Leaderboard

RAZBAM Discord F-15E

Hi all, with the permission of the Autor Marco1985_IT and with help of VSN Team, I present you the SU-15 Flagon AI Mod. It provides you the A and TM versions, with custom R8R, R8T, R98MR and R98MT (NATO sign AA-3 ANAB). You can download it here and start busting some Boeing or protecting them. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3328398/ Thank you. Enjoy!

According to numerous WWII Documentary reference footage this is the most accurate representation of colour from that era. null

nullnull

Just a few new pics of the AG Radar from RBs Discord. Notice the screen pixels are now simulated. null

Hello everyone, and thank you for the appreciation. About other mods WIP, thera are the Il-28 Beagle with Don Rudi and the Tu-22 Blinder with Hawkeye60. Here some very preliminar screenshot.

The Japanese users around me are very excited about your comments. They are very excited because Japanese aircraft are unique and hard to find someone who can reproduce them. Some are willing to provide photos if you need them. I am in Hamamatsu and can go see the world's last production aircraft (#440) every weekend, so if you need cockpit photos, I'll be there in a heartbeat. Among the existing EJs, #301 at Gifu Air Base is kept in very good condition. He should still be in the hangar. In addition to the Air Park in Hamamatsu, EJ Kai is scheduled to be exhibited at the Kakamigahara Air & Space Museum in Gifu in the future, and both are displayed in almost perfect condition. The Air Self-Defense Force has previously agreed to record audio for a game called WarThunder. There may be room for negotiation. For your information.

From Baltic Dragon ”Training missions for Strike Eagle. I'm going to break with the tradition of having long, overly complex sessions in favour of larger selection of much shorter ones, lasting max 10 minutes. So instead of flying a 40m sortie to learn about the navigation, you will have 5 or 8 more concise missions, each covering one system at a time. That also has an added value of being much better in terms of updating / troubleshooting later on.”

This is reported, I personally do not know where the issue lies, but we are now looking at it and will discuss with HB, thanks all.

Small test i did today: Numerical System for the Doras flown by Members of the Stab. Was a bit fussy work adjusting the size of the digits and finding the right spot the the chevron. Had to copy paste screens from the model viewer and do some alignments. But works like a charm! Of course, only if you use single digits. If you get higher than 9, it´ll throw of the effect and one digit will be displayed over the chevron. JG.26 Stab didnt use the chevron but only the beams. Easy.

Wow, that came out of nowhere. Btw, people should not need to “speculate” what you mean when you write something. And if they’re incorrectly “interpreting” what you write, then maybe it’s you. It happens to all of us.

New, highly advanced, smokeless, flameless propellant.

My theory on the F-4's release date 27 May that is becuse that would be the Phantom's 65th birthday

To be fair, I don't think any third party has a good track record for meeting the schedule... except possibly Aerges. It is what it is though. I'm just happy to be getting a Phantom and there's plenty of other things to do while I wait like fly the Mirage F1, get back to the Harrier after a long time of not flying it or even head out to the lake and do some fishing. It'll be here when it gets here.

The point of manual startup is that the pilot can check and confirm everything is functioning as desired. It gives a chance to catch somthing that might go wrong in flight and cause loss of aircraft/pilot. The pilot is not flipping switches in rapid sequence as fast as possible. They turn on a system, observe, and proceed once it's operating properly. You can watch this video where the pilot narrates and explains what he's doing. Automating stuff is easy enough. But it won't be reliable without multiple redundancies. Most rocket launches are automated for example.

As BN mentioned, using other sims as resource is not a great move. Anyway, it's not that the SAM is OP, its just wrong and so the methods you would use IRL do not work, while methods the SAM is specifically designed to not be affected by do work. Let me start by saying the following - in a technical discussion, let's not call it just "SA-2" because that can lead to many problems thanks to not being specific enough, but instead use the actual variant names. In addition to the above, the missile uses the wrong guidance method, wrong tracking logic, its missing half the features that make it work IRL, etc. It's all down to limitations of currend SAM codebase, although as Chizh mentioned in the Ru section of the forum couple months back there is a plan to rework the SAMs so my hopes are high. In case of interest, I do finally have the S-75M manual. This brings me to the next point. Vietnam used mainly SA-75MK; S-75M is not a "1995 version", it's from mid 1960s. They should behave very similar. One - The S-75M we have (at least, the radar of which we already have) would already represent a contemporary to the 1970s F-4E, but I would certainly love an older variant, like SA-75M, we already got the models for the launchers anyway. Two - with how the Dvina/Desna/Volchov work, breaking lock is not enough to defeat the system, as the operator can still manually track you by steering the TWS display onto your mark manually. SPJs are practically useless as well, best you can do is deny range information with a noise jammer or force manual track with angular deception jamming (invese amplitude modulation). S-75M is the answer to both, in theory. I think Iraq also had some older SA-75M(K)'s. However, seeing the inconsistent art assets, it still begs the question, which version is it supposed to be? ^THIS Due to the S-75M in DCS using proportional navigation instead of its correct command guidance modes, its much easier to defeat than in reality. Sorry to put it this way, but skill issue. S-75 is extremely easy to defeat. We have a 1960s S-75M with practically fantasy missiles, using proportional navigation like a SARH missile would. Again, I'd like to know which exact variant is this supposed to be. Again, try being more specific with the variants, you'll see there is a lot more nuance to it than just "vietnamese SA-2" or "inferior model sold to north korea". Not just USSR, the whole of Warsaw Pact at the very least. Keep in mind the oldest phantom HB is planning to make right now is a 1974 standard, Czechoslovakia received first S-75M Volchovs already in the 60s to replace original SA-75 and SA-75M Dvinas delivered in the early 60s. No variant was ever limited to just one missile in the air either. They always could handle 3 airborne missiles. If we do have the SNR-75M3 as Okopanje just sent as I'm typing this, and not just 75M, it pushes the time frame out a little bit. The missile being internally named V755 is interesting, however since the 3D model is already that of the V750, it makes me wonder if the stats fit the 20D (or any of its later derivates). So now, in no particlar order of importance, couple of actual issues with the system: It is not clear which variant of the system it's supposed to represent. At the very least the models and naming are inconsistent, if someone wants to poke around in the files we might be able to figure out if at least the values fit. Missiles use wrong guidance logic - currently they use proportional navigation, in reality they had 3 modes to select from. Three-point method, essentially advanced beam riding (system tries to align the missile with sight line), half-lead (system tries to deflect missile alignment line to point half way between pure lead intercept point and the aircraft), K-mode, which is half-lead in horizontal plane and vertically commanded altitude (this prevents driving missile into the ground). Missiles are in reality also only capale of up to 7G manoeuvres, 5Ya23 for the Volchov might be better as it was specifically designed to deal with low-altitude and actively manoeuvring targets. Site is missing all of its assets, including generators and transformer unit, command and control cabins, computer cabins. System is missing capability to connect to Vozduch-1 datalink. I have not observed the capability to launch on the TV channel.

Why hasn't this been stickied yet?

Normandy 2.0 Casmo AH-64D

Yo despues de que cierto creador de contenido hispano que va en plan clitbait "robara" contenido a un buen amigo que se dedica a hacer videos de aviación simulación, y encima se echase flores del robo por su "derecho a la información", no lo toco ni con un palo... además, mi canal lleva algo muerto desde hace cerca de dos - tres años.

To start with, I'm hoping that my little story below will convince you that I'm far from being a professional when it comes to PC optimization! My real-life job is to test software with no 3D involved. My PC is behaving like yours when playing DCS: GPU running @100% CPU staring at me like "give me more work, I'm bored". This made me believe for a very long time that my PC was GPU-limited, since many gamers use to say that whatever reaches 100% first is bottlenecking your PC. A few weeks ago, I did a lot of performance tests using different DCS settings. I was astonished to get such low FPS while using moderate graphics settings. Someone suggested that maybe my PC was simply CPU-limited, not GPU-limited. I first thought: "impossible, my GPU is always @100%", it can't do more. Then I did a little search on the Internet and found out that Nvidia drivers make the best of the GPU whatever happens, which means NVIDIA GPU @100% doesn't necessarily means the GPU is the limiting factor (explanations). I had an idea: since MSAA is post-treatment and dealt with by the GPU, why not comparing FPS using no MSAA, MSAA x2 and MSAA x4? Surprise! This made little difference, and my GPU was still running @100%. OK, time to test my CPU. I had been using a Ryzen 2700X for many years without overclocking it, and my RAM was supposed to run @3000 MHz. I realized my motherboard BIOS was very old and decided to update it to the latest version. Another suprise: my motherboard is compatible with the much celebrated Ryzen 5800X3D. This could come in handy if my tests were to show I'm CPU-limited... After I updated the BIOS, I checked my FPS: no change (blue curve ). Then I re-set my memory frequency using the new BIOS: I chose 3000 MHz (my RAM's "nominal" frequency). "No change", I thought...wait! (orange curve ). Then I tried my motherboard "Gaming Boost" (automatic CPU overclocking mode) (yellow curve ). Then I tried both "Gaming Boost" + "Precision Boost Overdrive" together (green curve , let's get back to 3). I'm now convinced my PC is CPU-limited. As I said earlier, I plan to buy a Ryzen 5800X3D. I'll let you know the results.

Thanks a lot, great Mod, works perfectly as AI background aircraft on my cold war missions. The bare metal effect is very nicely done, the only improvement I would love to see is support for Bort numbers, to allow more variation when one has several of these aircrafts on a mission, but overall an invaluable addition to cold war DCS

Just to clear things up, the only difference in “ground pounding capability” between the -3 and -5 is the introduction of HVAR on the -5. Apart from that they could both carry the exact same bomb load. Furthermore F6F-5s only carried rockets occasionally, as by that time the F4U-1D was operating off of fleet carriers as the primary fighter-bomber (VBF) type, leaving the A2A role largely to the F6F. If we are only going to get one variant I’d much prefer the -3 as it would be an excellent match for the WWII Marianas map and the lack of water injection would make it a really balanced match for the A6M5 Zeke. The ideal scenario would, however, be the development of both types as the differences are relatively minimal.

New version available!! (v1.6.2) Although I could not spend time in completing checklists, I hope the new incoming feature will be worth it From now on, it is possible to work in a complete Package mode, with common Commcard, Coordination, Notes... but up to 5 different Mission Datacards, that can be temporarily stored (same session), and recalled, to complete. Also an auto-update function will take care (hopefully) of updating TACAN, TOT and Laser codes for the different flights in the package. This will probably need some time until it is fine tuned, but so far it is working pretty well in my limited tests. I will try to record a couple videos and upload them, to show the intended behavior. Enjoy!

This is excellent work -- thank you! Looking forward to that Il-28 you have cooking, too. Have you given any thought to making the Yak-28 or Tu-128?

There are a certain number of Japanese communities. If you look at the multi-server, you can see that the Japanese community has multiple servers. For a long time, we had no choice but to put Japanese skins on similar aircraft. If it's still an F-86F, it's not much different from Japan's, but there's no F-104 or F-4, and the F-15J has no choice but to use the FC3's F-15C, and the F-2 is the F- 16 is substituted. Even in WW2, there is a current situation where the development of even the famous Zero fighter is postponed because the Japanese manual cannot be read. In the first place, JASDF's materials are strictly managed even if they are old, and they are rarely available, so detailed simulations are extremely difficult. There are not many Japanese programmers, so it will be difficult to form a team. That's why the possibility of the F-4EJ is so exciting to us. The F-4EJ is the JASDF's longest-running aircraft, and the first aircraft continued to fly for 50 years from 1971. It is also a familiar model for us Japanese. Without a doubt, when the F-4E is released, most of us Japanese will be flying in JASDF skins. I would appreciate it if you could at least include the JASDF skin from the beginning of the release for Japanese people.

You see, this is why god created the A-10C II. Whenever you are waiting for a new release and are restless, you can go back to the A-10C, remember that you barely remember any of it at all, and it feels like you're in a brand new plane all over again. One more week..............

https://www.tickcounter.com/countdown/3816402/f-15e-pre-order

Fix available with next patch, sorry for the inconvenience Inviato dal mio ASUS_I005D utilizzando Tapatalk

I ran my Pico 4 and VD via USB cable for a little while a couple months ago. The only benefits are a stable 1200 Mbps connection and maybe a little less latency. But after getting 3rd party accessories to mod the Pico 4 (Logitech Chorus) i went back to more convenient usage with Wifi connection and the USB-C cable on the power adapter to keep charging the HMD for longer sessions in VR. But for people with an older router, low Wifi quality or with a router not in the same room, the USB-C connection might be the best alternative solution. However, you can also connect a Ethernet-to-USB-C adapter to the Pico 4 and achieve the same thing.

In that case a bump of this issue is needed, as it's a core function of the missile.

так ты путь на свой поменяй! СтимВР то у всем в разных местах установлен! У меня так путь D:\GAMES\Steam\steamapps\common\SteamVR\steamxr_win64.json ты после того,как зарегишь файлы,пройди туда,где они регнулись и там поменяй пути на свои! HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Khronos\OpenXR\1 ActiveRuntime - тут править + HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\WOW6432Node\Khronos\OpenXR\1 ActiveRuntime - и тут через OpenXR можно поднастроить так,чтобы фпс поднялся не в ущерб(особо) графике а принудительный аргумент VR у меня стоит,потому,что мне так удобней,чтобы не стявя галку в настройках игры я могу и плоскую версию тут же запустить с DCS.exe

And we all know the Iraqis prided themselves on their all volunteer force, trained to such high standards they shamed even many European militaries.

Yup. Cold war is the future cuz there are plenty of planes and plenty of docs so systems can be modeled with a high degree of fidelity vs modern modules which are "a guess".

Hey, welcome back!

It could be set as an option for the player to turn ON or OFF. And in MP chosen by the server admin. This is the way it is in IL2 and it works.

I took a look at SA-2 composition, although at the moment I am more focused on SA-3 and SA-6, so I am not 100% confident on all possible combinations at time of Vietnam War. From what I got for search radars possible search radar options were: - P-12, Janesej, introduced 1956 - P-15 Tropa, introduced 1955 - P-18 Terek (this one was used within SA-3 to down F-117A and F-16CG in 1999), derived from P-12, introduced 1970 - P-19 Danube, derived from P-15, introduced 1974 This means within Vietnam Era War, P-19 could not possibly fit. If ED wishes to cover the Vietnam Era and likely Yom Kimpur war, they need to implement at minimum 3 additional radars and possibly additional height and iff radars. Note that each had revisions that introduced additional capabilities. In addition the cabins for these radars are missing (true for SA-3, SA-6 as well). As for the missile, the DCS fires SA2V755, which is actually which has factory designation 20D and belongs to S-75M3 variant. The tracking radar SNR-75 also had several versions and in DCS case is SNR-75M3, which was introduced in 1975. IMHO: for the upcoming F-4E release, the set of opponents has to be updated to feature more fidelity. Namely SA-2, SA-3 and SA-6 need significant improvements in terms of possible radars and fidelity.

Hi If you can wait until the last planned variant (M, after the BE) you will get a very different aircraft, much more capable and with plenty of toys to play (new HUD, advanced AG radar with tgt designation, new radar display, modern HOTAS functions, UFCP, MFD, etc, and... a RADIO ALTIMETER Regards

Razbam and "meet the schedule" should never be used in the same sentence!

Hello all, I've been going to Military air shows with my dad ever since I was young. I've been into simulators since Commodore 64 e.g. F19 Stealth and Gunship etc, then Amiga 500 with Original Falcon, through to Gunship 2000, then a big break to play all the Playstation era ... I remember being on the UBI website back in 2003 for Original Ghost Recon and seeing Lockon advertised, turned into an instant buy. I also remember talking to the likes of Stormin on the forums and logging into Hyperlobby. Memories! Here I am today with Eagle Dynamics

Actually if it is to be used as campaign continuity, then it has to be the same full airbase. If you are willing to implement it, then do it full throttle. If I have a mission in Syria map, I land at the Ramat David for example, I park the jet and I will use the trigger to load next mission. The next mission though will be in Sinai map, and I will start at the same parking spot I ended previous mission at. Maybe UM devs would be willing to cooperate in assets sharing?

Ok, do the math. He's 14nm ahead of you, doing about 11nm/min. You're doing 16m/min and that missile is going to do an average of 20nm/min (this is distance dependent - there's a peak, then the further you go, the smaller it gets). So what do you think, can your 120 cover the necessary 25nm over that one minute? It helps to think of missile flight time instead of range, you can compute the range quickly if you know the flight time and the average speed for that time.

I did a sneaky update for the Hornet guide (6/02/2023 revision), finally including the mysterious ACLS Case III Recovery. It's a fairly complex procedure, but I tried to simplify it as much as possible compared to the ICLS tutorial. Let's learn how to do a "hands off" landing and how to make a ham sandwich while doing so. Oh, and as a side note, I also realized that some of the advice I was giving in my air-to-air refueling tutorials for the Harrier, JF-17, Hornet, F-14B and Mirage 2000 was incorrect (or, more accurately, it made the player's life more miserable than it needed to be). Hopefully, the notes in the revised documents should be more helpful.

You're supposed to use your powers for good, not for evil.

Personally I find the F-4EJ to be one of the coolest aspects of DCS: F-4E! We'll be introducing a Japanese pilot option post-EA release as well

Yes. It probably as to do with the way the whole UI is structured. I guess that if the task to implement that was easy, and the fact that it is a hugely important feature, should already be done. It is really frustrating to build a mission, particularly when it starts to get more complex.