Leaderboard

I used the Hornet ready on the ramp instant action mission comparing both the latest DCS 2.7 and 2.8.1 which was uploaded to "stable" branch yesterday. Using clean DCS "saved games" folder, "high" graphics preset, just changing the Terrain Objects Shadows option. So it's the same track, the same preset and the same conditions in both cases. The tests are on a PC with Ryzen 5800X3D, RTX4090 and 64GB ram, in this scenario the game is CPU limited all the time. The results, according to the built-in stats are: Version Objects Shadows FPS Objects Triangles 2.7.18 Default 139 1511 1,5 milion 2.7.18 Flat 130 2689 2.8 milion 2.7.18 Off (doesn't work) - - - 2.8.1 Default 131 1700 2,5 milion 2.8.1 Flat 111 3880 6,4 milion 2.8.1 Off 133 3880 6,4 milion Several issues are clearly visible: 1. Even with terrain shadows set to off, the game is preparing all the shadow related geometry like it would with Flat shadows. Which is A LOT, especially for something that is never displayed on the screen. It may be related to the fact, that this option still creates shadows in 2.7 even when OFF, and it might not have been correctly disabled in 2.8. 2. Flat shadows generate a lot more geometry in 2.8. In 2.7 the increase between "default" and "flat" is 86%. In 2.8, the increase from "default" to "flat" is 155%. I'm not surprised that Flat shadows create extra geometry, as I understand they work by creating a "pancake" version of every model and add it to the scene as shadow. I'm not even surprised that this option in both 2.7 and 2.8 generates less FPS in this particular scene, as it doesn't work well when there's a lot of high poly models around. It still works better when there's a lot of shadows from a simple geometry, like flying over a city. But what's surprising, is the huge jump in generated geometry between 2.7 and 2.8, which is reflected in FPS hit: 7% in 2.7, but 15% in 2.8. 3. Flat shadows look nothing like they did in 2.7. In the previous version they were sharp and aliased. In 2.8 they are smooth and blended. Don't think it comes for free. 4. Even in a "best case" scenario with "default" shadows, DCS 2.8 is creating 66% more triangles for no apparent reason at the same game settings, according to the metric in game. It looks like the poor performance in VR is just a reflection of worse 2.8 performance overall. It's just that people playing the game in VR are more susceptible to 10-20% drops in performance, while on a monitor it may not be noticeable if the game now makes 110 FPS instead of 130. Also with a weaker GPU the results will look different, as it will mask the problems with CPU being overloaded with extra geometry in 2.8. 2.7 flat: 2.7 default: 2.8 default: 2.8 flat: 2.8 off: hornetReadyRamp.trk DxDiag.txt

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

ED FB

Modernized US Navy Ships by Currenthill Status update - current list of issues and improvements for release version 1.1.0 The list is not final, as this is work in progress. But I thought I'd share the current status. Version 1.1.0 Changed SM-3 launch parameters to focus on ballistic missiles Changed SM-2MR anti super/hypersonic missile engagement performance Changed SM-6ER anti super/hypersonic missile engagement performance Changed Phalanx ammunition to MK 244 Mod 0 APDS ELC 20 mm Changed ESSM anti super/hypersonic missile engagement performance Changed RGM-84L Block II to RGM-84L Block II+ (135 nm) Fixed AN/SPY-6 minor performance issues Fixed AN/SPY-1 minor performance issues Added Phalanx reloads (300 seconds)

Hi. This is actually the same mod as Black Shark 2 Custom Cockpit mod. I adapted it for Black Shark 3. This mod includes a few modified parts of Ka-50's current EN cockpit. Colored temp and pressure gauges. Autopilot buttons. Reduced brightness. Yellow zebra texture on Master Arm switch. Rockets parameters table (from Ricardo's cockpit work). L-140 Laser "OFF" and "OPER" texture bug - fixed. Made proper backgrounds for a few "OFF" label. Darkened the Rocket Correction Tables on the right door. UV-26 buttons (from Ricardo's cockpit work). IAS table on the left door (from Ricardo's cockpit work). Warning marks on the from dash gauges and APU gauge. Feet scale for altimeter gauge. Knots scale for airspeed gauge. New ID number plate background (from Ricardo's cockpit work). B, H, K letters on the power indicator is now T(ake-off), M(ax), C(ruise). EN red flags on ADI and HSI. This mod also includes my "Dirty Windows" mod. Thanks, Dev. DOWNLOAD: DCS: Black Shark 3 - Custom Cockpit Mod v1.0 (Upload: 12/2022)

I have updated the AT Infantry mod that had been created by Morkva some years back. I am by no means a modder or experienced in coding but I think it turned out pretty good. I haven't tested against many of the other mods out there but it seems to work fine now with the Swedish mod pack. ChangeLog: Modernized the coding to reflect current game assets Cleaned up the file structure and added the liveries in to the folder. Originally I think they were created to be put directly into the core folders. Tweaked their behaviors slightly, I reduced their acquisition and shot delays from 10 to 5. This is inline with current game assets. WARNING: It will not work with any missions that had the past iteration so you will have to update those in order to load this version Enjoy, Phantasmo https://www.mediafire.com/file/gdcvumic0ky5ldu/AT_Infantry_Updated.zip/file

From ED Facebook

Польза в том, что это не очередной поршень или синий файтер. Если они реализуют все задуманное - создадут новую нишу в ДКС. Относительно тяжелый транспортник и заправщик - уже вин. Будет успех - наверняка и ганшип запилят, будет двойной вин.

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

There was an interview in September with Enigma, where Cobra mentioned they might try and limit the variants they made. I don’t want to put words in anyone’s mouth but my understanding was that part of what is taking so long to finish the F-14 was that making a few variants was proving a lot more time consuming than expected. Worth noting that’s not a dig: the Tomcat released in a very feature complete state and is probably the gold standard.

А вы уверены, что им ничего не нужно больше? А может, всё же, дело в том, что для красных больше ничего нет и не предвидится? А вот тоже до сих пор на ГС и нашей древности сижу лишь из того, что для красных нет хоть сколько бы то ни было современных модулей из самолётных. А синие мне не интересны. Вернее, я не горю желанием платить за то, к чему не лежит душа. Вот и ту так же - люди до сих пор на Сушках летают исключительно из того, что больше не на чем. Ну и торопящиеся из-за того, что там не надо "многокнопак" знать.

А вы понимаете, что ДКС - это песочница, где у всех могут быть свои представления о разнообразном геймплее? В отличие от тундры, многие приходят сюда не за нагибаторством, а за проработкой летабл и возможностью самому придумывать для себя развлечения. Чем больше возможностей - тем интереснее придумывается. Не надо пытаться расчесать весь сим на пыщпыщ и "прочие извращения".

The slatted F-4E of Nov 1972 (Rivet Haste jets) indeed had no air to air kills. But its combat service and contribution was small but not insignificant as you seem to be implying. My point is it was there, it saw combat and should not be discounted. I seem to remember others pointing out that A2G work should not be ignored and that's true. Again for the record, I agree that the J has a more interesting air combat history than the Rivet Haste birds, but A2A is only half the story. I actually do prefer the Israeli F-4E's that shot down some 86 jets within two and a half weeks in 1973 during the Yom Kippur War (a total of 115 since 1969) before the 4th generation jets entered service, bringing the F-4E total higher than the F-4J. These were stock F-4E block 35 to 52, btw. Some of them delivered during Nickel Grass were straight from US stocks. These birds had anything but an insignificant contribution to the F-4 record and especially to the Israelis... I agree that I probably wouldn't count field mods as a good representation of the jet but all those mods came after the Yom Kippur War. Also we've already established with actual plots and data that the F-4E at the same loadout and fuel has both better ITR and STR than the J. By definition it is more nimble. I'm not sure what you are trying to articulate with this argument. The J is probably better in the vertical but that's not really more nimble if the F-4E has both ITR and STR advantages. Not sure if I would call an SR-71 nimble even though it can fly higher and faster than anything else... nor would i call the faster P-51 more nimble than the much slower A6M5. the F-4E is simply the most maneuverable Phantom version that saw combat. Full stop. And that's fine.. the F-4J is better at many other things. I'd like to point out this isn't a competition for which jet is better, or which one had more impact, simply why I prefer the E and why I think it's fair to compare it to the J and S from a historical stand point. Still, it's only fair that I apologize if it sounded like I was implying that the J was not as worthy due to its record. I just wanted to illustrate which jets were seeing combat at a given time frame.

Agreed, for AI only assets I wouldn't mind sacrificing a bit of quality on the altar of variety. Ground assets we have more than enough, but more variety in planes would be a huge boost to DCS WW2.

Sorry Ironmike but i don't agree with you. 1 I asked a question in a polite way, I was told to go and ask it on another forum. I replied this was not a good answer and your peers became salty against me, so who is judging who? Not me for first. 2 You told to be patient: the last FM update was in 2021, the next one will be in 2023, please don't use the word "patient" because i think i was patient. 3 The guys you are talking about are the ones who usually write to go against the ones who not agree with HB. 4 The known video was posted because a user asked for a graph: the graph is in the known video. 5 I appreciate really much your job but this does not means we can't talk about problems and post tacview files, i was invited to post tacview files by the ones who are now kidding me. 6 I don't have any peers, i don't care at all about peers, simply i'm used to write honestly what i think. 7 I'm always kind with everybody, i was not the first who was not kind. 8 After your last answer i told you thank you, I was sincere and for me the matter was closed: the next time please tell to lunaticfringe and the others to remain quiet instead to be salty for nothing. That said, i'm sorry all this was interrupting your Christmas family time, i think your family time is much more important than an answer about the FM. So please, the next time, don't worry about answer fast. I wish you and your family all the best and a Happy New Year

DCS updates to 2.8.1.34667.2 DCS World has updated to version 2.8 on its stable branch, so if you have been waiting to update to the A-4E-C v.2.1, now is the time to do so. Failure to update can cause crashes, and other additional errors when using radios, TACAN, and the ground radar systems. Please do what you can to help spread to word to other users and server operators that feature the A-4E-C, as the best results are achieved in multiplayer when the server and client are both running the same version of the module. We hope those of you who waited enjoy and appreciate the additions from the latest release! Thanks for flying, and download the latest version here: https://github.com/heclak/community-a4e-c/releases/latest

did you guys see this?

Critical game breaking bug here, In multiplayer I need the ability to fly over to my friends still starting on the ground and honk at them with the Mi8's horn. It seems the horn SFX are client side only which I feel is a terrible oversight and needs to be corrected asap. Also, make a bind for it in the controls so I can have it easily accessible on my button box for quick honk access. Thank you for your consideration.

It strikes me that, perhaps, HB did finish the Phantom "in time," but they've been working with ED on its final stages. They may have sent it off to ED for final approval and what not, but it just wasn't enough to hit it in time.

Currently the 120s always enter HOJ mode if the target is jamming regardless of if your ownship radar has burnt through the targets jammer (as far as I know). Currently it seems the 120 either doesn't try to use its own seeker on jamming targets or doesn't ever burn through. In effect this means that if you're engaging jamming targets your missiles are always hilariously crippled guidance wise. How intentional this behaviour is I don't really know. The HOJ logic itself seems very flawed but to what extent certain missed shots are correct you really don't know until maestro responds to your tracks .

I think the trouble with an F-4G is you need a human to run the APR suite- and a human on the ground to work the IADS for a challenge. What made the Wild Weasel F-4G work was the expert in the back dueling with the savvy SAM operator(s) who’d change freqs, shut down and illuminate on a different frequency, and other shifty tactics. On second thought, DCS would honestly need a distinct “Electronic Combat” mode to enable players to pick being SAM operators or Wild Weasel / SEAD. It would give planes like the F-4G, E/A-6A and E/A-6B, Tornado ECR and others a place to shine. As is right now I’m not sure an EW/SEAD platform fits the game.

It’s not an unrealistic feature for playing on a monitor. If you have eyes and I trust that you do, you’ll notice your own peripheral vision is about 200d. This is hardly practical to display on a 16:9 monitor. You’ll also notice everything in the real world is a lot larger than your screen. A “realistic” life-sized FOV would probably be 20-30d akin to zoomed-in. Again, hardly practical. So the solution is to give you the option of changing this on the fly ie zoom view. The other factor here is resolution. Again you’ll notice your real world eyes have much greater acuity than can be simulated on a monitor or VR headset. Since we can’t change the number of pixels the only solution here is to zoom in and magnify. It’s a method for the game to simulate 20/20 vision on a low resolution display. Even VR needs this solution since the best HMDs are still very far short of real life acuity. The zoom view is not unique to DCS. All flight sims have this feature for the same reasons. It’s amusing that you say you can get by without using the zoom, you’re literally flying blind. PS I haven’t noticed the change you mention. But you can set the “normal” zoom level to whatever you prefer in the config files.

Цифрами чего - умозрительных продаж несуществующего модуля? В разные годы создавались опросы - "хотели бы вы кликаб того-то и того-то", "хотели бы вы транспортник" и т.д. - которые по разным причинам - от "200 человек не показатель" до "да это просто крикливое меньшинство" - отметались. Было бы желание не делать - а повод найдется. Какими цифрами убеждали руководство делать Элку или Як-52, у которых историческая ценность немножко превышает практическую в реалиях ДКС? Какими цифрами руководствовались авторы Крайстен Игла и Ишака? Какими цифрами руководствуются те, кто сейчас пилит Геркулеса?

Agreed. Technologically, and aerodynamically, apples to apples the Navy Phantoms are way better for air combat. No gun, no bells and whistles for all the A2G work. Problem for me personally is the question of chronology and combat experience - when it entered service, the F-4J was way better IMO than any USAF F-4 but then the F-4E got slats, TISEO, and its more reliable (but less capable) radar etc before the end of the Vietnam War and the F-4J did not. Then the F-4S entered service with slats when the F-14A and F-15 were already seeing combat. To me that's like the F8F Bearcat entering service just after WW2 - no longer really a WW2 plane, and not as good as its post-war contemporaries. Chronologically, the F-4S isn't apples to apples. Similarly, the F4U-1D and P-51D were similar in technology level and time frame. But the superior F4U-4 entered service and saw combat during WW2, while the P-51H didn't get to do much if at all. So I would not choose the P-51D over the F4U-4 for WW2 if I was given the choice. No reason to arbitrarily limit myself to the P-51D and F4U-1D. Had it seen combat with slats before the end of the Vietnam War, the F-4S would probably be my top choice.

Edmuss, thanks a lot! You've got it. I disabled the winwing exports in Simappro and that made all the difference. Just had my first landing in the F14 where flying over the ship it wasn't stuttering. The hook switch didn't stutter as I employed it. Feels like a complete new game. Even on the carrier I don't get the stuttering. I might need to replay Zone 5 campaign now xD That one click in the software made all the difference. Now CPU times are around 8-10 ms (from 15-20 ms). It's in the green for the first time. FPS is stable at 45. It should probably come as part of the throttle package information as other people might be struggling with the same issue. Might email Winwing about it. Thanks again, happy new year!

Turbo Mode disables all v-sync (frame wait needed to reduce latency) and this means letting the game completely max out your GPU by just going as fast as possible without trying to reduce latency. Because the platform does a good job at late-stage reprojection (compensating the images for head movements), the extra latency is not that important, and the gain in framerate is well worth it. Your mileage may vary however: Turbo Mode can have as high as 20 FPS increase in some situations, but can also not give much in others.

The vast majority of the world uses QNH or if that value is not available, sets the altimeter to the location's altitude above sea level. On top of that, ATC either assigns altitudes based on QNH or QNE, so everyone has the same basis. If you use QFE, everyone has a different "0" altitude, making coordination of airspace rather difficult. But if you cannot see the pressure setting on the gauge, it doesnt matter if you use QNH or QFE, you cannot set it to an accurate value if you flew to a different location.

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]".

ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 9.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 8.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 7.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 6.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 5.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 4.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 3.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 2.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 1.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к полетам. Часть 10. Экзаменационные полеты.pdf ТПП_Схемы заданий. Часть 1.pdf ТПП_Схемы заданий. Часть 2.pdf ТПП_Схемы заданий. Часть 3.pdf ТПП_Схемы заданий. Часть 4.pdf ТПП_Схемы заданий. Часть 5.pdf ТПП_Схемы заданий. Часть 6.pdf ТПП_Общие метериалы. Кроки аэродрома Чернигов.pdf ТПП_Подготовка к ЛТУ.pdf

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

"I LOVE THIS JOB" is an free mission pack for DCS. An innovative civil operation module for the UH-1 "Huey" helicopter in Syria. Module will be release on January the 1st, 2023. I hope you like it!

Jester, yes, that'd be "simple", but consider this: DCS supports multicrew. The Intruder will be flown with humans in both seats. That means the INS system, with its quirks and operating procedures, needs to be modeled in full. The "computer game" mindset isn't helping anyone. One thing DCS does is virtually preserving historic aircraft. Flying an F-14B today is impossible, even if you happen to be Iranian, because Iranian 'cats were a downgraded A model. The Intruders no longer fly. You can fly warbirds today (mostly because they were rather simpler than jets), but not in combat, and it takes serious money. Stocks of several weapons we have in DCS have been depleted IRL. Highly accurate simulations is the only way anyone is ever going to experience how those aircraft and particularly weapons were used in combat. So, HB had better get it right. That said, the underlying principles don't have to be accurately simulated, just the stuff that pilot sees. INS isn't magic, and the way Intruder does it is clever, but for today, fairly primitive. I'm pretty sure all the relevant data for all the interesting variants is already available. Even if there are some advanced variants that have classified systems, we don't really need another JDAM truck.

"Realistic" FOV depends on monitor size and the distance of the eyes from the screen. There is no one-size-fits-all angle, even if fixing it to be "realistic" were to become a thing. There is never going to be a totally level playing field for MP. Just think of the pros and cons of VR vs. 2D for example? Are VR people cheating? The flat-screen crowd?

Given the challenges 2022 offered , it’s fair to say they are not going to make a Dec 2022 deadline. So be it. Just like the airplanes they’re modeled after, delays and overruns are inevitable for a quality DCS product. When it’s ready, it’ll come. I’d rather get a finished product in December 2023 then a rushed release at 11:58pm December 31st that’s a buggy mess.

Just flew a night time mission over the Caucasus in the F-16C with a huge amount of units and a lot going on. Framerates were half, as expected - 36 with Pico's ASW kicking in, but performances were still smooth and the average framerate shown on fpsVR was in the high 50's. CPU was most affected, but even that was well within the acceptable range. I did record it, but as it was night time and without NVG there isn't a lot to see. I'll post a couple of fpsVR shots in the heat of the action. Okay here are the screens. I magnified them so that the fpsVR info is easier to read, and added titles to describe what was going on at the time of the screenshot, also included a shot of the mission editor (its a QM generated mission) to show how many units are involved:

Тут я вижу параллелизм.... "сделайте мне самолет, карту, корабль, технику красным ЭД или западной 3-й стороной".... но не будучи 3-ей стороной Югра Медиа и Спрут-Г никто не получил вниз к этому Приступайте к работе над созданием вашей третьей стороны для создания эксклюзивного красного контента (Дека не в счет, он делает китайское снаряжение). Будем ли мы постоянно следить за тем, что каждый раз, когда третья сторона или ED приступают к работе над модулем, они плачут, потому что нет красного модуля X? Сейчас мы говорим об Ан-26 потому что делается С-130, вчера это было потому что сделали CVN-75 SuperCarrier а не Кутнесов... или где Балтика потому что ЭД сделал карту каналов, завтра она будет М1-А2 Абрамс и где мой Т-14 Армата... Господа, пусть плачущие учатся программировать и работают над тем, чтобы сделать что-то красное, со всеми вытекающими, не всегда плачьте. Ан-26 продадут, как и С-130, потому что есть часть сообщества, которая хочет транспортные планы, точно так же, как если завтра ЭД выпустит UH-60 для блюза, то продаст так же или лучше Ми-8. То же самое будет, если однажды ЭД сделает противолодочный функционал, а кто-то сделает Ш-60 или С-3 Викинг, найдутся желающие полетать на Ка-27 или Ил-38 "Дельфин" (май), потому что раньше были симуляторы с такой функциональностью. То же самое будет, если подводную лодку, линь или советскую подводную лодку класса «К» сделать в морской среде. И если на то пошло, М113 или БМП-1 в наземных условиях. Всему есть место в DCS World, но некоторые должны думать, что они должны добиваться того, чего хотят, а не ждать, пока это сделают другие. Инструменты и знания есть. Вам нужны сетевые модули? Работайте на них и не ждите, что это сделают другие. Извините за "кирпич", но бывают случаи, когда это становится школьным спором, который постоянно повторяется.

I'd say a 4080 would do. Went from a 6800XT to 4080 and the difference is noticable. FPS are between 45-55 fps on busy MP servers but the experience is just butter smooth. No blurred experience, no stutters. Silky smooth. Great frametimes. Running on a 13600K, G2, 64GB 3200 CL16

Awesome that it was such a simple fix and you've removed the bottleneck It's been a known issue for a long time, about the winwing exports. I have no idea if the issue is with winwing or DCS but it does catch people out.

Here is my wallet, 59.99USD is prepared.

The F-4G would be an awesome addition to DCS as it would expand warfare into a new and fascinating area of air warfare.

Hi all, just a reminder, the "Help" channel on the Vaicom official Discord here offers assistance delivered in real time by the people who maintain Vaicom Pro now. If you have a persistent problem and you're out of airspeed and ideas, that is probably the best way to find a solution. A Discord account is required (available via free registration).

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!

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.

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.