Leaderboard

More Mud Hen. Ghost controls instead of hide stick:

Some new screenshots from the second phase. - Cairo International Airport - Ben Gurion Airport - places for SAM systems (Egypt) - Ashalim Power Station - Cairo

We pass news when we have it, we update the patch status post when we have patch dates or changes, we pass news in newsletters, on social media, you can even jump in our discord and ask questions directly. The fact is it is impossible to make everyone happy, but we do understand that some of you get very frustrated with development time scales, development direction ect. so thank you for trying to be patient, we appreciate it. With that said lets not get off topic in this thread, it is for last patch notes, and we will have a new thread for the up coming patch. As soon as I have a new date I will let you all know. thanks

https://youtu.be/g3yNnMiSQoc

ED being really disappointing on the number of vehicles and ships available and of quality, thanks to Currenthill and Admiral189 for being so prolific.

Testing USS Constellation, USS Congress, and USS Chesapeake defenses against Admiral Kasatanov, Type55, and Type52D. The FFGXs are ready for War.

IR.Clutch. All weapons have been upgraded and corrected. They're more accurate now. I've added MK23 Nulka decoys, RIM-116, RIM162 & RIM174 defense along with Naval Strike Missiles.

Yeah hopefully all the modern assets can get some updating in DCS. Currently the WW2 assets look great and are all at similar standard. Currenthills mods look really good and would be great to get them integrated into the core game.

This is usually how stuff goes in major game development. 1. Game forced out in crapy condition because shareholders demanded release to fit their profit strategies. And heads will roll(always the workers not the leaders who screwed up everything. 2. Game is released in a decent condition after forcing workers to work 7 day weeks for 3 months, the game makes billions upon billions in profits, the CEO gets a giant bonus, while the workers who now are just husk. Will usually be screwed out of their promised bonuses on some technicalities. Then 30% of the workers get layed off, because the CEO and shareholders does not share money. And earning just billion upon billions in profit isn't good enough. ED might at times seem a bit content since they have a monopoly and might not feel pressure to fix all that should be fixed. But it's better they have a few postponements then working their workers to death, just to meet deadlines based on financial market quarterlies.

No offense to anybody or anyone, but I'd rather have a @currenthillDCS Mod product in my missions than anybody else right now.

Yeah, right! When I was a kid, we had to walk to school. Five miles each direction, through two feet of snow. Uphill both ways. And we loved it!

interestingly enough, there is a quite thorough post about the AIM-120 specifically. no response here either. it sometimes seems that the developers do not get enough time to actually use the game and witness some of the intricacies.

No. 613 Squadron (City of Manchester), Auxiliary Air Force / Generic RAF 2TAF, Day Fighter Camouflage ED User Files Download Page A paint scheme based on a Mosquito of No. 613 Squadron (City of Manchester), Auxiliary Air Force, with the less common 'Day Fighter' camouflage scheme with ocean grey upper paint; can also be used as any other 2TAF Mosquito FB.VI Squadron as it has adjustable squadron / aircraft codes and serial numbers.

https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/helmet-flying-protective-type-hgu-30p-or-vtas-i-united-states-navy/nasm_A19800073000 I don't know how common they were but it would be cool to have the VTAS helmet mounted sights

So I felt something was a bit off with the results I had previously gotten, and did a little experimenting. I figured out that even though I had Tacview disabled in the modules menu and Reshade turned off, it was still having a massive impact on my CPU for the benchmark. I went ahead and completely uninstalled both Tacview and Reshade, then did another 5 runs at 1080p to see the new numbers. I also went ahead and did another 5 runs with mirrors disabled to see what impact it had, and I got these results: Quite shocked to see how large of an impact Tacview/Reshade had on the benchmark after it was completely uninstalled. I was also not expecting mirrors to have an affect on the CPU as much as this. Looking at the FPS Graph, in the mirrorless run I'm now hitting the FPS cap of 180 at the end while averaging higher numbers across the board. So yeah. It might be beneficial for you guys to run the benchmark after disabling mirrors and uninstalling Tacview/Reshade to see what kind of an impact it has on your system. Since I've gotten this extra bit of data, I'll take a deeper look to see if the 7950X3D lowers the CPU hit of having these enabled, but I'm also starting to worry if the FPS cap of 180 might be limiting the benchmark now. Edit: So it seems disabling Tacview in the module manager doesn't stop it from recording. Bit of an oops on my part:

We will have some nice surprises of long awaited items, but temper your expectations please: in the discord I was indeed referring to the fuel pylons. We shall see what else we might have put into the patch. To avoid disappointment though: - it is not the -D. - it is not a clean cockpit. - it is not the early A (yet). - it is not glove vanes.

First of all, we are not on discord, but on the official Polychop Simulations channel here, on the ED forum. If communication on Discord is so good, then they could put some information here. Why this is not happening, I don't know. If someone demands something in terms of information, and someone else knows, it usually means that communication itself is not well conducted. As you can see, the last official post was here in June'22. There were considerable plans at the end of 2021 and it did not happen in much of it in 2022. Therefore, it is hard to think that the model is on the right way to release. Several years have passed since the announcement and there were many months of stop of this project as well. Looking at some problems related to Gazelle and lack of reaction, unfortunately Im not an optimist in this case, but I hope that Im wrong and the model will come out the holidays this year or earlier . Btw. do not compare advancement of F-16's systems to OH-58. This is a completely different level of avionics and integration. Note also that progress is very small and these are small differences when we finally see something new, not milestones according me. Of course, I wish the authors all the best and I keep my fingers crossed for this module.

I'm pretty sure that it will be more than a regular update why else would it have taken so long? Normal updates don't take two months. Also, it's highly likely that whatever that is, is a big engine update that would affect everyone. If a module release or update is not ready in time, it just gets pushed back into the next month, this had happened before. This is obviously something that can't just be left out of a patch, and that takes a lot of time to get right. As such, it's perfectly reasonable to expect the 2.9 update (if they don't call it 3.0, which they may) to come this month. No F-15E, but Normandy is a maybe.

Hello, when we have more news and dates we will share it. thank you

I really hope one day to have ground units as modules, similar with the official planes... with good interiors, VR compatible, MP capabilities and all those good stuffs... And we need to salute and encourage all these great modders, dedicating their time to all of us... They are only few of them and I would say they are equally great guys!

Someone need remember with: 1- ED has no a damocles sword over your head about reach a deadline with your entretainment branch, part of the team build some entretainment software with has no promise dates, and many info required "problems" to get and build them on a final product to a final costumer. 2. ED has build defense / professional software with has deadlines and your staments has very clear (Defense / profesional market has many permisive with a entretainmet market...), of course, the "profesional" get all required info and go very forward about they required and your issues on your products. 3- ED has more of 30 years on the software develop industry and some members has more time into them... they think very well about that "issues". 4- That discussion has repeat ever and ever from Flanker... About "you get it when its ready"... only need see the actual "AAA" gaming develop industry... with great "promises" with very fantasy false demos, great quantity of clones, very more great downgrades, the continual repetition and repetitive use of old software with just a few nice graphical updates, great quantity of DLCs and incomplete software. The same situations about talking about monopolies.... build hardcore simulation has the same to build a XVI Zelda version...

Given all the delays that last major military aviation projects had (I'm not bashing F-35 only, mind you), I'd say the defense industry is the very last one I'd consider as an example of meeting any deadlines ;).

Exactly, good point. That's what I said after buying the Apache that no more money from me to ED as long as they do not show some progress. Not even only on the field of development, but the communication of the progress itself. F-15 pre-purchase opened? Not interested, sorry!

If you have any EA or prepurchase running without ETAs you actively support this standard yourself.

i love that this guy is still publicly working on and making improvements to this, unlike the f35 a/b/c mod, which went silent a while ago, but keep this up, this looks amazing and hopefully it wont be too long before you have the finished product!

In testing with Civil Aircraft Mod, its B737 can start from Groom Lake's spots A06 / A07 / B01 / B03 / B05. Historical Wingspan values related to USAF: DC-9 -30 (C-9 / VC-9) = 28.5 m Gulfstream G550 (C-37B) = 28.5m B737 NG (C-40) = 34.3 m or 35.8 m B757 (C-32) = 38.0 m KC-135 = 39.9 m C-130 = 40.4 m C-17 = 51.8m B757 is also in Civil Aircraft Mod and it cannot spawn in Groom Lake / NTTR. 36 ~ 37 m width is set as a limit of its spawning on spots. I feel that map design realistic.

You paid for a U.S. Hornet circa 2005.

5800x3d + 64gb Cl16 + RTX3080 12gb 1920*1080 High Preset WITH MIRRORS: NO MIRRORS:

Dear all, A little update on DCS: AH-64D development. We understand that some of you are concerned about the lack of new features. No resources have been taken off the AH-64D, and work continues ahead steadily. Much of this work has focused on bug fixes and tunning. Before we add too many new features, it is very important that we first have a solid foundation to build upon. Additionally, a big push on bug fixes and tuning has been required to avoid player confusion and frustration. Some of the larger bug fixes and tuning that have been underway include: Tuning how George calculates target range. Corrected TEDAC video errors. Adjusted HUD only views. Tuning damage model like flying sans-tail. Adjusted gun fire shake. Fix multi-crew ASE sync. Removed HDU glare. Fix some engine start issues. Tuning LMC. Further improvements to the PERF page. Better IR texture maps. Lesson, input, and tool tip improvements. Fixes to the CMWS flare system. Tuning of SAS collective channel issues and altitude/attitude holds. Fix SAS tones and hold behaviors. Tuning yaw offset. Fix PNVS stutter. More accurate weight calculations. Trim tuning. Multi-crew hold modes sync. Fix hold modes disengagement logic. SAS fixes. Better SAS Collective altitude hold. More realistic slip ball behavior. APU not requiring fuel fix. Fixed various warnings and advisories. Fixed standby indicators. Tuning TADS and NVS relationship. This is to name a few. A great deal of work on this front is ongoing. Although bug fixing and tuning has been our priority, we have certainly been working on new features that are not gated by existing bugs. Some of these include: Option to remove the auxiliary fuel tank for more cannon rounds. Adding the AGM-114L radar-guided Hellfire. Adding the Improved Datalink Modem (IDM) and LB Net. Adding the Fire Control Radar (FCR). Adding the Laser Spot Tracker (LST). Adding animated engine nacelle cooling doors. Wipers removing rain drops. Many of these items are rather complex and take time. Please be patient. Kind regards, Wags

Modeling according to serial production standards. New parts: Tail fin V intake. APU vents. Chaff and flare dispensers.

Old videos... F-16C January update, no "MT - dx11" but FPS go from 90-110 over Sinai map on external. F/A-18C January update, no "MT - dx11" but FPS go from 80-100 over Cairo on external model on Sinai map, Cockpit jump to 110-130 The DCS: AH-64D | Image Auto-Tracker December 2012 dont show FPS counter, previous engine version?. All Wags videos recorded to 2160p 60 FPS (4K), recording / capture video process can reduce FPS.

The Wags ARC-210 video start to 100 FPS on external view over London N 2.0, and jump to 120-130 FPS on cockpit...

Could be, but based on the information they posted earlier, they might be at a point where it's not feasible to update the non-multithreaded branch. If they weren't, they would have put out a patch in February as usual. It seems the real development was done on the MT branch for a while now, and I'm afraid there's no going back to the old one now, as far as ED devs are concerned. So, however long that "little more time" means, they'll have to get it done before anything is released.

It’s surprising, given how complex DCS is, that any new player wouldn’t search out more info or help with it. Going to the official site is an obvious move. But… The vast majority of players only play any game for a few minutes total, especially games that are free. Even paid games have a very low hours played stat. It used to be possible to see these figures on Steam. I recall DCS had something like 4.5 million owners, go figure it’s free. But their median playtime was only a few minutes. So being able to reach those players with the free content offers seems like a good move. Something simple like putting a link to it in that News Flag which appears on the main screen would do the job.

A me non è mai piaciuto troppo il 104. Aereo mediocre la cui longevità in am è perfetto emblema dell'incapacità (se non peggio) del management italiano.

There is a "cheat" mode like "MFD / HUD only view" (CTRL+F1 or so, can't look ATM) with a full front view with just the enlarged MFDs and the HUD visible. I use this a lot, cause in VR the MFDs' content is even hard to recognize and identify. Also you can do a Zoom Into for better resolution. Still it's hard to find targets through the ground clutter like trees, rocks, buildings. I think that simulates real life problems - your targets will do almost everything so that you don't see them. Same with IR (or radar), the days are gone where vehicles are so much hotter than their surroundings. If you take a parked truck the IR signature will match the surrounding temperature but the black, in sunlight heated up tyres will shine bright in (WHOT) IR. Impressively realistic. Try an (IR) Maverick - D in plain daylight desert and the seeker gets a pretty hard job finding a proper heat signature. That's what the MFD's brightness, contrast and IR intensity (and radar gain) switches are for. Play around with the settings in WHOT, BHOT and TV mode and you will notice that a proper setting will result in the target gets killed rather than you. With old, more arcade like flightsim times an IR sensored weapon "saw" every tank all the time, it was always the best choice (even in the old Falcon 4.0). With the actual F16 / Mavericks I prefer TV guided most of the time and choose IR only for night missions (well, I don't use Maves at all ATM due to broken boresighting) or in winter conditions. I still have to figure out if vehicles change heat signature in relation to cooling down after travel. SAM launchers (the launcher ramp) are pretty cold, as they just sit and wait and are powered via a remote generator with litte "garbage energy" like heat losses. A tank in full speed is a very hot target. The right mode, the right sensor, the right weapon, that's the key.

Well, quite interesting how those 'kids' would get along with something extreme complex like DCS that needs a lot of research and dug in deep into manuals etc. The more funny is it that just looking into the discussions for DCS in Steam the 4th topmost and pinned entry covers the module transfer from Steam to the standalone version: Sometime its quite convenient to get out of the bubble and think outside the box to get some valid and even precious information - but maybe that's too much to ask for the – as we commonly state in Germany - 'generation rear seat' (='Generation Rücksitz' for those kids pampered by their parents until and even beyond when they normally should be adult)

Didn't even know there was a survey, but that's because I don't watch that channel. Biased or not, it's always interesting to see the results though, especially if number of participants was in 4-digit range.

As far as I know it is AMRAAM capability, HARM has HOJ too, but atm we don't have this implemented for F-16 and I don't know if we will have this in the future. I have asked for HARM HOJ and fuzing options but I got no answer.

I believe this is what was referred to based on my readings from the HB Discord and the Hoggit post about the same thing.

They were common-ish. VTAS-I was exclusive to the F-4J and S. I'm not sure about the N-model ones (Model B Phantom retrofits). They synced up the AIM-9G and the radar together, much like how soviet designs sync up with the IRST slew, and that allows the radar and/or the AIM-9 to be locked. The story of HMDs is a funny one- ironically enough, it wasn't one of the big powers, but actually South Africa that put them into service over Angola first. The US only really started using them in 1969 and I'm not sure if they had them in combat duty over Vietnam or not. Combined with SEAM and the AIM-9G's higher allowance for off-boresight shots than the AIM-9J, it's honestly not surprising that the USAF never pursued it. What puzzles me more, honestly, is that the F-14 and F-15 were slated to use it and both tested with it at ACEVAL '74 with the improved VTAS-II, but neither actually ended up using it. Not sure if it was because VTAS itself was bad or because the USAF/USN saw it as unnecessary, or if Congress took a fat L from Vietnam and decided that further defence spending bad, humminah humminah, awoogah.

Darf man vorsichtig optimistisch sein? (Also MT=Multithreading) ist aus dem Video:

Its Valid in DCS. B.Die Ram + SMA + VCACHE = Better Performance in DX9/11 Graphics Engines.

A little bit of Pantsir-S1 action. I've implemented the controlled bursts of the 2A38M.

For those interested in VR I've started a thread where I've so far run a baseline on a 5900x/3090 system. Just waiting for the cooler for a 7900x3D/4090 system and will re-run the benchmarks sometime this coming week. I'm not running any non-VR benchmarks so these threads seem to complement each other. I'm also CPU limited on the 5900x/3090 setup.

We have a special ordnance we drop. Canoes filled with slightly more aggressive and less apologetic beavers. Don't laugh, they inhabit the area at the mouths of rivers leading to large cities and create damns which slowly floods the area and cuts off the water supply downstream. Its sort of the long game but is a really dick move in the end.