Leaderboard

AviaStorm tornado dev update:

nullNot done a whole lot of screenshot taking recently but don't believe I've posted this one before

Hi At all times, people made monuments to their kings, heroes, or tried to build something monumental and unusual. France and the UK are countries with a rich history, so we had to work on recreating what they did 100 or more years ago. We would like you - DCS users not only to be able to fly over the capitals of England and France, but also to be able to conduct tours of London and Paris for your friends. ---London--- Queen Victoria memorial The Victoria Memorial is a monument to Queen Victoria, located in London. Designed in 1901, it was unveiled on 16 May 1911, though it was not completed until 1924. At nearly 25 metres (82 ft) tall, the Victoria Memorial remains the tallest monument to a King or Queen in England. Richard lion Heart The statue was created by Baron Carlo Marochetti and is located in Old Palace Yard outside the Palace of Westminster, opposite Westminster Abbey in London. With its pedestal, it stands 9 metres (30 ft) high, showing King Richard I on horseback. The king is depicted wearing a crowned helmet and a chainmail shirt with a surcoat, and lifting a sword into the air. The horse paws the ground, as if preparing for a charge into battle. Marochetti described his work as being inspired by Richard I rather than accurately depicting a 12th-century knight. Nelson's Column Nelson's Column is a monument in Trafalgar Square in the City of Westminster, Central London, built to commemorate Vice-Admiral Horatio Nelson's decisive victory at the Battle of Trafalgar over the combined French and Spanish navies, during which he lost his life. The monument was constructed between 1840 and 1843. Tower Bridge is a combined bascule and suspension bridge in London, built between 1886 and 1894. It crosses the River Thames close to the Tower of London. The bridge is 800 feet (240 m) in length and consists of two 213-foot (65 m) bridge towers connected at the upper level by two horizontal walkways, and a central pair of bascules that can open to allow shipping. Tower Bridge has become a recognisable London landmark. Westminster Bridge is a road-and-foot-traffic bridge over the River Thames in London, linking Westminster on the west side and Lambeth on the east side. The current bridge was designed by Thomas Page and opened on 24 May 1862. With a length of 820 feet (250 m) and a width of 85 feet (26 m). ---Paris--- Statue of liberty The quarter-scale replica sits on the southern end of Île aux Cygnes, an artificial island built in the Seine in 1827 to separate river traffic from the busy port of Grenelle. The statue itself was given to the city of Paris in 1889 by the American community in Paris to commemorate the centennial of the French Revolution. In characteristic American fashion, the statue was officially inaugurated on the Fourth of July. The gift was given to highlight the historically close bond between France and the United States, and reaffirm the dedication of the two nations to the republican ideal on which they were founded. la colonne Vendôme The original column was started in 1806 at Napoleon's direction and completed in 1810. It was modelled after Trajan's Column, to celebrate the victory of Austerlitz; its veneer of 425 spiralling bas-relief bronze plates was made out of cannon taken from the combined armies of Europe Its height is 44.3 m, diameter is 3.6 m. The column is helical - a strip 280 m long, with 22 turns - is overlaid with bronze from 425 bas-reliefs. Les monuments à Louis Pasteur The monument to Louis Pasteur by Alexandre Falguière (1831-1900) was installed in 1904 in Place de Breteuil by the architect Charles Girault on the site of the old tower of the artesian well in Breteuil. Do you remember the word "pasteurization"? Statue Maréchal Joffre Equestrian sculpture of Marshal Joseph Joffre by sculptor Maxime Real del Sarte and unveiled on June 10, 1939. The work is located at the end of the Champ de Mars. Pont_Alexandre_III a single-arch bridge spanning the Seine in Paris between Les Invalides and the Champs Elysees. The total length of the bridge is 160 meters (the metal arch is 107 meters), the width is about 33 meters. In order not to obscure the panorama of the Champs Elysees, the height of the structure does not exceed six meters, which at the time of its creation was considered an amazing achievement. The bridge was founded to commemorate the Franco-Russian Union by Emperor Nicholas II in October 1896 and named after his father, Emperor Alexander III. Pont Mirabeau Built in 1895-1897. The bridge is named after the French politician Honore Gabriel Mirabeau. The bridge is a three-span metal arch. The main arch of the bridge is 93.2 m long, the two side arches are 32.4 m long. The middle span is covered with three-hinged arches. The outer spans are covered with consoles resting at the ends on longitudinally movable supporting parts. The length of the bridge is 173 m, width - 20 m (of which the width of the carriageway is 12 m and two sidewalks are 4 m each).

It's a travesty that all the input hardware posts were stripped out of the Input Hardware forum and instedead buried among hundreds/thousands of super lame posts about RAM and processors. Basic computer hardware has almost nothing in common with joysticks and other input devices which were ironically perfectly at home when they were found in a forum titled Input Devices

A bit of NASAMS 3 AMRAAM-ER action...

Hello everyone, it's been a while since a new version of the program was released, mainly because I didn't find time to further code it. Lately however, I have found time to actually build a new version, with a fully remade interface that implemented all your requests so far. The changes include: New user interface with features like renaming waypoints, changing elevation and reordering (check the video below for more details) Support for exporting/importing files with waypoints Added keybinds for VR users Fixed FPS issues and other bugs Added support for the F16 Sufa mod and the Ka50 3 Please keep in mind this is a first release, please PM me any bugs or issues, and we'll get it sorted. Here is a video showing all the new features: To upgrade to this version, head over to the release found here Download the zip file from there. Then, extract it and replace your existing `TheWay.lua` file in Saved Games with the new one. Otherwise, the new version won't work properly. Then, run the installer, and that's all. If this is your first time using TheWay, follow the full install instructions here: instructions As always, thanks to all the people who've helped me so far with developing and testing. This is the way.

Now, now.... they're "suspected truck parks" ......

I was trying to adjust how the terrain appears in FLIR and discovered that the terrain texture affects the unit's IR signature? Below is same truck placed on different type of grass not too far apart as you can see. Clear sky, no fog. And you can see the one is brighter than the other. I masked them out to compare. They also look different on the road, grass, dirt... So what may look right on one surface may not look right on another. Or what might look right on PG might not on Caucasus etc. Below, the two flipping images are taken from same track file except that I took out the noise from the terrain on one. Only thing changed here is "landnoise.tif.dds" in Caucasus. Nothing on the truck's texture or FLIR texture. But that terrain noise texture is affecting the truck's IR. null Part of the problem with FLIR system might lie on the terrain. Not the unit's FLIR files. Or how the FLIR is rendered on the terrain. I couldn't look at how FLIR textures are rendered but it may be rendering as multiplier or transparency?

New vid:

Was bei Diskussionen rund um VR immer wieder gerne übersehen wird: Bei der Bildwiederholfrequenz in VR geht es nicht primär um die Frage, ab welcher Bildfrequenz ein Nutzer das Bild als “flüssig” empfindet, wie auf einem 2D-Monitor. Die entscheidende zusätzliche Anforderung ist die Überlagerung des bewegten Bildes mit der Kopfbewegung des Nutzers. Dies (und praktisch nur dies!) hat überhaupt zum Wert von 90 Bildern pro Sekunde als Grundanforderung bei VR Brillen geführt. Genau 90 müssen es zwar nicht sein (die 80 der Rift S funktionieren auch), aber unterhalb von ca. 70 Bildern pro Sekunde ist es rein technisch/physikalisch schon nicht mehr möglich, bei raschen Kopfbewegungen eine dazu passende Bildinformation zu liefern, da die Bildwiederholrate bzw. die benötigte Bildinformation der Kopfbewegung hinterher hinkt. Ich kenne Leute, die eine frenetische Abneigung zur VR-Zwischenbilderzeugung pflegen (Motion Reprojection) und sich in VR regelrecht bestimmte Kopfbewegungstechniken angewöhnt haben, um das Problem zu umschiffen, dass sie eigentlich mit viel zu wenig Bildern pro Sekunde unterwegs sind. Die gucken dann in bestimmten Situationen nicht zur Seite oder bleiben mit dem Blick im Cockpit, bis es wieder halbwegs flüssig wird. Und erzählen dann, dass eigentlich alles ganz “flüssig” läuft, weil ja 60 Bilder pro Sekunde für einen kontinuierlichen Bewegungseindruck ausreichend sind.

Soon too be released. The NASAMS 3 SAM with AMRAAM-ER. I will be re-using EDs NASAMS CP and SR models, but with new code so they will be mobile. I've also added my own NASAMS 3 LCHR with AMRAAM-ER mounted on a MAN HX truck. The SAM system will be mobile and can be deployed after movement.

The fact that the AI can see perfectly fine and laser beam you at night without night-time optics or radar guidance is a major issue. I wouldn't imagine it being that hard to introduce a in game penalty system through mission editor or just AI behavior that automatically lowers the accuracy based off the time of the mission and the lume provided by the moon and weather. I.e half moon with low scattered clouds. Obviously if the mission take place as the sun is coming up the penalty reduces. Sorry not sorry but a dude on the back of a moving truck without equipment I.e nods / night optic isn't going to laser beam you on the first burst and perfectly track you as you are defensive. This behavior instantly kills rotor ops and low level ground pounding.

Something About it Makes me Focus Harder.

If there is one livery I would absolutely love to have when the US Navy's F-4 Phantom comes out is definitely this one. I mean, look at that nose art! Gotta be my favourite. Someone already did it for War Thunder: https://live.warthunder.com/post/946019/en/

https://militaryleak.com/2023/04/16/f-15e-strike-eagle-trainer-by-vrgineers-and-razbam-simulations-arriving-2023/

What is it? This mod aims to address two specific issues with the current implementation of contact dots in DCS: Dot size is always one pixel, which means smaller dots at higher resolutions, and that the lower your resolution, the easier it is to find contacts. Dots are rendered too far. As long as an objects model is not culled, it will get a dot drawn on it. DCS' draw distances can go out to >40 miles, making it possible to see the dots of an aircraft before even your radar can pick it up. This is accomplished by adding these new rules to how dots are rendered: The size of the dot gets bigger with screen resolution, using the reference resolution of 1920x1080. The dot becomes fully opaque at distance of ~6 miles. The dot is completely transparent at a distance of ~18 miles. When between those two extremes, the dot will fade at an exponential rate. Download The mod is available on the DCS user files here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3330454/ How to install Unpack the "Bazar" folder in your DCS World root directory. This will overwrite the "dots.fx" file. By default, this is located in "C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World". As of the May 18 2.8.5.40170 openbeta patch, this NO LONGER PASSES IC. FAQ So what does this actually mean? 1. It means that dots are no longer visible from extreme ranges. You won't see planes 20-50 miles away. 2. Playing a high resolution (in this mod, defined as a screen height of >1080) you should have roughly the same "dot acuity" as somebody playing at 1920x1080. This corrects the common practice in DCS of people reducing their resolution to make the dots bigger. Are ground vehicles easier to see? Generally, no. At high resolutions, the dots become rectangles, since half the 2x2 dot is now under the ground. The dot also fades with distance the same as aircraft (the shader can't tell the difference), so you won't be able to spot vehicles from 30 miles like you could before. Why did you pick the ranges you did? Experimentally gathered data, from a paper that is infamous on this forum and won't be named, found that T-38s were spotted around 4-6 miles, depending on conditions. Knowing where the target already is can boost this detection distance by about 5 miles. Based on that information, I tweaked the opacity values and formula such that I was able to consistently find a dot around 4-6 miles, and could find and track distant dots (which are faded to ~50% transparency by this point) at around 10 miles, when I already knew where to look. Are dots completely invisible past 10 miles? Not completely invisible, but they are extremely faint. You'd have to already know they were there to find them, and they are very easy to lose. By about 15 miles they are basically impossible to see. Do I need to turn on labels to use this? No, the dot system in DCS is completely independent of labels. There is some confusion around the label system having a couple "dot" settings, but what those do is draw a label with a little . over the target. Labels are (at present) not obscured by clouds or the cockpit frame. The dots in DCS meanwhile are a completely separate function and do not interact with the label system at all. They are always on, cannot be turned off, and cannot be modified by players without messing with the shader itself as this mod does. To eliminate the chance of confusing labels with the dots, I recommend turning off labels completely when testing this mod. What makes 1080p special? In my experience, the dot size at 1080p resolutions is big enough to be useful, but not so big that it becomes distracting and strange looking. Therefore it was chosen as the reference resolution for which I wanted higher resolutions to have parity with. Does this mod do anything if I already play at 1080p? The only difference you'll notice is that contact dots fade away as they get further. Does this mod work on ultrawide? Yes. The only thing the mod takes into account for sizing the dots is the vertical resolution. Does this mod address the ability to see dots through clouds? No. I did make a brief attempt to see if I could fix that, but it's likely something that Eagle Dynamics will have to fix themselves the correct way. If I zoom into a dot that's far away, does that cause it to fade in? No, the dot opacity is based on a hard distance calculation. FOV has no effect on the opacity of dots. Does this mod address the exploit of raising the FOV to max in order to enlarge dots? It does not. The old impostor mod I made many years ago did this, but I wanted to keep this mod as simple as possible. I might add it in later if there is demand. As with the impostor mod, I'd likely just fade the dots over some field of view. What happens if I play at a resolution under 1080p? Dots will still increase in apparent size at resolutions lower than 1080. Initially I wanted to either try and make the dots "subpixel" by rendering them appropriately smaller at low resolutions, but this isn't feasible without engine changes. I also tried fading the dots proportionally when under the reference resolution, but this created problems with flickering models. The biggest advantage that low resolutions used to give was seeing dots from tens of miles away. Since the dots are now guaranteed to fade with distance, I figured it was best to just let the low resolutions keep their slightly larger dots. Why can I see missiles now? Unfortunately the only information I have to work with in the shader is the object's position. The shader is completely unaware of the model that is under it, so all the logic applies equally to all visible objects, regardless of their size. For objects larger than the average fighter, this works itself out and isn't an issue. However for smaller than average objects such as missiles, this can look a bit strange. Fixing this requires Eagle Dynamics to provide more information to the shader such as an object size. Does this mod pass IC? As of the May 18 2.8.5.40170 openbeta patch, this no longer passes IC. Update v1.1 See the below link for more information.

If you rename the thread, could be a good place to have all naval livery requests.

@NineLine @BIGNEWY Are you going to evaluate the player's feedback on the .50 cal sound effect? To me, the .50 cal sound is impressive. However, there is a trailing "echo" or "reverb" effect that makes it sound like the recording was done in some large underground shooting range bunker, which renders overall sound completely out of place inside the cockpit. Maybe ED dev team can look into it and possibly roll-off the last 100-200ms of the sound, or turn down the echo/reverb effect? If I happen to be way off I understand, but to me that's how it feels right now... The cannons sound fantastic, the new sound effect for them is perfect!

Lino hatte doch einen sehr ausführlichen guide in deutsch geschrieben. Vermutlich nicht mehr auf dem aktuellsten Stand, aber ich denke durchaus noch lesenswert.

Looks so amazing, I have to thank you for these excellent Mods and hard work!

The heck with digital aircraft combat, this map looks so good I'll probably won't do anything but sightsee all over the gorgeous thing!

I was interested into how the missile would fly if it's march engine switch off after 15-20 seconds of fly. And there is almost no difference, but engine allows to draw nice incoming flypath like MIRV tail just for gameplay purposes

On discord IFE wrote they plan the update with the next patch. They preferred not to deliver their current build as this may introduce some new bugs. Let's hope for the next one.

after some testing....... Turned on System>display>graphics>Default graphics settings..... Hardware-accel GPU scheduling (this produced better results in both MT & ST) MT: Best results with Nvidia flow & prefer frame rate both enabled However due to the 100% CPU4 issue with mutli thread its still a bit stutterey...... so back to ST ST: Best results with Nvidia flow disabled..... but prefer frame rate enabled very smooth gameplay Hope ED fix the MT 100% CPU issue soon as even messing with affinity still is not as smooth as ST Also I think I get better clarity picture in my G2 with the studio driver rather than the game ready..... May be placebo but it seems to be the case for me.... any thoughts as to why that could be?

Yea I thought that would be the case. I'm aware it's their intent to do their version of AI (TALON) but I expected it would be a way off. That's a deal breaker for me as I'm mainly single player focused and even in multiplayer, I don't tend to pair up for multi crew stuff. It's the exact reason I haven't bought the Mosquito yet either. How straightforward is it likely to be to run ground attacks from the pilot position only? Are we likely to find ourselves doing WSO stuff at a distance, jump into front seat to start the attack run then jump back into the WSO seat to drop the bomb, then jump back into the pilot seat to evade? I guess time will tell. In terms of RAZBAM modules, I've got the M2000c, the Harrier and the MiG 19. I bought the M2000c a while after it's release and its really good but as I understand, it took a long time to get to that point. I can't comment much on the Harrier as I've barely used it. The MiG 19 is the only module I've bought that I really regretted buying but I'm more than happy with it now. It just seemed so half baked and it stayed that way for a while. Again, it's good now but it took so long to get that way. For me, Heatblurs F-14 is the standard for multi-crew aircraft in DCS (JUST MY OPINION). The F-15E has a whole lot more systems than the Tomcat and I don't doubt that RAZBAM are up to the challenge but my previous experience with their products suggests it's going to be a long haul. I'll put the usual forum disclaimer here though: If you pre-ordered the module, I'm not critisising your purchase. This is only a discussion, don't go getting hurt feelings. With a bit of luck, developers peruse discussions like this and it gives some meaningful feedback of where some customers are at.

So much this. It's not that it's hard. Some things are just annoying. For example: 1.) Doing pedal turns when in position hold mode. There are two options: either you just put in pedal in the direction you want to turn. But the heading hold aggressively counteracts your pedal inputs, so you need to put in a LOT of pedal to break free from heading hold. And when the heading hold finally comes off, you rotate far too violently because now the pedal input is too big for a slow,precise turn. or you press and hold FTR during your entire turn. That makes the heading hold go away and you can do more reasonable pedal inputs (although still really tiny ones, because the Apache yaw is insanely twitchy). But holding FTR also completely disables all other hold assists, and now you have to do a completely unassisted hover+turn. Both of these options are extremely suboptimal. Is the Apache really meant to be this way? 2.) Retrim and SAS desaturation The instant the FTR is clicked, the SAS starts to desaturate. As a result, all assists the SAS is giving briefly go away. This often makes the helicopter jerk when the FTR is clicked. For me this is most noticable on the yaw channel: if I try to get into a hover but my pedal position is not 100% correct, the SAS adds some yaw input. I now get in a good and stable position and click the FTR. As a result, the SAS briefly takes out the yaw correction and the helicopter nose jerks to one side. Unless I get the pedal position exactly right, this happens every time I retrim. Yes, not a big deal but I find it extremely annoying. And I wonder if this also happens in the real Apache? Perhaps our gaming controls are too different and the real SAS logic just doesn't work well for them? For DCS why not add a 0.1 second delay before the SAS starts do desaturate, so we can click the FTR without compromising stability? (For reference in case that matters: I use a VKB Gunfighter with 200mm extension, springs removed and dry clutch. And VKB T-Rudders with springs removed and a friction mod. No curves. Apache control special options set accordingly).

Instead of potential dates for release which are usually worthless because of unforeseen issues, how about giving updates about what they are working on, which parts are finished, which ones are being worked on and what's next on the table to get started on. I think regular updates like that would be fantastic and give those of us that have little/no experience in these things some inkling of the magnitude of these projects. In turn, that would likely give us a better appreciation of the modules we buy.

Been flying sims for 25 plus years, and DCS for the past 2 months.(only fly warbirds) I find DCS the most realistic WWII sim by far, I also fly real planes and one of those a warbird trainer, last week I offered here in the forums to take any DCS pilot who lives in WA state for simulated dogfight (have done the same with IL2 and taken a few people) this time no DCS pilot showed up, so took a friend. After flying DCS Warbirds for 2 months constantly, I have a good feel for most online dogfighting and have seen the impossible jerking maneuvers, which kills immersion. During my dogfight simulation last week, I tried to compare the real event to DCS, FMs and DM are pretty good in DCS. In VR checking six is pretty realistic, a bit easier than being strapped to a 4 point harness IRL, getting the head out of the cockpit is not (VR limits would be nice) Force feedback its something that will make things closer to real. And the most important is pilot fatigue, even in a simulated dogfight you start to get tired, and the speeds are between 200 and 350KPH, DCS warbirds are a lot faster and heavier, so more demanding, some sort of pilot fatigue red out blackout should be modeled to avoid those impossible jerky maneuvers, because really ruins immersion, the pilot is superhuman, blackout happens and its good, but jerking the plane positive Gs then negatives time after time repeatedly , its not realistic, we never see these in real WWII footage.

More in a general sense, is the F-18 radar just broken in general? Ive heard that IRL its so precise that you sometimes can make out vehicle/aircraft type, but in the game its resolution is attrocious, especially past 5-10 miles everything is a blurry mess. The EXP modes (not just 3) mostly seem to expand the blur, rather than increase detection. Kinda got used to just never using the AG-radar, because it seems just kinda useless in DCS. To then go and try the F-16 ground radar is night and day. Way more detail and less bluriness, even at higher range, and the EXP mode improves image quite a bit. Its certainly not flawless, but its actually usable and sometimes even useful. edit: Reading up a bit, people have been talking about how IRL in Gulf War they used the radar to look for ground targets (not just GMT). Thats something you cant even do in an F-16 in DCS, and the 18 is way worse. I mean, its not like the 16 can really identify ground targets either.

You could always just not watch the videos, ignore everything, and just be excited when it releases.....

Please amp up the priority on this one, I'm using MT with VR and this bug since MT was released is seriously making it really rough to try to employ this aircraft on dead night missions. Everything else can be worked around, although always bright hud was killing me but it looks like you guys got that, thank you!!

Thank You, @Doughguy!

Thank you @currenthill- we've waited long enough for a C-RAM!

Seems like all Stryker variants are experiencing some issues with their hitbox, that being that they are missing. You can shoot machine guns and MBT AP rounds through them. Seems like the problem is around the center portion of the hull. Stryker Hitbox Missing.trk

Tnx man! Have a good day

Many thanks. I'll give it a try, then report back.

In the MS Store there is an option to update apps, you can find the OpenXR Tools app there and click update, that is what I did.

Both ATFLIR & LITENING pod when Auto Level Gain (ALG) button unboxed - gain should be souly manual, but because of bug, both pods are still adjusting gain auctimaticaly. ATFLIR moving sensor partialy into cloud - we can see if any targets there, unable to designate. LITENING same wrong behaviour as ATFLIR: ALG_LITENING_pod_BUG.trk ALG_ATFLIR_pod_BUG.trk

If and when HB decides to pay SME in anal beads, Im sure they can afford you.

In the next note on module development, let's talk about the features of air combat on the La-7 aircraft. As previously noted, the powerful ASh-82FN engine provides the Lavochkin with superiority in the main flight characteristics over opponents at altitudes up to 3,000 meters. Based on this, the main task of the La-7 pilot in air combat is to engage in combat at low altitudes, where they can maximize the advantages of their fighter. In the world of DCS, the Lavochkin's closest competitors are the Spitfire, Mustang, Focke-Wulf, and Messerschmitt. While the Mustang and Focke-Wulf can be easily outmaneuvered in turns, the Spitfire should be defeated in vertical maneuvers, utilizing high energy capabilities. The Messerschmitt is the closest competitor in terms of its characteristics. Fighting it is almost on equal terms and largely depends on the skill of the pilot. The most successful pilot who flew the La-7 in real life was the famous three-time Hero of the Soviet Union Ivan Nikitovich Kozhedub, who had a total of more than 60 officially confirmed personal victories on La-5 and La-7 aircraft. According to his memories, Kozhedub achieved his victories primarily by striving to gain the initiative in battle. The renowned ace had the most suitable fighter to implement such tactics. Our team honored the memory of the outstanding pilot by recreating the livery of the aircraft on which I.N. Kozhedub fought. We have no doubt that the La-7 aircraft, with its introduction into the world of DCS, will make a significant contribution to the development of virtual air combat.

Hope you enjoy and it helps you get back into the swing of things with the Viper, my dude. Appreciate the kind words!

Hi, I have a cockpit model under 3ds max 2021, and the latest edm plugin. I added a dummy box type="bounding_box"; although apparently this is no longer necessary with the latest plugins. (I have no problem my other models) I also added a bone, the problem is that this bone (maybe depending on its position) disturbs the model, either distorts it, or some args don't work normally anymore. Sometimes the model doesn't even load in ModelViewer2... The question is how to integrate a bone without disturbance, does anyone have a link to an older version of the plugin? Thanks for any help

It's cold out there...

First, turn off the easy comms, it's not working with the Viggen. Second, don't touch the FR24 mode selector (located behind the radar stick), its broken currently, it will make the radios inoperative! The main radio (FR22, V/UHF) has three "parts": 1. Special preset channels (marked red) 2. Base selector (marked blue) 3. Group selector (marked yellow) 1. Special preset channels Buttons H, 1, 2, and "no name" (should be Special 3 :D) are the presets. The frequencies can be set in the mission editor, and can be viewed in the kneeboard. By default, the H is set to guard frequency (121.5MHz), Preset 1 is your flight frequency (i.e. wingman). The other presets seen in the kneeboard (E, F and G) are used by the backup UHF radio (FR24), which does not work at the moment. Button "-" is used for manually dialed frequency. 2. Base selector Used to communicate with the ATC. The right knob is used to select the base, with its number displayed on the window next to the knob (does not work). The buttons associated with the knob (marked blue) are used to select a particular ATC frequency. All bases numbers and frequencies can be found in the kneeboard. For example, you want to contact the Anapa ATC. You can see from the kneeboard that its number is 1, therefore turn the knob to that number. You can also see in the kneeboard all the frequencies for Anapa ATC. Since the main radio is VHF/UHF, you can choose either 121MHz or 250MHz. As seen in the kneebard, the channels are A and C, respectively. So press button A/G or C/F. By default, your starting airfield number is already selected at the mission start. 3. Group selector Used to communicate with other flights (e.g. AWACS). Again, all the channels are in the kneeboard (see the second image, Groups). For example, if we want to contact the AWACS, we can see its channel is 1-1. To contact it, turn the left knob to 1, and press the number 1. The first number indicates the group number (i.e. turn the knob to that number), the second number a channel within that group (press the corresponding button). Unfortunately at the moment the right knob can only be turned by the keys, and the window display doesn't work.