Leaderboard

OH-58D develop pics.

I have reorganized - see this thread for more information:

I was just thinking how grateful I feel for some of the brilliant work that's completed by some of the modders here. I have nothing like the skill or time to do what they do so I'm very thankful. I don't want to single people out, but some of their mods, skins, documents and similar are a combination of brilliant and incredibly useful. Struck me that maybe we should have something like the following: An award from ED to their favourite modder. Maybe something that personalises their posts, or even some reward "Miles" A way for players to pass over their unused "miles" to their favourite modders as a way to say thank you

There's a lot of hyperbole, histrionics, melodrama & supposition being thrown around in this thread. As such, the legitimacy of any critique that is being levelled at ED or Heatblur is being compromised. Whilst I too am finding the AIM-54C PK is down around the 25-50% mark, there are known issues for this, and each on it's own is a problem but when you experience them in combination it makes the missile appear next to useless 1. Notch susceptibilty - currently the AIM-54 in both variants is easily notched. Now, good luck finding hard data on this to compare, you are just going to have to trust that ED have their guesstimate in the right ball-park. 2. When notched the missile automatically starts a pitch up, placing it's intended target outside of its radar detection cone, and obliterating any oppotunity for the missile to reaquire a target that might only be in the notch fleetingly. This is a guidance issue, therefore it is 100% an ED issue. 3. The AI are too omnipotent with regard to the position of an attacking active radar missile and are able to time a defensive split S or notch too precisely. This is an AI programming issue, therefore it is 100% an ED issue. When all the above are taken into account we see that it's relatively easy for the AIM-54 to get trashed, especilally by fighter sized targets. Heatblur claim that the missile kinematics are as accurate as they have ever been and meet test criteria; their graphs reflect this. And good luck finding data to disprove them. You are obliged to trust their claims. As for Jester issues; I doubt it. In TWS Jester is not manipulating the system - once a Phoenix leaves the rail, the WCS is automatically shaping the scan zone to attempt to maintain lock. Spurious loss of tracks can and will happen - it's an AWG-9 - and these can account for some Phoenixes being trashed. If you are having Jester issues, attempt a repair and see if that helps.

nullnull

We are looking at ways to better support modders, but its for the future. Your ideas are interesting, I will certainly pass them on to the team, but can not promise anything. thank you

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

Hello @VarZat This has been reported internally for analysis. Thank you.

As @DD_Fenrir said, it is not a Phoenix problem, rather DCS that shows all of its flaws the moment your aircraft interacts with… anything really: ATC, JTAC, AWACS, ground units behaviour, radars, RWRs, jamming, datalink, countermeasures, missiles, and the list is still very long: these are all very poor mechanics realism-wise, and Air-to-air combat is simply the worst offender. One day, when these mechanics are overhauled (and I'm sure ED is already moving in this direction), we will see that building SA will come much more difficult and, consequently, missiles will become more lethal. In the meantime, the only way to get a *slightly* more realistic experience is flying Cold War scenarios (but there are no realistic servers around). Then, tweaking the AI to randomly change how it behaves, from an omniseeing entity to something that can get killed without even defending (more realistic than you would expect), or defending without nailing the overexaggerated notch every time. Lastly, Jester is just an interface to the AWG-9. It is not any better than the pilot controlling it (potential bugs aside, of course).

as soon as we are ready to share news about the next patch date I will update the patch status post. For now work continues. thank you

We can't compare with another map, because Sinai map uses different technologies, different number and quality of objects and textures, etc.. Now we are checking and optimizing performance on different hardware configurations and with different graphics settings.

В текущих реалиях проекта процесоры и видяхи на ВР имеют едва ли не большее влияние, чем сами гарнитуры.

a short break, there will be news soon.

Exactly the same thing everyone does with every single one of the modules they own - whatever they want to do with them (obviously within the bounds of what the module allows, which for just about any Phantom is going to be a lot, though the E will have the most potential for the late Cold War and probably best fits DCS as it currently stands by a significant margin).

Что значит "гадить"? У нас на форуме нет разделения темы по VR на подразделы, по этому все вопросы и обсуждения в одной куче, не то что у иноязычноков.

Having checked each and every possible review of 7900 XTX I must say I'm really on the fence right now. The upgrade from 2070S was long time due, but in 2020 and 2021 I didn't want to pay scalper prices for 3080 and 6800XT. Well, guess what, in 2022 you pay MSRP+ which is somewhere around the scalper prices back in the crypto days. Now between 4080 and 7900 XTX it's a difficult choice. AMD reference card design is not the best one. I hate coil while and the memory junction temperatures are on a high side. On the other hand, I can already imagine non-reference designs (when they come) will probably ask a premium over the reference. Out here in Europe, you can find 4080 for around 1500 Eur. If 7900 XTX non-ref will be approaching 1350-1400 that will be a much less compelling argument. Performance wise it's a hit and miss with XTX vs 4080 it seems in pure raster. On average Radeon is somewhat faster, but not much. And you can give team red some credit for lousy drivers upon release. Add the fact that nVidia has been traditionally somewhat better in VR in terms of frame times. My use case is mainly DCS and MSFS which occasional other 'AAA' titles that may or may not work with ray tracing. So RT is not really something of a major importance, but of course it's better to have it then not. So while 7900 XTX looks kinda favourable, price-performance wise, it will all largely depend upon the asking price for the non-reference models. P.S. I'd buy a 4090 in a blink of an eye if it was available in Europe for the advertised equivalent of $1600. But since we land in the land of socialism with crazy high VAT, at Eur 2200+ that is not really an option

Some new pictures from PC discord:

Some more work. Some minor fixes to the pattern here and there. Still tryin to allign the exhaust residue... ED decided to split UVW at the most inconvenient place... the wing fillet.. leaving one to allign pixel dust on 3 adjecant pieces *shakesfist* I guess ill tone it down on the wingroot and filet for the sake of optical integrety.... figured ive exagerated it on these parts anyway since most residue seems to appear on the fuselage sides anyway. Added some mud splatters as test.The bottom fuselage is a UVW seam nightmare aswell... wings,center piece, andrest of fuselage. *shakesfistevenmore* Gonna take a break from the diffuse map and concentrate on the panels and rivets, since i could gather good info and ref. All of the lables are subject to change. Seen enough references, where some particular labels arent present. Atm is just for the sake of them bein "complete".

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

Some work in progress.

Took a break from flying the Anton for a bit. Recently came back to it and holy cow I forgot how beastly this thing is. It isn't great when going out hunting by yourself but it is a monster when flown right and used in support of multiple aircraft. This thing is so much fun. This video is just some of the kills from one night on my warbirds (Wolf Pack US).

2.8.1.34667.1 - 2022 December 22 MiG-21bis Fixed blinking canopy glass during rainy weather. Fixed warning light electrical operation. Adjusted Cockpit 3D file and Livery folder names. NOTE: Users with custom liveries will need to move them to the new location …\Mods\aircraft\MiG-21bis\Liveries\Cockpit_MiG-21bis

In the latest AH-64D update, a true image tracker was announced. I'm wondering when we will see this implementation be copied to F-16 (even on basic level) Not asking for something like auto-tracker (which works differently in F-16) but true implementation of contrast tracking. Currently both TGP and MAV are locking to nearest object which are in view. After TMS up, the view snaps to closest object in the view, or in case one is not available, TGP lock in point tracking to ground coordinates (sticks to them like a glue even without lasing and range finding) and refuse to lock in case of Mavericks. This is not how this actually works in reality. In reality a true contrast tracker (similar to how it will be implemented in AH-64D) is required to track a point or hot spot in thermal view. The drawbacks from current solution are quite obvious like: - tracking moving targets even they are occluded by building or terrain (without switching to INS mode) - occlusion by plane fuselage or terrain does not cause to lose a track - mavericks that lock up to something which is not visible on video feed (like cold objects in IR mode which does not produce any contrast) - artificial limits to Maverick range (~ 8 miles) to simulate some existing limitations that are actually related to range but not directly (like pixel count of the sensor and sensitivity) while at the same time: - locking to hot targets through the clouds and fog and keeping the tack even they are fully occluded by them - fog and clouds does not influence on tracking precision Basically all of this came from fact TGB and MAV are tacking game object (internal logic of a game), and not contrast of an image.

The CPU thermally throttles above 77°C which reduces the clock speeds. Less voltage = less heat = consistently high clock speeds. Because it's not overclocking you don't need the extra voltage to help the silicone run at the higher frequencies. A lot of modern hardware has the voltages set artificially high to ensure maximum stability across the massive range of system configurations they're likely to be in. Basically by undervolting you're finding the lower limits that still retain stability with your machine; to some extents the silicone lottery still exists.

7900XTX VR performance, vs 4090 and 4080, with 3080Ti and 6900 in for a summary. https://babeltechreviews.com/hellhound-rx-7900-xtx-vs-rtx-4080-50-games-vr/5/

Or it just means that we can adjust one and not the other.

I'd watch Tom's vid I posted before you do that - I'm now reconsidering. It sounds like there could be a hardware flaw - and you can't fix hardware flaws with drivers.

Any feedback for this? Regards

To second (third?) what rob10 and zildac said, the WarBRD base *seems* like it should be wobbly with the Warthog stick, and it does wobble--but only when I'm not actually flying with it. It's the weirdest thing. It seems like it should be a problem, but I've literally never noticed it while flying.

Since there is a "thank you ED" thread, let me thank to ED for helicopter flight model and force feedback support. I realized that i couldn't enjoy helicopter flights without force trim, force feedback and proper flight model while trying to play another flight sim. And I realized that I can't thank enough.

I looked at the link. I found one post, after much digging that had the F15 E flight manual. It was spam links to... well, I didn't find a F15E manual. I've found one from some company in new Zealand, but it's pay ware. (I found it elsewhere) so if anyone has a valid link to an F15E manual, that doesn't lead to pornography, that'd be great.

Now that we are likely getting a Su-17M4 or Su-22M4 from one dev or another, my next greatest unannounced aircraft is MiG-27K indeed. Very much so at that! Funky optical+laser Soviet targeting system in a full fidelity fixed wing red bird, which would still be a different thing from what Fitter brings on the table. Besides... sorry A-10 but... Nuffin' quite sez WAAAAAAAGGGHHH like A LOT OF DAKKA in a plane that actually goes FASTAH!

I was re-watching some a F-14 mock dogfight video and I noticed the DLZ indicator on the HUD being a lot more fluid and realistic regarding maximum and minimum range than the one we have in DCS. Currently even if you have a rate of closure of +200 knots with an AIM-9M against a cold target, you will still get a max range queue of ~6.5 nm. If you compare it to what's seen in the video, you can see that the DLZ moves a lot more and is less optimistic for both SWs and SPs. Also it appears that the Sparrow launch zone/target range doesn't drop down to a lower range scale (i.e. from 20 to 10) even when the target's range is within 10 nm in the video. DLZTest.trk

A much more immersive and active environment, less of that bland sandbox. A more comprehensive ATC that also interacts with AI traffic. "Pilot legs": the ability to walk and drive around at will, to get into and out of aircraft and vehicles Briefing rooms with working equipment (white board, projector....), ready rooms, and the ability to move from those out onto the flight line, perform a walkaround, enter the aircraft and take off. Interactive ground crew, arming/dearming areas. Real time weather, gusting winds, and better environmental effects: water that forms puddles and spray, snow that builds a cover over time, dust, sand, cut grass More realistic AAR, where the drogue for example behaves like a real physical object (flops around, and probe needs to be "pushed" in) and probe/ drogue can be damaged/ripped off Immersive (!) dynamic campaigns (or story-driven semi-dynamic/ branching campaigns), as opposed to a mere "mission generator". IADS More realistically behaving AI (both air and ground units): not superhuman with perfect SA and aimbot cheats, but not braindead either; and arrange respective skills according to platform (a ZSU should be a better AAA platform than a BMP!!!!!!!). Also give the AI some self-preservation instincts (ability to know when to bug out, and maybe even getting "scared"), and skill levels according to the general training standards of the nations they represent.

Maybe this is helpful:

Izzy is my co-pilot. She keeps me from tripping over stuff when it's dark in here

Oil radiator got its work done today

It's a good point, and it is more "wobbly" than the TM base for example, however this has never been an issue for me personally. I did try the heavier springs, but they were way too much for me. I only really got AAR down once I had the WarBRD base.

Ok, I'll be the one to point at the pink elephant in the corner In times where one needs an additional mortgage in order to purchase a GPU: My no.1 wish for DCS: Performance improvements

@_BringTheReign_ I am rubbing my lucky rabbit foot, too.

Thanks, I just learned about the target range dashes after hundreds of hours in the Tomcat, lol

Yes, good list. On top of that, I'd love DTC functionality. This is my biggest one, though: Considering the C-130 is coming and some of the helicopters that are in DCS now (and those to come), adding search and rescue gameplay would bring a dimension to DCS that would make it pretty compelling, imo. I feel like the pieces are already in place for that to be amazing, at least in multiplayer. I know there are mods for it, but I'm talking solid functionality and gameplay. Oh, and the CH-53.

Side-note: rig on carpeted floor with a dog running around… BTW, congrads to the G2.

A fix is in the works.

Not to be disagreeable, but "in real life tanks are NEVER jettisoned. EVER." isn't true. In Desert Storm, tanks were regularly jettisoned, particularly by F-15 drivers as they were closing on bandits and engaging was looking imminent.

I have to try the "up flaps and it'll track straight after touchdown" thing. It does track straight, if you land near perfectly, until it slows down. I really wouldn't know ofc but the P-47 "inertia" while taxiing "feels" more real. I can taxi the Spitfire but it seems more painful than it "should be".