Leaderboard

DCS: Normandy 2.0 Update FAQ When will it be released? Very soon you will be able to enjoy all the hard work done by Ugra Media. What is DCS: Normandy 2.0, and what updates does it bring? The new DCS: Normandy 2.0 map is a significant upgrade over the original DCS: Normandy 1944 map and will be a greatly enhanced experience of war-time Normandy. DCS: Normandy 2.0 is significantly larger than DCS: Normandy 1944 and contains: much greater detail; historical accuracy; texture resolution; much larger high-detail areas (including London and Paris); updated map objects such as models of buildings, trees, bridges, airfield objects, rail lines, roads, fences, poles, and more; many new and remodelled medium to small size urban locations such as new ports, airfields, factories, rivers, canals, and much more. The image below is a map size and detail comparison: The release of this new map benefits all existing owners of DCS: Normandy 1944. Owners of the original DCS: Normandy 1944 map will receive a free update that enhances the whole area of the original map to the same high detail level as in DCS: Normandy 2.0. The free update will also include the new much larger DCS: Normandy 2.0 total map area and airfields but at a lower level of detail. For a limited time, players that own DCS: Normandy 1944 or DCS: The Channel are eligible to upgrade to or purchase DCS: Normandy 2.0 for a discounted rate. Please read further into the FAQ for more detail. Please note that DCS: Normandy 2.0 supersedes DCS: Normandy 1944, which will no longer be available for purchase after the release of DCS: Normandy 2.0. Information describing for each user case continues below. The FAQ provided here should answer the most common questions you may have. How much will it cost? DCS: Normandy 2.0 will be $59.99 USD, but has a 20% discount applied while in early access and is $47.99 for this duration. For a limited time, players that own DCS: Normandy 1944 or DCS: The Channel are eligible to purchase or upgrade to DCS: Normandy 2.0 for a discounted rate. Please see the pricing matrix below: You already own: You get DCS: Normandy 2.0 for: Normandy 1944 $14.99 USD The Channel $14.99 USD Normandy 1944 & The Channel $9.99 USD The pricing above may be subject to change. How do I purchase DCS: Normandy 2.0? And am I able to try it first? Click here if flying in Open Beta (will be updated with store page on release) Click here if flying in Steam (will be updated with store page on release) If you are flying in Open Beta you may activate a two-week Free Trial of DCS: Normandy 2.0 by pressing the ‘Trial’ button beside the module in the E-shop. You will then be able to download DCS: Normandy 2.0 via the in-game module manager and will have full access to the new terrain for two weeks. The Free Trial programme extends to most DCS module; look for the ‘Trial’ button in the e-shop to participate. I already own DCS: Normandy 1944. What happens? Excellent! Your existing DCS: Normandy 1944 map will be updated for free so that the whole area of the original map is in the same high-detail as in the DCS: Normandy 2.0, and you will benefit from updated airfields and a significantly increased total map area but at a lower level of detail. You will still be able to play on your favourite servers or with friends even if they upgrade to DCS: Normandy 2.0 and you don’t, but your areas of high-detail are significantly smaller and may be missing world objects. If you wish to, you may pay $14.99 USD to upgrade to DCS: Normandy 2.0 for all the benefits described above. I already own DCS: The Channel. What happens? DCS: The Channel remains a separate map made by Eagle Dynamics SA and has not been updated regarding this release. In the corner where there is some map overlap, details between the maps may not match up. See the included map showing the DCS: The Channel map vs the DCS: Normandy 2.0 Map Specifically, DCS: Normandy 2.0 has different airfields, high-detail areas and focus versus DCS: The Channel. If you wish to, you may pay $14.99 USD to purchase Normandy for all the benefits described above. I already own both DCS: Normandy 1944 and DCS: The Channel. What about me? You will automatically benefit with an updated DCS: Normandy 1944 map as described above, but as you additionally own DCS: The Channel, you may upgrade to DCS: Normandy 2.0 for just $9.99 USD I don’t already own DCS: Normandy 1944 or DCS: The Channel. What are my options? The DCS: Normandy map is available for purchase for $59.99 USD with a 20% discount while in Early Access. The original DCS: Normandy 1944 map is no longer available for purchase. I have DCS Normandy: 1944 and don’t want to pay for an upgrade! You don’t need to; your existing DCS: Normandy 1944 map will automatically update and you’ll receive updated airfields and a significantly increased total map area. You will still receive a discounted price if you ever do decide to upgrade to DCS: Normandy 2.0 for all of the benefits described above. Can I fly with friends or servers if we have mismatching versions of Normandy? Yes, you will still be able to play with friends and on your favorite servers even if you have DCS: Normandy 1944 and they are running DCS: Normandy 2.0, or vice-versa. You will be able to fly together but the detail that each of you sees will differ. Those flying DCS: Normandy 2.0 will have a significantly larger area of high detail, including London and Paris and many new and remodelled medium to small size urban locations such as new ports, airfields, factories, rivers, canals, and much more. Will I have both maps after updating or purchasing? No. The normal upgrading procedures will be followed and all players will only have one map installed, but their versions may differ. Those that upgrade or purchase new will see and fly DCS: Normandy 2.0, and those that don’t upgrade will see and fly DCS: Normandy 1944 (but with updated/upgraded airfields) and a larger map size overall (but in lower detail and with missing world objects). The original DCS: Normandy 1944 map is no longer available for purchase How big is DCS: Normandy 2.0 compared to the DCS: Normandy 1944 map? Please see the attached image that illustrates the low and high-detail areas of DCS: Normandy 2.0 compared to the original DCS: Normandy 1944. DCS: Normandy 2.0 is significantly larger overall with much greater areas of high detail, including London and Paris. DCS: Normandy 2.0 spans 400x600 km, with the majority of that in high detail. What new cities and landmarks have been added? Chief among them are London and Paris, but many new medium to small size urban locations make up the greatly expanded area and include new ports, airfields, factories, rivers, canals, and more. Most of the DCS: Normandy 1944 map objects have also been greatly improved; for example: buildings, bridges, airfield objects, rail lines, roads, trees, fences, poles, and much more. Am I paying for the same map twice? No. This new map is a significant upgrade over the original and will be a greatly enhanced experience of war-time Normandy. Please read What is DCS: Normandy 2.0 above for more detail of the changes. Please also read I already own DCS: Normandy 1944. What happens? above for more detail of the differences. Why create DCS: Normandy 2.0? The original DCS: Normandy 1944 map was created using older map technology and tools which rendered it impossible to simply expand and update the existing map to achieve DCS: Normandy 2.0. DCS: Normandy 2.0 has been created with new map technology and tools that have allowed us to increase the map size and amount of detail greatly. In order to make the maps compatible with one another, the airfields in the original map have all been updated so that the spawn locations match. This way, players can fly together regardless of whether they have the new DCS: Normandy 2.0 or DCS: Normandy 1944. What about my missions and campaigns? Some work will be required to adjust for some of the changes to the map. All existing airfields have been updated and so spawn-locations, script triggers, and so on will need to be checked and re-worked. New airfields have been created entirely, so there is much greater opportunity for mission and campaign scenarios. For example, many of the UK airfields have been updated heavily to be more historically accurate. Campaigns such as those from Reflected Simulations have been updated and should be working at release. Please watch his video on this here. ED and Ugra Media will work hard to get the remaining content updated shortly after the Early Access release. If continuing to fly DCS: Normandy 1944, missions that have been updated to suit DCS: Normandy 2.0 might reference world objects you will not be able to see without the update. Will the framerates be worse than the current DCS: Normandy 1944 map? Using the latest Terrain Development Kit (TDK), DCS: Normandy 2.0 has been well optimised and so despite a great increase in the number and detail of objects you should see no loss in performance compared to the original DCS: Normandy 1944 map. This will also be aided by the recent release of Multi-Threading by Eagle Dynamics. Please see here for details. Will there be winter textures? At this time, no. We plan for DCS: Normandy 2.0 to include Summer as it is being created around operations in Normandy in the summer of 1944 (Opération Neptune) but it will also include Spring and Autumn seasons. What airfields will be included at release? The total number of airfields has been increased to 50 for the Early Access version. Both owners of DCS: Normandy 1944 and those that upgrade to or purchase DCS: Normandy 2.0 will see all of these. Please see the following list of the initial airfields, which may increase after the Early Access release: Airfields in France A1 Saint Pierre du Mont A21 Sainte-Laurent-sur-Mer Fecamp_Benouville Flers A2 Cricqueville-en-Bessin A24 Biniville Evreux Goulet B17 Carpiquet A6 Beuzeville Guyancourt Hauterive A12 Lignerolles A8 Picauville Villacoublay Lonrai A14 Cretteville A9 Le Molay Saint-Andre de l Eure Poix A15 Maupertus B11 Longues-sur-Mer Orly Ronai A16 Brucheville B2 Bazenville Amiens_Glisy Rouen-Boos A20 Lessay - оригинальны B3 Sainte-Croix-sur-Mer Argentan Saint-Aubin A3 Cardonville B4 Beny-sur-Mer Avranches Le Val-Saint-Pere Triqueville A4 Deux Jumeaux B7 Rucqueville Barville Vrigny A5 Chippelle B8 Sommervieu Conches Broglie A7 Azeville Beauvais-Tille Creil Beaumont-le-Roger B9 Lantheuil Cormeilles-en-Vexin Deauville Bernay Saint Martin A17 Meautis Dinan-Trelivan Essay Airfields in UK Chailey Stoney Cross Farnborough Ford Funtington Gravesend Heathrow (as it was at this time, it is under construction and not usable) Kenley Needs Oar Point Tangmere West Malling Deanland Friston Lymington Odiham We hope that you thoroughly enjoy exploring and experiencing the incredible new WW2 theatre that is DCS: Normandy 2.0. We would also like to extend special thanks to our partners Ugra Media for their continued dedication and hard work. As always, we also would like to thank you for your continued passion and support. Yours sincerely, Eagle Dynamics and Ugra Media

I've released an updated version of the mod. The update can be found on User Files: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3330454/ The updated mod (v.1.1) contains two changes: The dots correctly snap to the pixel grid and don't require MSAA to work as intended The near and far ranges have both been adjusted based on feedback and my own experience while testing the mod Corrected dot rendering and no longer requiring MSAA This is the most important change of the update. As I mentioned in a previous post, I had noticed that when playing with MSAA disabled, the dots were flickering and not rendering correctly. The math I was using didn't correctly snap the dots to the pixel grid, resulting in dots which were either misaligned to the grid, or the wrong size. MSAA fixed this issue, but I didn't want the mod working correctly to rely on a very expensive graphics setting. The intended dot sizes are unchanged from the original release, but for reference the maths works out as such for common resolutions: 1080: 1x1 pixel dot 1200: 1x1 pixel dot 1440: 2x2 pixel dot 1600: 2x2 pixel dot 2160: 3x3 pixel dot Adjusted ranges Based on feedback from people in the thread, and my own experience testing the mod in various PVE and PVP servers, I made a few adjustments to the ranges. The near range has been pulled slightly in, as I felt like the fully opaque black dots were a little too easy to see, a little too far away. Meanwhile, the far distance was pushed out slightly. This is a compromise based on discussion that under certain circumstances aircraft should be visible from a further away. I still think a better solution would be some kind of glinting for truly distant spotting, but as I said before that's complex enough that I'm hesitant to put in the work for a mod that will probably be obsolete for MP purposes by next patch due to IC checks. In practice, these adjustments make for a smoother transition between a distant dot being invisible, and a near one being completely visible. More importantly, it makes it easier to approximate distance of a contact, since the curve is more gradual. When WVR (<5 nautical miles) the targets are still clearly visible, which is the area I'm most concerned with. Targets are also visible for slightly longer past the 10 nautical mile mark before they totally fade out with new, more gradual curve. To put numbers to this: Near range: 12km (6.48nm) -> 8km (4.32nm) 50% visibility range: 18000 (9.72nm) -> 18200 (9.83nm) Far range 32km: (17.2nm) -> 42km (22.6nm)

Just blew 50 euro for chinese food and a few bottles of beer for myself and the wife. We will get one night of fun for that 50 bucks... For 10 or 15 bucks i will get thousands of hours of fun. Honestly i feel the devs have been very generous with this upgrade and lets face it: The map looks as sexy as it gets. Just saying.

Still being worked on. Progress is going well. I would expect releasing it before the summer.

Thanks, Gogi12! I appreciate it. As a gift from me, I have released the USS Blue Ridge LCC-19 Ver 1.0.0 with the livery of the USS Mount Whitney LCC-20 early. Page #1 of the Forum # 28. There will be version 1.0.1. I'm updating the textures via Substance Painter. As always. If you experience any technical issues please PM me and I will gladly correct it. USS Blue Ridge (LCC-19) is the lead ship of the two Blue Ridge-class amphibious command ships of the United States Navy, and is the flagship of the Seventh Fleet. Her primary role is to provide command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) support to the commander and staff of the United States Seventh Fleet. She is currently forward-deployed to U.S. Navy Fleet Activities, Yokosuka in Japan.

Hello! The radar is probably the most WIP item in the plane. Reports from our SMEs (both pilots and technicians) indicate that the noise levels should indeed be generally lower, so we are aware of it. Thanks a lot for the report and the video tho.

Normandy 2.0 FaQ

Hey @Callsign JoNay thanks for the testing and info! Facts and hard numbers are always appreciated! I'm generally not the stores/loadout guy but this must have slipped through the cracks or been the product of an internal misunderstanding, I'll take a look. The good news is this doesn't impact the FM tuning since all the testing that informed the tuning was done with non-Phoenix loadouts. This will only add some extra weight so the performance should work out accordingly. Now we just need to figure out why the weight isn't being added properly... Everyone else: take note of how this FM bug report was presented and formatted, I will ignore reports that are based purely on feelings!

Need wallpaper in 4K?

Yep, that is correct. I've chose to emulate the resupply truck with a total of three pod reloads. Each reload takes 5 minutes. That's one of the key features with a modern rocket artillery system like the HIMARS, the quick pod reload with the integrated crane. I have implemented reloads for most of my assets.

Its our hobby!

Great! Looking forward to this map, this is going to increase popularity of DCS WWII and attract lots of new pilots. I think the price is totally fair by the way.

Hi Folks, Prior to 2.8 Open Beta, we were able to add SC Liveries a follows: Supercarrier Deck Upgrade v1.00 (digitalcombatsimulator.com) Higher in Contrast, for easier spotting of the deck in certain lighting and weather conditions, Most certainly a Hugh Boost for us in VR. Since the release of 2.8 O.B in Fall of 2022, this feature is broken when used on a MP server or Dedicated Group Server (it only works on the Client side), when the SC Custom Livery is selected via the Mission Editor on a Group Server, it reverts to only Displaying the Stock SC Livery. It would be cool to have this feature available again, @ ED Team, would you kindly look into this please? Thank you!

This is a formal bug report to let the team know that the phoenix pallets are not influencing aircraft performance. It is not just a bug of the weapon loadout screen in the mission editor, which seems to be the understanding of the HeatBlur team. Two months ago a user on Reddit asked a question about the weight of the phoenix pallets, and whether or not the current flight model was accounting for them or not. @Cobra847 replied to the redditor and claimed that the Phoenix pallets have always been accounted for in the flight model, and that if there is something causing them to not influence the model it should be reported as bug. Cobra's reply garnered 67 up votes. I replied to Cobra stating that the users of the HB F-14 proved in 2021 that the Phoenix pallets were definitely not affecting the F-14 flight model performance, and I referenced the topic and pages where the data was provided. My reply garnered 10 down votes, go figure. Here is a screen capture to the reddit conversation: And here is a link to the old Performance/FM Discussion topic that I referenced in my reply to Cobra: In pages 19-21 of the discussion topic we provided data to the team to prove that the FM was not correctly modelling the weight of the Phoenix pallets. Even Victory205 was involved in the discussion, and advised us how to properly test it. This was reported to the team in 2021, and nothing ever came from it. At the time of this Reddit discussion I knew that there were more flight model updates on the horizon, scheduled for the beginning of 2023 as per Iron Mike, so I refrained from testing until after the most recent update just in case the Phoenix pallet weight issue would be solved by Fat Creason's newest update. Today I tested again, (in MT on the latest OB), and I can confirm that the Phoenix pallets are still not affecting the F-14B's in-game performance. How I tested: I tested three aircraft. The first aircraft is a clean F-14B, loaded with 10,000 lbs internal fuel (set to unlimited fuel in the settings so that the weight stayed consistent), no pallets or stores. The second aircraft was the same except it had four Phoenix pallets equipped. The weight of the pallets including the fairings, should total approximately 2,200 lbs of weight, according to public sources. The third aircraft was the same as the first except it was equipped with four AIM-7P in the tunnel instead of the pallets. Each Sparrow is approximately 500 lbs, so they should be a very close approximation of the weight/drag that should be created by equipping Phoenix pallets in the tunnel. I tested all three aircraft at 800 feet, same weather conditions, same heading, gear, flaps, and hook down, DLC engaged in neutral position, trimmed until on-speed according to the AOA indexer and HUD staple. Then I paused the game to reference the IAS according to the F2 view. Aircraft #1, clean loadout, trimmed on speed: 137 IAS: Aircraft #2, 4x Phoenix pallets, trimmed on speed: 137 IAS: Aircraft #3, 4x Sparrow in the tunnel, trimmed on-speed: 143 IAS: Attached here is the miz file I used in case you want to test yourself. Pallet weight test.miz

You guys really do spend a lot of time worrying about when it's going to be released

(btw. Nice but they should to know what anti aliasing does from years. )

Texturing on the wing starts, testing a technique to get the overlapping effect of the sheet metal. Working on a 8k texture per wing that gives us approx 5.551 pixels per centimetre which sounds like a lot until you realise a standard rivet it about 3/16" or 0.47cm giving us about 2 pixels to rivet with Theres banding on the gradient here with the way I exported the height map from photoshop but its enough to demonstrate how a pop rivet would look

Worked on, how? I think it's pretty clear from this thread and the poll so far that most think this is at least a step in the right direction. It doesn't give anyone an unfair advantage. Why would you want to make sure the IC picks it up unless/until you guys have a solution? I love this sim. I love the visual fidelity that it's capable of - and I play for immersion. Almost everything I've done to upgrade my PC/setup is purely to make the game look better - and users like myself suffer when doing MP because whether an opponent is running a potato, or just sandbagging their settings - they get a very clear advantage over me for spotting. I've only just recently started flying warbirds, but I can't tell you how many times I've had friends running 1080 or lower call out contacts that they can very clearly see that don't even show up to me because I'm running 2k. As many others have pointed out, it's the worst part of flying warbirds and it's something that quite literally everyone I've spoken to about mentions as being "completely borked." Everyone on the servers says "gotta turn your resolution down." ...it shouldn't be that way. It's no different than the FPS players that used to turn their settings all the way down so they could see people in grass and bushes and stuff. I'm not trying to rake you guys over the coals...but c'mon.

I think the only difference DCS makes for fighter jets is if the pilot has a G suit or not. So the F86 pilot just goes boom and blackout, whitout g suit, but the modelling for the F16, F18, F14 etc should be the same as their pilots have G suits. Whats also simulated is a g warmup. There are techniques but the easiest is to do some barrel rolls with more than 7 G. If you dont do it, you also go black out quickly. And the paddle pulling F18 is also not relevant here. Because there are no EM diagrams for the paddle pulled state as far as I know. And its not a common practice to do so. If people need the paddle its for compensating the lack of BFM skills. The F18 paddle is not being used in a dogfighting reality. But the F16 is built around and for the 9G limit, thats why its called a true 9 G fighter. And it makes no sense that the virtual pilot cant handle 9Gs long enough for the F16 to be in the regime where its built to perform. Sure the flight model is correct. But with a pilot who is unqualified for this jet it is pointless.

Currently a lot of servers have/are adding logistics play but short of using the cargo rope system, you can't see any cargo in back. It would be much more immersive to at least have some static pallet, bladder, and vehicle objects that can be loaded and having some way of organizing them such that the pilot has some way of choosing how much weight to carry and knowledge of what that cargo weight is and its distribution.

Hi, It's a cool video about French Mirage F1 operating in Tchad, Mirage F1 CR and CT. Mirage F1 CT were former Mirage F1 C200 upgraded with CR components. But the radar was kept the same, so for instance, instead of upgrading the radar to get AG ranging they added a laser ranger finder. At 5:34 you can see the radar operating in AA. As far as I can tell: mode "IC", range 35Nm, elevation setting D+06. There is no noise on the scope !

The standard is that we create our modules based on available non-controlled documentation/information on a per aircraft basis. You cannot compare one module to the next as each has different levels of available, non-controlled documentation/information. Further, you cannot compare a system in one aircraft to another because they may be implemented differently (often due to different mission computers and software). Everything we do is based on the standard to create the most realistic simulation possible within the bounds of valid documentation/information, not in comparison between aircraft or based on speculation.

That's rather disappointing. I think it's a good opportunity to fix the mess caused by weird decision to have two separate maps for (more or less) the same thing (and same period of time). Incorporate the Channel map area into Normandy 2.0 map (as high detailed area that is currently missing). Make the purchase attractive by discounting it to the Channel Map owners (also after the initial special offer there should be *some* discount available). Discontinue sales of the Channel Map. The only difference in comparison to Normandy 1944 map should be - the Channel map stays available to people who buy it before pulling it from store. That's how I see it.

I subscribe to that, i almost don't know what mission to build with all the goodies - thanks man!

G2 and 4090 user here. To me with the mod contacts that are mid to close range are way easier and so way better to spot and track. Totally a step in the proper direction and imho blocking this behind the IC is totally idiotic since it should be worked and iterated more into the base game before. As usual a member of the community was able to provide what ED wasn't able to. I hope this time we won't lose another member for the stubbornness of the guys in the command room, since many prominent members doing scripting for the community as the guys behind overlord bot and others already expressed their frustration toward ED management and jumped the boat

Just to add to the excellent information already provided, I'd also like to mention that the F-4E with slats showing up in late 1972 in the final stages of the Vietnam War with the "new" 555th TFS was a very mature version of the F-4 while the earliest of F-14A and F-15A blocks had a lot of hiccups to fix at the time when they were still prototypes. Of course despite this, when they worked properly, they really were next generation in terms of performance. To me, what makes this F-4E version special is that it was the best version of the F-4E to fight in wars (Vietnam, Israel in 1973) where it was the best over all in the world. After 1973, the F-14A, F-15A, Mirage F1, MiG-23 started showing up and IMO, the F-14/F-15 completely outclassed the new fighters entering service. The MiG-23MS - the first mass produced version - did not have a radar as capable as the 1977 circa MiG-23ML/MLA. And indeed the first examples of the MiG-23 to see combat was the MF variant in 1974 which had no BVR missiles and a MiG-21 radar. The AIM-7E-2 at this time also yes, had a poor hit rate - only improving over the legacy AIM-7 by around 2% - but Clashes: Air Combat over North Vietnam, 1965–1972 (and probably the infamous Ault report - I'd have to read it again to confirm) admits that a LOT of the missed missiles also had to do with shots out of parameters or switches being in the wrong position, leading to duds on top of the lack of reliability. I've seen figures as high as 30% of missed missiles was from these factors, but I'd have to dig deeper to be sure. If we end up making servers with period-accurate combat until and including 1973 tech, say good bye to chaff and flare launchers on either the F-4E or MiG-21 and very limited R-3R/S missiles on the MiG. The F-4 would be at a significant advantage here, being able to use AIM-9D's (if Israeli) or J's (probably similar/exactly the same as AIM-9P's as far as DCS is concerned). However to get good traffic, I imagine servers would understandably need to compromise a bit by having technologically similar jets for balanced gameplay and accessibility and sort of forgo time frames. From quick and rough checks of weights, dimensions and uninstalled, sea level engine thrust, the Mirage F1 appears to be inferior to the F-4E in thrust to weight ratio with a similar wing loading, aspect ratio and wing sweep while also having leading edge slats (the Mirage has half span slats and half span LE flaps), though it seems to be faster. It does not surprise me too much if it were to actually turn worse instantaneously and sustained. Also note that the S530F, while maybe a much faster missile than the AIM-7E-2 was a 1978ish missile - by which time the contemporary would have been the AIM-7F which equipped F-14's and F-15's and would equip some F-4E squadrons. The AIM-7F is still slower but it is loads better in performance and reliability than the AIM-7E variants. All this to say I guess is that the better MiG-23MLA and DCS Mirage F1 variants and weapons aren't really contemporary to this F-4E chronologically (but they would be for the later DMAS F-4E) - but rather they'd showed up when the likes of the Tomcat and Eagle were on the scene.

Its an ongoing issue since many years Just do a quick google search and: https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=dcs+smart+scaling+site%3Aforum.dcs.world

Few new screenies from M2M:

Okay, just checked. No, only turning off the radar completely will reduce the load. Keep in mind we're working on improving the radar simulation and these problems will be ironed out later.

Many people asked me for tutorials about certain aspects of DCS. Here are a couple of guides I made. ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** MAIN REPOSITORY [ALL DCS GUIDES] https://chucksguides.com/#dcs ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** WORLD WAR II PROPS DCS DH.98 Mosquito FB Mk VI https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/dh98/ Last updated: 20/09/2023 DCS P-47D Thunderbolt https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/p-47d/ Last updated: 20/09/2023 DCS Spitfire LF Mk IX https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/spitfire-lf-mk-ix/ Last updated: 20/09/2023 DCS P-51D Mustang https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/p-51d/ Last updated: 20/09/2023 DCS FW190A-8 Anton https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/fw190-a8/ Last updated: 20/09/2023 DCS FW190D-9 Dora https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/fw190-d9/ Last updated: 20/09/2023 DCS Bf.109K-4 Kurfürst https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/bf109k-4/ Last updated: 20/09/2023 DCS I-16 Ishak https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/i-16/ Last updated: 6/01/2023 JETS DCS F/A-18C Hornet https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/fa-18c/ Last updated: 25/04/2025 DCS F-14B Tomcat https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/f-14b/ Last updated: 19/08/2023 DCS JF-17 Thunder https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/jf-17/ Last Updated: 14/08/2024 DCS F-15E Strike Eagle https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/f-15e/ Last updated: 17/07/2024 DCS F-16C Viper https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/f-16cm/ Last updated: 17/04/2025 DCS F-4E Phantom II https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/f-4e/ Last updated: 5/07/2025 DCS F-5E3 Tiger II https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/f-5e3/ Last updated: 14/08/2024 DCS AV-8B N/A Harrier II https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/av-8b/ Last updated: 6/02/2023 DCS AJS-37 Viggen https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/ajs-37/ Last updated: 25/12/2020 DCS F-86F Sabre https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/f-86f/ Last updated: 6/01/2023 DCS MiG-15bis https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/mig-15bis/ Last updated: 6/01/2023 DCS MiG-19P https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/mig-19p/ Last updated: 6/06/2019 DCS MiG-21bis https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/mig-21bis/ Last updated: 5/02/2022 DCS Mirage 2000C https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/m-2000c/ Last updated: 14/08/2024 DCS Mirage F1 https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/mirage-f1/ Last updated: 14/08/2024 DCS A-10C Warthog https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/a-10c/ Last updated: 31/08/2023 DCS C-101CC Aviojet https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/c-101cc/ Last Updated: 22/04/2020 DCS L-39ZA Albatros https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/l-39za/ Last updated: 13/10/2023 HELICOPTERS DCS AH-64D Apache https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/ah-64d/ Last updated: 7/09/2024 DCS Mi-24P Hind https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/mi-24p/ Last updated: 13/10/2023 DCS UH-1H Huey https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/uh-1h/ Last updated: 20/01/2021 DCS Mi-8MTV2 https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/mi-8/ Last updated: 20/09/2023 DCS SA-342 Gazelle https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/sa-342/ Last updated: 1/09/2023 DCS Ka-50 Black Shark https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/ka-50/ Last updated: 18/01/2023 GENERAL AVIATION DCS Yak-52 https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/yak-52/ Last updated: 06/10/2018 ************************************************** Want to contribute? Here's a link to my Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/chucksguides **************************************************

I ran into a problem with some Moose functionality. In debugging the issue, it appears to originate in the SSE. So, I wrote a test using only SSE and duplicated the underlying issue. I am attempting to scan the area defined by TestSphereZone. Here is the test code: local foundUnits = {} local sphere = trigger.misc.getZone('TestSphereZone') local volS = { id = world.VolumeType.SPHERE, params = { point = sphere.point, radius = sphere.radius } } local ifFound = function(foundItem, val) foundUnits[#foundUnits + 1] = foundItem:getName() return true end world.searchObjects(Object.Category.UNIT, volS, ifFound) trigger.action.outText("Number of units found: " .. #foundUnits, 20) Note a volume type of "SPHERE is specified. (Really should be called Cylinder IMHO, but whatever.) I would have expected a count of found objects to be 6. What is returned in this case is 18 objects (i.e. appears to include objects outside the cylinder but inside a bounding box corners. On a 10 nm radius zone the error at the corners is 4nm or 140% percent of the intended radius. (Test miz attached.) Thanks in advance. TestShereVolume.miz

I think this needs to be addressed. It seems the F-16 requires more documentation/evidence to implement stuff than other ED modules. With the recent news of the F-16’s litening being removed for the Lantirn due to lack of evidence, JDAM’s having an impact error zone that just isn’t being implemented right but will do one day I guess, MAV’s having to be bore-sighted and so on and so on, the list is bigger. yet none of these items are implemented on other ED modules and in fact ED said they do not have the required documentation to to properly implement MAV’s on the F-18 such as bore-sighting so why are MAV’s not being removed from the hornet for the same reason the litening TGP is being removed for the viper? in the end implement whatever realism you want but just have a standard between the modules.

Доброго времени суток. Предлагаю настройки управления сохранять на серверах eagle dinamics. Естественно с привязкой к учетной записи для автоматического применения при загрузке профиля в симуляторе. Про какие сервера я веду речь? Про те где хранятся учетные записи каждого игрока. Кому это нужно? Тем кто не сохранил/утерял конфигурацию управления (из-за технических причин)

This is reported internally, thanks.

I don't think I'd go that far, many Naval Aviators have lost their lives during or as a result of ACM/BFM training hops. Even the daily "norm" of the job was dangerous, accidents happened, aircraft had failures, and folks perished doing what should have been routine flights.

20Apr23: Added "What you should be doing..." video

Can't thank you enough. What an amazing addition to the game.

Thanks for letting us know that this is on the list for future updates. I would not expect the seat position to play such a big role as it also needed due to the small cockpit measurements of the F16. (Little selling trick by General Dynamics here) I would rather expect that the DCS pilot will be adjusted to meet the real world requirements for a qualified F16 pilot. With that real F16 techniques will become possible in DCS. Like rating at the best sustained rate and pull the bandit in HUD, which is difficult at the moment because the DCS pilot blacks out in the final pull.

Спасибо. Нашли одну проблемку. Будем чинить.

You guys!

Awesomeness! Great FAQ. Sounds like we are getting really, really close. Can't wait to refly Reflected's Spit campaigns.

WARZONES HOTFIX 0.5a! Latest release: https://github.com/Pantera93/dcs-warzones/releases/latest CHANGELOG: FIXED: Mission default template filling logic when no "template" was defined anywhere in zones (thanks to graham) Fly safe and happy hunting!

Many thanks, Admiral ! This another superb Mod added to your excellent naval assets !

I cant see how thats true... the flight characteristics have dramatically changed since the last OB update and not for the better. Id suggest trying to fly it yourself as now on take off she is exceptionally sensitive to rolling on her side where as before she would lift smoothly and hold herself quite stable, a;lso the collective is much more sensitive. Life has simply become more challenging if piloting the rear seat only wiuthout a human CP/G. Considering I’m not the only one suggesting changes to the Flight Model, surely it’s worth investigating by ED.. a side by side comparison which i believe may surprise you.

If you have better public data than we do please PM me we are always happy to re-evaluate what we have. thank you

So much this. I never saw an issue with spotting system at long distances as it depends on gazilion of variables (fog, air pollution, sun position etc) so discussion 6nm vs 10 nm vs 20 nm is pointless - important part is to make sure that players with different monitors have the same chance to spot a target.

Iskander SSM 1.1.1 released! Changelog Version 1.1.1 Fixed 9M723 collision model against projectiles Fixed 9M729 collision model against projectiles Bastion-P LBASM 1.2.1 released! Changelog Version 1.2.1 Fixed 3M55M collision model against projectiles Fixed K340P model disappearing in certain angles Fixed Monolit-B model disappearing in certain angles Fixed Monolit-B model missing rotating plate between radar and radar mount Project 22350 Admiral Gorshkov Frigate 1.4.1 released! Changelog Version 1.4.1 Fixed 3M14T collision model against projectiles Fixed 3M54T collision model against projectiles Fixed 3M55M collision model against projectiles Project 22800 Karakurt Corvette 1.4.2 released! Changelog Version 1.4.2 Fixed 3M14T collision model against projectiles Fixed 3M54T collision model against projectiles Type 052D Destroyer 1.2.1 released! Changelog Version 1.2.1 Fixed YJ-18 collision model against projectiles Fixed CJ-10 collision model against projectiles Type 055 Destroyer 1.3.1 released! Changelog Version 1.3.1 Fixed YJ-21 collision model against projectiles Fixed YJ-18 collision model against projectiles Fixed CJ-10 collision model against projectiles Type 45 Destroyer 1.2.1 released! Changelog Version 1.2.1 Fixed NSM collision model against projectiles BTR-4 IFV 1.2.1 released! Changelog Version 1.2.1 Fixed RK-2 Barrier collision model against projectiles Arleigh Burke Flight III / Ticonderoga CMP 2.2.1 released! Changelog Version 2.2.1 Fixed SM-6 AShM collision model against projectiles M142 HIMARS 1.3.1 released! Changelog Version 1.3.1 Fixed ATACMS collision model against projectiles Fixed PrSM collision model against projectiles Fixed PrSM AShM collision model against projectiles NASAMS 3 SAM 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version And by the way, I updated the site. Removed everything unnecessary and put the release log right in the center.