Leaderboard

Aaand despite all the feedback posted in this thread for two months, the issue has been pushed to stable today. Are we allowed to be disgruntled now? They didn't even fix the flat shadows, just left the option broken as it is.

Ich denke mal, dass sich die F-100D Super Sabre durchaus gewisser Beliebtheit erfreut und da ich einen interessanten Link gefunden habe und merkte, dass wir hier noch keinen eigenen Thread dazu haben, dachte ich mit, ich mach‘ mal einen auf. https://grinnellidesigns.com/progress/?fbclid=IwAR0yQuvLAkqGVzIwh0Iy7cF_Mvfo5VH1ETkkYiTmTMGow42wx6uYQUEkOQE

Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk

Надеюсь, DCS и в будущем не будет ориентироваться на геймплей перелёта из точки А в точку Б.

More drivable ships coming soon Even with some weapons, thanks to Currenthill

This isn't entirely correct. Turbo Mode will interfere with Motion reprojection, but it is being discussed as "turn it off" anyway in the conversation. Turbo Mode heavily relies on Spatial reprojection (something that is always on), it makes it work a little harder due to extra latency, but it's an essential part of the process. Without it, Turbo Mode would create a wobbly mess. Regarding WMR Motion reprojection, some significant improvements are currently in testing before release, and my tester with DCS claimed "it looks significantly better for me [on a 3080Ti]".

And now it is time to shut the canopy and enjoy the holidays. In the new year the systems' implementations will begin. Stratos Hungary had not had M4 version in operational use but as a fictional skin the livery can be done too... Happy holidays!

i have to say, i was surprised and disappointed by this move to push 2.8 to live given the performance issues caused by shadows, and them not being resolved... it feels like clouds all over again... yes a little bit "miffed" might be in order.

Merry Christmas !

А с "ценителями времени" и любителями спинномозгового геймплея мы быстро докатимся до уровня вартандера. Вам же Экшн подавай, на кой чёрт вам реализм тогда? Зачем вы о нём говорите вообще. Или крестик снимите, или трусы уже наденьте.

Ну если отбросить сложности реализации конкретных моделей летательных аппаратов- получился бы довольно неплохой гемплей. Например физическое снабжение аэродромов. Да и ястребам дополнительная задача по прикрытию или уничтожению. Порог вхождения чуть ниже ( не считая освоения модуля) Но не надо ломать голову над нал очередной замороченной механикой сервера , а просто перевезти груз из п.А в п. Б и сделать общественно полезное дело. С возрастом знаете ли, уже начинает надоедать все эти гладиаторские бои. Война дело молодых.

Maybe the real Phantom was the friends we made along the way!

Rudel on Reddit

BLUF, I would like to see SAM’s better modeled within DCS. I’ll be speaking primarily about the SA-2 but the points I bring up apply to other SAM’s in the game. There are a few things on the in-game SA-2 that are modeled but not function such as the trough antennas on the Fan Song Target Engagement Radar (TER) that allow it to do its own limited search function. These antennas can scan a fixed area at a time or be combined with the rotation of the whole unit to provide 360 degrees of search. Another thing missing on the Fan Song is its optical tracker. This allowed crews to track targets without the use of the 2 parabolic dish antennas mounted on top. Since the missile guidance was accomplished using Command Guidance instead of Beam Riding the target aircraft wouldn’t get a missile launch warning until the beam from the missile uplink antenna also encompassed the aircraft. This is also true for when crews tracked targets using the Radars, the aircraft would be alerted via its RWR (Radar Warning Receiver) that it was being locked onto, but the missile launch alert would not be given until the aircraft was in the same beam as the missile. For a brief explanation of why this happens continue reading this paragraph, if you already have a grasp of it feel free to skip to the next one. On radar's like the Fan Song that use command guidance, there will usually be antennas dedicated to tracking a target and antennas dedicated to missile guidance or, "talking to the missile." Because the radar's goal is to get the missile out in front of the aircraft to pull lead and not waste its limited energy, it will be fired with lead and the narrow beam of energy pointed at it to give it commands during flight will likely not encompass the aircraft until the missile and aircraft are very close (this scenario assumes a side aspect shot). The aircraft will be kept in the beam of a tracking antenna that works with a computer or the operator to tell the uplink how to guide the missile. The optical tracker is seen on most "E" models of the Fan Song radar which is the variant modeled in game, this is evident by the placement of the 3 parabolic dishes as well as the trough antenna's. From what I have read the SA-3's Low Blow radar includes similar trough antennas however it does not utilize them in the same search function, instead they act as receivers. These Trough antennas are fixed in place so they are limited in azimuth and elevation in terms of search capability, however the inclusion of these antennas mean systems like the SA-2 are not completely useless if the search radar is offline. Something to note is the choice of search radar for the SA-2 and SA-3 being the P-15 Flat Face in game. In real life as far as I've read the P-18 Spoon Rest was the intended Search Radar for at least later model SA-2’s such as the “D” model we have in game. It was also used with the SA-3, however the SA-3 also used a later version of the P-15 called the P-15M Squat Eye. Both the Spoon Rest and the Squat Eye include better performance over the Flat Face. Something that I cannot confirm (as I do not know how the guidance is modeled) but suspect to be inaccurate is the flight path taken by missiles using command guidance. Rather than being fired and leading the target they seem to lag behind it or travel directly to it as if they were beam riding. My final point on the SA-2 specifically is the maximum range of the system. The Target Tracking radar is the SNR-75M4 Fan Song E (it could also be the SNR-75M3 Fan Son E I have not been able to distinguish between the two systems based on our in-game model). The variant of SA-2 to use Fan Song E’s was the SA-2D which used the 5Ya23 missile. This missile has a maximum range of 76,000 m or 41.04 NM. The missile in game has a maximum range of 28 miles, which while being a more realistic firing range as it's much closer to the "no escape" range of the missile, is still short of the maximum range. It's important to note that the statistics for the type of missile used in game seem to be relatively accurate, I believe it is just the wrong missile being used for the variant of SA-2 we have. To conclude, I would like to see track radars have expanded functionality to match their real world counterparts, the variant of SAM specified (like SA-2B, SA-2C, SA-2D etc...) and the components and missiles of SAMs used in game synchronized and their specifications brought in line with the appropriate variant. Thank you and Happy Holidays Sources: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Engagement-Fire-Control.html http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-S-75-Volkhov.html Both sources include other links to information

Yep, as a VR User I am pi**** off now! Where is the promised "performance increase"? Where is multithreading? FPS and frametimes are decreasing and decrasing..........with top tier hardware. Really slowly loosing my motivation for DCS

I'm so glad we're getting the old/red UFC. It's unique, and what I picture when I think F15E cockpit. The LCD/green UFC is too generic, and just make it look like a SuperHornet (sort of...) I just hope WinWing like it as much as I do.

Жду лавку как манну небесную! Опасения по затяжке выхода бета версии есть, если вспомнить как долго не выпускали ишачка. Хотя И-16 ни как не влиял на расстановку сил. А вот Лавочкин даст просраться всем, при условии, что все правильно сделают. Огромной удачи в разработке, и терпения при общении с ЕД.

Depending on how technical we want to get, strictly speaking the F-4K/M had the lowest maximum speeds of around Mach 1.9 clean IIRC due to the extra drag of the larger intakes/fuselage and Spey engine limitations. The slatted F-4E was a close second at Mach 2.05 clean. We also have both data and anecdotes for the F-4J and F-4E. The sustained and instantaneous turn rate data from NAVAIR and USAF TO's are all in another thread (https://forum.dcs.world/topic/292414-phantom-vs-xxx/page/3/), so we know that the F-4E with slats, sparrows and 60% fuel sustains turns the same as a light F-4J at ~23% fuel armed with sidewinders and sparrows. We also know that the addition of the extra drag of pylons and sidewinders minimally affects turn rate by interpolation within either manual. At the same clean load and weight, the F-4E has significant instantaneous turn rate advantages per the same manuals. Interpolate within the manuals for different weights and you'll find the slightly heavier F-4E will still outturn the F-4J on the max lift curve. That said, the British Phantoms have a very high T/W ratio (but with more drag) and a slightly lower base empty weight than the F-4E block 48+ makes it a bit ambiguous if it would be more maneuverable or not in a constant G turn. Based on the similar wing loading and the aforementioned F-4J/E comparison, we know the UK Phantoms cannot have a better instantaneous turn rate than the slatted F-4E at the same fuel load. I'll have to sift through the British Phantom manuals when I get back from vacation. Anecdotally, hot rod F-104A pilots with maneuvering flaps mentioned that only the F-4E with slats could outturn them - although they could outmaneuver the draggier F-4E in the vertical. British crews believed the British Phantoms to be the most expensive, worst performing Phantoms built! Might be a bit of an exaggeration lol. The affect of the slats are great and I expect that the lighter F-4F and F-4S would have been the best turning Phantoms ever built.

M5 Bo-105 HKP Tow-1

Dear friends, virtual pilots, thanks for your support, likes and following my project throughout the year! I wish you a merry Christmas.

From Aerge's facebook page. null

I've seen a bit of negativity surrounding the date of release due to the lack of news as well as about the variant, so I wanted to pump some positivity and hype back into the forums. I'm honestly pretty pumped for the F-4E and it's pushed me into the Big, Scary World of DCS and the world of No Mouse-Aiming(tm) and No Keyboard Control(c. 2008, Eagle Dynamics). Dear Heatblur, Thanks for putting out the F-4E! This module's been a motivating factor to get into DCS and I'm pleased as punch that you guys are making it. Thanks for putting out what is sure to be one sick-ass ride! The F-4E's been my favorite Phantom variant and probably by far the one that's the best as a multirole and one of the best for the air-to-air arena, equipped with TISEO, targeting pods, CAA, AIM-7s, AIM-9s and all the bells and whistles one could hope for. Back when I was a kid, the F-4 Phantom was one of my favorites- and I hope that this new module makes this plane a new favorite for a bunch of others too! I'm looking forwards to flying the most maneuverable, best-outfitted Phantom variant ever produced, and possibly the forerunner to the entire multi-role integrated sensors/weapons platform philosophy that we see in modern US Aircraft. The upgrade variants touted has got me pretty hyped! Overall, it looks like we're going to get pretty much the definitive F-4 Phantom- more so, I'd argue, than the USN variants that focused more on being purely interceptors and never managed the sheer level of upgrading and technological integration that the USAF did on their late-model E aircraft. I'm hyped as hell to use the AGM-65s on their first ever deployable platform, as well as using its air to air abilities and maybe experiencing the TISEO for myself. Sure, it's not perfect- The Mavs that we'll get will have a tendency to do the "Maverick Dance", and so will the walleyes and HOBOS- and the Pave Spike sure as hell isn't the best pod. CAA is nice to have but it sure as heck ain't pulse doppler, and not having HMCS like F-4S and F-4J is gonna be a be a bit of a drag- But damn you sir, I am an F-4E Sim Pilot and I shall be so till the day I die! You ain't s**t without Slats and a Gun! Godspeed, (Future) Spook Pilots!

Chuck's Guide to the AH-64D is finally available! *** Link: https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/ah-64d/ *** I am a few months behind schedule and I apologize to all of you for that. This project was a huge undertaking, and I still have trouble wrapping my head around the fact that I started working on it back in March of this year... 9 months ago. As they say in the business, I was stuck in scope creep hell for a while. The Apache is one of the most complex modules in DCS, but I do not think it is prohibitively difficult to learn. The page count (770) might seem daunting at first, but keep in mind that the operation of the AH-64 is overall not that complicated once you understand the basics. It's a machine of war with modern capabilities that can do many, many things in all sorts of environments. As some of you may know, the Mudspike website is shutting down. With the help of a kind and generous soul, I have found a new home at https://chucksguides.com/, which is where you will find the latest versions of my guides. The next few weeks will be a kind of "test run" to work out the kinks and see what works (or not) with the website. Expect some changes/improvements down the line, but I believe what we have now is functional enough to be useful to the community. Happy reading and Merry Christmas to all of you! Chuck

Fixed internally coming to a future patch. Dont tempt me I see LODs for the MIG-29's in the shape folder, am I missing something here?

That's not a good reason to dumb down the simulation. Good thing neither HB nor ED goes this way.

Tomorrow I am off to a tropical island for New Year.. I hope everyone has a wonderful and safe New Years

Yeah the IR missile stuff aside from the 9B needs to get fixed/updated. As well as the radar. Hopefully both come with the EE.

These are just what I've been waiting for. Thank you!

Об этом в том числе и речь, ибо в текущем виде карт тут "затык друг о друга" - без модулей "дальнолётов" нет необходимости в "связывании" различных карт, а без карт нет смысла вводить дальнолёты. Вот, может, стоит как раз таки начать двигаться в сторону натягивания карт на общий глобус, что придало бы смысл существования и транспортников и пассажировозов и дальников. Больше возможностей - больше модулей - больше доход. проблема в том, что сторона "скорострелов" сильно против возможности расширения рутинной составляющей., хотя их и сейчас никто не заставляет проходить все процедуры, а для особо спешащих даже упрощенные режимы есть

А тихо жду динамическую кампанию. Хотя бы как в Falcon 4.0.

I understand the purpose of benchmarks, but I notice that most (all?) are testing with FC3 aircraft (Su-27, A-10A, etc), which have much lower detail in Cockpit 3D and far lower res textures. Same thing for the map, Caucasus is simpler and much better in performance than pretty much any other DLC map. I'd say to try that with higher-detail modules, such as an F-14A/B Tomcat, F-16C Viper, AH-64 Apache (among others) and in, say, Syria or The Channel maps, to get a better representation of the real capability of the GPU in test.

Практика показывает что без должного снабжения боевая составляющая довольно быстро перестает быть боевой. Транспортная авиация очень даже была бы не лишней. Постоянно мелькающий в Хотелках Ан-26 как бы намекает .

Боже упаси что-то советовать извращенцам. Каждый играет, как он может. Главное, что DCS на данный момент является симулятором, где боевой составляющей уделено значительное внимание.

@simo-dj If you use this trigger setting you will automatically move to the gunners seat in SP. I hope this helps. Cheers.

Hi, yes it will be added. Inviato dal mio ASUS_I005D utilizzando Tapatalk

Просто интересно-а зачем объединять карты? Процент юзеров которые решат полететь от Кавказа до Сирии настолько мал, что это просто экономически нецелесообразно, примерно такой же процент требует дальней авиации, (всякие там ТУ-160, ИЛы..попробуй найти хотя бы второго пилота в апач тот же, а тут целый экипаж нужен) ну полетают два с половиной человека в это и все-забросят. ИМХО конечно.

Да, норм. Только, наверное, лучше подержанную брать за примерно 50-60к, есть практически нулёвые карты на Авито. Новая стоит почти как 4080, и тогда из этих двух уж лучше 4080 брать, т.к. в большинстве случаев она быстрее будет работать, 16 гигов закончатся только в тяжёлых сценариях, когда и проц обычно заканчивается и всё равно с репроекцией летать. С другой стороны, 4080 брать по мне как преступление против человечества - я ее новую с моральной точки зрения не рассматриваю, Nvidia совсем ох**ли Себестоимость карты 350 баксов, кристалл просто огрызок, а они ее за >1100 толкают. И ведь берут, блин.. цирк просто

Thank you !!!

I try to keep it as simple as possible to make something out of it.... tho I have a terrible flew and my head feels like 2m wide Any service on a network needs one or more ports and a port can only be used by one service. DCS uses several ports with multiple protocols, 10308 tcp & udp for gameplay, 10309 tcp & udp voice. It also uses other ports but those do not need to be opened to the public network for various reasons. 5222 XMP is outbound only, same for 80 & 443, all tcp. You do not need and actually should not open those incoming ports at all. You may want to open the WebGUI to public but I think that is not such a good idea, use VPN instead and allow only local WebGUI access. What is a DMZ or Demilitarized Zone: It means that any Machine you put in there is NOT protected by the Firewall but directly accessible on all 65535 Ports by anyone from the public net. Not a good idea in 99% of scenarios. Strictly only allow ports and protocols inbound that you REALLY need for: anonymous/world/POSSIBLE_BAD_GUY connections. examples: Mail Server : 25 or 465 or 587, the 3 relevant Mail ports, all tcp Web Server: 443 nothing else only 1 https, tcp DCS Server 10308 tcp & udp simualtion service 10309 tcp&udp voice service When you open those ports, they bypass the firewall and only a unknown to me firewall that could sense the DCS net-protocol in its Application Proxy could maybe control DCS netstreams. Only a handfull of games, mostly web based games, are pre-included in high end firewalls with such filters. I havent seen DCS among them in the list. Use well protected Remote Services only. Teamviewer ( might need a license ) or VPN + RDP.

We are 2nd rate citizens...

Happy Holidays Everyone, Progress on the new App is progressing. The core is finished and most of the UI Art is done as well, pending my bad habit of wanting to re-do things to get the best look possible. There is still a good amount of sub-function code to be written and debugged, especially thread syncing between primary and sub functions as well as between primary functions. The App itself is about 85% functional, as stated, with some sub-function code to be written, synced and tested. The only setback so far has been to outside parameters. A few weeks ago, I fractured my left hand, and possibly tore ligaments (MRI Pending). My left hand and lower arm are in a cast, and I am unable to type with it at the present time. That being said, the code work is being done one handed, Just a little slower. Once the App features are finalized and the app is in internal testing, I will be releasing detailed information, and media. The Goal is still Q1 2023, and there's no reason that goal can't be met. Alas, I do not leave you with nothing, being the holidays and all, I leave you with the image below of the new UI Home screen (still WIP, and relevent info redacted of course).

Better looking, better working, taking less fps version - 3.0 in short.

RAZBAM F-15E

From Polychop discord, new OH-58D image

Magnitude 3 and his Corsair new shots. more:

The MiG-15 and F-86 are pretty much forgotten modules. Watch: a mod will come here, tell me I've no idea what I'm talking about in a snarky manner, yet it's been YEARS since this was discovered and has yet to be addressed. F-86 is not getting its gun updated. It's why I'm not going to be buying anymore of the WWII modules coming out from ED.