Leaderboard

Thanks guys! I will be adding more Chinese assets, and SAMs will definitely be among those. In regards to donations, it's actually the donations I get that enables me to keep up the high pace of new assets. Since I don't have to model everything from scratch, I can focus on customizing the models, animating, making textures and coding. If you're interested in donating, just click the link in my signature. All donations goes into the making of new assets. Donations are of course completely optional, all my assets are free to download and use.

The short sightedness of some commenters is surprising. Is a PC-9 getting me moist in anticipation? No, not really. However, we have another 3rd party developer interested in bringing content to DCS and using a trainer-light attack to cut their teeth with learning how to interact and integrate with the DCS code base. This is a tried and tested entry route for DCS developers; Aerges, M3 and India Foxt Echo have all done the same to provide themselves a solid understanding of how to simulate systems and flight models in relatively simple aircraft, then utilise this experience as a stepping stone to produce more complex combat aircraft thereafter. So, quit the petulant whining about useless aircraft and just be happy that we have yet another 3rd party interested in expanding the DCS meta and the potential that exists for what more they could bring in the future.

BTR-4 IFV 1.1.0 released! Changelog Version 1.1.0 Changed RK-2 Barrier ATGM to better target helicopters T-84 Oplot-M MBT 1.2.0 released! Changelog Version 1.2.0 Fixed APDSFS not working correctly Fixed 3D model see-through issue Fixed missing track animations T-64BV MBT 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Thanks! A classic copy/paste mistake. It's been fixed. Be sure to refresh a couple of times for the update to work.

As mentioned above we changed the policy on releasing information on third party projects when they are approved, this helps other teams decide where to best put their own future plans for modules. As for the base game, we have just released multithreading, it was featured in our newsletter and a very big step forward for our teams. We will release more information on core / base game developments when they are ready, but it will probably not suit your own time frame, development will always take a long time and does require some patience. thank you

DCS: PC-9/A by Check Six Simulations module aircraft team

Modernized US Navy Ships 2.1.0 released! Changelog Version 2.1.0 Changed Phalanx CIWS to burst mode Changed Phalanx CIWS dispersion Changed SM-6 to reduce accuracy Changed SM-2MR to reduce accuracy Changed ESSM to reduce accuracy

I hate to say it but I'm fed up with all the premature announcements. It's ridiculous. I'd rather hear about the modules that were announced 2-3 years ago, or you know, the ones that stalled in development like KW and F4U. Wait until you are almost done and have something that's actually in reach and about to enter the market and not some concept stuff we won't see for the next 2 years minimum. The base game doesn't get nearly enough attention and the empty newsletters are depressing. I mean, I'm waiting for a couple AI planes for over a year. And that batch doesn't even include the KC-10. SAM repetoire is incomplete and inaccurate, so many things could be optimized or corrected. But of course, new modules it is.

I apologize if I misunderstood or took the comment about the lack of competition as an assumption that we had a lack of urgency. And yes I replied to you, but it's for all taking part in this thread. There are 2 important reasons we do Early Access. 1) Development time of modules is long, very long. Even 3rd Party modules that come out near complete were in years of development before this. If we told you that the Hornet was coming back when we originally released it and waited till now to release it, sure it would have been a much more complete and enjoyable release, but you would have lost many years of playtime and many people have enjoyed the journey from 1st release till now. 2) It funds development and Eagle Dynamics as a whole. To keep the core free, and major upgrades like Multi-threading free, we need to supplement that with module releases. The only way we could have continued to improve the core, add new team members, develop new modules etc is with income. If we waited till every module was near complete, we would not be able to sustain what we do now. This was brought up by Nick Grey before. I would argue while some may think this is wrong, I would say 99.9% of users would rather have had the journey they had on the Hornet or other modules than wait 5+ years for a 90% complete release. And about your comment, about the Hornet and Viper issues. Had we left the Viper in the state it was on release and continued normal development it would not have impacted the Hornet at all. The fact was we made a mistake in releasing it a little too soon, and to make it right with our customers we had some of the Hornet team help out. This impact on the Hornet was not major and in the grand scheme of things did not slow it much. In fact, around that time new people were coming on board and the pace picked up again once they were trained and up to speed. We are thankful that people have chosen to support us over this time and continue to support us with new modules and products. We know not every patch or update has been perfect or moved us forward as much as we like or you all would like, but we are determined to deliver the most authentic and realistic experience possible and make sure these modules bring joy and entertainment to our customers for many many more years than the past 5 years in develoment.

I'm excited about the PC9 coming to DCS. I imagine you have access to plenty of contributors, however I have over 1000 hours on the RAAF PC9 (including FAC/MIS910) mostly as a QFI and MTP IRL if you need some external input. Thanks for developing this module, should be fun.

The way you guys interact with the community here is just supreme. Thank you a lot!

"The F-4E was a considerably deadly tool in air to air warfare, and always has been. I'm looking forwards to taking off in my land-based multirole phantom and doing both air to air and air to ground after taking off from a land airfield, and I think that the F-4E is possibly the deadliest variant of the Phantom and of its time period and generation, far surpassing the other aircraft and particularly the inferior naval variants, which scored less kills over Vietnam and had the fatal flaw of being unable to be multirole aircraft. In fact, I think the F-4J and the F-4S should not be added. They'd detract from the F-4's rich history." ... said nobody ever. But if I replace the F-4E with the US Navy ones and switch around the other stuff, as well as replacing the schpeel about multirole aircraft with your opinion that the solely air to air aircraft is better than a multirole one- something that historically has repeatedly been proved to be wrong- I like the F-4E. I also like the F-4J. But I like the F-4E more. I see the potential of the international exports where it saw combat service prior to upgrades, such as in the Turkish-Greek border conflicts, the Iran-Iraq War, and the Arab-Israeli conflicts. I'm very excited to see the F-4 coming into the game, and believe that in terms of definitiveness- the F-4E is the Phantom for many people around the world, including myself, but that doesn't mean we somehow don't acknowledge the US Navy or their Phantoms, or British Phantoms- something that you have trouble comprehending and applying, since you seem to ignore any and all international F-4 use prior to upgrade programs and have what comes off as a superiority/god-complex about US Naval Phantoms, to the point of regurgitating myths such as the fact that the F-4J and USMC aviators could "hit mortar-tube sized targets" while the US Air Force somehow could not, or of higher US Navy Kill Rates when all evidence points to the contrary. The US AIr Force had more planes in theatre at any given time and hogged most of the air to air kills over Vietnam, and did most of that with their short-nose, doppler-less F-4s, most often without a gun pod. None of us see the need to blatantly rub the F-4E in your face as superior to your short-nosed naval variants, and this forum is for the F-4E being released by heatblur, at least until the naval F-4s start coming into the game- so why do you see the need to constantly derail threads on it? Please leave us alone. I'm- if you'll excuse the pun- exhausted of seeing your comments on threads- most often not on the content that you write, since they at times have merit to them, such as about USN training versus USAF training- but more because of how you phrase them and put them. You've made your hate for the F-4E clear. Can you please not bring that into F-4E threads? You're not the only one waiting for a naval phantom, but most people are patient enough not to say anything about a plane they're never going to buy, and instead make other threads about the ones they do want to buy. I think you might be able to have a more constructive discussion if you perhaps created threads about USN phantoms and discussed those there. ----------------------------------------------- On the topic of HUDs, @1130 in my opinion, despite some people believing that adding a HUD would detract from the aircraft, I think it might be interesting. Historically, towards the end of their service life in air forces globally, usually when the F-4s were transitioning from predominantly multirole or air-to-air roles to the air-to-ground role, upgrade packages that integrated many modern weapon systems also integrated the HUD systems of modern aircraft of the time, as well as MFDs. Interesting aircraft like the Kurnass 2000, the F-4EJ Kai and the F-4E(H), as well as the Simsek and Terminator 2020 F-4 upgrade programs, might see use as mods, but I don't think any of them would merit a full part of a module- but they'd certainly be interesting being added later on as variants to the F-4E, like the F-14A and F-14B will be. I've been trying planes without HUDs recently and find that the HUD really helps you visualise a lot of important things in a quick and easy fashion- the most important thing being your velocity/lift vector. Actually being able to see where that is pointing is extremely important for knowing the tempo of a fight, as well as for figuring out in what kind of state your plane's flying, and I'm going to miss that with the F-4E.

Wow! I just want to say that I'm very pleased and impressed that you've continuously kept this mod updated for all these years, and up to even the latest DCS version. That's wild! 10/10

Hey Guys. I have made some small updates to Normandie to include a new Collision Model, adjusted the Helicopter Landing Position, and corrected the speed. She was pushing 39 Knots in DCS. Now she's down to 29 knots. The new release is on Page #1 of the forum. #14. Enjoy!

I can ask, but at the moment our engineer is very busy with MT and tweaking, for him to take time out for a in depth newsletter piece would not be good timing. Maybe something for the future when things are not so busy.

With the extra detailed and animated RAZBAM's Strike Eagle driver and upcoming Eagle Dynamics Hornet and Viper pilots, it would be really really nice game dynamic if: 1/ in case of AI downing / AI ejecting a SAR mission tasking was generated for human (or AI helo) + if a utility helo lands near downed aircrew they board the helo and trigger is generated so we can further action this. 'trigger action 'unit x boards rescue unit y' 2/ in case pilot ejected and landed in water, it uses floating device to stay afloat and wait for SAR. If the above is not feasible then perhaps we can get these pilots as personnel static object as with the deck crew. That way we could spawn / despawn them using Lua code.

Dear all, I have reopened this to update what we have been doing. We have continued to investigate and spoke with three Viper pilots, including a Thunderbird pilot. All said the same thing. You should not be able to maintain altitude at a 90-degree knife edge. You will lose altitude. Only when at around 85-degrees or lower should you be able to sustain altitude. The aircraft can simply not generate enough lift. Based on our current, internal version, this matches up. Thanks.

Not much happening.Just fixing bugs i keep discovering. Other things i kinda fight touching cause they´re a pita to fix... pattern and seams dont go well together.. *sigh* Meanwhile, some pics of the finished 13./JG.51 pattern. Not sure on the disruptive pattern on the main wings. JaPo/ Crandall are contradictive in that matter. Colors in general rather speculative... but the 301s were painted with brown all over so this makes a nice change.. Gonna do the Stabsversion of this JG soon.

Sorry for the late reply. Is this the issue you are encountering? It's because I'm using 2 different types of lights for the lightbars. One type looks great from upclose but doesn't render properly at a distance, the other type looks crappy but is visible from afar. I guess I can tune it so the transition happens a bit sooner but it's never going to be perfect unfortunately I'm not sure I understand correctly but AFAIK, no, I can't do that. What's land and what's water is part of the map properties and I can't create an object that would be recognised as land or water by the game. I might be wrong, if you know a mod that does this, let me know and I'll look into it. I haven't figured out a way to start the animation a given point but you can use these liveries in conjunction with some trigger rules to freeze the animation at a certain point. Do note that this will completely freeze the animation. Place the liveries in the mod folder or with your other liveries in saved games. Sinking Ships Liveries.zip In the mission editor, select the sinking animation livery Then add a new trigger rule to turn off the AI of the sinking ship. "Group AI OFF" or "Unit AI OFF" will work. When you start the mission the animation of the sinking ship will be frozen in place You can tweak at which point of the animation you want it to be freezed by editing the "custom_args" value in the description.lua contained in each livery folder livery = { } name = "Sinking Animation" custom_args = { [13] = 0.9, } 0.0 would be the very beginning of the animation, 1.0 the end.

Airplane Simulation Company c C-130J тоже же вышли из мода. Если мод дорастает до нужного уровня, почему бы и не сделать его полноценным модулем. Я бы лично купил бы Sufa, если бы он был. Ведь уже совсем неплох, есть конечно над чем работать. Рано или поздно может и IDF Mods доберутся до SDK, хотя многое упирается и в документацию по ЛА. А Пилатус или еще что-то, никто же не заставляет покупать. Движок DCS в плане лётных характеристик намного более продвинутый по сравнению с сами знаете чем. И не ED делает, свои человеческие ресурсы не тратит.

Далеко не факт, внешка модулей ЕД вне конкуренции

" ha ha ha ha hahaha " JestHer so cute IMG_0709.MOV

This is presumably all stuff that is done by the groundcrew before the pilot touches the aircraft, right? I'm all for nuts and bolts simulation, but it does seem this is one of the things that could be glossed over. Especially since we can rearm and refuel in less than 60 seconds. The things ED, and by extension the community, obsess over, are as always... irregular.

Так, давайте не путать тёплое с мягким. UH-1H - это официальный модуль. Он сделан и предлагается к продаже именно так, как он сделан. Все вопросы к авторам. И доступ к SDK у разработчиков модуля есть. И назвать их не талантливыми язык не повернётся. И этот модуль хоть каких-то (я надеюсь) стандартов ED (если о таком вообще можно говорить) придерживается. Все дополнения, ливреи, модификации - это к официально допущенному к продаже модулю не имеет никакого отношения. Просто вольные зарисовки любителей. Именно поэтому, модуль, за который заплатили, обязан работать после очередного обновления (что, к сожалению, не всегда даже у самого ED получается) и, в случае поломки, обязан быть исправлен, пока он поддерживается. А вот с модификациями - как бог на душу положит. Устал автор бороться - забил на модификацию. Терять-то нечего - всё даром и по доброте душевной отдано в сеть. И имеет на это полное право - к нему не может быть никаких претензий. А вот перечисленные модели истребителей, которые, по факту, перерисованные модели всё того-же набора самолётов из Горячих скал 3, да ещё с какими-то непонятными реализациями двигателей с ИВТ, СУВ и т.д. Возможно кому-то это нравится. Но, на полноценный модуль как-то не тянет. Да и не думаю, что многим из игроков хотелось бы летать на купленном модуле, который, вроде как, пытается соответстовать реальности, против уфолёта со знакомыми очертаниями и неизвестно на чём базирующимися возможностями. "Я его слепила из того что было..." Представьте себе, какой зоопарк начнётся после того, как ED откроет всем талантливым мододелам SDK и каждый из них привнесёт в игру свой набор авиамоделей франкенштейна. Автор (ED) делает то, что считает нужным. И совершенно не обязан пускать в свою творческую мастерскую кого-то, с кем он не находится в творческом союзе. И, кстати, если мне не изменяет память, ED совершенно не держит в заперти под семью замками свой SDK. Приходишь с предложением к ним и, если оно всех устраивает, договариваетесь о взаимоотношениях (правовых и финансовых) и вперёд - у талантливых мододелов всё окажется на руках! Только ваяй на радость своим поклонникам!

"Отряд не заметил потери бойца" (с) М. Светлов.

Good evening everyone, I want to register my mosquito In this skin I wanted to show what a veteran aircraft would look like, which underwent several repairs during World War II https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/de/files/3330029/

Caiman MRAP has arrived in SMAO Version 1.6 ... null

I'm pleased to announce the upload of my campaign : Mi-8MTV2 Palestrael 25 2023/03/25 - v1.0 - Initial release What if... 2022, a new extreme right Israeli government is elected. It continues the illegal colonization of the Palestinian territories. 2023, Israel massacres thousands of civilians in the Gaza Strip. It is the crime of too much. The country loses the support of the USA. 2024, an Arab coalition overthrows the power in Israel. A war breaks out and sets the region ablaze. 2025, under the pressure of the UN, a new state is created: Palestrael. The Palestinian and Jewish peoples finally share the same territory, divided into autonomous regions. Extremist groups, both Israeli and Arab, refuse to recognize the new government. The UN sends peacekeeping troops : MOMAPP. Mission de l’ONU pour le maintien de la paix au Proche-Orient. Here starts your campaign, as a Mi-8 Pilot! Your name is… Commander, your Copilot/Navigator is Larry and the Flight Engineer/Crew Chief is Joey. Fully voiced over. Story driven. Full documentation in briefing and kneeboard. Happy landing! null

Lets be honest the new FLIR system is utterly ludicrous. Some vehicles like the T-90 are impossible to see - they start cold irrespective of if they are ticked to start cold and even when hot are nigh on invisible. - whilst some vehicles (esp trucks) can be seen from the moon. It was better then we had the old model as at least it was consistent. The current system is an utter joke. Either get all models working correctly or none. Here is a video of FLIR looking at a rabbit (10:06) and we cannot see a tank!

Small pack of liveries for the Kamaz truck, the UAZ and the Soldier M4 GRG Drop the content of the zip in "C:\Users\%username%\Saved Games\DCS\Liveries\" https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3330019/

Hello there, being a Viggen pilot, it happens quite often that our map markers get deleted. Either, and i think this is the usual reason, unintentionally/by accident or intentionally for trolling reasons. Setting up these markers for waypoints is a bit of work and having them deleted, especially when it happens repeatedly, can be quite some disturbance. I sometimes see myself just leaving the server because it feels like a waste of time. I would love to see a temporary/short term solution for this until data cartridge as a core feature is available. This could as example be done by: 1) (edited with below contributions of Kang and Machalot) If the text of the map marker is Viggen specific (see image below), then the markers should only be visible to other Viggen pilots. This would also mean less clutter for everyone else, since these markers are really just relevant for the pilot and maybe his wingmen. Maybe these special waypoints could also get another color, so they are easily distinguishable from common/visible ones. This would be my preferred solution as it is not intrusive and actually improves map readability for everyone. 2) If created by a player currently in a Viggen slot, the markers could be non-deletable by players (creator and admin only). To avoid clutter, markers could auto-delete x minutes after owner disconnected, so people having connection issues do not lose their markers. In case of abuse, the name of the creator is always visible on the map marker and admins can punish such behavior. Less preferred method, cumbersome and messy i think. 3) By other means, open for ideas from devs and community. Thanks!

Hotfix 1.0.7 ... sorry for people who already downloaded the 1.0.6. I made a mistake that may produce wrong package restoration during upgrade/downgrade of package that is overlapped. Better use the 1.0.7 to avoid any problem. See link in previous post.

For me original Swedish cold war JA37 Viggen as well. I don't care about classified modern D with modern avionics and weapons. In '80s enviroment it would be dangerous fighter, in '00 it would be outmatched and outdated.

I will be sharing the files and parts I've designed/used to build my projects on my Discord if anyone is interested. I have designed replicas for most of the rear seat AH-64 panels. Custom cyclic and collective designs will be released as I get them sorted out. I have PCB files for hat switches and analog sticks. I'm always working on something and will document it on Discord. Formatting and channels in Discord are a WIP. https://discord.gg/UtWvB5mCU4

Апач - он разве не в раннем доступе? А теперь мы получаем SDK для всех и все, кто умеет, лезут его исправлять. Что в итоге получится? Гиперреалистичность за деньги - это мантра ED. На святое замахнулись! Сколько копий сломано на темы "оно так не должно летать" или "такой-то аппарат носил такое-то вооружение, а у нас его нет"! Симулятор - это не открытая платформа. У его авторов-владельцев свои представления о том, как в их мире работают законы природы. И это их дело - пускать в этот мир кого-то или нет. А что и откуда мододелы знают о реальных возможностях Рафаля? И какими волшебными способами через сильно ограниченный мир DCS они собираются передать близость к миру реальности полётов того или иного модуля? Кто бы и что бы не говорил, DCS - это просто компьютерная игрушка. Набор пикселей на плоском экране в большинстве случаев. К реальному миру он имеет очень опосредованное отношение. Да, при попадании, например, в реальную кабину самолёта, который есть в мире DCS, многие вещи для глаз будут знакомы. Но, это знакомство на уровне визуального объекта. Банальную тугость нажатия кнопки ничем вообще не передашь. Так что, дать всем SDK - это выглядит как "ED не делают то, что нам хочется, а делают то, что может принести им доход; при этом то, что делают - летает не так и багами полно; давайте раздадим SDK всем и пусть каждый делает такие же глючные модули, но только внешка у которых будет радовать взгляд, бо именно это мы и хотим; пусть багов будет ещё больше - привнесём неожиданность в мир симуляции полётов!" Вообще, как мне видится, это должна быть какая-то отдельная вольнораспространяемая версия какого-то из релизов (хотя бы ОБ), которую отдадут в сеть, с возможностью ломать-строить из неё всё, что пожелаешь, всем, кто умеет. Например, как это в своё время сделала с Ил-2 команда Мэддокса. Это совершенно не помешало в дальнейшем развиваться симулятору, но и оставило старый Ил в живых с кучей дополнительных модулей, где никто особо не заморачивается их правдоподобностью: просто летают в удовольствие. Причём, жив старина до сих пор! И был бы какой-нибудь DCS "за деньги" со строгим следованием коммерческой политике ED, и такой же, но бесплатный и фантастический для всех желающих, без новых плюшек, режимов применения БП, погоды или чего-то там ещё. Два мира - два образца творчества: от создателей и от пользователей. Даже интересно было бы посмотреть, а каком из них пользователей в итоге осталось бы больше и кто лучше его разовьёт. Глядишь и, например, реальный шторм на море в виде волн в вольной версии будет в разы лучше, чем это умеют разработчики. Или погода приобретёт хоть что-то похожее на реальность, бо фанат этого дела сядет и, наконец-то, сделает её в более-менее похожей на то, что мы за окном видим. Интересно, а он входит в пакет обязательных к покупке? Честно говоря, модулей сродни пилатусу = больше половины всех доступных в DCS. Всё равно летаешь на трёх-четырёх. И то, если они достаточно сложны, то вечно забываешь управление назначенное и приходится, после длительного неиспользования, вспоминать модуль как с нуля. На остальные даже внимания не обращаешь. Хоть там 100500 новых пилатусов. Что есть, что нет - какая разница?

look closer

Не хотелка, а большая просьба к разработчикам - не использовать "рабочее" пространство наколенника для элементов интерфейса. Часто приходится делать для планшета предельно упакованные картинки - чтобы избавить юзера от необходимости лишний раз перелистывать страницы. Поэтому каждый - буквально! - пиксель на счету. С прогресс-баром можно смириться, закладки - не использовать. Но кнопки листания мешаются (что они листают - я так и не понял). Для полной нирваны кнопку закрытия тоже хотелось бы куда-нибудь перенести. Например так:

I'm using a standard hardware configuration including Intel i5 9400F, 28 GB RAM, GTX 1660 Ti, running Windows 10 Home Edition, which is very convenient for demanding DCS missions. Quite a basic one Below are some screenshots showing the Normandie firing IRDecoys agains Kh-41 anti-ship missiles, as well as Aster-15 and Aster-30 missiles. Also firing an Exocet missile, with the missile booster dropping into the water after launch, as mentioned by Admiral. Almost best of all, the Normandie also fires a torpedoe... but the wrong way, opposite to the target... Should be easy to correct Admiral ? As mentioned previously, I only use the 1.0.2 version of the Normandie which works very well for me. Not the last 1.0.3 update.

Я в недоумении, зачем нам пилатус...

The F86 sim pit project is still alive! Have managed to track down an original CAC CA27 Sabre airframe and am currently negotiating to purchase it so that I can convert it into the ultimate DCS World F86 Sabre Sim Pit! More photos to follow as things progress.

Included are several objects planned for early access. The rest of the unique objects will be included in phase 3, I think we will discuss them separately on the forum (we forgot about helicopters and helipads on tall buildings, they will be made) Tel Aviv https://www.instagram.com/p/Cne6k5LrcnX/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link No more screenshots, we wrote about it, but I'll find time to take them

it's really weird, since we haven't touched wmd7 code for months the programmer will check this issue asap

No there isn't a light version, I tried to keep the unit count reasonable for the map size ... I was holding back as it was May isn't that far away really! I am currently working on a new concept which I will build something for on the Normandy 2.0 map if the concept comes together properly (so far so good). It will be completely different to how I've done things before.

I'm not sure how I missed these amazing mods for this long! I can't wait to get home from work D/L and install the aircraft. Any chance you guys might be up for a mod to RAZBAM's mod KC-130? I would love to see an HC-130H/P even without the Fulton recovery gear working. -Woog

I completely understand that this is a niche within a niche in that the active player base for the F86 is probably a very small subset of DCS as a whole, and ED is a small team with limited manpower and resources and they need to dedicate the majority of those resources to things that generate profit, ie new product. BUT - the fact remains that inaccurate gun ballistics/gunsight is pretty much a game breaking bug on a gunfighter aircraft and would never be tolerated by the community or the ED Devs on one of their 'flagship' products like the F16/18 etc. Additionally, the community has done the work and produced this .lua file mod which as far as I can tell completely fixes every issue I have with the F86's gun ballistics without being unrealistic or over performing: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3301685/ However, this of course breaks IC so can't be used online. While I make no claims to be an expert in this, it seems to me that it would take maybe one afternoon for one dev at Eagle Dynamics to have a look at this existing user mod, confirm that the changes meet their quality standards or whatever, and then push it out with the next patch. I have no doubt the community would be grateful and it seems like such an easy win.

With all the barriers you mod authors/team have to go through, you guys are seriously setting a standard. cheers and thank you

The included maps in DCS are the ONC and TPC series charts. Here are the ones for South Atlantic: https://maps.lib.utexas.edu/maps/onc/txu-pclmaps-oclc-8322829_t_18.jpg https://maps.lib.utexas.edu/maps/tpc/txu-pclmaps-oclc-22834566_t-18a.jpg https://maps.lib.utexas.edu/maps/tpc/txu-pclmaps-oclc-22834566_t-18b.jpg

To be honest, I'd prefer a JA37C if we ever get one. Yeah, it doesn't sling AMRAAMs, but... so what? It'd fit in a lot better with existing and upcoming 70s to early 80s "3rd gen" fighters like F-5E, MiG-21Bis, MiG-23MLA, Mirage F1, F-4E, etc. It may not share as much with Gripen. Although I think it still used still classified datalink with GCI, it may be implemented in a simplified way, or, as in case of many existing modules with similar systems, completely omitted. We'd still get "funky delta canard with lots of power, but don't mind pulling some AoA now!" Allegedly AJ Viggen has a theoretically better peak turn performance, for a very short while. However, Jakt Viggen has a more powerful engine that also doesn't start coughing up compressor stalls at highish AoA left and right. Besides... who wouldn't want that Oerlikon KCA with "automatic gun targeting" feature of Jakt Viggens? That thing uses the monstrous 30x173mm rounds like GAU-8 after all! But I don't know if HB (or any other dev) would undertake such a project now. HB has their work cut out for foreseeable future too: between finishing F-14 and Viggen, releasing and developing F-4E, Eurofighter Typhoon, later Navy F-4s, and A-6. And while I'd really love a JA 37, I'd honestly much prefer HB to give us a Draken first. I really want a Draken in DCS. Just look at the thing, oozes character, and was pulling Cobras before Flanker was a thing! It'd also go well with MiG-21, F-5E, MiG-19, F-8J, etc.