Leaderboard

That's simply how dots work. At some point the dot has to disappear, and unfortunately since they are pixel perfect they can be of an inconvenient size relative to the model under them before they disappear. If the shader had more information, you might be able to do some math to make the dot fade based on FOV, distance, etc. but that's simply not available. In either case, this is an inherent drawback of a dot based system. I don't think dots in general handle this transition very well, and are best suited for low resolutions and distant targets. A good smart scaling style system on the other hand, works best at high resolutions and shorter distances. They complement each other well. Unfortunately, ED thinks such systems are heresy and will never, ever implement anything like them because DCS' spotting is already perfect because you have a zoom slider axis and an 8k 80" monitor. What do you mean you don't have one? The only way to improve DCS is to improve your hardware. Not going to upgrade? What are you, poor? Use labels and a magnifying glass then, I don't know what you're complaining about. Lowering resolution makes it easier to see targets? No it doesn't. You're clearly mistaken.

La-7 Oficial ED Screenshots

Thanks for all the suggestions! I really appreciate them since I don't follow a strict release schedule, because that would take the fun out of it and only slow me down. For a lot of the suggestions, the main issue stopping me from creating them is a usable 3d model. Since I can't model every asset from scratch, that would take too much time, I buy models and customize them before rigging and animating. And the issue with that approach is that some assets aren't available or very expensive. So I really appreciate the donations, since everything goes into models for new assets.

A new unknown module was just added to the steam database. Could it be the F-15E ? Maybe its the F-4 ? Next update will soon show. Edit by BIGNEWY: This is not the F-15E or F-4.

NEW Update: https://github.com/heclak/community-a4e-c/releases/tag/v2.1.1

Reply from a post on reddit asking about the Eurofighter.

Конечно, DCS только для успешных состоявшихся людей, который могут позволить себе 80" 8К экран и каждые 2 года покупать топовое железо для 8К. Ишь чего захотели холопы, LODы вам увеличивать или контакты делать жирнее. Для начала достигните чего-то в жизни, а потом уже вякайте про видимость.

Hey guys, The Normandy 2.0 release kinda came at a bad time, as I'm currently in the process of overhauling this package. Don't want to release the update half-baked, so I'll just drop the new Normandy pages here for anyone who needs them now:

Yes, I have a report internally about the brightness changing when switching between F10 and F1 I think it is somewhat related. I am waiting to test a fix and then I will take another look. thanks

Been wild seeing Currenhill's SAMs and AAA lately... C-RAM null IRIS-T and the LVKV 9040 firing away against a barrage of cruise missiles.

Here is some suggestions that would be great additions into DCS. Some new Chinese Medium/Long Range SAM systems like the: - HQ-22, their newest indigenous LR-SAM system, missile seems to be based on the S-300 5V55RUD missile. Range 170KM. Link: HQ-22 - HQ-16/B MR, a derivative of the Russian SA-11/17 BUK system, but with VLS TEL system, about 40KM range. Link: HQ-16 - HQ-12, this older system is still in used by the PLA, wheeled TEL with a pair of missile, the KS-1A missile has a range of about 50KM. Link: HQ-12 - HQ-9/15/18, would be nice to have, but its basically a S-300PMU system, which there are other mods available. Link: HQ-9 Indian/Isreali SAMs - Akash, modernised SAM-6 KUB system, increases the range and altitude to 40KM/18KM. Also features new 3D PESA Radars Link: AKASH SAM - BARAK-8, Israeli MR/LR SAM system, features 2 missiles, an ER and LR version, with the ER having an additional booster stage that increases it range to 150KM. Link: Barak-8 SAM - Spyder, another Israeli system, similar function as the NATO NASAM-3 system with both short range and medium range version, feature Python-5 and DERBY-ER missiles. Link: Spyder

Hey Guys there has been a change of plans. I have been putting off creating the USS Fitzgerald DDG-62 for far too long now. It's a mod I'm passionate about creating because I commissioned and served five years aboard her. Half of the time-consuming modeling part has been completed which is the weapons. Once I complete animating the 96 missile cells she will be close to adding to DCS. It's a big project so I will take my time to make sure everything is created properly. With that said I will be creating all three Flight Classes. One technique we use in 3DS Max modeling is called Import/merge. It's copying all the weapons from one mod to another but the good thing about it is all the animations of those weapons are transferred as well. Without having to re-animate all the weapons again. So once FITZ is complete I will import/merge the weapons to the other two Flight Classes. As mentioned before it's easy to get distracted while working on one mod so I will continue to work on the Lewis Puller as well but my main focus will be to complete the USS Fitzgerald. I will do what I can when I'm able to do it. My ailments slow me down sometimes so I will not push myself too hard on this. It will be worth the wait!!! Thanks for your patience and support!!

I know, Normandy did Ugra, Channel did ED but from user perspective we have now quite big Normandy 2.0 map and small Channel map. Two maps of the same area that could be together. So we lose space on the disk (we lose space for mesh, textures and some objects) and in addition we now have an artificial division. It's also not a good idea to create campaigns that instead of being on one map are on two separate ones. It doesn't make sense from the user's point of view. The bigger problem is that the map of Normandy could easily include a more detailed area of the Channel map (after all, this area is on Normandy 2), but it doesn't because the "owner" of this part of the land is ED. Managing both maps separately is also more difficult, and Ugra showed with Normandy 2 that it is able to perfectly prepare an older map and combine it into a new one. However, maybe one of the companies would buy a map from the other and make one nice and full map? It colud be Normandy 3.0 . I don't think anyone needs convincing.

Here is an illustration of the problem The black lines illustrate what should happen. The red line is the buggy behavior we observe in game. I do not know the exact numbers, but the enable should happen some set distance before the target point and the self destruct some set distance after the target point. If the turn point is closer than that distance, the radar should turn on only after reaching the turn point, preferably also giving the missile to give some time to get on course, at least that's what I would do if I were to design such a system and that is also what I have seen modeled in other simulators. The missile is launched in R/BL mode, the search and destruct ranges as well as heading to fly are set automatically by the system. But they still exist internally for the missile.

Please read the report or at least the title. The point is that harpoons should fly to the turn point first, not that they don't clear terrain. The terrain is just to highlight the issue.

That was the problem. Thanks. The buildings are incredible. They modeled balconies!

Ich weiß nicht wie das Grundwissen zu DLSS und VR ist, aber ich möchte hier mal ein paar Dinge nennen, die die Hoffnung in DLSS, bezüglich VR, ein wenig gerade rücken. DLSS ist eine Art Upscaler und egal welche Qualitätsstufe man wählt, das erzeugte Bild wird nie die Qualität des Originals erreichen. DLSS fügt !!immer!! eine Unschärfe hinzu, das liegt in der Natur der Sache. Meistens erzeugt DLSS ein Flimmern und verstärkt schon vorhandenes. Die meisten VR-Nutzer haben sicherlich bemerkt, dass das "Grundflimmern" von DCS in der VR-Brille deutlich störender ist als auf dem 2D Bildschirm. Der Grund liegt in der "Nähe" der Augen zu den Bildschirmen im HS. Man ist eben dichter an der Sache dran und dann wird das ganze auch noch vergrößert. Meine Erfahrungen aus dem MSFS mit DLSS sind niederschmetternd. DLSS erzeugt so viel Unschärfe, dass ich die Displays nicht mehr sauber ablesen kann. Ja, ich habe mehr FPS, aber der Bildqualitätsverlust ist das einfach nicht wert. Wer meint, dass könne man mit Nachschärfen regeln, der irrt gewaltig. Das mit DLSS generierte Bild ist !!immer!! unschärfer als das Original. Auch Artefakte (Pixelfehler) treten ab und zu immer wieder auf. VR hat jetzt schon unter einer gewissen Unschärfe in DCS zu leiden (stärker als im MSFS, zusätzlich zum Flimmern und Ghosting), wer möchte das dann noch freiwillig zusätzlich verstärken? Ich sicher nicht. ;) Man sollte sich keine falsche Hoffnung machen. DLSS ist keine Lösung für derzeitige VR Spiele. Es fehlt einfach der Spielraum in der jetzt vorhandene VR-Bildqualität, um Abstriche durch DLSS hinnehmen zu können. Selbst in 2D ist es im MSFS deutlich zu sehen und ebenso wird dieser Bildqualitätsverlust in DCS schon in 2D zu sehen sein. In der VR wird das alles noch einmal verstärkt. DLSS wird deshalb noch über einen langen Zeitraum !!keine!! Lösung für die VR FPS-Probleme sein, zumindest dann nicht, wenn man auf eine scharfe Darstellung der Umgebung steht.

agree, ignoring is the best solution

I think we're being trolled. The arrogance of the concept "everyone else shouldn't need any more options available to them than I need - so DCS should be changed to force that on them" beggars belief that it's anything other than trolling.

And time and time and time again it's pointed out that it isn't... ED don't seem to think so either... So when are you gonna learn your opinion on this is about as worthwhile as the contents of a soiled nappy?

Hi CH, did someone ever request the successor of the german Gepard system? It‘s Skyranger Part of Skynex https://www.rheinmetall.com/de/produkte/flugabwehr/flugabwehrsysteme/vernetzte-flugabwehr Only if you feel bored

Shout-out to @Zahnatom for the idea... your comment on the F-15E WIP made me laugh out loud

Проблема в том, что контакт вдалеке имеет размер в один пиксель. Отсюда разная видимость в зависимости от разрешения и довольно странный для 2023 года совет покупать мониторы с крупным пикселем. Надо отвязать размер контакта от размера пикселя. Типа того, как сделано в этом моде Пользователю можно дать возможность выбирать размер контакта.

Nope, you could have the game for the first time and just hop in the lancaster, not dependant on anything After a couple of hours work, the fuselage has been rebuilt, still awaiting a canopy but ive got exams coming up that I should really start revising for Good to see that our model lines up with the technical drawings though

Jeez can we cut some slack here? Its an interesting nugget of information on related aircraft, from the right country in the right time period. Its even directly known to have been in other century series fighters - so its at least tangentially related, which is cool on a slow news day for F4 development and we haven't even ruled out that its not the right CADC. In other news - cool find, enjoyed the read.

Why don't you try and see? I put it there because I know there are a lot of people who don't read or ignore the briefings, and would just taxi and take off before Col. Meyer.

Well, well, what do you know. I guess the race to release between the F-4E and F-15E is about to have another very close contender

My and my teams form Dark Ravens Squad(Latinoamerica)

Developers, would it be possible to get printable images of the maps (Map, Alt, Sat) used in Normandy 2.0? I like to fly like in the 40s, just a map and a stopwatch, and I don’t want to rely on the maps in-game. Thanks!

В саппорт написал. Проблема алгоритма поиска пути никогда не являлась какой то сверхсложной задачей требующей терафлопсов вычислительных мощностей в рамках компьютерных игр. Наверняка у вас есть целый ряд подводных камней не позволяющих это сделать "в две строчки". Но весь остальной геймдев то с этим вопросом справляется. Лапшу про то, что на двухмерной плоскости у разработчиков на столько сложные проблемы с поиском пути, что это требует бесконечно сложных вычислений мне как старому itшнику вешать не нужно.

I am a bit tempted now to get a Mustang now for getting some Maverick vibe.

Danke, das ist fast auch meine Erfahrung. Und je nach subjektiven Sehempfinden stört es eine Person weniger als eine andere. Ich sehe selbst in der Außenansicht, wenn ich im MSFS auf den Boden schaue, selbst bei Quality-Einstellung für DLSS, eine sehr starke Unschärfe. Ich bemerke auch einen starken Verlust der Tiefenwahrnehmung, 3D Objekte verschwimmen früher mit dem Hintergrund. Der Test der PCGH und auch anderer Medien, zeigt mir bei den Bildern meist deutliche Unterschiede zum Original (Textureverfälschungen, Unschärfe, besonders in der Entfernung). Was man nicht vergessen darf, der Unterschied von 2D (Monitor) zu VR, ist riesig, weil die Pixel viel dichter am Auge sind (durch die Linsen vergrößert werden). Es ist aber auch immer sehr subjektiv, nur habe ich nicht feststellen können, dass das DLSS Bild jemals schärfer ausgesehen hat, als das Original. Gerade in CP2077 sehe ich das immer wieder an den Gebäuden in der Entfernung, wie stark die Bildschärfe mit DLSS abnimmt. Was auch noch sehr wichtig zu erwähnen ist, DLSS fügt immer ein LAG (mehr Frametimes) hinzu. Im Grunde wollte ich nur darauf hinweisen, dass DLSS für VR nicht das sein kann und wird, was es für einige beim 2D Spielen ist und man seine Erwartungen nicht zu hoch ansetzen sollte.

Any of the CVRT series, updated Land Rovers (WOLF 110/90, WMIK) and MAN trucks (already part of your Swedish pack). Pinzgauer, and Some British infantry?

Sounds like direct rip from Janes F-15 with a slight pitch up.

Ok, all, job done! I found another font that had the decimal point in it, and used Fony to basically redo all the numerical characters and decimal point to suit my sketch. And boy am I happy at how it turned out! The characters look great, the spacing of the characters is perfect for my fascia, and it works perfectly with the Nano. For anyone interested I have included the sketch below for download, remember that this is for the 2.08" SH1122 OLED but you can probably use the guts of it to suit another OLED. Now, just because I like a challenge I am going to see if I can get a 0.66" i2C OLED to run from the same Nano. Once more, thanks to Vinc and Outbaxx for their help on this Les 208OLEDUHF_with_go_wait_SEG14_LCD5.ino

Just a thought, hope Reflected doesn't mind me chiming in. I see Quest 2 crashes on Multi threading in campaign missions as well (got pretty much the same setup as you), I've generally stopped my campaign testing on the MT branch as I'm finding it too unstable and really can't afford to waste development time on crashes in testing. MT always starts off with great performance but tanks after a while, leading to a crash. Might be worth trying in normal OB if you haven't.

I totally agree !!!

Oh boy was it hard but after a looooong time trailing the tanker, bobbing up and down and side to side I managed to fully refuel the jet. In the end the following things helped the most. 1. Adjust RPM so you match exactly the tanker speed then micro-adjust accordingly when connected 2. Try not to overcompensate movements so you don't end up with PIO, small movements on the stick 3. Don't aim for the basket! aim for the wing/refuelingthingie from which the basket/fuelline extends 4. Don't give up! It took me like half an hour before I managed to connect properly Love the module Aerges! keep it coming!

Campaigns for me are: "Dominant Fury" from Baltic Dragon and "Bold Cheetah" from Sedlo ( this one is free but both are awesome).

I'd like the option to tell Jester to DO NOT ATTACK > from the left / from the right/ from the front / from the back > x1 / x2 / x3 etc so that I can then sort & meld either with an AI or a Multiplayer wingman without a human RIO...

This could be a very useful Jester wheel add-on as well. Say under BVR-TWS options, we can have the number of tracks generated by the AWG-9, and they can never be more then six of them, so there should always be enough room for all. Then once selecting a number, we can have DO NOT ATTACK option or BACK. Would help in saving some time for people that don't like jumping in the back seat or just for "immersion" having your RIO do it.

I found a hardware fix that I m happy with... up to you guys to try if u like it. As I said, the real TDC in the jet is an OTTO force sensing ministick. Apply a little bit of pressure to a direction and the cursor will move slowly but apply a lot of force, your cursor will run like in the video above. Most of our throttle have ALPS ministick (just like playstation sticks) that are based on angle to provide a deflection. They have short arm and lots of angle so it's mega easy to overcontrol them. With previous TDC speed I realised I was almost always bumping them to full deflection witch is not the way it should be. So on my winwing tdc ministick, I set the curves to 0 then popped out the cap to place a roundel of foam underneath. I had to find the right thickness so that the cap would meet resistance while moving. took me 2' but you can take out that cap super easy... It allows for good smooth movements near the center for more precise work and, by applying more force, you can still get the fast cursor speeds. It's also closer to the feeling offered by a force sensing ministick... For Virpil throttle, the cap is different so you ll need a different way to place some orings... hope it helps

So just wondering about the title of this thread, is there a time that wouldn't be a perfect time for a G6?

@SharpeXB Male Bovine Excrement. The point of Open Beta is that ED cannot possibly account for: the vast array of hardware and software combinations out there in use by the community and that can have a direct effect on the game’s stability the almost impossible to replicate way we interface with DCS in terms of mission design, weapons/systems employment, trigger combinations and the gamut of edge of envelope flight model excursions that we as users en masse will execute. It has happened before, though it has been a while, where a serious game breaking bug has been introduced in Open Beta and the community at large has been glad of a Stable version to fall back on; admittedly that has meant that for the owners of module(s) affected it means losing out on a new toy or feature temporarily but generally for a short period and that most of the rest of your consumer base has not had their entertainment shafted by a bit of errant code. Ultimately you have a choice to opt in to Open Beta - if you do so for the “new toys! Gimme gimme!!!” without acknowledging the possible caveats then that’s your own damn fault. If you choose to opt out because you don’t want the risk then be aware that you may wait a while as ED want to square away as much as possible before committing to a Stable release branch - you have no leverage in that process as it’s their software and their decision. Want to sway that decision? Then get on the board or start buying significant shareholder stick cos otherwise you’re farting at the wind. And if you think they are being deliberately obtuse by holding out on porting the Beta to Stable then that says more about you than ED; they will be only too aware of the Stable only user base hanging on for an update and probably have damn good reason to hold back that you aren’t entitled to know about.

Many years ago, the 104 was going to be the first third party module. There was a subforum for it. But for now, I'm glad it was posted as it's quite interesting to see the evolution of avionics that was the state of the art during the development of the Phantom. It gives a bit of context for just how revolutionary the Phantom really was.

Dear all, It has been decided that we will release the Sniper TGP before creating an accurate LANTIRN pod to replace the existing Litening TGP. This means that the Litening TGP will remain in its current form until after the delivery of the Sniper TGP. We believe this will be a more popular approach for our customers as no capability will be lost prior to the release of the Sniper TGP. As mentioned earlier, we are currently unable to include an accurate Litening TGP given the lack of non-controlled, public reference data. If this changes in the future, we’ll certainly consider adding the Litening back. Thanks for your patience and understanding and we look forward to continuing to bring you the most accurate F-16C possible. The ED Team

You can switch to TWS, same as before, by using OSB 4. You don't need to press the DDI button either, you can switch by hovering over the radar mode (RWS) with the TDC. It'll expand the list, and you can select TWS from there.