Leaderboard

Hi Today we will see what airfields we have and how many there are in total, we will take a close look at British airfields and fly over some of them. Airfields in France A1 Saint Pierre du Mont A2 Cricqueville-en-Bessin B17 Carpiquet A12 Lignerolles A14 Cretteville A15 Maupertus A16 Brucheville A20 Lessay - оригинальны A3 Cardonville A4 Deux Jumeaux A5 Chippelle A7 Azeville B9 Lantheuil A17 Meautis A21 Sainte-Laurent-sur-Mer A24 Biniville A6 Beuzeville A8 Picauville A9 Le Molay B11 Longues-sur-Mer B2 Bazenville B3 Sainte-Croix-sur-Mer B4 Beny-sur-Mer B7 Rucqueville B8 Sommervieu Beauvais-Tille Cormeilles-en-Vexin Dinan-Trelivan Fecamp_Benouville Evreux Guyancourt Villacoublay Saint-Andre de l Eure Orly Amiens_Glisy Argentan Avranches Le Val-Saint-Pere Barville Conches Creil Deauville Essay Flers Goulet Hauterive Lonrai Poix Ronai Rouen-Boos Saint-Aubin Triqueville Vrigny Broglie Beaumont-le-Roger Bernay Saint Martin Airfields in UK Chailey Farnborough Ford Funtington Gravesend Heathrow Kenley Needs Oar Point Tangmere West Malling Deanland Friston Lymington Odiham Stoney Cross Chailey Farnborough Ford Friston Funtington Gravesend Kenley Needs Oar Point Tangmere West Malling

Here's my humble submission - 3 Historical Israeli air force liveries with authentic Hebrew stencils and decals All of these could be used well in the upcoming Sinai map as these were used extensively in the 1956 suez crisis. First - 110th - "Knights of the North" Squadron - 1956 Operation Kadesh colors https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3318518/ null Second - IAF Mosquito - 109th - "The Valley Squadron" - Silver https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3318517/ null Third - IAF Training yellow https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3318519/

DCS: Mosquito FB VI livery competition Using the official template found here, we are holding a DCS: Mosquito FB VI livery contest. The top ten submissions will have their skins integrated into DCS world and their name will also be included in the official manual. Here are some of the requirements and details: The skin must be created using this template. The livery must be based on current or historic schemes from any Mosquito variant. The livery must be associated with one of the countries currently present in DCS. Here are instructions for saving textures with MIP levels using NVIDIA Texture Tools for Adobe Photoshop. After submitting your file to User Files, please post in the DCS: Mosquito FB VI Competition forum topic with a screenshot and link to your file from the ED user files. The contest will run until the 24th March 2023. All ten winners will receive a free copy of DCS: Mosquito FB VI, or any other Eagle Dynamics module, that can be also given as a gift to any DCS account.

null

Here are some progress Pictures for Build 05. Remember guys that this is WIP and also lack of data makes it hard to create these simulations, I do have references for naking the HUD but not the HMD, the HMD I have created will be more as a basic system to get started untill I learn more information about how it behaves and looks, that high glow will also be fixed.

@TOMCATZ: before you start, keep in mind that I wrote the following rather quickly. Give me a shout if there's something not clear /**************************************************************************/ I thought I had more time, it turns out I didn't. @The_Tau has already lined up some facts, so I'm just going to add some numbers. Keep in mind the "age" thing. In primis, remember that the Tomcat is closer to a P-47 (32 years) than a JF-17 (33 years). This is a hyperbole, ofc, but it bluntly puts into perspective what we are dealing with. In secundis, you can read a lot of diverse and often wrong takes on the Phoenix on the internet. Trust the numbers, leave the rest out. PERFORMANCE Let's start with the performance. Ab initio players tend to miss the huge differences between common missiles and the Phoenix. This will probably happen again with the Meteor, at some point. The following is the impact speed of the C Mk47 vs range. Forget the loft for a minute, and look at the speed. Scenario: hot, Vc ~M1.9, 35,000ft. As you can see, it is not linear, and it is rather stable after a certain point. Let's use a different chart now. Same ordinate and abscissa, this time standard employment, no loft. They differ a bit because the criteria and the parameters of the scenario are different, primarily Vc (in this scenario the target is static): Due to the low Vc, this chart highlights better the performance of the missiles. See that big jump in the performance? This is due to how the Phoenix is controlled and commanded by the WCS. All this is explained in the manual, but it is paramount from the proper employment of the missile. Something these charts don't tell you, is how the vertical plane is used, so let's move to chart #3, which shows the Apex of the envelope. The employment altitude for this scenario was 35k. To no one's surprise, at 20 nm the altitude is 35k. Then, it increases almost linearly through the envelope. However, this affects the separation at timeout: The separation is again rather linear, and it settles at around 35%-40% of the initial separation. Problem: the chart above shows a manually lofted missile. Otherwise, the performance is worse. So, to put everything into context, we have a long stick, performance between 15-20 nm is poor, until ~30/35 nm is ok-ish, but very slow compared to others. Speaking of others, let's see how much modern missile compare to the AIM-54C Mk47 (1986). Here we have the AIM-120B (1994) and the R-27ER (1990, apparently?). The 120B is comparable-ish, it has advantages and disadvantages. At long range, the Phoenix prevails. The R-27ER is the fastest missile in DCS and blows even the AIM-120C-5 and the SD-10 out of the water. I wonder what they feed the missiles with in China, the SD-10 is damn fast! lol Important: I consider a cutoff date in my scenarios equal to mid 90s. Why? Because the geopolitical situation caused a lot of chances in the evolution of the Tomcat, the AIM-152 and so on, and we don't even have the F-14D. There is little point playing with an almost mid Cold War aircraft vs modern stuff. Therefore, I won't consider AIM-120C and SD-10. This is only a partial relief, as the R-27ER is still a huge threat (although notching in DCS is too easy. It shouldn't be like that). Comparing R-27ER and AIM-54C, we notice that, within a ~20nm, there is no story and the R-27ER performs better. The 120B is somewhat comparable depending on the range, and the Super 530D sits between the envelope of the 120B and the AIM-54. Also, this is a hot scenario, the moment the missile has to turn, farewell energy. So, in conclusion: let's take advantage of our strengths and employ at a range that allows us to safely shoot, and allows us enough room for second employment. 60 nm is a sweet spot, especially if you add a bit of loft. Considering cranking by definition (55ATA), A-Pole is around 25-30 nm. This should allow Out before MAR. Or, you can defend, assess and decide what to do next. The target has to defend the shot (btw, shooting to force someone to defend is nonsense, you shoot to kill), as at A-Pole its speed is M2+: Whatever you have decided, now we get to a shorter timeline, the important is employing in a situation where A-Pole > MAR. Although the 54C gives you a bit more room. The tricky bit here is making sure that you are launching at an advantageous range. If ~10/13nm < separation < 21 nm, then you are in for the worst performance possible of the missile. So, let's say we are down to 15k, MAR R-27ER should be ~17nm, if you shoot at 30+nm, the separation at A-Pole should be around 14/16 nm, which is dangerous but feasible (I'm eyeballing here). The last step depends on your plan. If banzai, notch for a few seconds (it's very easy in the Tomcat, especially with LINK4), if naked go in; otherwise I'd abort, bugout and wave goodbye. The Su-27 should not be able to catch you. You can almost always force a draw against any opponent. I tried to keep this is as simple and plain as possible. If you are new to this, and it sounds like plenty of random words, trust me, it's stupidly easy, and it's not as fancy as it sounds: - shoot at long range (60nm); - crank, manage speed to reduce Vc; - A-Pole, go out or prepare a follow-up shot; - second shot, monitor MAR, then merge or run away. Obviously, the problem with long-range shots, is that they are easily to defeat kinematically. A crank, sometimes, is more than enough. That's why the Phoenix is very strong in realistic, low SA scenarios. For example, in the Cold War, RWRs weren't as precise or common as today. In the Iran - Iraq war, but also in the 90s Gulf War, you see people dying whilst driving straight into a missile. In DCS, this does not happen at all! Humans know everything all the time as SA is too easy to obtain on any server, the avionics of many modules is better than an F-35, and the AI can notch perfectly even with the most basic RWR. These are some of the great issues of the Phoenix right now, but the biggest is the lack of understanding of the missile which, hopefully, it is now a bit more clear. RESOURCES Various definitions: https://flyandwire.com/2020/12/24/intercept-geometry-part-ii-definitions/ WEZ, MAR, LAR + Tool: the plan was to create a proper WEZ model for the 15 most common missiles in DCS, I don't have time to complete it right now, so this is more like a NEZ model. Get the missile performance tool linked inside: https://flyandwire.com/2023/02/17/determining-wez-mar-lar/ AIM-54 Manual loft - Part I: intro to the AIM-54. The Phoenix is unique, if you don't understand it, you're going to have problems. AIM-54 Manual loft - Part II: data discussion: kind of interesting if you want to squeeze a bit more energy out of the missile - at a cost. First look at the "new" AIM-54: written right after the patch. They should still work for a quick, non-in-depth overview. Energy: https://flyandwire.com/2022/09/05/new-aim-54-brief-look-part-ii-energy/ Guidance: https://flyandwire.com/2022/09/05/new-aim-54-brief-look-part-i-guidance/

So, Total Controls is going to produce a Apache Keyboard Unit. We would lovey your thoughts and inputs on this hardware. Release date and price is not set yet. We might do a Kickstarter on it.

DCS Air-to-Air FOX1 Grundlagenkurs by GTAG Es ist wieder so weit, die GTAG bietet wieder ein Draftee Air-to-Air Grundlagenkurs für alle begeisterten DCS-Piloten an. Diesmal geht es ausschließlich um die FOX1 Missiles (hier: AIM-7 und S530). Warum ausgerechnet FOX1 Missiles? Durch die bekannten Probleme mit den FOX3, ist es unserer Meinung nur möglich mit den FOX1 eine tiefe A2A Simulation zu erleben. Alle Inhalte, die in diesem Kurs vermittelt werden, sind auch in einem FOX3 Fight vom großen Nutzen. Welche Kenntnisse sollte ich mitbringen? Du solltest die Grundlagen und Steuerung deines Flugzeugs prinzipiell beherrschen. Zudem solltest du dein Radar, deine A2A Bewaffnung, TACAN und deine Gegenmaßnahmen bedienen können. Mit welchen Modulen kann ich an diesem Kurs teilnehmen? Zur Auswahl stehen hier Mirage F1, Mirage 2000C, F-14B Tomcat und F/A-18C Hornet. Welche Inhalte vermittelt der Kurs? Gemeinsam fangen wir bei den Grundlagen an, können aber zügig zu den wirklich spannenden Themen kommen, sofern das Wissen dafür schon vorhanden sein sollte. Nachdem Euch die Grundlagen von Geometrie, Missiles, Communication, Commits, Cranks, Notches, Shoots, RWR und SA in der Theorie vermittelt wurden, wird dieses Wissen Stück für Stück mithilfe von betreuten 1vs1 gefestigt. Das bedeutet, dass ihr während euren Fights einen Flightinstructor an Eurer Seite habt, der Euch live „über die Schulter schaut“ und aktiv mit Korrekturen unterstützt! Anschließend werden die Fights gemeinsam mit TacView analysiert, Schwächen, gute/schlechte Manöver identifiziert und die Situational Awareness geschult. Ein Ausblick in BFM und ACM gehört ebenfalls dazu. Nach ein paar Wochen werden wir mit den 2vsX Fights anfangen, dort werdet ihr durch einen erfahrenen Flightlead an die Hand genommen und erlernt den gemeinsamen Luftkampf im Team! Zeitgleich runden wir das ganze mit einem menschlichen GCI ab, der ein Lagebild aus dem „AWACS“ gibt. Wann geht’s los? Geplanter Start ist in der 12. KW, also zwischen dem 20. und 24. März. Generell finden die Termine an einem Mittwoch statt. Änderungen können sich hier noch ergeben. Es ist ratsam mindestens jeden zweiten Termin dabei zu sein. Wie melde ich mich an? Wenn Du schon jetzt weißt, dass du die Zeit & Motivation mitbringst, kannst Du gerne @Papa Saubär#8642 anschreiben. Dieser lädt Dich zum GTAG Discord ein, dort erhältst du anschließend die @Draftee Rolle. Alles Weitere erfolgt dort. Bei Fragen, Sorgen, Nöten oder Anträgen könnt ihr ebenfalls @Papa Saubär#8642 anschreiben. Stand: 24.02.2023

Приветствую, Выкладываю гайды, переводы сделаны с польского сайта, как и в разделе по Вайперу(см. мою тему), сделаны отдельными файлами пока что. Надеюсь будут кому-то полезны в освоении этого вертолёта. Добавил некоторые тезисы в виде PDF по force trim уважаемого PilotMi8 Удачи в небе DCS! https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ZpOu1xun-Ge5PB5xsIZlXeAd-CcPfihA?usp=sharing

Good evening friends, virtual pilots! After the weekend I spent at the museum, I bring you more news. I took a few shots and established other contacts regarding my project with people who worked on these aircraft in our air force during their time. I am also bringing a few interesting photos and also a short video of the starting sequence and the pitching of the engine before takeoff (of course, this part is not completely finished yet, but I am gradually working on it). I wish you a nice evening and watching! Many thanks for your comments and continued interest in this interesting aircraft!

Salute, Having only recently started playing with the tanks in the Combined Arms module I discovered that I did not have any vehicle engine sounds in a large number of vehicles eg, the Abrams MBT, WW2 Sherman Firefly. So, I set about finding the cause. It turns out that this issue is caused by installation of certain mod planes and the sound file structure they use. The A4-E, Bronco and UH60 Blackhawk helicopter are three so far that been identified as culprits but there may be others. Planes such as the T-45 Goshawk and Phantom mods use a different method and they do not seem to be a cause. Ships also do not seem to be a conflict. If you discover an aircraft that is not included below, check the file structure and if it is the same as what I describe below, this same fix hopefully should work. When I set about finding the solution to this issue I contacted the development teams of the A4-E and the Bronco and a big shout out to 08jne01 Joshua Nelson from A4-E dev team who responded quite quickly with a fix. It was through this fix that I was able to work out how to transport the fix to other aircraft. I would also like to give a shout out to my squad mate DD_Sid who also assisted in getting this solution together. The fixes are very simple but do involve the renaming of one file and the editing of one file per aircraft (I used NotePad - other editors are available) so you may want to do a quick back up if you feel uncertain about editing the files. Please find below the steps required, as I say, if you have any other installed mod aircraft and still do not have vehicle sounds after completing these steps, check out the files and you should be able to replicate the changes I describe here on those. Please add a post if you do find another aircraft that this change works for. The fixes have been tested on 3 individual set-ups plus a server where the A4-E and Bronco are mandatory mods on our server (www.dangerdogz.com why not come and check us out, we are a fun group with no set rules about flying. We play DCS on Monday and Thursdays in the evening UK time from about 19:30 until 23:00 approx). We also fly GBS on Sundays and Tuesdays. Please Note I am not some coding guru so can not answer any questions other than what I have described below. These fixes were worked out via a desire to resolve the issue and a curious mind. Use the steps below for each applicable aircraft. I reiterate, this fix only applies to aircraft that use files within the "Sounders" folder. If you have an aircraft that does not use the files listed below and can fully prove that the plane still causes an issue for you, please let the community know. Testing Notes DD_Sid when testing has reported back that the engines sounds when flying the Bronco do not now seem as loud as before the fix and also lack sound bass resonance. If anyone reading this knows more about this (anyone from the Bronco devs perhaps?) and can contribute I am sure the community would be grateful. EDIT: Please see following post for solution to this issue. Fix Navigate to your DCS "Saved Games" folder. The default location will be on the "C:" drive under users and your name. You may have moved yours. When there, open the "DCS" folder. Open the "Mods" folder. Open the "aircraft" folder. Within this folder will be all the folders for your installed mods. You may also have some folders that relate to saved custom views for example. When these fixes were being tested on one of our squad mates he had a Spitfire folder and that was because he had saved his cockpit view. A4-E Open the "A-4E-C" folder. Open the "Sounds" folder. Open the "Sounders" folder. Rename the "Tools.lua" to be "A4Tools.lua" Open the "Aircraft" folder. Open the "Engines" folder". Edit the file called "J52P8.lua" with notepad or similar. Edit the first line which says dofile("Tools.lua") to read dofile("A4Tools.lua") Add a second line that says dofile("Curve.lua") Save and close the file. Bronco Open the "BRONCO V1.08" folder Open the "Sounds" folder Open the "Sounders" folder Rename the "Tools.lua" to be "OV-10ATools.lua" Open the "Aircraft" folder Open the "Engines" folder" Edit the file called "T76.lua" with notepad or similar Edit the first line which says dofile("Tools.lua") to read dofile("OV-10ATools.lua") Add a second line that says dofile("Curve.lua") Save and close the file. Blackhawk Open the "UH-60L" folder Open the "Sounds" folder Open the "Sounders" folder Rename the "Tools.lua" to be "uh60l_Tools.lua" (this reads uh'sixty' lower case L) Open the "Aircraft" folder Open the "Engines" folder" Edit the file called "uh60l_engine.lua" with notepad or similar Edit the first line which says dofile("Tools.lua") to read dofile("uh60l_Tools.lua") Add a second line that says dofile("Curve.lua") Save and close the file. Start up your game and hopefully enjoy the magnificent tank engine sounds!

МАС этот ещё десять лет могут делать, если вообще не забросили (что очень похоже). То, что его хотят отдельной игрой сделать, мне крайне не нравится. DCS держать на диске с 400 гБ бэту + стабильную, ещё и МАС бету+ стабильную гигабайт на двести каждая. И это ради тех же карт и техники. Но с упрощёнными управлениями систем. Сомнительная какая то перспектива. МАС должен быть встроен в DCS или не быть совсем.

As someone who's watched the disaster that was the P-47 and Fw190A8 livery competitions, I BEG that people who make livery submissions think of how applicable their livery would really be for DCS. Consider, the following: 1) WORKING BORT NUMBERS The last two livery competitions, some skins that were accepted did not having working bort numbers. This is a MUST for a livery, please don't submit your livery if it doesn't have working bort numbers. 2) CORRECT TIME PERIOD We are working out of 1944, early to late. Please do not submit liveries that are from a time period that we cannot represent in DCS with our maps and planeset, otherwise they cannot be historically used. 3) CORRECT CONTEXT We only have Normandy/England to fly over. Not the east front or Mediterranean. Mosquitos were not used in an extensive capacity in the Pacific. Sorry Aussies, but we don't have that map. We cannot use liveries from fronts other than the ETO west front, because we do not have those fronts. 4) SQUADRONS AND GROUPS, NOT SPECIFIC PILOTS Liveries based off of specific individuals in the past do not help DCS. There were not 50 Mosquitos all with the same nose art and 'John Doe' written on the side ever in history. Keep liveries to squadrons at the most specific, not pilots. 5) HISTORIC They had to exist in history. We do not need another Japanese what-if paint scheme, we cannot use those in DCS.

Here's a short playthrough of mission 4 of V for Victory, my DCS Mosquito campaign. This one is a Night Intruder mission, where we set out to wreak havoc among the Luftwaffe night fighters as they assemble over their airfield to intercept the Lancasters.

Oh god... now Electronic Arts are getting involved?? Guess we'll be seeing micropayments in the update - $10 if you want to use that runway, $15 to fire that missile...

Man, you seem to have very short memory. Just about an hour earlier you replied to a question about "successful AIM-9 shot from 7-8nm away" and suggested reading "Mig-29 shootdowns over former Yugoslavia", which turned out to be bollocks, again. Are you on a mission to say something absurd every time you post?

All four of those were Aim-120s. https://theaviationgeekclub.com/f-15-vs-mig-29-the-493rd-fs-mig-kills-scored-during-operation-allied-force/ But that´s just one of the many mistakes and misconceptions about Air Combat you´ve shown in this thread (as mentioned by a lot of people here).

>People aren't interested in a bomb truck >F-15E >A-6 >A-7 >A-1H >A-10C >A-10C AGAIN Not even going to be that bad of a fighter. Radar won't do well on the deck but that's true of a lot of birds we have access to.

The atc contains some code from the JAS 1.8.0 which was released to public on GitHub years ago. Since I talked to Whisky_actual on discord only, if whisky_actual you are reading this thread yeah this is my DCS forum account @Nightstorm I believe the moving map is a doable stuff with some precise calculation as we can have the aircraft coordinate through api. And a more proper map image of course. getting waypoint on it seems not possible. But we can at least put the airport on the moving map. We should be able to get awacs call data on our client export but have to find a way to communicate with the mod. Not sure possible or not. Love the community idea. The reason for me doing this was just want to get rid of fc3 avionics and for now make anyone happy would be a bonus for me

Everything appears to be working well for both the Single Player and Multi-player version. I just want to confirm with @whisky.actual that it's ok to include this code ported from the JAS-39C Mod. FlyingAlex told me that he'd contacted him, but I've learned to "trust but verify" and I want to ensure that everything is out in the open for all to see. Thanks!

Haha, yep. I thought he was referencing the Iskander-M I'm working on separately. This is in fact a K-300P Bastion-P with 3M55 (P-800 Oniks) anti ship missiles.

Yep, it's in the works.

Welcome to the Wish List section for the core game, this is for all those things you would love to see added to DCS World. This is a safe zone for free expression of ideas, there are no bad ideas that doesn't mean every idea will be added or can be added. In an effort to acknowledge your wishes more we have decided to start tagging threads and even joining in on the discussion if needed. This is not a high priority though so there may be some time that new wishes might go a little while before being acknowledged, but we promise to try and do better at letting you know we are watching. In the past we would just scroll through and look at them when we are looking at new features and additions to see what people are talking about, but no one knew we cared or watched, we do! The Tags: noted: This means that we have looked at your thread, we might add to the discussion and we will keep an eye on it. submitted: This means that its a intriguing idea and will be highlighted to management and the team, this doesn't mean it will happen tomorrow or even ever but it will be highlighted for possible addition to our internal plan. already requested: This has already been requested by someone on the team or in the past by another user, its already in the system but again, no guarantee it will be done soon or not. reported: This is just straight up a bug or issue that needs to be put into our internal reporting system and we have skipped right to that to do so. available: If a thread is marked solved then a solution is already available in the sim. Discussions: Wish List threads can be very personal, and as I said above there are no bad ideas. This doesn't mean everyone will like the idea. If you do not like the idea use the star rating on the threads We do not have time to read through a 30 post thread of two people arguing why something is bad, in fact most times we will just read the first post for the idea and move on from there, if there are 30 posts and a good star rating we will just assume everyone loves the idea. Yes that means that those of you that love arguing about ideas you don't like will actually help the idea get views. So if you don't like it, don't respond, give it 1 star. And be nice to each other. Added 'available' for tags.

Dear All, The Heatblur Simulations team and our wonderful partners at TrueGrit would like to wish you a successful and joyful 2023! Have a great new year, full of joy, great times and awesome sim experiences. 2023 is a big year for Heatblur, and we’re grateful that you’re along for the ride. It’s going to be a great one! We’ve just wrapped up a very tough 2022. From a personal standpoint for many of our team, with personal tragedies and the invasion of Ukraine taking its toll on us and our timelines. Despite this, we look back at 2022 with pride. We’ve seen tremendous growth in capability and size, forged new partnerships and shipped features and improvements throughout the year. While still playing catch-up; we’re right back on track on finishing the first of our next generation of high fidelity simulation experiences, starting with the F-4E Phantom II and leading towards the Eurofighter Typhoon. While we missed our mark on the F-4E Phantom for a 2022 release; we’re now very close to full completion of all major elements: flight model, radar, weapons systems, and other key major systems- and even ancillary content as another full length Meteor album! You’ve seen a sneak-peek in the 2023 and beyond video, and we can’t wait to fully unveil the aircraft that we’ve built over the past two years. For the Phantom- and all of our new products- we’ve invested heavily into building our next generation platform and framework. This enables faster future development, intrinsic multithreading, more dependable multicrew synchronization, far less of a maintenance burden, and new standardized features such as wear & tear, aircraft persistence, mass dynamics, and far more. In addition to this; we’ve also had our sights on JESTER v2, a complete rewrite of the JESTER AI system which will enable faster AI development and developer ease of use for integration in future aircraft such as the A-6. On the Eurofighter front, we continue to lay the foundations of this module through application of our next generation framework. Soon, the majority of the work will remain in high level parts: radar, weapons systems, displays and flight control systems- all leaning and benefitting from the completed next generation core. As an incredibly complex aircraft and project, the Eurofighter will be a litmus test for our team to ensure quality and accuracy while avoiding excessive technical debt. These considerations are key for a project of this scope and size, as we strive to minimize maintenance burden and excessive sustainment resources. You should expect to see much more Eurofighter development progress in 2023 as we begin to approach an early access release and feature completion level. We also look towards 2023 with continued love for the Viggen and Tomcat. We capped off the year with another major Viggen patch, and now set our sights on another round of additions to both products. We’re working hard to get on target on the early F-14A, which remains the largest piece of the F-14 yet undelivered, among of course other outstanding and promised features, such as TARPS or FORGE. Further Viggen improvements are slated for the early part of this year as we continue product sustainment. It’s time to get rid of those Early Access tags and square these aircraft away. Quality, consistency and pushing boundaries are our top priorities, and we’re as excited as ever for all that we’ve been cooking. Stay tuned for the full Phantom unveiling and for other exciting announcements with new partners and beyond. Thank you all once again for your dedicated support and passion. That’s what drives and motivates us, and we’ll make sure your faith is well placed with each upcoming release. Sincerely, Team Heatblur

Been messing around with taxi routes again. This is a work in progress and I'm also working on routes for the Forrestal. They don't and won't work in MP and I have no plans to figure that out...I only play SP because I can't commit to a group. Wife says no lol. Once I finish them, I'll deliver the goods.

Oh my God!!! This is incredible. It's going to be the best map in DCS. The amount of detail is insane. Congratulations for the great job.

UPD What airfields are there in Normandy 2.0 Airfields in France A1 Saint Pierre du Mont A2 Cricqueville-en-Bessin B17 Carpiquet A12 Lignerolles A14 Cretteville A15 Maupertus A16 Brucheville A20 Lessay - оригинальны A3 Cardonville A4 Deux Jumeaux A5 Chippelle A7 Azeville B9 Lantheuil A17 Meautis A21 Sainte-Laurent-sur-Mer A24 Biniville A6 Beuzeville A8 Picauville A9 Le Molay B11 Longues-sur-Mer B2 Bazenville B3 Sainte-Croix-sur-Mer B4 Beny-sur-Mer B7 Rucqueville B8 Sommervieu Beauvais-Tille Cormeilles-en-Vexin Dinan-Trelivan Fecamp_Benouville Evreux Guyancourt Villacoublay Saint-Andre de l Eure Orly Amiens_Glisy Argentan Avranches Le Val-Saint-Pere Barville Conches Creil Deauville Essay Flers Goulet Hauterive Lonrai Poix Ronai Rouen-Boos Saint-Aubin Triqueville Vrigny Broglie Beaumont-le-Roger Bernay Saint Martin Airfields in UK Chailey Farnborough Ford Funtington Gravesend Heathrow Kenley Needs Oar Point Tangmere West Malling Deanland Friston Lymington Odiham Stoney Cross ---------- screenshots here:

This is my entry for the competition https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3327837/

Last two weeks I quite often have Error 502 when trying to get ED website or run game. Is there any known issue with ED's servers?

Next patch is planned for March 1st ( as long as tests go well )

competition rules are in the first post. thank you

My god, man. Who do you think you're speaking to? You should temper your expectations about us tempering our expectations. I would like to see some core updates, that would be good. Some new map action, or updates to existing maps would also be very welcome.

...only if it does not affect performance please. My high end PC is struggling with all the eye candy already.

Thanks; I'm so happy I found your post, it saved my sanity Actually, you inspired me and I went to make a super clean/clear version. Now I can understand all messages clearly. Maybe not really realistic tho (and the volume is quite up too) Thanks again; It goes to Mods\aircraft\UH-60L\Sounds\Effects APR39.zip

With the Mudhen we know that BalticDragon is working on a manual and training mission, so I am sure RAZBAM took the issue that you mentioned seriously @Konovalov. But yeah, unbelievable for the Harrier.

And you only have yourself to blame for this. It is very clear in the terms and conditions, from the start of the programme You not planning on buying ED modules ever again? And there are still the trials.

Hey @WHOGX5 This is a known issue and the TLL lines are being worked on at this moment. Thanks for your report, nevertheless.

so while i understand the frustration i think it’s important to remember that heatblur’s policy on unreleased modules is radio silence until imminent release. that way they avoid issues like razbams mishandling of the F-15. also some of their staff are in ukraine continuing work on this product while in a literal war zone. and as delays go there’s been 1 compared to the A-10C updates 3 and the F-15E’s however many at this point that’s really good. and finally from what i’ve heard it’s still on track to release in q1 early q2 2023, likely either in the late march/april update since ed don’t release two products at once and have gone down to one major update a month.

It seems you've mistaken game meta for sim experience.

It doesn't depend on the Landing Gear, but the IAS & other variables of the jet: >250 : Speed brake stays open wherever you leave it, you have to retract manually when required >250 + pulling >6G turn : auto retracts >250 + >28° AoA : auto retracts <250 : Speed brakes extended only while holding the button in the aft position. Auto retracts when released Flaps @ Half/Full : auto retracts Flaps @ Half/Full + Weight on Wheels : stays open 250 kts happens to be when you're dropping the gear

I have to say you two made my dream atmosphere. While I don't agree with the J-20-MiG similarity either, Wyvern also raised it up quite cautiously and calmly, and good to see you made it clearer. Even exact genetics and evolution studies went through an age of morphology (and even now morphology is still important) before molecular biology comes to make a mess. I have accepted the truth that we normal fans can hardly find better way than "visual inspection" to rise a query on the relationship of aircrafts. Even the most precise guy can't avoid that before getting more info of the development and history. In fact, most people in the forum seem to know little about those unproduced early Chinese projects, which can prevent many argue here. I hope someone can make such a brief introduction and it could be useful. I would try to find some more info myself.

With respect, I think that's a bit of uncalled for pessimism considering the developer that we're talking about. When has Heat Blur failed to not only deliver, but not over-delivered to boot? Have a bit of faith, they've earned it. We'll see that Naval variant. It's the earlier, mid to late 60's variants the that I'd say are in question, yet I hope for.

unfortunately no more chance at this moment

Development is taking as long as it takes. That's the truth of it. The complexity of our products is quite unmatched, this takes time. The other option of course is to do what some 3rd Parties do and wait till its closer to being done and then release, but the only thing that does is make people wait longer to get their hands on it, it wont speed or slow development. If you are suggesting we should only release and develop one module at a time, that wouldnt work either, its a sad fact that you need income to survive, and we continue to grow our team to be able to work do more but this all requires funding this covers your comment about the Mi-8 (as much as we would love to live in a world where everything was free and no one needs an income). Thanks

As it was noted before AIM-54 Phoenix is NOT AIM-120 AMRAAM - its much older (concept from 1950s, design/electronics from 1960s or best case 1986 for 54C - 14 YEARS before 120C-5) - DIFFERENT PURPOSE! from different era! - Different shape/weight class (needless to say there are no more short, fat missiles, but rather long and thin - there is good reason for it) You have the biggest radar ever fitted to fighter, best detection and possible engagement range at least until Eurofighter arrives. From those facts IMO limiting yourself to 30-35nm shots (like you would employ with 120) is a great handicap and limitation placed on F14. AIM54 is fast in comparison to other weapons which were in service at the time of its introduction in 1974, mainly AIM-7 sparrow. Comparing it to 2000s AIM120C-5 is pointless However it got poor acceleration and ridicules' drag, employing it like 120 will put you in great disadvantage. Needless to say that AIM54 mk47 will have great difficulty to break mach 2 when fired from below 10k, mach 0.9 Firing at 30nm will allow bandit (except one armed with IR missiles or like MiG21) to potentially /spot you/lock you/fire at you/go defensive even before your 54 goes active. All he really needs to do is to go into notch for few seconds and your TWS track is gone. On top of that 54 will not have really energy to do anything to really threaten him. If your goal is to force him to go defensive, you might as well fire AIM7 preserving 54s for closer ranges for Fire and Forget capability AIM54 when employed correctly is amazingly good at keeping same amount of energy over distance. Missile energy wise for TWS shots, there is not much difference between 35nm shot or 60-70nm shot. MIssile will arrive at pitbull point with very similar energy. So why not use that to your advantage and fire from longer range, and stay outside enemy engagement range? If bandit is at above 40k when missile which still have at least 2.5 mach of energy goes active, PK of 54 is very high even against ACE AI or humans. Here is an interview with former F14 crew member that said that they doctrine of using 54s was to fire at 40nm ranges up to 30nm for TWS shots. then 30nm-20nm was missile "deadzone" as bandit will be much more aware of danger from you due to your proximity to him, and more likely to start defensive maneuvers. And then they would use STT at ranges 20nm and less. In my experience in DCS these ranges are very much true or even you could use mentioned older distances of firing at 60nm. In PvP especially, if bandit is high above 30k-35k at 60nm he still is ingresing towards target area, thinking he is completely safe. He might arm bombs, check phone whatever, and suddenly got RWR warning. He might even ignore it thinking its for someone else. You add to that at least 1.2 mach, 30k-40k ft alt you would be cruising, following Missile Abort Ranges (for 120 especially), and then you are extremely hard to kill to any SPAMRAM throwers (F-15 included).

I address this exact point in the last paragraph of the OP. I am not asking for the missile to have magic terrain avoidance. I am asking for adjustments in guidance laws to reduce the chance of the missile hitting the ground when targeting diving targets. Did I not make this clear enough in my original post? If so I will add clarification.

They don't need to be aware of the ground at all, that's the idea. They just need to be conservative about taking a dive and this is all done in relation to the target. This is accomplished by running a different guidance method on the altitude axis. What 'short' distance is, is very subjective depending on what your purpose is.

(...)"the DCP calls for the F-15 to be "superior in air combat to any present or postulated Soviet fighters both in close-in, visual encounters and in stand-off or all-weather encounters."(...) Directly from the "Development Concept Paper". What was your point again?

In the terms of the FX Development Concept Paper (DCP), the F-15 is "Optimized for counter-air missions" operating as part of TAC. ... It is no surprise, therefore, to learn that the DCP calls for the F-15 to be "superior in air combat to any present or postulated Soviet fighters both in close-in, visual encounters and in stand-off or all-weather encounters." According to the assessment, an improved F-4E with new wings and engines was not considered able to meet FX objectives. The performance requirements embodies in the FX Request for Proposals were intended to equip the resulting fighter to better all existing and proposed Warsaw Pact opponents. As of the late 1960s these were represented by the small, agile, MiG-21 ...(and -23 and -25 and Su-15) At the same time some compromises had to be accepted, so that the USAF's original requirement for a maximum speed of Mach 2.7 at high altitudes, for example, was reduced to Mach 2.3 with a Mach 2.5 burst capability. The higher speed not only would have prevented the use of a bubble canopy... More generally, performance was to be a consequence of high thrust-to-weight and low wing-loading, which had been recognized as the fundamental elements in providing the desired degree of superiority in performance and agility. By the time Boyd was assigned to the FX program in October 1966 he had already developed his theory of energy maneuverability... Thus the F-15s low wing loading and high thrust-to-weight ratio combine to make it exceptionally maneuverable. (In Israeli service) Combat is usually conducted at close quarters with infra-red homing missiles and, of course, the 20mm cannon, underlining the continuing requirement for the classic dogfighting type of aircraft. Excerpts from The Great Book of Modern Warplanes F-15 chapters written by Michael J. Gething and published in 1987. Can we put to bed that the Eagle was not designed with close fighting in mind? As if the 900+ round ammo drum and 4 Sidewinder stations didn't already cover that.

This would be nice to have in the damage model.