Leaderboard

A7 CORSAIR II FOR DCS WORLD ARTWORK The Corsair has had a tumultuous journey! 2022 saw the completion of our complete remake of the A7 3D model, which took a significant amount of time. With the aid of Iakov, our new artist, both the external and internal models of the A7 have been completely remade from scratch as we've previously discussed. The remake started work in 2021 and was completed around Q3 in 2022. The remake is significantly more detailed than our original model, with almost all elements of the aircraft accurately modelled, including maintenance areas. Having such a detailed model delivered by Iakov meant that lots of work was required in terms of optimizing the model to extract the maximum possible performance, without compromising much detail. This is still ongoing, however most of the exterior has now been optimized, as well as large chunks of the cockpit. Work is ongoing to optimize the remainder of the cockpit so it can then be textured. Work has begun on UV mapping the exterior model and to that end we have created a dedicated Paint-Kit team, who are providing value feedback during the UV mapping process to ensure that our paint-kit is as easy to use as possible for livery artists. Work is also well underway in animating the cockpit & exterior as well as setting up clickable areas, which has been very helpful in allowing us to start testing more systems in-flight using proper procedures. FLIGHT MODELLING The A7 Flight Model has undergone extensive work this year, especially in the first half of the year, with much of that work being 'behind the scenes' so to speak. This year we've been working closely with Research in Flight, an aerospace & hydrodynamics analysis company that creates tools for aerospace engineering applications. They are the developers of Flightstream, a sophisticated numerical flow solver and one of our primary tools that we use for CFD analysis & data collection for the A7. We have been working closely with them to enhance & improve our A7 Corsair model, to the point where we have been able to supply validation studies and case tests against the real wind-tunnel data we have gathered. The A7 model has also been used to test & assist in development of new control surface analysis techniques being integrated into Flightstream, in turn also enhancing our data collection capabilities for various control surface & damage configurations. CFD COLLABORATION & NASA PRESENTATION As part of our collaboration, we spent some time this year developing some internal tools to aid in the collection of CFD data; not only for the A7 but also for any model we wish to analyze. One such tool that I developed personally was a utility that facilitated the conversion of an OpenVSP model into a solution-ready FlightStream model. Without going into too much detail, what this accomplished was an extremely fast & efficient method for simple OpenVSP geometry models to be analysed in great detail in FlightStream. For us, this allows us to gather CFD data in a fraction of the time required using traditional modelling techniques. Our work was shown off at the 2022 NASA OpenVSP workshop, and we have since made the tool publicly available, where it is now being used around the world in both academic & commercial design purposes. We have even been informed the utility is being used over at Boeing! It is our hope that this simple tool will make CFD modelling more accessible to all sim developers. For further reading, you can see the presentation slides that relate to the relevant Flightstream developments here. Of course, all this only matters if it helps us to develop the A7! Although it's taken some time, these developments have been a worthy time investment. By forging a new workflow, we're able to tweak & experiment with our models in a fraction of the time to get the best results possible when testing unusual aircraft configurations. If you've worked with CFD or know alittle about it, you'll know that it is an enormously time-intensive process using conventional techniques, and almost always requires constant model tuning & tweaking to collect valid results. As we are now developing the advanced aspects of the A7 Flight Model, this has been absolutely essential when testing non-standard configurations. For example, using our workflow we've been able to run tests and collect data on virtually every control surface interaction possible, in order to assess the relative significance of unusual interactions and determine how best to model them in-sim. Some examples include interactions between the flaps & elevator at various high Angle-of-Attack configs, forces in a spin and leading to a spin, spin recovery analysis and post-stall analysis. Furthermore, this new modelling workflow has provided us with a very efficient means to study the effects of airframe damage on flight dynamics, an aspect that is often modelled with only very simple approximations due to data limitations. Not so anymore! DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL AUGMENTATION SYSTEM (CAS) AND AUTOMATIC FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEMS (AFCS) In terms of Flight modelling, the latter half of 2022 has been heavily focused on designing & developing the CAS for the A7 Corsair. This has been a huge undertaking and admittedly has required a large amount of time on my part devoted to studying advanced engineering control system design principles. Although we don't have the exact equations used in the real aircraft CAS, we do fortunately have enough information on the inputs & outputs of the system to be able to reverse engineer it. This has required us to approach the situation in much the same way as the original aircraft designers, attempting to carefully craft a control system that meets the requirements of the airframe and pilots. Although work is still ongoing, we are quite pleased with how things are shaping up and are confident that with the feedback from our SME's we will be able to fine-tune the CAS to operate almost exactly as the real system would. Flying with the CAS switched on is a completely different experience than flying with it off; the airframe is incredibly difficult to control without it. Therefore, it is absolutely critical that we get this right and we are dedicating an appropriate amount of time & resources to try and achieve this. The CAS is only one part of the A7's AFCS, which is used not only to enhance flight stability but also for Autopilot control of the aircraft. The AFCS is being developed in tandem with the CAS and has made significant progress in 2022. The primary Autopilot modes (HDG, ALT, ATT, Airspeed) have all been developed & implemented. We are currently in the process of refining the Yaw Stab system, which stabilizes and corrects for aircraft slip and assists in turn coordination. CAS & AFCS naturally have a strong interconnection with the control surfaces and thus required a complete rewrite of all of our control surface models. This was completed in 2022 and are controls are now working in harmony with the AFCS, respecting defined authority limits and behaviours. As a pilot you will need to be aware of & respect these limits to ensure that you are working with, and not against, the AFCS. The A7 Corsair is not a simple airframe to fly; it has extensive quirks that need to be understood and mastered for the aircraft to be flown effectively. The AFCS is a quintessential part of this; understanding & mastering it will be a key component of flying the A7 well. OTHER FM DEVELOPMENTS On top of everything discussed above, this year we have been working to refine our mathematical classes & methods implemented in our codebase. Focusing on optimization, we have been spending time implementing new methods of data processing that require less computational resources to achieve the same result. An example of this is interpolation and look-up table (LUT) modelling, which is the foundation of data processing in a simulator and one of the primary methods used to implement CFD & aerodynamics data. These calculations happen thousands of times every second and have thus been a big priority for us in terms of code optimization. As discussed in the CFD section, we have developed a new workflow that has allowed us to quickly and efficiently analyze aircraft damage scenarios and the impact of damage on Flight dynamics. While still in-progress, we have been very pleased with the data we've been able to collect and are currently busy expanding the Flight Model to include damage modelling. SOUND DESIGN Although still only in the very early stages of development, work has begun on sound design for Corsair! Thanks to the collaboration from some amazing people in the community, we've been able to organise the recording of a real A7 during a maintenance engine run. This is of course an extremely rare opportunity, and we are so grateful to the good people at Tulsa Tech University for making this possible! Thanks to some collaborative efforts from 'Armorine' in our community discord (who has also been invaluable in helping us to secure certain documents. Thank you Armorine!), we were able to organise a professional field recording of the A7. The recording was carried out by Tulsa Tech's team of sound engineers & sound engineering students, with the entire engine run captured from various positions by professional grade equipment. The team even went so far as to produce an excellent master of the samples for us! In total we were given an amazing 29 high-quality aircraft samples from various mic positions, as well as 4 completed mixdown tracks. Below you can see some shots from the recording process Tulsa Tech sound engineering team, responsible for the excellent recordings provided. Images provided by Tulsa Tech & Armorine SYSTEM & WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT Alongside all of this, work has continued throughout the year to develop and flesh out the cockpit systems of the Corsair. Once again, we owe our thanks to 'Armorine' for assisting in helping us to acquire some missing documentation. Unfortunately, due to the nature of systems development, we don't have a wealth of flashy screenshots to show here, but I will do my best to explain the various systems under development and the state they are in. One of the biggest priorities this year has been developing the codebase & logic underlying the A7's targeting and weapon delivery systems. To this end, lots of time has been spent refining and further developing the armament control systems: developing correct pylon release cues & logic, release inhibition conditions, developing calculations for interval drops and developing the core logic that underpins the sophisticated weapons systems of the A7. The culmination of this has been the development and integration of CCIP & CCRP weapon release modes; both of which draw heavily from various sensors and targeting systems in the aircraft before making real-time calculations to determine an impact point. We are pleased to say our A7 can now accurately release unguided weapons on target, using both CCIP & CCRP methods that are unique to different weapon types. Work is ongoing to further develop both weapon release modes to include inhibition cues as well as to develop the navigational modes of weapon release, such as Bomb on Coordinates (BOC) and offset bombing modes. Navigation systems also received some development time in 2022, with the INS and tactical computer systems currently being expanded upon and developed. We have developed the aircrafts waypoint system, including storage, recall and editing of flight plan waypoints. We've also made progress integrating information from the navigation systems into other aircraft avionics; most importantly the HUD and PMDS. 2023 will see the detailing & expansion of the INS system; expanding on current modelling of the Inertial Measurement Unit (IMS) and the development of the Doppler Radar, both of which feed information to the INS. We will also be working to implement mark-points, target points and other in-flight navigational systems. As a pilot flying the A7 will require careful monitoring and management via positional updates and pilot corrections; the A7 requires navigational updates to correct for INS drift, in a similar fashion to the Viggen. As we've shown throughout the year, 2022 has seen the development of most of the A7's key avionic systems in various states of completion. The Projected Map Display (PMDS) is integrated and functioning, with current work focused on integrating navigational data from the Tactical Computer, as well as integrating some of the lesser used functionalities. The RWR has been on the backburner for some time due to some limitations in documentation, however we have now obtained the necessary documents and work is now ongoing in developing the RWR fully! The aircrafts multiple radio systems are also well in development, with the primary functionality of all radios already implemented and work ongoing to implement cockpit controls, presets and other functions. The A7 Radar systems are also well in-development as we've previously showcased, with current work focused on radar targeting functionalities as well as navigational cues. As well as all the above, our current codebase is being constantly refined, expanded upon and rewritten in order to be more realistic with its flow of information. To elaborate, we are aiming to mimic the flow of data as it occurs in the real A7 avionic systems, with many avionics being dependent on other systems and prone to certain failures and accuracy limitations. For example, the tactical computer relies upon information from the Air Data Computer (ADC) as well as IMS systems in order to complete navigational and targeting calculations; any inaccuracies in data supplied from either the ADC or IMS will result in flow on errors and inaccuracies further down the avionics chain. In practical terms, this means that simple things like damage or icing to your pitot tubes can result in inaccurate data being supplied to the ADC and thus the Tactical Computer, creating targeting & instrumentation inaccuracies. We want each system to be interacting with each other as organically and realistically as possible, allowing for the accurate simulation of failures, errors and inaccuracies as they can occur throughout the aircraft. To summarise the state of systems development in the A7 Corsair: most if not all systems have been developed and integrated to at least a basic extent, with work now being focused on expanding and developing the advanced functions of each system as well as the interconnections between each system. This will happen in-tandem with the art, as more & more cockpit controls and displays become available and ready to be tied to code work; we anticipate this will be ongoing for much of 2023. WHAT'S NEXT? We've previously discussed our 4-phase development roadmap for the A7, which roughly translates to the following 4 phases: SFM Based model Basic EFM & flight systems Advanced EFM & advanced flight/weapon/avionic systems SME testing & tuning + damage modelling We are currently approaching the tail-end of phase 3, which as expected has been the longest development phase by quite a margin. Our goal is to complete phase 3 and move into phase 4 of development at some point in 2023. We know it's been a long wait and it seems to still be forever away, but we want to say thank you for your patience and hopefully this report can give you some insight into what's been happening behind the scenes.

Greetings! Today I'd like to share our 2022 end of year development report on the A7 Corsair, which has been extracted from our full company report which is available here A7 Corsair II for DCS World Artwork The Corsair has had a tumultuous journey! 2022 saw the completion of our complete remake of the A7 3D model, which took a significant amount of time. With the aid of Iakov, our new artist, both the external and internal models of the A7 have been completely remade from scratch as we've previously discussed. The remake started work in 2021 and was completed around Q3 in 2022. The remake is significantly more detailed than our original model, with almost all elements of the aircraft accurately modelled, including maintenance areas. Having such a detailed model delivered by Iakov meant that lots of work was required in terms of optimizing the model to extract the maximum possible performance, without compromising much detail. This is still ongoing, however most of the exterior has now been optimized, as well as large chunks of the cockpit. Work is ongoing to optimize the remainder of the cockpit so it can then be textured. Work has begun on UV mapping the exterior model and to that end we have created a dedicated Paint-Kit team, who are providing value feedback during the UV mapping process to ensure that our paint-kit is as easy to use as possible for livery artists. Work is also well underway in animating the cockpit & exterior as well as setting up clickable areas, which has been very helpful in allowing us to start testing more systems in-flight using proper procedures. Flight Modelling The A7 Flight Model has undergone extensive work this year, especially in the first half of the year, with much of that work being 'behind the scenes' so to speak. This year we've been working closely with Research in Flight, an aerospace & hydrodynamics analysis company that creates tools for aerospace engineering applications. They are the developers of Flightstream, a sophisticated numerical flow solver and one of our primary tools that we use for CFD analysis & data collection for the A7. We have been working closely with them to enhance & improve our A7 Corsair model, to the point where we have been able to supply validation studies and case tests against the real wind-tunnel data we have gathered. The A7 model has also been used to test & assist in development of new control surface analysis techniques being integrated into Flightstream, in turn also enhancing our data collection capabilities for various control surface & damage configurations. CFD Collaboration & NASA Presentation As part of our collaboration, we spent some time this year developing some internal tools to aid in the collection of CFD data; not only for the A7 but also for any model we wish to analyze. One such tool that I developed personally was a utility that facilitated the conversion of an OpenVSP model into a solution-ready FlightStream model. Without going into too much detail, what this accomplished was an extremely fast & efficient method for simple OpenVSP geometry models to be analysed in great detail in FlightStream. For us, this allows us to gather CFD data in a fraction of the time required using traditional modelling techniques. Our work was shown off at the 2022 NASA OpenVSP workshop, and we have since made the tool publicly available, where it is now being used around the world in both academic & commercial design purposes. We have even been informed the utility is being used over at Boeing! It is our hope that this simple tool will make CFD modelling more accessible to all sim developers. For further reading, you can see the presentation slides that relate to the relevant Flightstream developments here. Of course, all this only matters if it helps us to develop the A7! Although it's taken some time, these developments have been a worthy time investment. By forging a new workflow, we're able to tweak & experiment with our models in a fraction of the time to get the best results possible when testing unusual aircraft configurations. If you've worked with CFD or know alittle about it, you'll know that it is an enormously time-intensive process using conventional techniques, and almost always requires constant model tuning & tweaking to collect valid results. As we are now developing the advanced aspects of the A7 Flight Model, this has been absolutely essential when testing non-standard configurations. For example, using our workflow we've been able to run tests and collect data on virtually every control surface interaction possible, in order to assess the relative significance of unusual interactions and determine how best to model them in-sim. Some examples include interactions between the flaps & elevator at various high Angle-of-Attack configs, forces in a spin and leading to a spin, spin recovery analysis and post-stall analysis. Furthermore, this new modelling workflow has provided us with a very efficient means to study the effects of airframe damage on flight dynamics, an aspect that is often modelled with only very simple approximations due to data limitations. Not so anymore! Design & Development of Control Augmentation System (CAS) and Automatic Flight Control Systems (AFCS) In terms of Flight modelling, the latter half of 2022 has been heavily focused on designing & developing the CAS for the A7 Corsair. This has been a huge undertaking and admittedly has required a large amount of time on my part devoted to studying advanced engineering control system design principles. Although we don't have the exact equations used in the real aircraft CAS, we do fortunately have enough information on the inputs & outputs of the system to be able to reverse engineer it. This has required us to approach the situation in much the same way as the original aircraft designers, attempting to carefully craft a control system that meets the requirements of the airframe and pilots. Although work is still ongoing, we are quite pleased with how things are shaping up and are confident that with the feedback from our SME's we will be able to fine-tune the CAS to operate almost exactly as the real system would. Flying with the CAS switched on is a completely different experience than flying with it off; the airframe is incredibly difficult to control without it. Therefore, it is absolutely critical that we get this right and we are dedicating an appropriate amount of time & resources to try and achieve this. The CAS is only one part of the A7's AFCS, which is used not only to enhance flight stability but also for Autopilot control of the aircraft. The AFCS is being developed in tandem with the CAS and has made significant progress in 2022. The primary Autopilot modes (HDG, ALT, ATT, Airspeed) have all been developed & implemented. We are currently in the process of refining the Yaw Stab system, which stabilizes and corrects for aircraft slip and assists in turn coordination. CAS & AFCS naturally have a strong interconnection with the control surfaces and thus required a complete rewrite of all of our control surface models. This was completed in 2022 and are controls are now working in harmony with the AFCS, respecting defined authority limits and behaviours. As a pilot you will need to be aware of & respect these limits to ensure that you are working with, and not against, the AFCS. The A7 Corsair is not a simple airframe to fly; it has extensive quirks that need to be understood and mastered for the aircraft to be flown effectively. The AFCS is a quintessential part of this; understanding & mastering it will be a key component of flying the A7 well. Other FM Developments On top of everything discussed above, this year we have been working to refine our mathematical classes & methods implemented in our codebase. Focusing on optimization, we have been spending time implementing new methods of data processing that require less computational resources to achieve the same result. An example of this is interpolation and look-up table (LUT) modelling, which is the foundation of data processing in a simulator and one of the primary methods used to implement CFD & aerodynamics data. These calculations happen thousands of times every second and have thus been a big priority for us in terms of code optimization. As discussed in the CFD section, we have developed a new workflow that has allowed us to quickly and efficiently analyze aircraft damage scenarios and the impact of damage on Flight dynamics. While still in-progress, we have been very pleased with the data we've been able to collect and are currently busy expanding the Flight Model to include damage modelling. Sound Design Although still only in the very early stages of development, work has begun on sound design for Corsair! Thanks to the collaboration from some amazing people in the community, we've been able to organise the recording of a real A7 during a maintenance engine run. This is of course an extremely rare opportunity, and we are so grateful to the good people at Tulsa Tech University for making this possible! Thanks to some collaborative efforts from 'Armorine' in our community discord (who has also been invaluable in helping us to secure certain documents. Thank you Armorine!), we were able to organise a professional field recording of the A7. The recording was carried out by Tulsa Tech's team of sound engineers & sound engineering students, with the entire engine run captured from various positions by professional grade equipment. The team even went so far as to produce an excellent master of the samples for us! In total we were given an amazing 29 high-quality aircraft samples from various mic positions, as well as 4 completed mixdown tracks. Below you can see some shots from the recording process Tulsa Tech sound engineering team, responsible for the excellent recordings provided. Images provided by Tulsa Tech & Armorine System & Weapons Development Alongside all of this, work has continued throughout the year to develop and flesh out the cockpit systems of the Corsair. Once again, we owe our thanks to 'Armorine' for assisting in helping us to acquire some missing documentation. Unfortunately, due to the nature of systems development, we don't have a wealth of flashy screenshots to show here, but I will do my best to explain the various systems under development and the state they are in. One of the biggest priorities this year has been developing the codebase & logic underlying the A7's targeting and weapon delivery systems. To this end, lots of time has been spent refining and further developing the armament control systems: developing correct pylon release cues & logic, release inhibition conditions, developing calculations for interval drops and developing the core logic that underpins the sophisticated weapons systems of the A7. The culmination of this has been the development and integration of CCIP & CCRP weapon release modes; both of which draw heavily from various sensors and targeting systems in the aircraft before making real-time calculations to determine an impact point. We are pleased to say our A7 can now accurately release unguided weapons on target, using both CCIP & CCRP methods that are unique to different weapon types. Work is ongoing to further develop both weapon release modes to include inhibition cues as well as to develop the navigational modes of weapon release, such as Bomb on Coordinates (BOC) and offset bombing modes. Navigation systems also received some development time in 2022, with the INS and tactical computer systems currently being expanded upon and developed. We have developed the aircrafts waypoint system, including storage, recall and editing of flight plan waypoints. We've also made progress integrating information from the navigation systems into other aircraft avionics; most importantly the HUD and PMDS. 2023 will see the detailing & expansion of the INS system; expanding on current modelling of the Inertial Measurement Unit (IMS) and the development of the Doppler Radar, both of which feed information to the INS. We will also be working to implement mark-points, target points and other in-flight navigational systems. As a pilot flying the A7 will require careful monitoring and management via positional updates and pilot corrections; the A7 requires navigational updates to correct for INS drift, in a similar fashion to the Viggen. As we've shown throughout the year, 2022 has seen the development of most of the A7's key avionic systems in various states of completion. The Projected Map Display (PMDS) is integrated and functioning, with current work focused on integrating navigational data from the Tactical Computer, as well as integrating some of the lesser used functionalities. The RWR has been on the backburner for some time due to some limitations in documentation, however we have now obtained the necessary documents and work is now ongoing in developing the RWR fully! The aircrafts multiple radio systems are also well in development, with the primary functionality of all radios already implemented and work ongoing to implement cockpit controls, presets and other functions. The A7 Radar systems are also well in-development as we've previously showcased, with current work focused on radar targeting functionalities as well as navigational cues. As well as all the above, our current codebase is being constantly refined, expanded upon and rewritten in order to be more realistic with its flow of information. To elaborate, we are aiming to mimic the flow of data as it occurs in the real A7 avionic systems, with many avionics being dependent on other systems and prone to certain failures and accuracy limitations. For example, the tactical computer relies upon information from the Air Data Computer (ADC) as well as IMS systems in order to complete navigational and targeting calculations; any inaccuracies in data supplied from either the ADC or IMS will result in flow on errors and inaccuracies further down the avionics chain. In practical terms, this means that simple things like damage or icing to your pitot tubes can result in inaccurate data being supplied to the ADC and thus the Tactical Computer, creating targeting & instrumentation inaccuracies. We want each system to be interacting with each other as organically and realistically as possible, allowing for the accurate simulation of failures, errors and inaccuracies as they can occur throughout the aircraft. To summarise the state of systems development in the A7 Corsair: most if not all systems have been developed and integrated to at least a basic extent, with work now being focused on expanding and developing the advanced functions of each system as well as the interconnections between each system. This will happen in-tandem with the art, as more & more cockpit controls and displays become available and ready to be tied to code work; we anticipate this will be ongoing for much of 2023. What's next? We've previously discussed our 4-phase development roadmap for the A7, which roughly translates to the following 4 phases: SFM Based model Basic EFM & flight systems Advanced EFM & advanced flight/weapon/avionic systems SME testing & tuning + damage modelling We are currently approaching the tail-end of phase 3, which as expected has been the longest development phase by quite a margin. Our goal is to complete phase 3 and move into phase 4 of development at some point in 2023. We know it's been a long wait and it seems to still be forever away, but we want to say thank you for your patience and hopefully this report can give you some insight into what's been happening behind the scenes. Thanks for reading! Sincerely, Dan K. FlyingIron Simulations

The naval variants are very important to us and not a distant afterthought, FWIW. We had to start with something - in this case we felt the -E was a great representation of the Phantom to begin with. That doesn't in any way diminish the importance of the naval versions though- do keep that in mind. We don't play favourites.

Turns out that the HB Ukrainian team of developers were working in an isolated farmstead in east Ukrain when the Russians invaded. The F-4E code was left on the hard drive of a computer, disconnected from the internet, 100 miles behind enemy lines. Cobra847 was tasked with training a team of soldiers to parachute across enemy lines and retrieve the hard drive. The soldiers, recruited from murderers, rappers and criminals on death row, are promised commuted sentences. In spite of their history, the 12 men prove a spirited and courageous unit. However, 2022 passed and the team was not heard from. This is why HB were unable to give us any news or even screenshots of the module. Now, with just 2 days to the 2023AB video Cobra and IronMike have taken upon themselves to write the entire code from sctratch. They have been frantically hammering away at their keyboards while being sustained by the other HB employees on a strict diet of Redbull, sugar, and espresso shots. Each of them has worked through multiple keyboards already that fell apart sending Caps Locks and spacebars flying everywhere. Will they make it in time for a 2023AB video? It only takes one broken typing finger for this effort to fail. I dont know bout you all, but I will cheer for them and keep my fingers crossed.

TL;DR You aren't sh*t without slats and a gun. F**k MiGs.

Muss das hier jetzt schon wieder ein neuer Hardware-Diskussionsthread werden??....

Hey guys, regarding all these: 1) It is fixed now. Will be available in the next update. 2) The fixed logic will be available in the next update. 3) Was fixed. Will be available in the next update. 3b) The elevation reset function is not mentioned in any information source, so as far as we know it has to be done manually. 4) BZ mode is still in progress. "- C+M/SW button, pressing it twice does something to swapping lock targets?? Haven't noticed any difference between pressing a few times or just holding." This is not implemented yet. "- Antenna-Gyro switch, just behind the throttle, not sure what that does." The switch is now described in more detail in the manual. Basically, it controls the 2 modes of the gunsight: *ANTENNE: is a kind of a radar director sight, the piper can be simply put on the radar target symbol (the orange square) to get a hit. *GYRO: a classical LCOS sight, the aircraft is assumed to be flying in the target's plane of motion, and with the same speed. "- The dogfight modes are the same as "Rapid Gun" mode right? And so the radar should be focused around the centre of the jets flightpath marker rather than something on the horizon? Is that correct? Seems hard to sometimes lock folks above or below you when nose on." In TL mode the antenna scan center should be positioned 5 degrees below FRL, which is the radar installation angle. The radar datum symbol of the sight is the visual reference of the scan center in TL mode. This position was fixed recently and will be available in the next update.

Dear Partners, fellow 3rd Party Devs, and Fans, May the New Year give everybody courage to triumph over vices and embrace the virtues! Happy New Year! - Mag3 Team

It's interesting how you said you have support from others but I don't see any of your posts in this thread getting upvoted but others are. You've gone from insisting on historical facts (while calling the -E slow and sluggish, something I found hilarious because it's not) to simply "giving your opinions". Opinions are like buttholes, everyone has one and they all stink. As others have pointed out, Heatblur has stated they will be doing a separate module for naval variants. When is that going to happen? Well it will probably be a while so patience is in order. You've discounted other countries success with the -E, even unmodified -E's success has been discounted by you. Apparently you think only U.S. service counts but that seems narrow minded to me. While stating the Phantom was designed as a naval fighter (you're not wrong about that) you completely ignore the fact that far more -C, -D, and -E models were made for the U.S. and other countries than naval variants. Only one other country used a naval variant while 10 countries used land based versions and 4 still do. With these things in mind it makes sense for a land based version to be made first. We should smoke a joint and talk about this. Why? Because it's super hard to act like an angry stinky butthole while high on weed. Real conversations could be had then. Personally, I'm ecstatic over the upcoming F-4E because I worked on it but... I still want naval variants because as a kid I was enthralled with stories of U.S. carrier fighter pile-its. I can't wait to bomb the VC and NVA with the -E or to fly escort for naval strike missions that are going Down Town. Just a suggestion, what if you went back through this thread and read every one of your posts and try to put yourself in others shoes so you can see how you're coming across? Sometimes these types of exercises can give us new perspective. Regardless of whether or not you think that is worthy of your time, I hope you have a great day.

Why do you still visit the PC subforums if you're not interested in their products? All you do is come here to badmouth the company.

Waiting for BigNewy to come back in here. He's already put a warning in once, it's best to not continue pushing buttons.

Oh I am well aware of where we are. Tell me, are you? If you are then you must be looking for the numbers to show the F-4J had more kills than the F-4E. If not, maybe the F-4J dropped more ordnance than the F-4E? If not, maybe it served for a longer period? If not, and you cannot provide any sources beside "because I said so" then I think you had better come up with a new tactic besides deflecting and avoiding the conversation. Nobody here has asked about the doctrine or training of the USAF or the USN.

You literally just answered a question about the veracity of the claims that the F-4E beat the F-4J 23 kills to 20. Nowhere in your reply did you address anything other than doctrine or training. That has nothing to do with the number of kills that was achieved by either airframe which would is an airframe to airframe comparison, not a pilot to pilot or doctrine comparison. Either the F-4E got more kills than the F-4J in US service or it didn't end of story. Also, I set the requirements? You're the one that asked for historical backup. I merely reciprocated. You then responded as you have mostly been doing in a rather condescending manner.

You previously asked others to use history to back up their points. This implies that your points are backed up by history. If so, that should be very easy for you to prove and set the record straight. When you claim all your statements are historical and backed up by common knowledge, it is actually required you list your own sources. You can't just say, "I didn't like this other guys sources" and then not provide your own because, "the utility of listing them is quite low." Since the basis for your entire argument rests on this common knowledge, I would please like to see the underlying reasoning and the information behind it because I do not have this common knowledge in my repertoire yet so a source would be nice so I can actually learn something new.

No doubt the Israeli and especially Iran victories are contested. Even the books on Israeli Phantoms (Ghosts of Atonement) points out where opinions diverge between the US evaluation of the conflict and the Israeli claims (i.e. some Israeli losses are attributed to AAA when they were actually shot down by MiGs). However there are several kills that are confirmed by all sides (Israeli, US evaluators and Syrian or Egyptian accounts) and those are the ones I take most seriously. My research so far implies that most kills are confirmed. Even so, the sources in question are all US sources on the US-North Vietnam conflict and they confirm each other, for the most part. My question is primarily on the US claims of 23 kills for the F-4E vs 20 for the F-4J. There are also plenty of interviews and videos of both services' pilots but I want more book-related info since I guess I'd rather read than sift through (admittedly good, but long) interviews.

Pull up your numbers please then. IIIRC, there was a sourced statement that said that in US service, the F-4E had 23 victories while the F-4J only had 20. If you can disprove this, please do.

But... you just asked me to provide sources. Earlier you said: Then you said the following when asked about your sources: How confusing! Anyway - and now I'm asking genuinely- do you have any sources that refute the aerial victories in the sources I posted? This is an open question to anyone in the thread btw. If my understanding of the F-4's A2A victories is wrong, I'd really like to know.

"202X and Beyond" videos never has been a "release" video, only show what working ED and 3rd parties on that year.

I agree. I've rarely read such a detailed, honest and proactive report. There're moments of waiting that seem endless, but when such a report is sent, one is even more willing to wait for the next update. Thanks a lot, good job.

Gentlemen, mission pack has been released and is ready to download: ■ I LOVE THIS JOB (LAST VERSION) ■ HUEY SHERIFF SKIN

I must agree. I am extremely dissappointed by stable moving to 2.81. It feels like mockery to me. Stable version has always been a bit of a meme, but at least it avoided the biggest issues. Now with stable on 2.81 it has become a complete farce.

"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!

I don't think that's nice the way you're laughin'. Y'see, my MiG don't like people laughin'. He gets the crazy idea you're laughin' at him.

I think the CM placed the tag although it does not make sense to me since I am not second guessing the JDAM.

In section 5.2 "Alternators ventilation" of the Aerges flight manual, you can find the regions of the envelope in which the overheating occurs.

We need to start making some serious and insane connections. I want some real muck-rakin' here! We're working on a deadline and I expect to see a connection between Halliburton and Cobra. Whaddya guys got for me!?

Добрый день! Предполагается ли в финальной версии Ка-50 Черная Акула 3 обучение с инструктором, говорящим на русском языке?

Hey! Which LAU-88 do we have, the LAU-88/A or the LAU-88A/A. They are similar but not the same. The A/A is an improved version of previous. Either way the LAU-88 (/A) or the LUA-88 A/A both can be boresighted. Why do you say LAU-115 when its the LAU-117/A ? - its rather confusing. The reason im asking which LUA-88 is modelled here because you guys had it implemented correctly at first. My assumption is that we have "had" the LUA-88 A/A. Which has a boresight memory setting. It provides the same boresight correction to all missiles on the same launcher. Meaning you only have to boresight one maverick on each pylon. if however we do have the LUA-88 A/A launcher specifically then its missing features.

This C-9A is not "Air Force Two" one, but NATO VIP transport. VC-9C's paintscheme is similar to this 71-0876 and I'll add it easily. I try to change its belly's blue into more bright like B747-AF One.

Haven't peeked my head into this thread since it was first posted and see I've not missed much. Tbh I think it's dumb 90% of the time when mods lock threads, but I think this one might be needing it. We're getting the F-4E. While I unrepentantly wish we were getting the J instead because I love me some naval aviation, we're getting the E, and I'm going to love it, and I will continue to love it after we get more Phantoms. Nothing can be said or done to change the fact we're getting the early E first. The E variant as a whole saw noble, heavy, and effective service for the USAF, and many other airforces of many other countries. Much like a lot of other Phantom variants. Looking forward to Jan 4 and the 2023 video. Where we will hopefully be seeing a Phantom. With a gun.

Agreed. Definitely let myself get too riled up... Can we all just be fans of the F-4 Phantom in general and stop arguing over which one is best?

That's just how things go when you have a mix of people online discussing things they are passionate towards. All I know is that I am going to buy all Phantoms that come out and enjoy learning each of them with all of their pros and cons... Unless pilot kills aren't possible in the F-4 as well, that's a con that I wouldn't mind seeing fixed.

YAY!!! I was just reading the initial DCS A-7 Corsair II thread, thinking "oh no, there's still no progress since August/22" , wondering if the development might have stalled. Then I noticed FlyingIron Simulations has its own dedicated section in these forums! Such an awesome development progress report. That's exactly what we all want to see, from time to time, until the module is released. The A-7 Corsair II was an aircraft which my country (Portugal) proudly used for many years, and one I've seen flying around since I was a kid. Later on, I even watched (mesmerized!) a group of two in ground combat simuIations, during exercises back in my days in the military service - impossible to forget those memories. So, it's no wonder it's a module that I've wished to have in DCS for years now. Your progress reports make that desire even bigger - eagerly waiting for the A-7 Corsair II module! Thank you team!

Here's a look at some of the things I have in the pipeline:

Ok so arguing with you clearly has no point. Therefore I suggest you focus your efforts on the respective thread and state your opinions against HBs decisions there, if that's what you want. Also I'm pretty sure HB already stated something along the lines of "we plan to produce other separate moduls with different versions of the phantom" so maybe your complains aren't necessary since it's already something they are planning for. We don't know the exact reasons for their decision and probably will never know them. We all can agree, that we want some variant of the phantom. Why isn't that enough for you? Your statements are always totalitarian and are therefore presumably mistaken for being negative so maybe try altering your phrasing too?

Now that's how you do an status update!

Feel free to make your skins available on the User Files as well! Textures are very WIP, but I already have it working mostly as intended.

No, those things happened based on DATES, not the model of jet. The 55 was introduced on the Navy side around '87/'88, and due to shortages many 33s were converted to the bungee visor using new edgerolls installed by the PRs, or even without that step and just adding visor bumpers or other leather material to help the visor stay put. From that point onwards, there was a transitional phase where some folks continued to use their HGU-33s as they were still considered serviceable and approved for use by NAVAIR and the newer 55s were still trickling in as the Air Force had been getting the lion's share of the allotments. During ODS there was a mix of them, 55s, converted 33s, and standard 33s all being used. But within a year or two after for most fleet squadrons the fixed-visor 33 had faded out and either full on 55s or converted 33s were in use. The exceptions there were reserve squadrons but they still had to comply with NAVAIR. But past a certain point the 33s would not be seen, somewhere around '94 from what I have seen so far. Aggressor squadrons were just as quick to work on switching over because the bungee visor setup was lighter, meaning less weight and stress on the head during ACM. So, no. Most liveries are being done based on dates, cruises, specific jets or at least airwings from a particular time. And based on those dates, certain helmets and flight suits are quite specifically "right", and some would be directly "wrong". An HGU-55 with the Fast Eagle 102 and 107 skins from 1981 are going to look just as retarded as Jolly Rogers F-14Bs from 2003 with HGU-33s.

M3 Reddit... Ki-84 AI A6M5c AI Essex Carrier AI IJN/A AI units. F4U-1

HB has a contest ending tomorrow, in which you can win a free F-4, and then the next day is 2023AB, which thr teaser for that had some hints that we'll see the F-4. Maybe... Just maybe, even though they didn't make the 2022 release, they are able to make a Q1 2023 release. Is that good?

It must simply be silly to want to see the numbers then. Obviously we should all just be Team Nv!! Yeah I'm not a team buyer. I don't care who is better... turns out "better" is a fairly complicated and situationally dependent thing. I for one will decide based on the factors which determine which is "better" for me and not the color fo the box. So any head to head DCS 4080 vs 7900XTX tests in VR? DCS is a nasty beast to accurately benchmark but more information is always better.

Agree. I'm ignoring the latest round as it is obvious that no matter how people respond it will only degenerate further. Best wishes and apologies. Bad mix of views and personalities, I guess. I'm not going to point fingers or try to steer blame, since as much as I hoped for a less aggressive and more focused discussion, it takes two to tango and I participated in this hairy mess. Cheers, happy new years and best wishes for 2023.

I think it's still on topic as we were both still addressing feelings of negativity and how best to deal with them. I honestly and truly believe that Heatblur will give us our Naval Phantom after they complete their current projects. In turn, I to wish you the best while we wait for its release.

I understand your frustration. I want the F-4, too. Be patient. I know it is easier said than done. Mike Force Team

Heck Yeah! What an update! Not to mention the fact, that the A-7 used for gathering audio, likely flew over my childhood home in OKC several times. Seen lots of A-7's in my day from the 125thTFS! Very cool!

All of this sounds nice in theory but what you're doing is destructive flame baiting and when you show up to 'discuss the naval Phantoms' it will inevitable end up being a pointless mud slinging contest.

Happy New Year!!!

I noticed an error in the Karakurt, the MG soldier doesn't seem to animate correctly. This will be fixed in the next release. This is how it should look.

https://discord.com/channels/1020277498363269120/1020303137145368627/1058724969674190878 We want to take this day and the end of the year to wish you all a Happy New Year. May the new year be filled with joy and peace, may all (or at least most) of your wishes come true in the new year. We as AviaStorm look back on an eventful year, we have accomplished a lot, also thanks to your great feedback and your great support we experienced throughout the year. It has been and will continue to be the biggest drive and motivation to deliver the best Tornado to you - the DCS community. Thank you also for your patience. We know that some things don't always go as fast as we all would like and that sometimes it just takes a little longer to get certain things up and running, for example the promised FAQ. But rest assured, we have not forgotten. But enough of the many words: THANK YOU, HAVE AN AMAZING 2023! We appreciate your support very much and will continue to work hard on our dream module.

Just to expand upon @Harkers reply: IRL if there is no LSP (launch Sequence Plan) the aircraft launch interval is determined by the aircraft parking spots on the carrier. All Aircraft that fly in a days cyclic schedule are parked on the flight deck. Aircraft working together on the same mission might be launched out of sequence. This will require them to rendezvous when airborne. This is accomplished at a predetermined location, usually at the tanker, overhead the carrier or at an en-route location. The location is pre-briefed and often depends on what the mission will be. More often, jets will launch less neatly, and your lead/wingman may launch several minutes before or after you. In this common case, you would meet at the prebriefed point. For training/local missions this is almost always at the overhead tanker or the overhead holding altitude. However, for combat missions going in country, you would likely meet en-route. This can be done without spending much gas. For example, The aircraft launching first can do a 90 degree turn away from course to allow the following aircraft to catch up using geometry. This would then use the same procedures as a normal CV Rendezvous, just without a constant turn by the lead aircraft. When using the catapults next to one another, aircraft are normally launched with a 30 second interval, but could be launched together by launching 1 aircraft from the bow (Cat 1 or 2) and one aircraft from the stern (Cat 3 or 4). This is called a “covey launch.” It is important to note that covey launches only occur during Case I departures. Case II and III do not allow covey launches to take place. If the covey launch occurs between 2 unrelated aircraft. Then they will just fly parallel at 300kts and 500 ft and at the end of the departure each go separate ways. If the covey launch occurs between two aircraft of the same formation, then one of two things will happen. Most frequently, the Airboss will say “cleared to join” right after the jets are safely airborne and they can fly together. This will mean that it is perfectly fine for wing to accelerate and join up with the lead right away before reaching 7DME, however the Case I departure altitude of 500ft AGL will have to be adhered to. Less often, the Boss will not say anything, and they will join up after 7 miles. For practicality in DCS we in Carrier Air Wing 17 most often use the Covey launch with Aircraft of the same flight. That means we join up immediately after launch within 7 DME. We do not simulate Airboss giving us the cleared to join, because we always know who we are launching with. So there you go, the IRL Procedure and how we do it in DCS. It is important to take not that DCS is much simpler than real naval aviation (starts with the parking spots on the flight deck, we can park as we want and move on the deck as we want for example) as such we simplify things in DCS. I hope this was helpful and sorry for the long reply!