlung kommt unten. Aber jetzt zur "schnellen" Lösung: Du musst das 8-Digit-Grid vom JTAC in entweder ein 6-Digit-Grid (Standard) oder ein 10-Digit-Grid (PRECISE geboxed) umwandeln. Als Basis nehmen wir mal das Grid aus dieser Mission: GG 31734298. Als erstes trennen wir das 8-stellige Grid genau in der Mitte auf: GG 3173 4298 Die ersten 4 Stellen sind das Easting, die hinteren 4 Stellen sind das Northing (ran an den Baum, rauf auf den Baum). ---------- Um daraus ein 6-Digit-Grid zu machen, entfernen wir beim Easting und beim Northing jeweils die letzte Stelle: GG 3173 4298 => GG 317 429 Und nun fügen wir das Northing und Easting wieder zusammen: GG 317429 - fertig ---------- Um aus dem 8-Digit-Grid ein 10-Digit-Grid zu machen (wenn also PRECISE im HSI DATA Format geboxed ist) füllen wir Easting und Northing jeweils mit einer Null auf: GG 3173 4298 => GG 31730 42980 Und nun fügen wir Easting und Northing wieder zusammen: GG 3173042980 - fertig ---------- Du musst also in diesem Fall immer die Koordinaten wie beschrieben von 8 Stellen entweder auf 6 kürzen oder auf 10 verlängern, weil die Hornet das zumindest aktuell nicht selbst macht. Damit sollte es dann funktionieren. Möglicherweise löst die Hornet das GZD-Problem etwas eleganter, aber in Richtung Hirnrissigkeit würde mich da gar nichts mehr wundern... Klappt das so? Viel Erfolg auf jeden Fall!

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.

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

I'm more excited about the F4 than the F15. I hope that at least one bulletin comes out to get an idea of the state of development of F4.

Many people want the best version of every plane available, and yes it is more capable. The DFCS alone lowers the required skill floor for pilots so the F-14 will become more accessible to some people, same with the Sparrowhawk HUD. There is a reason pilots who only flew the D were called "D Babies" and "HUD Cripples" because it made so many aspects of combat so much easier. The guys who never flew the D speak very much like you do, "you don't need all that." If you are happy with the A/B, great, that's awesome for you, I am too. Some people aren't and want a more modern plane, including many friends of mine. Who are you to poo-poo their wants?

Hey gents, Oliver, who built the cockpit model itself posted that on his own accord and it's of course blurred as our marketing and development update materials come through our and truegrit channels. Don't see it as a slight; Olli did a great job and is very proud of his artwork and involvement as a key member of TrueGrit. Updates to come, promise.

Thanks a lot, it makes for a really nice companion to the flyable OV-10A mod:

With the upcoming Kola Map, I'd really love to see either a Saab Erieye or GlobalEye:

This is fixed internally. The fix should be in the next OB update.

Full set of 10 download link https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3326374/ I have tweaked/updated Missions 9 and 10 to Include JTAC auto-lasing to assist with destroying the SA-19s. A closer FARP option has been added to both missions plus a few other tweaks. Regards to all, 74_Fox M09-FALKLANDS Apaches -9-V2.miz M10-FALKLANDS Apaches -10-V2.miz

Ok guys the crosshair issues is reported. I will leave this open in case anyone else needs help beyond this. Thanks all.

The F-15's air to air focus shouldn't impact its viability DCS. It's pretty much exactly like the F-14 and should have exactly as much appeal. This is besides the fact that the F-15 can carry AG weapons, including LGB's. And air to air fighter is also no less interesting single player than it is in MP. Remember that back when FC3 was the only way to even fly fighters in DCS, the F-15 was no less popular when it came to single player missions. As someone that players SP only, I find AA AI more interesting than ground AI anyway. Air AI is dynamic by nature, while ground forces are basically static unless scripted to be otherwise. As far as E vs C, they don't have to worry about competing with each other any more than the Hornet and Viper do.

I *believe* (can‘t check right now), that a „dead“ event is created when you lose cargo and it subsequently is destroyed. If it‘s not destroyed, I doubt that you get any events. dead for statics is quite reliable.

Het schmiefel, great to hear about your Aunt's experience with the Yak-52, coming from a real pilots perspective it is nice to know we are as close as we can be to real life. Our real Yak-52 pilot has given a lot of time and experience to make it the module it is. GOZR appreciate you may not like how turbulence is done or want more but please keep it constructive. We have more weather improvements coming in time.

Wie alt ist dieses Handbuch denn? Es gab ende April ein Logik-Update, somit wäre es möglich, dass dieses Handbuch falsch ist. Aber wie gesagt, frag mal im Dekka-Forum. Die könnens dir mit Sicherheit beantworten.

These are simple switch logic that use to work fine then got broken after an update. Are they now low on the priority fix list? If so, that would be quite annoying because they weren't there before and now that they are there they might be put on the back burner. Will they be fixed in the next update?

Internal cargo is added mass. If you used setUnitInternalCargo with the empty mass value then the total mass of the aircraft would be emptymass * 2 + weapon + fuel. So don't do that unless you want to make them super heavy. The values within getDesc are static and do not change. To answer your question you gotta keep track of it on your own. The value outright sets the mass, assuming each passenger weighs the same you do something like currentPassangers = currentPassangers + 1 trigger.action.setUnitInternalCargo("heli" , currentPassangers * passangerMass )

That's cool to hear that the F22 is getting these long overdue upgrades. I want to reiterate that the F22 mod is not my mod. It's a mod by Grinnelli Designs that I have made modifications to and added to. Despite my best efforts to make that clear, I still get accused of stealing the F22 mod. In fact, I was recently banned from the F22 Discord for speaking out in my own defense when I was very recently accused yet again, by one of the team members of stealing and repackaging the mod. You may not have meant to suggest it was "my" mod but all of this has made me extra cautious. I still enjoy flying the F22 and will do what I can to maintain compatibility with DCS should something break it. However, with all the drama that surrounds this I don't plan to spend much effort on any significant changes even if they were possible. Considering that I just wanted to share my changes with the community, and have nothing to gain from it, the stress just isn't worth it. Additionally, the F22 mod is based on the F15C avionics. The F15C doesn't have an HMD or Link16 in DCS. I don't know of a way to integrate those features even if all of the F22 mod systems files were open, but they are not. Many of the systems files were encrypted in the original mod.

I updated the title, remember all this is a wish list thread, the map itself is feature complete, would I love to see it expanded one day? Sure who wouldnt, but currently I know of no plans, but wish lists help us decide what things people want to see.

I've had mixed results with doing this with ships. In a small isolated test mission teleporting ships with client spawns seems to work well enough. In a much more complex mission, where perhaps I'm not doing it precisely the same way, clients spawn where the ship was originally at over the water and die. I have not tested this with static objects. I don't even recall exactly what happens when you try spawning a FARP with the exact same values. With units it replaces it entirely, but FARP objects are a bit special so it might not work.

You need to be in point track or area track to slew the pod. also if you are in CCIP bomb mode or have the gun selected, the pod is slaved to the pipper location and cant be moved. if your pod is in A-A mode it cant be slewed either and is slaved to the FCR

No problem, enjoy!

null

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.

Technically the word "compromise" means, that both negotiating sides doesn't reach their goal. In wiki (eng.) "To compromise is to make a deal between different parties where each party gives up part of their demand." In our situation we have two sides: -For us the goal is : "to have most realistic module". -For you a goal is: "to have carrier capable F-4E" So compromise (according to definition) isn't carrier capable F-4E. Compromise is when F-4E became for example a hydroplane. It's not satisfying any of us, but it's a compromise. Either you don't understand the meaning a word "compromise", or you do understand, but you try to manipulate us. In first case you're just silly, in second you're offensive. The choice is yours. You may call a friend or ask public.

I don't see why people get to a level of pessimism where they unironically think it won't come out next year. Pessimistic view earlier this year was that it was going to come out at the very end of December or maybe as late as Feb. Then they announce "Some delays but we're still gunning for 2022." and now it's "Late next year, if not two or three more." I know some, if not most of the comments like that are jokes, but for it to take that long to come out Heatblur would have to be lying through their teeth. And I get it "Where are the pictures???????", I get it, but the policy was laid out clearly from the start. We get the pictures and serious big boy updates when it's about to release - which I'm making the gamble on being no later than Q2 next year, but that's my pessimistic view where I'd be kind of ticked at HB. Q1 I think is more realistic, absolute latest first month of Q2. Anything past Q2 color me genuinely surprised, and wondering if HB had been all that truthful and if they're deserving of my cash without a VERY indepth explanation of what's gone wrong.

Changed: Disabled 3dMigoto Enabled CAS 30% sharpening inside OpenXR NvidiaProfileInspector SGSSAA - Sparse Grid Supersampling 4X - Beautiful but heavy impact Nvidia Control Panel: MFAA 2X (extra visuals at no extra performance when MSAA is on?) Processor scheduling changed to Background Services (https://www.thewindowsclub.com/processor-scheduling-in-windows-7-8) Items tried with no visible advantage: Frame limiter in NVCP and OpenXR-Toolkit - Removes Judder but gives terrible ghosting VSync Adjusting DCS Desktop window size Game Mode ON 60Hz in the headset (eyes can't take it) Items still to try: Undervolting the 4090 Get a 3rd SSD and have OBS record to this SSD. Reducing OpenXR-Toolkit: shaking reduction OpenXR - FSR 80% Clouds Ultra

I know what notching is. A quick look at the tacview shows that the relative angle is around 50 degrees; nowhere near enough to notch the missile. Not to mention this test was performed over water, which effectively prevents notching as of 2.8.

all always coming... remember F/A-18C, F-16C and AH-64D...

again, I will reiterate my offer. If winwing doesnt want to reward you, id be glad to. Sim app Pro made my game stutter like crazy in the past, so that i didnt use it for keeping my devices synced with DCS. Now I can and its great. I'd be glad to help you purchase something if you want to

Personally, I'm a little disheartened at the mood of this thread. Although I do understand where the stance regarding auto-population of these points comes from, the generalizations being made in this thread that ED doesn't take feedback regarding gameplay issues is hyperbole. I understand it is born of frustration, but I don't understand this "us versus them" attitude. I say this as someone that has been a player of DCS for well over a decade, and community interaction to make the product better is something that I think is very important. But when it delves into resigned and sullen threads like this, it's just disappointing. Addressing the topic of this thread, this is being taken seriously and discussed internally. Despite that any solution rarely makes everyone completely happy, we are looking into potential courses of action to address this. Regarding some of the more specific comments in this thread, Target Points (TG) do in fact have threat rings displayed on them, of which the default radius is 3 km, so this is accurate to the real aircraft. The reason being that if you get within 3 km of a heavy armor or mechanized unit on the battlefield, they will no longer need to rely on their attached air defenses to protect them since every tank or IFV will be able to engage your helicopter with their organic weapon systems. Having said that, there is a bug (last time I tested it at least), in that enabling THREATS (R5) also enables the threat rings around Target points and Terrain points. In reality the rings should only be displayed around Terrain points if TRN PT (R3) is enabled and only displayed around Target points if TARGETS (R6) is enabled. So there is a way to display threat rings around air defense Threat points independently of Target points or Terrain points, but it isn't working correctly at the moment. I don't have a timeline on when this will be corrected (priorities vs time/resources and all), but that is how it should work when all is said and done; so you should be able to avoid a cluster of several tightly-packed 3 km rings when you start lasing and storing targets "out there" with the TADS. Resolved in subsequent updates.