Leaderboard

@MAESTR0 Firstly, let me say thankyou for all your teams efforts - the general layouts of the airfields look pretty good and I can see the effort that has been invested to make the airfields less sterile. After a more detailed review, I do, however, have some concerns. 1. Many of your RAF fields have too many control towers. One was the norm. In some cases there were two where the airfield topography required it because of blindspots, or where one originally built was not up to the capacity required as the airfield expanded (which they often did as the war progressed). However, they were the exception, not the rule. From the screenshots provided, Tangmere, Ford and West Malling immediately jump out as being examples of where we have a surplus number of unprototypically placed Control Towers. If you would like information on where to accurately place control towers please PM me or @Fred901 as between us we have the data to help you get it right. 2. There should be no foliage (shrubs, bushes trees) within the perimeter track. This is an instruction laid down in Air Ministry Standards long before the war. It's just not a feature of Allied wartime airfields as they present a hazard to aircraft. Please omit them from Gravesend, Ford, Farnborough and Funtington. 3. There should be no concrete block paving on the runways/taxiways. Whilst large aircraft pans were certainly paved with large concrete blocks, taxiways and runways were not. Please adjust the runway/taxiway textures to reflect this at Tangmere and Farnborough. 4. There is a lack of dispersal points and blast pens on some of the large airfields. Tangmere and Ford had provision by 1944 to support 9-12 squadrons each of 18-20 aircraft - this needed a LOT of real estate dedicated towards parking spots for aircraft. These could be as simple as a small poured concrete circle, many of which were in evidence at these two airfields but are missing in your reproductions. So too the blast pens, these dating from pre-1940 and a very distinctive feature on many RAF airfields of the time. Please conside adding some of these in. All the above can be summarised in these annotated drawings of Ford and Tangmere respectively: The layout is 75% correct regards runways and taxiways but the areas where the hangars are is wrong by some margin. Also note the foliage and compared to period plans there's a dearth of places to park aircraft. Tangmere best displays the over-abundance of Control Towers and again, the lack of aircarft parking spots. 5. Incorrect hangar types. Please see my original post on this matter here. I do see a change has been made to the large hangar type being used throughout the RAF airfields from this: to this: But even this generic hangar looks little like any example on any British airfield. In addition, it's uselessly too tall! The only reason you'd have a hangar that high is because you were expecting to put a tricycle undercarriaged bomber sized aircraft with a very tall single tail in it, yet that framed glass full width transom window prevents any aircraft from utilising the height within - it doesn't make much sense. Please, please, PLEASE consider making an accurate 3D model of a single bay Belfast Truss instead; a 2 bay version is shown below: This would be FAR more prototypical for all the airfields shown and I wouldn't grumble if it appeared on other airfields in lieu of their actual hangar because at least it was of a period prototypical pattern.

WIP of the DCS F-15Es avionics bays open: By Metal2Mesh (Twitter)

For those who still say J-8PP never existed, here is a nice picture of a J-8PP coming out of a C-5 nose.

Not nearly as irritating as all the complaining on this forum about ED's communications.

I've added the Monolit-B surface radar for the K-300P.

So airfields like Biggin Hill, RAF Manston, and Dover aren’t on the map at all? Or are they on the map, but in low detail? If they are on the map I’d like to see screenshots of those airfields, so we know “how low is low detail.” This is the first “2.0” of any map, as well as the first time two entities released DCS products that overlap… and I feel it’s been handled horribly. *The announcement that claimed it was an “upgrade” and fully compatible Vs the F.A.Q. saying it was all new and not compatible… *The whole “L-shaped” map: hi-res/low-res crap. *Why didn’t Ugra upgrade their map further West and let DCS expand their Channel Map further East? Instead they enveloped an area they aren’t even allowed to map fully. *Does DCS plan on a Channel 2.0? If not, why can’t Ugra model the Channel area in full detail? It’s all very frustrating.

RCAF 418 SQN. RAF ADGB (Air Defense of Great Britain), Holmsey South, Hampshire, early- mid 1944 Mosquito early FB VI Series I A/C, TH_U Tail No.HJ719 "Moonbeam McSwine" flown by Ace F/L James F "Lou" Luma (USAAF) and navigator F/O Colin Finlayson (RCAF) Upper side painted in RAF standard grey-green late war camo and lower side in black specially for night operations https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3329275/ 418 SQN THU "Moonbeam McSwine" https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3329276/ 418 SQN generic night ops skin with bort numbers

Мне кажется, уже давно пора сделать так, чтобы планер продавался отдельно, условно за доллар, а приборы в нём отдельно, за сто. Положение тумблеров в приборах за три. Не хочется ругаться, но анонсировали с этой радиостанцией последние изменения у A-10CII. А значит, что так и останутся переключатели, одни вверх по ПКМ, а другие вниз? Про рулёжную и посадочную фару я сколько уже писал тут? TGP сейчас часто улетать стал куда-то в небо и чтобы обратно его вернуть, спасает только в STANDBUY и обратно. Верните наконец переключатель указателя топлива в баках в нормальное положение. Я уже и не знаю, кто и на ИЛС смотрит теперь, потому что ни хрена не видно в нём. На ИЛС смотришь как на монитор через мобильный телефон. Режимы WHOT и BHOT просто поражают, где едущая техника сливается с ландшафтом, но здания рядом ярко белые. Может в реале так оно и видно, но тогда на фиг нужен такой прибор, в который не различить ничего? Я уж молчу про другие болячки, которые сейчас не вспомнил. Радиостанция новая, клёво, но я что-то так и не понял, для чего она нужна? Не помню я на своей памяти, чтобы была хоть на йоту потребность в новой радиостанции. Старые болячки то будут лечиться? Или с новой радиостанцией наконец начнут работать стрелки на ПНП, указывая на маяки? Индикация есть приёма, а стрелки стоят? Сделайте поддержку Link 16 пожалуйста, избавьте от болячек старых, меня лично можете лишить радиостанции новой, лишь бы другим было хорошо.

Folks, please keep it friendly here. The rules for the competition are in the first post. We try to do a livery competition with our modules, its fun for the artists out there and we get to see some impressive work that can potentially be added to DCS. We are looking for real liveries past and present from any mossie variant, if you want to focus on 1944 that is fine but please dont discourage other liveries. thank you and good luck.

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

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.

Now that we have them mounted on the back of the pick ups, can we please get them as regular ground based AAA as well? Will make them easier to hide and to place them over buildings.

Hello, Just wanted to tell that I've the third mission ready, after updating it for v5.2 of the A-29 user mod, here is how it looks: You can download it from here: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ai6cuX3YQI26ic5Fxo7ky6T3EH1K9Q?e=InnJrD I will now continue with the first weapons training mission, hopefully I can have it ready soon Cheers, Eduardo

For everyone who is looking for the most realistic gameplay with coordinated, tactical flying on a PvP server, you should try out our new Dynamic 1-Life Campaign. This campaign builds on our highly popular concept of 1-Life Events, 2 hour long events during which all players get just one chance, if they get shot down or die or ditch outside of a friendly airfield, they are out. These events create a completely different dynamic on the server, where players coordinate together, fly as groups, and choose their engagements tactically and carefully, since your survival matters more than kills. Building on this concept, our Dynamic 1-Life Campaign consists of a series of 1-Life Events, the results and actions of which determine the next mission in the campaign. The missions are custom built for every event to combine as best as possible dynamics and realistic, manual unit placements. From mission to mission we see front line progressions, local break throughs, bombed and deativated airfields, newly opened airfields, and many more. The campaign runs every other week on Saturday night, the next one being on the 12th of March.

I think the world map is far more complex than the dynamic campaign so I don't expect to see it anytime soon (5 years at least). The advantage of my proposed map is that covers, the 1990-1991 ODS campaign, the 2003 campaign and the main ground battles of the Iran-Iraq War. We have almost the complete set of aircraft for all the three conflicts.

Those who use TacView are usually the ones who put it to good use: analyse, take notes and consequently get better.

Personally, not much interested in the F-16A unless it comes as a HUGE discount for the current Block 50 F-16 owners, seems more like a downgrade, brings only minimal changes. It simply does not bring the amount of changes like between the Legacy Hornet and the Super Hornet which is actually an upgrade.

Let's keep it friendly please shall we. @303_Kermit I don't think our server qualifies as simple sawmill dogfight server given the unprecedented amount of research an attention for detail that goes into building the historical missions. That being said, many of the things that you mentioned will improve a lot with the new map, since this will create different gameplay which will not be suited for those who only want quick dogfights. With the new map you will find longer flights, targets deeper behind enemy lines such as factory buildings and marshalling yards, and more spead out action, a change which I am sure you will enjoy. But we are not going to become a ww2 Enigma server. This is because we do not share the same view of how a mission should be, and I do not think that this type of server has very sophisticated gameplay. Enigma did a fantastic work with his server and it is great fun to play, but it is not the way we want to make our server.

Nachtrag: Ich habe meinen Fehler gefunden. Ich habe immer erwartet das beim ersten mal wo sich die Cue bewegt auch die Bombe lösst, aber danach gibts erst den eigentlich Countdown.

Есть мнение

For aircraft that can’t set weapon laser codes, instead of a janky knee board window, just have it in the rearm refuel window for the ground crew

The only exception to the “no-foliage” rule would be the ALGs which by their nature were temporary and thus the surrounding terrain was not extensively cleared. St Pierre Du Mont for example has many aircraft dispersals in the surrounding hedgerows.

nullI just wanted to throw something out there. I wanted to use my ipad as a kneeboard and couldn't find any apps or for dcs which sucks. So what i started to do was save these files into my icloud and then have folders organized. I also use my stylus pen with the notes or a scratch pad app to write anything i need down. The good thing about it is you can write over mission briefs and flight plans with the stylus and screen shot them as a photo to save or just erase the writing easily. It's not a perfect solution but it works pretty well. The case for the ipad is a otterbox case and i had an old nylon strap with a clip that i use just to keep it in place.

It is meaningless anyway. Given that the scale is correct in both games (that means that a kilometer is a kilometer and a 100m wide building is a tenth of that), you are at the same altitude with the same reference objects (mind the term reference - like in frame of reference), the FOV is the same (this is very important) and no tricks like speed blur are used. The sense of speed is exactly the same. Speed is way divided by time. Notice how neither variable is dependent on a particular game (or any other environment), unless it's bend and cheated. (One way for cheating would be actually going faster than displayed by the instruments. Which is something I can imagine for something like WT but not for any serious simulator). My advice for the adrenaline junkies that feel the need for a more "thrilling" ride would be, increase your FOV and fly lower (L O W E R !)....

I'll see your C-5 puking up a J-8 and raise you a J-8 over, presumably, California.

I re did the mission and now everything is working fine. I remember last night when I did mission 1 that at some point my Apache was not showing on the F10 Map anymore... I don't know if it's because I was hit by some ennemy fire during the mission but it's probably the reason I was not able to use the End mission at the end after landing. For now problem solved! Thank you

Well, it IS you. Just like it was me. I had the same issues, and then I started to practice specifically on how I launch them. I followed my missiles in F6 view, and looked at what happened to the ones that missed. I started launching in much better parameters, like high altitude and speed, 10-15 degree nose up, etc. And the hit ratio went well up. And the ones that missed, missed barely because the enemy notched them for instance. You're never going to get 100% but my hit ratio went from 1 or none out of 4, to 3 out of 4 regularly, and occasionally 4 out of 4. Coincidentally this helps your Sparrow game too. Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

A small participation with livery on No. 333 (Norwegian) Squadron RAF. I took over the "RAF 1944" livery on which I added the markings of No 333. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/fr/files/3329270/

@rob10 and @dark_wood. thanks for your answers. takeoff from ramp and uncontrolled was the ticket. it was kind of cool seeing them all parade past me, takeoff, and land in an orderly manner. null

I'm 100% sure Dover airfield isn't on the map, as its never existed anywhere other than in your post. Its possible you mean Hawkinge, which is actually just outside of Folkestone, not Dover, located in the village of....... Hawkinge.

Hi Everybody i just bought ARC A750 just for fun and testing, i will give you feedback on how it run DCS and other sims...there is first sample from me DCS video on YT

I hope there's more to the patch than 3 campaigns and a radio, and anyway who uses the in-game voice chat its pretty much useless as it is, due to inconsistences in getting it to work across many people, we have tried several times with our Discord group, we always end up back at SRS.

We’ve read that there is an intent for a “world map” for DCS, potentially something similar to a certain well known Civ Sim, and I’m all for that. It does strike me that if/when that arrives, that it’ll be great for modern day scenarios, but possibly inappropriate for historic ones, eg WW2 or Cold War times. That “opportunity” would appear to be a highly appropriate use of the current and planned DCS Theatres. Current day theatres would appear to be pretty much pointless when that world map arrives. However, just as that Civ Sim isn’t going to be able to present 1944 London, neither will a DCS version. Sure , someone is going to ask why we can’t have a world map with a date option, eg just wind the map back to 1987. Great idea, but not really feasible with current technology. Might be possible with AI at some point. Assuming that I’m not missing something really obvious, is that a suggestion that could be put forward to Theatre creators?

Even with a world map, it’s highly unlikely to be correct for either war, as the world map we get is most probably going to be based on current Sat Nav data. I see that as where future DCS Theatres make sense as stand-alone modules, ie to provide a snapshot in time for a location, whether that is WW2, Korea, Vietnam or pretty much any scenario not set in the present.

My entry is also a WIP, so will upload the files soon. DK296, the only mossie sent to the USSR. Delivered on 19th April 1944. DK296 was actually a MKIV, but we only have access to the MKVI, so it will have to do. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3319689/

This is the most likely cause of this issue. I haven't watched the track replay, so it could be something else. I'd suggest practicing this offline with the simplest mission possible: only you and the ship. The ACLS is not that complicated once you understand its cues and the order they appear on the Link 4 page during the approach. 1. Configure and enable ACLS before the "Inbound" call. Confirm the "ACL 1" status on the Link 4 page. If it's not there, then something (the boat and/or the on-board ACLS) is misconfigured. 2. Once reported "Established", confirm the "T/C" cue. 3. When the ATC says: "Final radar contact, 8 miles", confirm the "LND CHK" cue. 4. At 6 nm the ACL tadpole should appear on the HUD. Check the "ACL RDY" cue, and make sure the "T/C" cue is replaced with "MODE 1". Else you most certainly won't get the CPLD P/R option. 5. At 4 nm ATC says: "Approaching glidepath". Decouple the autopilot if it was coupled (use the paddle switch), then press UFC > A/P > CPL to couple ACL. This can be done as soon as the tadpole appears on the HUD. "ACLD RDY" cue is then replaced with "CMD CNT", and the "CPLD P/R" cue appears on the HUD.

Hi @BIGNEWYthere's no such information for almost any missile whatsoever - ie. can you find any unclassified evidence that AMRAAM uses PN or APN etc for guidance? But we know that this is basically what AAMs do and that's why ED has programmed it this way. Likewise, issues with intercepting low-flying targets and dealing with a diving target have been known about and dealt with to some degree since the 50's. There are specific methods for specific SAMs that we know of and are documented (eg. SA-2) and then there's the basic idea that this makes sense so use it, like most homing AAMs using PN unless otherwise specified. This is one of those things: Use a different guidance algorithm in the altitude axis in order to avoid getting driven into the ground - don't need to know anything about the ground for this, it's strictly about what the target is doing and thus I'm not implying any kind of terrain following or terrain knowledge or detection - the missile will still smack a ridge the target puts it between itself and the missile, but if you dive it will not attempt to beat its target to the ground when it makes its own dive, rather it will limit itself to diving to the target altitude (or keeping the target slightly below the horizon) until it's really close (say 1nm or closer).

this is resolved, thanks. in base SDK i have openvr and openxr enabled. just using "--force_OpenXR" in the command and installed the openXR wrapper.https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/topic?url=https://forum.dcs.world/topic/318268-varjo-aero-dcs-native-oxr-oxrtk-and-offset-cockpit-cursor-issues-fixed/&share_tid=318268&share_fid=74365&share_type=t&link_source=app worlds difference. Thank you again all the fast and quick help <33

I too have a dream. In that dream, people who say things like "I don't like your server, you should scrap your unique formula and copy My Favourite Server" simply go away, and never bother us again. I hope you will share my dream, and play your starring role in it.

I disagree. I love seeing what people come up with for these things! Let the creative juices flow!

de Havilland DH.98 Mosquito FB Vl Turkish Air Force 1947 I know this won't win, I'm just leaving it here for the activity. good luck! https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3329244/

We need this!

French Indo China conflict. A generic nose is included so they don’t all have to have shark teeth. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3329248/

Although I usually admire Zach's hard work and feedback related to paintschemes, the narrow minded and arrogant approach in this case is surprising and puzzling for me. The last thing Mosquito deserves is limited bunch of all-the-same looking RAF mid-44 skins with an odd Coastal Command livery thrown in for a change. I don't have Channel map, I'm not THAT anal about historical context (though I admit it's something "nice to have"), because I use DCS primarily as a cheap MSFS alternative for recreational flying. I'm also not Aussie, far from it (figuratively and literally, living on the opposite side of the planet Earth ;)) but I really hope MateusOV will participate in the competition and update and submit his awesome silver RAAF and RAF SEAC skins (the primary ones I'm using while flying wherever I feel like flying). It would be shame not to have at least one of these available in stock collection. How about Il-2GB approach: let's indeed have a couple of Channel/Normandy relevant skins for historic mission and campaign purposes, and then a collection of skins from whatever period / theater / user as long as they comply with ED's requirements.

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:

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

I don’t think a “1-1” Vietnam era campaign is in the cards. But we can get close. A server with MiG-19S’ , MiG-17s, F-4s (RBs and VSNs) and others duking it out is close enough for me.