Leaderboard

Just to be clear, no missile gets nerfed. Missiles may go through changes, updates and improvements to make them as realistic is possible. The AIM-54 does have some minor tweaking still to be done, but in no means has it been "nerfed" or is it "trash". Heatblur and Eagle Dynamics work together on these issues, its not about pointing the finger at one or the other. We are both focused on making the AIM-54 as real is possible. If you have a bug or an issue, please reported as required. Thanks all.

I have reorganized - see this thread for more information:

А я тут перевёл обучающее видео Вульфпака по применению ракет "Игла" на Ка-50. Вот, если кому интересно:

Before the last update this year....one render for you (but not the last)

I had some requests from some sim pit builders who've commented on my Youtube channel, asking for dimensions and measurements on the F-4 Phantom that I get to help maintain. I have yet to find any dimensional drawings in our Tech Manual library, and I've not been able to source any documentation or drawings online. So this past Saturday I got out a tape measure and a notepad and just started measuring. The ejection seats have been taken out, giving me a better opportunity to get good measurements. Below are measurements from the front cockpit, plus photos for those who want to extrapolate other measurements. The first post will be for the cockpit only. The second post will be measurements from a real Martin Baker Mk 7 ejection seat, U.S. Air Force version. If there is interest in the rear cockpit I will get those measurements too. If there are other measurements or photos that I could get, please ask below. All measurements are in inches. Canopy: Canopy Bow width (inside arch) - 26 1/2" Canopy Bow height - 18" Canopy Rail length - 40" Canopy Rail height to floor (forward edge) - 29 1/2" Canopy Rail height to floor (aft edge) - 35" Instrument Panel Floor to bottom edge of instrument panel - 18" Floor to top edge of glare shield - 39" Aft wall to instrument panel - 43 1/2" (this varies as the aft wall is canted vertically to the rear) Bottom edge of instrument panel to highest upper corner - 15 1/2" Altimeter gauge width - 3 1/2" VSI gauge width - 2 3/8" Round engine gauge diameter - 2" Consoles: Center console width (top edge) - 10 3/4" Master caution and warning panel height (tallest edge) - 7 1/2" Side console width, forward end - 11" Side console width, aft end - 14 1/2" Side console height, forward inboard - 16" Side console height, forward outboard - 18" Side console height, aft inboard - 11 1/4" Side console height, aft outboard - 14" (approximate, was hard to get a good read with this one) Width between left and right console - 22 3/4" Controls: Stick height (floor to top of stick) - 25 1/2" Throttle handle height (in full aft position) - 5 3/4" Throttle handle width, combined (left and right, excluding switches) - 4 3/4" Throttle handle width, single (excludes switches) 2 1/8" Emergency brake pull handle, L x W - 3" x 1/2" Drag Chute handle length - 8 1/2"

Hello everyone. I'm pleased to inform you that the next Open Beta update will include the first set of revisions and updates to the F-16 manual. The manual has increased in size from 318 to 452 pages, and includes a mix of revisions and new content. Below is a screenshot of the most recent entry in the Latest Changes list that illustrates what you can expect in the update. The next edition will also include a greater use of embedded and discrete hyperlinks to facilitate easier navigation. Expandable bookmark entries will be present, however in some cases there may be options to directly click on an entry to take you to the applicable section. For example, if you were to click on the orange box labeled "Data Entry Display (DED)" in the cockpit image above, the manual will proceed to the following page outlining the DED: From this page, you may then click on "CNI", and the manual will proceed to the specific sub-section explaining the DED's CNI page in greater detail. Not all figures will include hyperlinks (in some cases because the sections have not been completed yet), but if you mouse over a word box and your mouse pointer changes to a small hand icon, that will indicate that you may click to go directly to a manual section that explains that item or function in greater detail. Finally, I want to stress that this is just the first set in a series of updates. As you can see in the Latest Changes image above, there is still a ways to go; but the actual progress is further along than what you will see in the next manual version, and work has not stopped since pushing this version for publishing. Thank you to all the virtual Viper pilots out there for your patience. Respectfully, Raptor

I reported a bug here on Nov 1: It has not been replied to by any ED representatives, or marked as "investigating".

The updated DCS F-16C manual is now available on the DCS website on the Downloads>Documentation page. Respectfully, Raptor

I've owned most top end cards from AMD and NVidia for the last 10 years or so. I don't care to start an AMD/NV thread war but the card that has been in my personal gaming (flight/racing) rig has always been an NVidia card. AMD is a giant hype machine pre-launch that rarely delivers. I'm not considering a value proposition here. Where AMD has excelled is in their CPU's. I've had an AMD 3900x and now 5900x and will get a 7900x3D in the new year. They got slightly bumped by intel in the 3900x generation but I have not regretted that CPU purchase much. If I had to purchase a CPU right now it would be the Intel 13900 series, but that CPU was released sort of in the middle of my upgrade cycle which should land on the 7900x3D which I fully expect to beat out the Intel. (If not, I may switch back to intel). I digress. The only time I've enjoyed the AMD cards was in their value per hash in crypto mining which was far superior (580 over 1070ti) when comparing price to performance. Gaming not so much. If every dollar is important in your purchase than I understand the consideration for AMD, but if you are seeking bleeding edge performance to squeeze the most from your rig, AMD just doesn't have the edge.

Oil radiator got its work done today

Ok I figured it out copy View.lua from C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\Config\View paste into your Saved Games folder C:\Users\Youname\Saved Games\DCS\Config\View Then edit: CockpitMouse = true --false CockpitMouseSpeedSlow = 1.0 CockpitMouseSpeedNormal = 10.0 CockpitMouseSpeedFast = 20.0 CockpitKeyboardAccelerationSlow = 5.0 CockpitKeyboardAccelerationNormal = 30.0 CockpitKeyboardAccelerationFast = 80.0 CockpitKeyboardZoomAcceleration = 900.0 DisableSnapViewsSaving = false UseDefaultSnapViews = true CockpitPanStepHor = 45.0 CockpitPanStepVert = 30.0 CockpitNyMove = true Looks like it passes the MP check if you put the altered files in your Saved Games folder

Martin Baker Mk 7, USAF version: Seat Pan width - 21" Seat back to forward most corner - 23" Seat pan width at side pull handle - 21" Seat pan depth (fore to aft) - 25 1/2" Seat pan to top of seat - 42" Bottom of seat to top of seat - 47 1/2 Seat cushion depth (fore to aft) - 18" Main chute bucket width (widest point) - 17" Face curtain handle width - 12 1/2"

Thanks to great artwork from @crazyeddie we have a new liveries package (download link see first post)

Dawn of the 11th day, 20 days remain. Nearly a month after Cobra said the phantom was nearly finished. I can guarantee it's releasing this year, because I'm going on vacation from the 23-30th....

Hey guys, Some time between June 2022 and present day, (probably during the Phoenix Overhaul on Sept 2), the AIM-54 became much more susceptible to notching targets. It used to maintain a course and give itself a chance to re-acquire a pitbull after getting notched. In the current open beta the missile starts a pull up maneuver after the first instance of getting notched almost as if to avoid the target. See below a video demonstrating a before and after: I reported this to HeatBlur but they say it's out of their hands. Can ED please take a look at this? This susceptibility to notching targets is the biggest factor involved in the AIM-54's currently poor PK%, more so than the nerfed adjusted kinematics implemented in the recent overhaul.

I bought my 8kx a little over a year ago and although I love it, I must say that I am very impressed with the HP. I've only had the HP for a few days but from my testing so far, I think I will use it exclusively for my sim driving. The picture is so clear and the distance viewing is quite a bit better than the 8kx. I've read so many complaints regarding the sweet spot of the G2 but I am not seeing any issue there, but I'm certain it is because I can crank the SS as high as I want for all of my driving sims at max quality, yet maintain a solid 90FPS with zero drops. The 8kx is still my go-to for flight sims right now, but the HP does almost make me want to say "FOV who?"..... Sometimes!

Just tried it, looks great ... hadnt have time yet to test its operational capabilities. Great that it has three liveries, easing the job of editing ship formations. For dawn operations it has a few lights, but I wish it had more around its flight deck

Thank you sir. That fixed it. The Bronco and all other mods are working just fine.

hi! @Flappie. Unfortunately I didn't do this very scientifically, but basically I changed the first few (7 or 8 ) settings from 'something, I dont remember, to 'application controlled' including the anisotropic filtering and antialiasing settings. The white lines disappeared in the ME... As asked by @silverdevil I tried to make some screenshots when I came back from Europe this week, but funnily enough, the while lines that were doubling my normal black lines in the ME (flight plans, names, etc...) didn't appear on the screenshots... neither on some Windows native screenshots (Picpick for example).. I couldn't believe it... Then I had this intuition when doing ALT-TAB to go from DCS to external programs: while ALT-TAB was depressed, the white lines disappeared (!!!!!) then I tried changing some nvidia settings and boom, it solved my (very strange) problem!

Different issue, please open a new report for this otherwise none of this will get looked at

prccowboy, may I ask you to finish the TU-214 collection with a small addition - TU-214PU-SBUS - It is an Airborne Command Post of the Russian Chiefs of Staff (or Ministry of Defence - nobody really knows:)) ). Visually it is very similar to the government PU version, but there are some notable differences: - main difference is an additional roundish fairing in the back of the fuselage containing something additional:)) ; - as it belongs to the Ministry of Defence, there is no "Rossiya" lettering on the fuselage; - there are less windows. Russian Government Tu-214PU-SBUS, RA-64529 seen at Astana.… | Flickr

Updated the color, and I think it needed a little more style SunVisor.mp4

@mr rotofly I see you post many screens of aircraft, yet never once have I seen you ever release ANY mod. Pretty pics may be nice, but it is all fluff till we see the goods. My radar is going crazy whenever I see you leave screens like this. Plain and simple, I do not trust you. No offense meant, or intended. Just stating the facts as I see and feel them. There! Another Elephant has been addressed! Have a great day!

Yes. Based on the info you provided, devs have fixed it immediately and will be available in the next update. /s

может быть у Вас какая-то проблема с настройками управления ПН, но возможно причина в другом (см.ниже). ПН у нас сделан в соответствии с документацией. Есть гиростабилизация. Если вертолет висит (имеется ввиду ПН находится на одном и том же месте в вертикальной и горизонтальной плоскостях) , и при этом цель неподвижна - то марка будет стоять на цели "железно". Всё верно! Тоже самое - если вертолет "летит в цель" - тоже марка будет на цели без дополнительных усилий оператора. Однако если цель во время наведения движется относительно СГФ вертолета, или вертолет относительно неподвижной цели смещается (например, на режиме висения перемещается в сторону/по высоте, или в режиме ГП при удержании марки на цели отворачивает от цели), то оператору придется осуществлять удержание линии визирования ПН на цели некоторой "работой" со своей стороны))), а именно - давать угловую скорость для линии визирования, которая при вышеописанных условиях неизбежно будет смещаться относительно цели, не смотря на гиростабилизацию (мы говорим про гиростабилизацию ПН, реализованную в настоящем вертолете Ми-24, а не про гиростабилизацию комплекса танка Т-72, они сильно отличаются по реализации!). Угловая скорость лини визирования ПН относительно СГФ вертолета "задается" Пультом Управления Прибора Наведения (ПУ ПН). Кроме того, она появляется только тогда, когда ПУ НП отклонен на некоторый ненулевой угол от своего походного положения. Чем больше угол, тем больше угловая скорость. И да, с какого-то времени существования модуля DCS: Ми-24П мы добавили в модель 9К113 "признак" минимальной угловой скорости (согласно ТО комплекса). Это значит, что если для удержания марки ПН на цели при движении цели, или движении вертолета относительно цели потребуется угловая скорость ЛВ ПН менее 0.07гр/сек, то оператор этого обеспечить не сможет. Или 0.07гр и более, или ноль. 0.07гр/сек=1.22тыс радиана в секунду. Если цель имеет близкий к указанному значению угловой размер, то оператору придется немного "страдать")).. т.е. осуществлять удержание марки на цели короткими движениями ПУ ПН (туда-сюда). Минимальная скорость ЛВ ПН обусловлена конструкцией гироплатформы, где для начала её прецессии (перемещения от гиростабилизированного положения) требуется создать некоторое минимальное управляющее напряжение, которое не может быть очень близко к нулевому. ПС. про остальные Ваши вопросы нужен целый доклад-отчет)), это на форуме уже там и там поднималось и обсуждалось, может кто-то ответит, что не обсуждалось - обсудим в процессе

First of all, from one vet to another, TYFYS! I've never worked on or around the mighty Phantom, but growing up I read tons of reference material about them. I read that the triple MAV (6 total) loadout wasn't used quite as often because of the drag penalty they created. Is that correct?

I have to admit, this is the only aircraft that I'm *seriously* excited about... If this module gets released, I will commit large sums of money to upgrading everything to get the best game play possible. Rolling in on a target with 24 Mk82's is definitely something I look forward to doing..... Photo credit: VA-176 Intruder on the cat, submitted by LCDR Hank Teommey, USN(ret.)

F's in the chat for @dcsil2pilot he is bringing it home for us. ;_;7

Объединенная коалиция Синие, там есть все вышеуказаное и даже больше

Would be nice to at least have it as an AI unit...I get it they are making it a full module, but would be nice to finally get that little bit offered up when the Tomcat was announced as a backup tanker.

I think a Mig-19S would be much needed first

Ребяты! Тут тема про обсуждение официальных новостей. Заходишь сюда почитать, он планируемом введении анимированной модели сфинктера пилота и её влиянии на геймплей, пусть и с очередным падением ФПС. А тут уже две страницы про джойстики да резисторы!

Add the unit "crew chief" and other ground crews to service static aircraft for immersion. All of them with 3-4 animations. Bring the hangars to life for that SP "eye candy" as you roll to the flightline. Great for single missions or campaigns. Give the crew chief the ability to scream obscenities at you for damaging aircraft.

In this DCS: AH-64D video, we’ll discuss the Performance (PERF) page and how to read the data and plan your flight. Thanks to BradMick for creating this video.

Simply press the "buy as a gift" button in your shopping cart

You can try placing a SPI with AG radar and reposition it by looking at HSD until SPI and emitter more or less align

Yep, crazy awacs is no more

Exactly why it's nice to have a lot of options. You can't please everyone!

For new upgraders, try under undervolting with PBO2 Tuner for possible further performance gain plus temp reduction.

Hello DCS world, I'm sure this has already been a topic before and I know ED is probably being pulled in so many different direction that only Stretch Armstrong can cope but I wanted to make sure this topic doesn't fall by the wayside and add my vote (if it matters). I love DCS and my strongest thanks and gratitude to ED for binging this experience to the gaming world. I'm to old to have any realistic ambitions to becoming a real fighter pilot which is why I'm grateful for DCS being a really good study sim. I enjoy learning about aircraft systems and subsystems, going through real procedures that we can find in the actual NATOPS manuals. Although, I wish the radio communications as a whole were improved to add a deeper emersion into the sim. Usually a pilots gets their altimeter setting before he/she ever leave the parking spot by listening to ATIS. Also being able to choose a runway that you want to use when conditions allow and ATC would give better taxi instructions like "Hold short RWY 28L at Whiskey and contact TWR for departure". Sometimes I have to be across the RWY hold short line before TWR acknowledges me. Also getting and using squawk codes is an essential part of a pilots daily life. I'm not a gaming programmer and I have a lot of respect for those that can do it. I'm sure it's no small task to revamp the core of the game to improve and add additional comm features. but as a wish list item I think its defiantly worth keeping at the forefront of your development plan. There's a great deal of folks that play other sims just to have that particular emersion experience. With respects, thank you for listening. ASH-CAN

Squawk codes would be much more useful if we had a player controlled ATC of some variety.

Seconded, lights are awesome, but they should be stretching out to the horizon. It shouldn't tax performance because aside from Dubai, there's not a whole lot of them between the cities.

Flappie hat heute einen Raster Chart Mod für die Kaukasus-Karte veröffentlicht; der Mod verbessert die MAP-Ansicht im Missionseditor sowie die Moving Map in allen entsprechend ausgestatteten Modulen (A-10C TAD, AH-64D TSD, ...), und das ist ein Unterschied wie Tag und Nacht. Einziger Nachteil: Wenn ich es richtig verstehe, muss der Mod in das DCS-Installationsverzeichnis installiert werden und bricht damit den Integrity Check. Ist also nichts für Spieler, die auf (kompetitiven) MP-Servern unterwegs sind.

Multithreading Development Report To date, DCS has performed most of the computational workload on a single thread (some audio components were moved to a separate thread). This was not a problem in most cases because the Graphics Processor Unit (GPU) did most of the work, and FPS was mostly limited by the performance of the GPU. As DCS evolved, GPUs have become much more powerful whilst the performance of a single CPU core remained practically unchanged. Instead, CPU manufacturers increased the number of cores rather than the clock speed of individual cores. As a consequence, DCS performance has become CPU-limited. In parallel, DCS World has become much more complex with increased reliance on CPU calculations that has exacerbated the problem. To improve efficiency of CPU resources usage, we have reworked the core of our engine. First, at the architectural level, it has been divided into two main threads: graphical and logical. This opens up new possibilities for further thread parallelization of calculations in both the logical and graphical parts of the engine independently. Second, to meet the requirements of scalable multithreading, and the needs of modern graphics APIs, the graphical engine part has been significantly enhanced. In addition, many subsystems have been updated, or written from scratch. Internal testing has begun, and we plan to release the updated DCS graphic engine (EDGE) next year. The initial release of Multithreading support will contain a fully reworked engine including preparation of the graphical frame and the separation of the graphical and logical parts onto two independent threads. It should also be noted that the most significant performance improvements will be regarding larger missions. This will be a welcomed change, especially in multiplayer where unit numbers are typically far higher. VR performance will also see a significant performance improvement in large missions. Stay tuned for upcoming releases. Source: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/newsletters/2b4826e39c84423db49b8789fe2409f3/

My opinion on this VAICOM issue as a SINGLE pilot/player on a retired fixed income; Many thanks to Hollywood for adding such immersion over the years, and additional thanks for the decision to hand it on to others to further expand and support. We all owe a debt of gratitude to him for that. He didn't get rich doing this, do the math on 'Revenue x Licenses'; it was a passion. A possible future of VAICOM product development & support without a license fee, balderdash...continue charging for the product! It takes effort, talent, time and some passion to build/maintain this, TIME is MONEY. For those of you that may complain because you've already bought a license...it was well worth it. Divide that license fee by the number of hours you spent flying with such immersion....do the math; damn well worth it! How many beers, cups of Starbucks, packs of cigs, bags of Tostidos was that. Sorry, but you should be embarrassed by even whining about that small, token license fee. Continuing a license based product ensures a future for it, especially with a larger team and a growing community. Be happy Finally, upgrading to the 2.8 version??? I was considering rolling DCS back to 2.7xxxxxx latest version out of frustration. Then MAXsenna gave me simple instructions to d/l and install new Vaicom DLL. It took a whopping 3 minutes to complete and I was back on the tarmac 'requesting engine start' in my A-10C, F/A-18 and F-16. Thanks again MAXsenna! So please, stop the whining, do the upgrade (doesn't even hurt), praise Hollywood's contribution to our community, and go drop a BOOM or FOX an adversary...be happy.

Les mods T-45C et A-4E-C sont catapultable, je pense que se serais une bonne piste pour pouvoir avoir le Rafale de nouveau catapultable un jour, surtout que l'A-4 est communautaire en plus.

I would like to see reduced WWII AI bombing accuracy so they don't hit their targets 100% of the time, which trashes the realism.

Why does he tell about the workaround at 10 minute mark? This shouldn't be a video, it should be a one line forum post, with the following line: Switch POS/GPS to GPS in the HSI page to get more accurate CCIP. Less yammering, more solutions, please. Reading one line of text takes less than 17 minutes. If the idea was to report the bug, it could've been a track.