Leaderboard

Razbam F-15E Strike Eagle: Driver looking really good!

Check Six Simulations - 3rd party developers doing a community survey. Make your voice heard: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdLRjfPtJW6LNlyKa91_84mBhfgqq4i2f9OfKerAELes6E4QQ/viewform?usp=sf_link

This is a dangerous duo.

Cannot do that. We are a bunch of insolent babies.

I think making the neutral faction playable would add some much needed depth to the possible scenarios to be made within DCS, especially in multiplayer servers where players could coordinate together to try and enforce a no fly zone or simply defend their airspace and territory from the conflict the 2 other factions are fighting

Well , Currenthill , you are great ！we need these rare mods ! Could you make other mod of china ,such as DF series ballistic missile ?

Горячее сердце нашего воина

Display name is -> Difarsuwar Airfield

Smoothness is more a matter of how regularly the frames are displayed than how many... Motion reprojection sends a perfect steady 90fps (assuming the headset has 90Hz display(s) ) from only 45 actual rendered frames. This is the reason why it is smoother than a framerate running like crazy between 60 and 80. I'm in VR for almost 3 years now, and I still really can't figure how people can play without Motion Reprojection without dying from headaches, or simply throwing up ! (No offence @BIGNEWY ).

bottom right of the main menu screen shows you MT is enabled, also your fps counter when enabled

Мне бы ХОТЕЛОСЬ,чтобы была возможность в командирской кабине загнуть вверх к обшивке фонаря вентилятор, там ведь два шарнира,(или возможность вообще убирать его ,как зеркала) очень мешает обзору.

A new vid from the “Operations Room” channel - the 1970 furball of Israeli F-4Es and Mirage IIIs vs. Soviet piloted Mig 21s.

I'm enjoying FORGE. I'll keep it random if/when.

agreed, the ACM panel falling off (and associated field expedient fixes) is part of this. the ACM panel fixes form part of the looks of the cockpit too welcome to military aviation, it's a myth that everything works all the time every time, I spent 7 years on Eurofighter and can attest to this first hand even on delivery jets (with less than 50 hours). I appreciate your preferences and can sympathise with what your saying, I'd have loved my jets to have arrived from the factory and been able to go straight on ops. but sadly what your expectations are, are unrealistic both in terms of back than and even nowadays also, i believe that that when finalised you'll be able to disable this feature iirc, so effectively your concerns are moot.

"Wag's 'War-Wagon'" UP-J NS838, No. 605 Squadron (County of Warwick), March 1944 ED User Files Download Page A Mosquito night intruder skin with fixed markings to represent "Wag's 'War-Wagon'" UP-J NS838, flown by Flt Lt Alan Wagner and Fg Off ‘Pip’ Orringe of No. 605 Squadron (County of Warwick), Auxiliary Air Force, based at RAF Manston. This version includes the standard luftwaffe cross for the three kill markings on the nose, I've also uploaded a version with historical kill marks, which can be found in my user files.

Hello fighters! We're excited to introduce what you've been asking about: Airfield Lighting Systems. Lights . . . . . . . . . . . . . ON Unexpectedly, many airfields were equipped with permanent lighting systems. The Allies and the Wehrmacht ensured round-the-clock operation of airfields and already in those years, lights hidden in the ground were created - the ancestors of airfield lights that we can see now in airports. Depending on the situation, you can choose the mode when the lights are on or off. P.S.: We congratulate the ED team on the introduction of multithreading in DCS World. The entire DCS community benefits from this: for users, this is an increase performance, for developers, this is pushing the boundaries of development possibilities. Tangmere Needs Oar Point Odiham Amiens Glisy

There is a vocal portion of the community that does not understand, over hypes themselves based on anything and then complains when their overinflated expectations don't match reality. I can see why a small dev team would choose to just not communicate.

I certainly understand the desire not to overcomplify things as long as it doesn't need to be done. Nevertheless DCS is still a simulator, with the goal of the supercarrier being to have the most realistic depiction of a Nimitz class and its operations. The fact is that we're obviously missing some rather important interactions and signals with the Deck crew when preparing for a Catapult takeoff, so i don't see any reason from a gameplay perspective in the light of what the Supercarrier is supposed to be that would speak against implementing afformentioned missing features.

Please find here a manual for the ARC-210 as it is current being modelled by ED. Or download here: https://www.476vfightergroup.com/downloads.php?do=download&downloadid=499 TO 1A-10C-ARC-210-ADM.pdf

Hi gents, i would like to know if there is a way to have the possibility to set all the weather preset to "0ft" so i can fine tune where i'm gonna be able to see the ground when approaching during ILS GCA or else. I saw that all overcast are stuck to a minimum of 1300ft and i would like to have for exemple 150FT or even less to have a very dirty OVC like in real life and not necessary fog Thank you

Hi, DCS 2.8.3.37556 Open Beta Multithreading or normal made no difference F-16 Litening TGP travels downwards when commanded POINT or AREA track from over 54 NM slant range. In INR (TMS aft) it says in place, but when commanded POINT or AREA track, coordinates start running on the display and the view starts to travel downwards. Steps to reproduce: Fly towards a steerpoint over 54 NM away TMS aft - Note the pod stays in place Enter either POINT or AREA track - Note the pod travels downwards and coordinates change on screen TMS aft - Pod returns to STPT, view stays in place and coordinates are stable Repeat steps 3&4 and keep flying towards the STPT When withing 54 NM slant range, note that POINT or AREA track work as they should: Coordinates are stable and the view stays in place. I say repeat steps 3&4 because it seems the pod might not stop moving on its own even when inside 54 NM slant range, if commanded to track when outside 54 NM. So to test, keep repeating the TMS aft / track commands. Best regards, itn F16 Litening over 54NM slant range.trk

Hey guys, like many others I had the problem that I always got the red notice "CPU bound to mainthread" like many others. Turning off motion reprojection in the OpenXR toolkit AND the OpenXR-Runtime solved this problem! FPS went immediately up from 30 to > 60 with nearly maxed out settings. No stuttering annymore MT works now better than ST. Try it out! I9-10900K, RTX3080, 32GB RAM I hope this will help you out! EDIT: Although my FPS went up to nearly 80 (high in the sky) I have to admit after some testing that there is still stuttering and I have the impression that even with much lower FPS (30 -45) in ST the gameplay with activated motion reprojection was much more fluent...and the images are far more crispy...

Deversoir Air Base? I think there:

Agree 1000%, hopefully, ED spends some time improving the AI BVR tactics to be much smarter. The current AI tactics feel like they came from a Youtube content creator.

I agree with you, since day 1 of the new BVR AI I've criticized this behaviour, and a few others. - the AI always cranks and dive after firing its missile(s). But cranking AND diving only makes sense if the enemy is very high threat, and you suspect your'e close to the MAR of the enemy plane. Watching AIs F-18 firing Aim-120C from 30 miles and diving, while they're against a Mig-21 is ridiculous. They give up altitude and offensive potential for nothing. - the AI will ALWAYS go straight at the enemy until they fire their own missile. That means, we can see planes like Mig-21, Mirage F1, F5... happily go in a straight line to be slaughtered 100% of the time by superior planes and missiles. Against superior planes, they SHOULD either try to run away, or try to get closer by cranking, going cold then hot again, notching and hugging the ground... whatever it takes to try to preemptively trash enemy missiles and break radar lock to try to get closer and in range of their own missiles. - the AI defensive maneuvers against active Fox-3 are kind of pathetic. They always try dive and notch, dropping chaff, never pulling more than like 3 or 4 Gs. If the AI estimates that the incoming missile is high energy, then it is acceptable behaviour (no hope to kinematically defeat the missile). But if the AI estimates that the missile is low energy, just going in a notch and praying it works is a really bad decision... the AI should maneuver hard instead.

The DCS AH-64D's Quick Start Manual is currently undergoing a major revision to improve it's structure, content, and format. However this is occurring in parallel to other manual revisions such as the A-10C and F-16, so it will take time.

All military vehicles are like that, the only time they look new is when they are delivered. I took my wife to the local airshow at the airbase near us a few years ago. The aircraft were interesting but there was an Army display and I wanted to show her what I worked with day to day. Then I saw a Chinook and took her through it. Something didn't seem right. It was pristine, none of the wear and tear, none of the dark brown stains that no matter how hard they seem to clean, seem to remain between the floor boards and on the webbing of the seats that you try not to linger on. And it smelled like a new car on the lot, just after they removed the plastic protection from the seats, instead of spilled JP 8, vomit, urine and fear. I asked the copilot how many hours it had, it was a brand new CH-47F, with less than a hundred hours, probably about the same as him. I like the Forge elements, but please, no Smell-O-Vision, I can already imagine it.

я предположил, что это было сделано для большей надежности, все же вертолет огневой поддержки отличается от самолета тем, что летает гораздо больше у земли, где огня стрелковых средств гораздо больше, и вертолет может быть уничтожен не сразу, но поврежден существенно. Однако один из SME дал более развернутый взгляд на причины, по которым полностью электрическая система управления все-таки не была внедрена как основная на этом вертолете. Вот его ответ: "That is a good question. I suspect that the technology wasn't mature enough at that time. The AH-64 was developed in the 1970's, when fly-by-wire was very new technology. The F-16 was revolutionary by combat aircraft standards for using a pure electronic control system without mechanical linkages, so I would suspect that it was considered too risky from a development point-of-view to incorporate that into a helicopter, especially given the state of the economy in the 1970's and early 1980's. Aircraft contracts are often awarded based on the assessed probability that the aircraft will be able to meet the production timelines and budget. Risky advancements don't always bring about confidence in expensive aircraft contracts, and helicopters have lagged behind aircraft in practicality by about 30-40 years. When you look at the RAH-66 Comanche, an aircraft that came 10-20 years after the AH-64, the technology had advanced to make such flight control systems possible; and computing power of microprocessors not only made such technology possible, but provided more advantages over a conventional mechanical system to make the leap into electronic flight controls worth the investment and costs. When they went from the AH-64A (which had a more rudimentary flight computer called DASE) to the AH-64D (with a digital FMC), a complete re-design of the flight control system would have been extremely expensive, and in the 1990's when budgets toward the military were shrinking, this would not have been possible. This is also why the AH-64A+ and AH-64B upgrades were cancelled, eventually leading to the AH-64D. This isn't a historical fact, this is just my own summary of design decisions. The actual engineers might have had different reasons, or additional reasons. This is just my own estimation after seeing how military contracts and development work. In the end, when you consider the possibility of ground fire taking out your electrical system, I would much rather have mechanical linkages and transmission-powered hydraulics flying my aircraft, instead of wires that are subject to power failures. Redundancy of flight computers and wiring doesn't do you any good if you lose electrical power altogether from taking damage." ПС. Про снятие ПЗУ - скорей всего снимать не будем... жалко времени дизайнеров и программистов.. имхо - "овчинка выделки не стоит"

Both your Huey screenshots show GPU pegged at 100% or close to that. No amount of CPU will make a significant change in FPS in that scenario. I wouldn't pay too much attention to DCS counter showing "CPU bound". Even if it is not bugged, it's only what the game sees, without VR software overhead. As I explained here, FPS is not a good indicator of CPU performance in VR, you should look at CPU frametimes.

For the specific wire solution we have in-game, that jet was a VF-33 jet in '91. For the plate, at least 1 jet in VF-11 had it, I don't know if it was adopted by more squadrons, however.

PNVS and NVS are not the same. "PNVS" is the name of a specific sensor turret on the nose of the aircraft. "NVS" is a mode in which either the PNVS turret or TADS turret can operate in either crewstation. Because the PNVS and TADS can operate as separate NVS sensors, both crewmembers can be using NVS mode at the same time, but neither crewmember can use the same NVS sensor as the other. If the pilot is using PNVS as his NVS sensor, the CPG must use TADS as his NVS sensor. If the pilot is using TADS as his NVS sensor, the CPG must use the PNVS as his NVS sensor. However, the TADS cannot be used for targeting as a sight if it is being used for flying as an NVS sensor. If you are in the CPG seat and you move your NVS switch to NORM or FIXED, you are engaging the TADS into a mode meant for flying, not targeting. This is why the sight is automatically set as HMD and flight symbology is displayed on your helmet display instead of weapon symbology. You can, but only if TADS is your sight. If you are in NVS NORM or FIXED, the TADS is being used as a sensor and your sight is HMD. You cannot make your sight your acquisition source because you cannot slave a sight to itself; therefore as the CPG, you cannot slave your HMD (as your sight) to the Gunner Helmet Sight because your HMD is already looking where it is looking.

Thank you both

Quality interesting interview, he remembers a big amount of details, specific numbers, differences between different models, systems etc.

No. 605 Squadron (County of Warwick), Auxiliary Air Force / Generic Night Intruder / Night Fighter, March 1944 ED User Files Download Page A paint scheme based on a night intruder Mosquito of No. 605 Squadron (County of Warwick), Auxiliary Air Force, March 1944; it can also be used as a Mosquito from other night intruder / night fighter squadrons as it has adjustable squadron / aircraft codes and serial numbers. Edit: Alternate version with cutouts for the aircraft ID letters

I'm Well Aware of the Specs and System Requirements for DCS, I've been testing DCS and Modding DCS for over a decade. Recommended DCS VR Req. 16GB of SYSTEM RAM & Discrete 1080+. This Assumes all 16 GB of System Ram is available and you have another 10+ GB of VRAM. The PS5 does Not have that, it has a Single Shared Pool of 16GB, and the larger the mission, the more Memory the System will want, the less the GPU will have, and the GPU will want more for the Larger VR Frame Buffer. Simply Put, the PS5 cannot handle DCS.

Got a lot of work done this weekend. gauges are non functional, but switches, buttons and pots will work, as well as the 7 segment LEDS.. hopefully Sent from my Samsung Chromebook Plus using Tapatalk

This website contains many airports. I hope it can give you some reference. There are many airports in Sinai map. If all of them can be made, it will be a great thing! https://ourairports.com/big-map.html

Sometimes I wonder if I should be allowed to use photoshop, I had to make the visual pun after reading eye candy. If anyone is wanting to view the new FORGE option in model viewer the argument is 4001. Now if you will excuse me I need to go get some skittles...

I'll Break this down Politely. 1. the GPU is Equivalent of a RX6600M Overclocked, That GPU would Run DCS at the Lowest settings 1080p w/ no MSAA (But it would look horrible when compared to other Games on PS5, Ace Combat, WT, etc etc), Don't even think about VR. 2. the Console Utilizes 16GB GDDR6 Total Memory, Shared between the CPU and GPU. When's the last time you tried to run DCS on anything less than 16GB of Ram, because out of that 16GB, the system would likely only get 4GB, DCS would have a stroke w/ only 4GB to Pool, Even 8 GB would be problematic, assuming the system will allow an 8GB Split for System and GPU Pipeline. 3. PS5's OS Doesn't run MSVC Libraries nor DirectX, DCS's Libraries are written and compiled on Microsoft Visual C, which is not part of PS/OS DCS's Graphics are written on DirectX11_0, which is not part of PS/OS Nor does the Custom Oberon GPU Block (CXD90044GB) Support DirectX at All. 4. The GPU Performance is Overstated, as most Reviews try to pass it off as a RTX2080 level performance, please tell me how rDNA2 can match an RTX2080 at 1/3 the TDP, The Specs have it in line w/ the RX6600M, there's no way an RX6600M can match a RTX2080, zilch. At that's assuming your PS5 is New (November 2022 Revision), Running the Oberon PLUS APU w/ the increased GPU Power, and not the old Oberon APU. 5. 9 Gb/sec is also an exaggeration, the PCIe4 M.2 in the PS5 Gets 5.5 Gb/sec Sequential. I've done repairs and teardowns of dozens of PS5s, and a few of the new ones w/ the Oberon Plus APU, I'm well aware of the hardware capabilities. So to Summarize Not.... Going... To... Happen..

The RTX3090 may be older, eat more watts and run hotter, but it has double the VRAM (24GB vs 12GB) which is GDDR6X (=pretty expensive) and also double the memory bus size (384-bit vs 192-bit) when compared to the RTX4070Ti. More VRAM is very important. For example, F-14A/B launching from carrier and then over Syria, high settings at 4K resolution, VRAM can hit 14GB+ (note: not allocated, used). More memory bus size is also very important, because it's the rate at which data can be read from or stored, like a maximum theoretical bandwidth (like more lanes dedicated for traffic, the greater the flow). It's important especially at higher resolutions and with bigger data in use (such as the many enormous textures of DCS!). So, those are very important aspects for higher resolutions (4K and VR) and makes the RTX3090 the stronger product of the two, also for longer term, even if it only supports up to DLSS 2.x (RTX4070Ti supports newest DLSS 3.x). As said on some other thread, DCS doesn't support DLSS anyway and, when and if it does, it's not like version 2.x isn't good enough... so the DLSS part here is a moot point. Yes, brand new from the store, both GPUs are absolutely horrible value. But you can get an RTX3090 used (2nd hand) in mint condition these days for nearly half of the (outrageous) prices that they try to sell them new. None of that is happening with used RTX4070Ti (at least AFAIK). All of which makes the RTX3090 more appealing, and a better investment IMO. Even if it's been over two years since its launch, and even if it's one bought as 2nd hand product. One thing that should be added is that the RTX3090 requires at least a quality 850W+ PSU, whereas you might get away with just 700W+ if with a RTX4070Ti. That said, the RTX3090 really appreciates undervolting, which is easy and a "must do" for anyone using one (see forum thread here).

Please note : from DCS 2.9.8.1107 both bin and mt-bin folders contain Multithreading. Single threaded DCS is now legacy and removed from DCS. DCS Multithreading F.A.Q Users who want to test the new multithreading version of DCS can do so by following the steps described below. Multithreading contains some known issues, but we will gladly receive reports. Please make reports as full and clear as possible that are reproducible. Also, please send crash information using the automatic send-crash tool, if possible. Launching Multithreading DCS For the standalone version from our eShop DCS: You can find the new folder "bin-mt" in your DCS / DCS Open Beta main root folder where you have installed DCS. i.e. "D:\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\". To launch the multithreading version, navigate to the "bin-mt" folder and launch DCS.exe from it. i.e. "D:\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\bin-mt\DCS.exe". For your convenience, you may want to create a shortcut for "D:\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\bin-mt\DCS.exe" on your desktop. Be advised that the DCS launch shortcut that is automatically created on your desktop after DCS installation will launch the DCS updater from i.e. "D:\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\bin\DCS_updater.exe". You may have gotten used to the process where you launch DCS and it checks for available updates before launching the game. If you make a shortcut for the multithreading version (i.e. "D:\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\bin-mt\DCS.exe") then this shortcut will launch DCS, and it will not check for updates before launching the game. For STEAM users: Use the Play MT Preview in launch options. To do so, right click on DCS World Steam Edition in Steam and select PLAY; you should see the below pop-up. What is multithreading (MT)? MT is a programming technique that allows multiple threads to exist within the context of a single process. A thread is an independent path of execution within a program, and MT allows a program to perform multiple tasks concurrently, improving its performance and responsiveness. However, MT also introduces some complexities, such as thread synchronization and resource sharing, which must be carefully managed to avoid issues such as race conditions and deadlocks. Why am I seeing no to little performance gain? There are several reasons that could account for this. One of the most common reasons for lower-than-expected performance gains is being GPU limited. Whereas MT can greatly improve CPU efficiency and resulting performance, most of the graphical rendering elements are still reliant on the graphics card. To check this, play a mission and press Right Control + Pause at the same time to display your performance Frame Per Second (FPS) and rendering information. If it indicated GPU BOUND, your graphics card is holding back the maximum possible frame rate that the CPU can provide. MT is most effective in large missions with many units. In small missions with a limited number of units, CPU calculations are not a gating performance limit. As such, you may not see much of an MT performance gain in small missions. Older CPUs will not benefit as much from MT as more modern CPUs with a greater number of cores/threads. Please be sure that you are using the current Open Beta and that you are using the DCS.exe from the Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\bin-mt\ folder if using the standalone version. Controls HOG PLUG is enabled. Please ensure that that HOT PLUG is disabled from OPTION / CONTROLS tab. You may not have appropriate BIOS setting for your CPU. If you have 32 or less cores, please ensure that HT/SMT is enabled. If you 33 or more cores, please disable this. If you have Vsync enabled in OPTIONS/SYSTM, uncheck the box Are there any known issues that I should be aware of? As an initial test version, yes. NS430 inoperable. Not in 2D neither 3D Sporadic stuttering in 2D and VR Ka-50: IT-23 display is colored. Supercarrier: there is no picture on LSO displays Display issues with a limited set of VR devices Dedicated server doesn't start automatically first time after update, hoster have to launch server manually by clicking on “start” button for mission or server itself in web GUI Motion Blur causes blue/black 'fog' (in single-thread only) Invisible player aircraft sometimes Cockpit tooltips AH-64D Instant action Persian Gulf - animator.dll crash If you notice other problems that you'd like to report, please visit: Multi-Threading Bug Reports (Temp) - ED Forums (dcs.world) Why is MT currently optional? As MT is a complex addition to DCS, we have made it optional for initial public testing. Once fully tested and working well, it will be enabled by default. How long will MT be in preview? It depends on public test results and feedback; we will keep you all informed as things develop. What is the maximum number of threads the game can utilize? About half of P-cores are dedicated for the graphics needs. Currently the rendering pool scales up to 16 threads on P-cores (1 core = 2 threads). The other P-cores are used by the main logic thread, sound engine threads, and the auxiliary thread pool that occupy all available space. E-cores are used only by the resources streaming pool that has no limits (1 core = 1 thread). Will VR and flatscreen have an equal performance improvement? MT is agnostic between a 2D monitor and VR. Both will see the same proportion of improvement. Note that VR is in general more demanding so you will see lower FPS than flatscreen performance given the higher rendering overhead. Will performance be improved for people currently bottlenecked by their GPU? MT may not help with performance if you have a GPU bottleneck. This is because the GPU is responsible for rendering and processing graphics, and it operates independently of the CPU. So MT may not directly improve GPU performance, but it can help to improve overall application performance by offloading non-GPU related tasks to separate CPU threads. Are there any downsides to MT if I have a CPU with few cores (Like an old quad core)? While MT can improve performance on a CPU with multiple cores, it may not provide significant benefits on a CPU with few cores. In fact, it could even lead to decreased performance in some cases. Will the dedicated server also be multithreading? Currently, the dedicated server is ST. MT dedicated server should behave exactly like ST one including performance because the game logic is still running on a single thread. If you have issues with performance or anything else, please make detailed reports for us to review. Will I be able to play on MT servers/large missions that I couldn't before? You should see improvement in larger missions, but mission designers should still consider unit count in any mission they create. Overloading a multiplayer mission with units will result in loss of performance. Will MT and Single Thread (ST) be updated separately or updated at the same time? You can update DCS in the usual way. Can MT and ST clients join the same server? Yes, MT and ST users can play on the same server. Should I enable HT / SMT in my motherboard BIOS? Currently, users with more than 32 threads should disable HT/SMT, but for everyone else we recommend enabling HT/SMT. Can I expect more bugs with MT, and can they be reported the same way or do I need to do separate reports for MT and ST? MT is a very complex addition to DCS, we have done a lot of testing but you may see issues we have missed. If you do, please report them on the forum bugs section. When reporting issues, please make it clear that you are using multithreading by either by adding “MT” to the title or in the topic itself. I have not seen any improvement what can I do? If you are not seeing any improvement in performance, please make a forum post with your dcs.log dxdiag and a track replay example in the performance issues forum section. How can I launch VR in MT? Same way you do now but using the bin-mt/ dcs.exe with the added launch parameters. ( example "C:\DCS\bin-mt\DCS.exe" --force_enable_VR ) Steam users will have a MT VR option in the launch pop up. Or try starting in 2D and enabling VR in the DCS VR tab, then restarting DCS. Experiencing a crash on first launch of MT DCS? If anyone has an early crash when starting MT DCS and sees almost empty dcs.log file with/without the stack, it would be great to get additional CPU information from such user. 1. add mt.lua to Saved Games\DCS\Config\ mt.lua 2. launch DCS 3. provide Saved Games\DCS\Logs\dcs.log attached to forum post 4. remove mt.lua

V1.2 has been released with a fix for the weapon station status indicators. Some stations indicators, especially 1A’s indicator has like a super opaque viewing window that makes it look like a weapon is loaded even when it wasn’t. Here's a screenshot with stations 1A, 8A and 3-6 empty with 1B and 8B loaded.

Please try to be patient. We (Eagle Dynamics) are not creating the PRF tones, the Heatblur team is creating a single library that we will also be using. thank you

The gun heating due bullets fired model is incorrect. TLDR Version: The gun heating model has the wrong barrel and body mass. Resulting in a rapid rise in gun temps. The mass of the barrel in the game is 2.7 Kg. The mass of the real gun barrel is 10.6Lbs or 4.8kg. The mass of the body in the game is 14.3 Kg. The mass of the real gun minus the barrel is 58.09 lbs or 26.34 Kg There is too much heat per shot. The thermal energy input into the guns in the game is 7.823 Joules per bullet. Tests indicate the variable “shot_heat” should be from 4.62 to 4.023 Joules per bullet. The reduction in accuracy and velocity due to gun heating are too large. Tests of the Real gun barrel indicate that a burst of 365 bullets can be fired without a reduction in accuracy or muzzle velocity. And, that the accuracy and velocity life of the M3 gun barrels are 8 times greater than that of the regular steel barrels. https://www.loc.gov/resource/dcmsiabooks.hypervelocitygun01bush/?sp=499 An accurate model for gun heating would look like: { name = "HeatEffectExt" , shot_heat = 4.62, barrel_k = 0.462 * 4.94, body_k = 0.462 * 26.34 }, With a 20% reduction in accuracy and reduction in muzzle velocity 200 fps being applied at a barrel Temperature of 800c or the equivalent of 350 consecutive shots. Having the guns fire uncontrolled ( a Cook Off model) after a 200 round burst or a body temperature of 900 C would be realistic too. For comparison the current gun heat model in the code is: { name = "HeatEffectExt" , shot_heat = 7.823, barrel_k = 0.462 * 2.7, body_k = 0.462 * 14.3 }, Elsewhere in the code, the values of gun heating model are explained for the 50 cal M2: function M2_heat_effect() --[[ 7.823 kJ - one shot energy , 462 (steel specific heat), 6 kg - barrels mass ]] { name = "HeatEffectExt", shot_heat = 7.823, barrel_k = 0.462 * 6.0, body_k = 0.462 * 32.0} The heat effect model contains 3 variables which describe the thermal dynamics of the gun. The First variable is,. shot_heat = 7.823, This energy input into per bullet fired. It’s set to 7.823 Joules per bullet fired. The variables barrel_k and body_k are the thermal capacity of the gun barrel and body. This variable consists of two numbers: the specific heat of the material and its mass. For the F-86 Barrel, the thermal capacity is, barrel_k = 0.462 * 2.7 .426 is the specific heat of steel and 2.7 is the mass of the DCS F-86’s gun barrel. The specific heat of a material is the energy, in joules, required to raise the temperature of a kilogram of that material, by 1 degree C.The specific heat of steel is.462 joules per gram. Therefore, the energy (Joules) required to raise the temperature of the gun barrel 1 degree C is Joules Need to raise temp by 1c = mass of material * the specific heat of the material. 1.2474 =2.7*.462 Since the code gives the heat input per bullet, 7.823 Joules, we can compute the change in barrel temp after 1 shot is fired. As the change in temp is = (Joules per Shot * Number of bullets fired) / (the specific heating of steel * the barrel Mass) In terms of the Gun heat variables the change in barrel temp = (shot_heat = 7.823 * the number of shots) / (barrel_k = 0.462 * 2.7) For one bullet the temperature of the guns increase by 6.27C 7.823/(0.462 * 2.7)= 6.271C The code tells us, The DCS F-86 is modeling a barrel with a mass of 2.7 kg which is about 5 lbs. The manual for the 50 Cal M3 machine gun. . https://www.scribd.com/document/38654349/TM-9-2190-M3-Browning Notes, the barrel weight is 10.91 lbs which is 4.94 kg. The DCS M3 machine gun barrel has half as much mass as the real one. It seems trivial, but the reduced mass has important implications due to the heat modeling. If we model the gun with the correct barrel mass; the gun temperature increases 3.47C per shot. 7.823/(0.462 * 4.94) = 3.4377C. This is just about half as much heat as is currently modeled 6.7C per shot. The code shows the weight of the body of the gun as 14.3 Kg which is also incorrect. body_k = 0.462 * 14.3 The weight of the gun body in DCS is 14.3 Kg or 31.5 Lbs, The M3 manual gives the weight of total Gun as 64 1/2 lbs + 4 1/2 lbs for the recoil adapter. So 69 lbs total. The total mass - barrel should give us the “body mass” 69-10.91. Or 58.09 lbs / 26.34 Kg. Again about half the mass of the actual gun is in the thermal model. So the body of the gun heats up twice as much as it should too. In DCS, the temperature of the gun body increases 1.184C for every shot. 7.823/(0.462 * 14.3) = 1.184C increase in temp If we model the gun with real weight - barrel. The temperature of the body increases by .6428 C 7.823/(0.462 * 26.34) = .6428c. With the correct body weight that shot per heat is reduced by half. If you’re ready for a deep dive on the metallurgy and performance of 50 caliber gun barrels, read on. We’re going to compare the heat modeling of the DCS M3 to some real tests.The tests indicate that the loss of accuracy and the drop in muzzle velocity as a result of barrel heat are too high in the DCS F-86. The construction of the gun barrel used on the M3 machine gun is different from a standard steel barrel. The properties of the materials used in the barrel of the M3 machine gun increase the number of bullets which can be fired before the accuracy or the muzzle velocity of the gun drops when compared to the plain steel barrel. https://www.loc.gov/resource/dcmsiabooks.hypervelocitygun01bush/?sp=499 This chart shows how many M2 AP bullets can be fired on a severe firing schedule, before the muzzle velocity drops by either 200 fps or 20% of bullets impact yawed. The chart shows that a steel barrel can only fire a single 170 burst. The lined and plated barrels, Which are on the F-86’s machine guns, did a 350 round burst and two 500 round burst cycles, for a total of 1350 bullets before the accuracy of the weapon dropped. The test consisted of an initial burst of 350 rounds. The gun is then allowed to cool to room temperature. After the gun is cooled, a burst of 100 rounds are fired. The gun is allowed to cool for 2 mins and then another 100 round burst is fired. This cycle is repeated until 500 bullets have been fired. After the 500 round burst, the gun is allowed to cool to room temperature. The 500 bullet burst cycle is then repeated until either the muzzle velocity drops by 200 fps or the accuracy is degraded by 20%.The accuracy and muzzle velocity of the gun are measured periodically through the test. The model barrel of the M3 machine gun on the F-86, is the same design as the one tested in the chart. Stellite lined with chromium plating. From the M3 weapons manual. The model of M3 barrel is 7265156 and it has the same type of lining and plating as the barrel tested in the chart. Page 23 of manual notes, the barrel has a 9 inch liner and is plated with chromium. A cross section of the barrel is available in the M3’s weapon’s inspectors manual. https://www.smallarmsreview.com/archive/detail.arc.entry.cfm?arcid=2758 And a color picture of the liner. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA472711.pdf The Manufacturing process of the Stellite / Cobalt liner. The 9 inch liner in the F-86’s gun barrel is made of Stellite 21. An Air National Guard memo regarding the recycling of these barrels and liners verifies this. https://www.google.com/books/edition/National_Guard_Bureau_Bulletin/cYhat3J3bmUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=RA7-PA7&printsec=frontcover Note the same barrel model, 7265156, as indicated in the Manual for the M3 machine gun posted above. The lining and plating of these barrels was developed during World War 2 to improve the accuracy and velocity of the 50 caliber aircraft machine gun. The development, metallurgy, construction and testing of these barrels are discussed in detail in the National Defense Research Committee Report. https://www.loc.gov/item/2007498072/ Let’s look at the 9 inch Stellite line and see how this improves the performance of the M3 machine gun barrel. The 9 inch liner is made of a cobalt alloy called Stellite 21. The Stellite / cobalt liner provides two primary advantages over the plain steel barrel. The cobalt liner has a higher heat hardness and is less prone to chemical erosion than the plain steel barrel. The properties of the Stellite / Cobalt liner reduces wear inside the barrel and keeps the grooves (rifling) in the barrel intact. This increases the velocity life of the weapon. Meaning long bursts can be fired through a Stellite /Cobalt lined gun without a reduction in muzzle velocity. The Stellite / cobalt barrel liner is so effective that it actually increased the muzzle velocity of the weapon. The Stellite / cobalt liner is so effective at preventing a drop in muzzle velocity during burst firing, that the limiting factor for burst length is the reduction in accuracy. Since the F-86’s gun barrels have this type of liner. There should be no drop in muzzle velocity for bursts shorter than 350 bullets. The second benefit of the cobalt / Stellite liner was that it reduced the heat input into the barrel. Which helped to prolong the accuracy life of the weapon. Meaning more bullets could be fired through the barrel before the accuracy drops. A 295 continuous burst could be fired through a Stellite / Cobalt lined barrel compared to 167 from a plain steel barrel, for the same loss in accuracy. This is because the cobalt liner is a worse conductor of heat than plain gun steel. Less thermal energy per second is transferred from the Stellite / Cobalt liner into the gun barrel. The Cobalt / Stellite liner reduces the heat transfer into the barrel per bullet fired when compared to the plain steel barrel. A 350 round burst test, on a 50 cal 36 inch aircraft barrel with just the 9 inch liner. Illustrates how effective the Stellite / cobalt liner is in reducing heat input into the steel barrel. The mean barrel temperature was measured to be 750 C after the firing. If we assume an ambient temp of 20c. The temperature of the barrel rose 730C after a 350 round burst. For a 350 burst, The DCS thermal model for the F-86 gun barrel predicts a temperature increase of 2195c. (7.823* 350) / (0.462 * 2.7) =2195C. That’s 3 times more than the test firing of a barrel the cobalt liner. Based on the test data we can compute the thermal energy input into the barrel per shot for a 50 caliber machine gun with a Stellite / Cobalt liner. In game terms we can find the real value for the variable “shot_heat =” Assuming 20 c ambient temperature. The temperature of the lined barrel increased by 730 degrees. Each shot increases barrel temp 2.0857C. Temperature increase per Shot 730/350 = 2.085714 c per shot The energy input into the barrel per shot works out to: Change in Temp =( Joules per shot *Shots fired) /( Barrel Mass * The Specific Heat of the barrel.) Joules per shot = (Temp * ( Barrel Mass * The Specific Heat of the barrel))/ Number of bullets fired. 730=x*350/4.808*.462 730=350x/2.219 x=(730*2.219)/350 = 4.6282 Joules Per shot Testing of the aircraft barrel shows that the energy input into the barrel with the Stellite / cobalt liner is 4.6282 Joules per bullet. The DCS model adds 7.823 Joules per bullet, 1.69 times more than the testing indicates. The reduction in heat transfer to the gun barrel is important because, reducing the temperature input into the barrel improves the accuracy during burst firing. As the gun barrel heats up, it expands. The expansion of the gun bore caused by heating is proportional to the linear coefficient of thermal expansion of the barrel material. Once the temperature of the gun barrel reaches 750c, The barrel expands to the point where the grooves (rifling) in the barrel do not engage the bullet. This causes the bullets to yaw and tumble in flight. Which reduces the accuracy of the weapon. The lack of grooves cut into the bullets 4, 5 and 6, indicate the barrel has expanded to the point where it no longer produces accurate fire. In this test of a plain steel barrel a 100 burst was fired, followed by 2 minutes of cooling. Then a 100 round burst was fired. After the second 100 burst all the bullets from the standard steel barrel begin to impact yawed / tumbled. In a burst test of the Stellite / cobalt lined barrel, the trigger is held down until the bullets begin to tumble and yaw in flight and impact, thus impacting sideways. The Stellite lined gun barrel can fire 350 round before all the bullets impact yawed. In this next series burst tests belts of combat mix ammo were fired. The C-1 schedule is a continuous burst fired until 100 % impact sideways / yawed. The Stellite lined barrel can fire a continuous burst of 295 bullets before the accuracy is degraded. Compared to only 167 bullets for the plain steel barrel. In another set of tests, a Settilte / Cobalt lined barrel was fired until the accuracy was reduced to the same point as the combat mix tests, 100% of the bullets tumbled / “keyholed”. The temperature of the barrel was measured to be 750C when all the bullets tumbled. We’ll use the temperature data from this test and the burst length from the combat ammo test to calculate the heat input per bullet into the plain steel gun and the Stellite / Cobalt lined barrel when belts of combat ammo are being fired. From the temperature monitored heating tests, we get the coefficient of linear thermal expansion of the gun barrel. 16*10^-6 or 0.000016 The coefficient of linear thermal expansion = The change in barrel diameter /( the initial barrel diameter * the change in temperature). This tells us how much the gun has to heat up to expand to the point where all the bullets tumble. The coefficient of linear thermal expansion of gun steel (0.000016) = The increase in barrel diameter due to heating (.006)/ the initial diameter of the barrel(.5) * The change in temperature (750). 0.000016=.006/(.5* 750) This says for the barrel to expand .006 inches the temperature of the barrel has to be 750C. When the diameter of the gun bore expands .006 inches, The bore diameter is greater than the depth of the rifling, the grooves in the barrel. When the bore diameter increases by .006 inches, The groves in the rifling no longer make contact with the bullet. No spin is imparted to the bullet and it tumbles in flight, resulting in a drop in accuracy. Since we know the barrel has to be 750c to expand enough for 100% keyholing to happen: The burst test conducted to 100% keyholing, provides us with a means to make a direct comparison of the two gun barrels. Since we can assume the barrel Temperature of both guns barrels was 750C when the test was stopped. *note the lower burst length in these tests is a result of the ammunition used. These bullets have a larger powder charges / higher muzzle velocity when compared to 50 Cal M2 AP ammunition We’ll compute the energy input per shot for the steel barrel and Stellite / Cobalt lined barrel. Based on the law of linear thermal expansion and the previous testing. We can assume Both barrels were 750c when 100% keyholing / tumbling occured. The coefficient of linear thermal expansion of gun steel (0.000016) = The increase in barrel diameter due to heating (.006)/ the initial diameter of the barrel(.5) * The change in temperature (750). 0.000016=.006/(.5* 750) If we assume that the ambient temperature of the guns was 20 C, We can solve the specific heat equation, to determine the energy per bullet needed to raise the barrel temperature 730c to 750C. Let's look at the steel barrel first and compute the energy input per shot. Barrel Temperature = ( Joules Per Shot * The number of shots)/ (Specific heat * The barrel Mass. 730 =( x * 167) / (.462 * 4.807) Joules per shot = (Temp * ( Barrel Mass * The Specific Heat of the barrel))/ Number of bullets fired. 9.707 = (730 * 2.220834)/ 167 9.707 Joules per bullet are transferred into the barrel when fired from the plain steel gun. The Stellite / Cobalt lined barrel reaches 750c after firing a 295 round burst. Therefore the energy input per shot is (730 * 2.220834) / 295 =5.495 Joules per shot. The Stellite / Cobalt liner reduces the thermal energy transferred into the barrel by 56%. On a per shot basis, the barrel of a Stellite / Cobalt does not heat up as much as a regular steel gun. Therefore the barrel of the Stellite barrel expands less than the regular barrel per shot. Thus over a large burst, the Stellite barrel is more accurate than the plain steel barrel. While the accuracy and velocity life improvements resulting from the Stellite/ Cobalt liner to gun are impressive. The performance of barrels of the M3 machine gun were also improved by their Chromium plating. The development and testing of the Chromium plating is covered in the same NDRC report. The Chromium plating also improved the velocity life and accuracy life of the gun barrel. However Chromium plating primarily improved accuracy of the gun. The Chromium plating of the barrel chokes the bore. Meaning the plating reduces the bore of the gun near the muzzle. The bore of the Chromium plated barrels is reduced from .5 inches near the breech to .492 inches at the muzzle. This reduces the loss accuracy due to heating. Going back to our calculations of the linear thermal expansion of the gun. We can calculate the temperature need to increase the narrow barrel diameter to the original diameter .5 Since the linear coefficient of expansion is intrinsic to the gun barrel material. algebraically we can compute the temperature needed to make the Chromium barrel expanded from .462 to .5 inches or .006 inches Coefficient = material expansion/(Bore of the Gun * temperature of the gun.) 0.000016=.006/(.492* x) Temp = ( expansion / Coefficient * Bore) 762.1951 =.006/(0.000016*.492). In the report it’s noted that the temperature required to increase the muzzle diameter of the plated barrel to .5 inches is 800C Tests of the Chromium plated barrel indicate that 319 consecutive bullets can be fired before the accuracy is degraded. If we assume 800 C is the critical temperature for this accuracy reduction and 319 bullets are fired we can compute the number if Joules per shot fired were fired to reach 800C. Well assume the ambient temperature is 20C and compute the Joules per bullet based on a 780 C rise in barrel temp. Joules per Bullet = ((Barrel Mass * Spec Heat) * Change in Temperature) / The Number of Bullets fired. 5.42 = ((4.807 * .462)* 780) / 319 The accuracy of the Chromium plated barrels was remarkable when compared to the accuracy life of the plain steel barrels. On the same 100 round burst 2 min of cooling schedule. The line barrels can fore over 1000 rounds without a reduction in accuracy. The plain steel barrel, on the same firing schedule, loses accuracy halfway into the second 100 round burst. The chromium plating also helps to reduce the heat input to the barrel, While not as effective as the Stellite / Cobalt liner, it still helps. Temperature monitored tests of the barrel give an indication of the effect. The plated barrel was seen primarily as an accuracy enhancement, While the Stellite / Cobalt lined barrel was seen as velocity enhancement. Since the two improvements were complementary, The Stellite liner was combined with Chromium plated barrel to provide a gun with the best features of both materials. When the Stellite / Cobalt liner and Chromium plated were combine, the barrel was known as a “combination” barrel. The performance of the combination barrels was remarkable. The guns equipped with these barrels, could be fired without a loss of accuracy and minimal velocity drop until the barrel melted. Given the increased performance of these barrels, why does the 50 Cal M3 have a 200 round burst limit? The burst limit is not the result of decreased velocity or accuracy. The burst limit is pure a function of the cook temperature of the ammunition. The manual for the 50 caliber M3, actually notes ``The treatment of the barrel gives it exceptional velocity and accuracy life, but does not affect the cook off point.” A cook off is an uncontrolled firing of a bullet inside of the gun. https://www.smallarmsreview.com/archive/detail.arc.entry.cfm?arcid=13265 The cook off point is temperature in the breach which will cause the bullet to fire on its own, without a trigger pull. The M3 weapons Manual notes that a 200 burst is the cook off limit. The NDRC report gives the temperature above which a misfire / cook off can occur. 900 F = 482C the cook off temp. Using the specific heating capacity of the real gun we can calculate how many bullets in a burst it would take to heat the gun up to 482 C. We’ll assume the ambient temperature of Barrel is 20 C. The barrel reaches the cook off / misfire temperature after a burst of 221 bullets have been fired. As the number of shots fired = ((Barrel Mass * Specific Heat) * delta Temp) / Joules Per shot Assuming the ambient temp of the gun is 20 c. The temp has to rise 462C to reach 482C, the cook off temp. 221.6 = ((4.807 * .462) * 462) / 4.63 By using the test data, we can compute the burst limit within 21 rounds of the limit given within the manual. When we compare the burst limit to the performance tests of the real gun barrels, it is obvious that the burst limit of the F-86’s are not reflective of a performance drop of the guns. f86 gun heat .trk