Leaderboard

M270 MLRS 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Haha, sleep is mostly a hinderance. I substitute it with coffee.

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.

Dealing out 14.5 mm long range hurt.

Miltech-5 / PD Bo-105 progess develop

Ok, a small sneak peek of what to expect: Feels much better now! Cheers, Barthek

I'm not convinced of that. Just because "many" would leak, isn't proof that "all" will leak. Some people and groups are able to maintain very high opsec. Just because they aren't showing, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Some are just quiet.

ED doesn't model anything relating to sensor performance. In fact the ATFLIR/LITENING are not even working in the correct "band". The apache FLIR that the FLIR "model" was built for uses LWIR radiation, while ATFLIR/LITENING etc all use MWIR due too superior range performance in that band. ED models nothing of this. Nor things like degradation with digital zooom and so forth. I also have little doubt they will model even a fraction of what SNIPER can do, because most of that is actually classified AFAIK, especially the A/A stuff. So more or less, you will get a reskin of a TGP and some different A/G symbiology and thats gonna be that maybe some better "zoom".

The external scan lined up with the new fuselage model

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.

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

so, flew some bomb toss attacks, noticed that upon starting the pullup, the release cue on the ASL starts "jumping" up and down. is this supposed to happen or is this bugged? CCRP_Rel_cue_jumping2.trkCCRP_Rel_cue_jumping1.trk

I gave the latest asset the more generic name M270 MLRS. At release it contains the M270A1, the thinking is that I may add the A2 with support for the PrSM in the future. In case you're wondering why it doesn't have the PrSM like the HIMARS.

You are a legend. Seriously, when's the last time you've had a full night of sleep?

While we appreciate the feedback, and agree SRS is a great app. Having a in house out of the box voice tool is something we want to provide, it will help with new users who do not want to mess with outside apps. A voice tool for DCS has been asked for for many years and we are happy to provide it. thank you

Yes and no. This may have been caused by previous posts from myself that weren't as explicit as they should be (differentiating between SAS sleeves and SAS logic), coupled with a personal misunderstanding of the green indicator marks and what they represent. To start off, the green indicator marks are not a direct indicator of the positions of each SAS sleeve within the flight control servos (that's what I thought they were at first as well). The green indicators represent the real-time positions of the swashplates on each rotor system in each respective axis. So they may serve as an indirect indication as to what the SAS sleeves are doing within each flight control servo, but they don't represent the SAS sleeves themselves. For example, if the green line in the yaw axis is to the left of the white line, then I can see the tail rotor swashplate has been moved an additional amount by the SAS sleeve in the Directional servo. When the force trim is not being pressed, rate damping is in play, which can be detected by the swashplate (green cross) moving independently of the cyclic position (white diamond). When force trim is pressed, the rate damping is removed, which causes the FMC to keep the swashplate aligned with the control positions. To do this, the FMC uses the SAS sleeve positions to remove any mechanical lag in the system to ensure the swashplate is perfectly synced with the controls (part of the CAS logic in the FMC). So in this instance, while the force trim is pressed, the SAS sleeves are still active, but they are only performing CAS functions. So the SAS sleeves themselves do move a little while the force trim is pressed, but only to remove the mechanical lag in the system as part of the CAS logic; not rate damping, which is a SAS logic. What is still work-in-progress is 1) the CAS logic when the force trim is not pressed, causing some swashplate overshoot when a significant input is applied, 2) the swashplate behavior when the FMC channels are turned off, no mechanical lag applied yet, and 3) the overall stability of the aircraft itself, which is why the aircraft is wobbly when the force trim is pressed. (There are other aspects of the flight model, SCAS, and hold modes that are still work-in-progress as well, but these are the three relevant points in this case)

Bad news, guys. I thought I would simply adapt the textures from the GTM: NORMANDY to the newest version of the map. It did the trick but after spending more time testing, the textures seemed kinda cartoonish. I started the whole process of development one more time, taking screenshots from MSFS of that region as the reference. It will take more time but I hope the final result will be much better. Barthek

Hi ,Currenthill ,I have bought some chinese assets mod of 3Dmax ,I can send them to you ,are you interesting to them ?

It's not just "some inaccuracies", man, it's sloppiness and plain laziness. More than a few airfields that were supposed to be historically correct in the Normandy 1944 map now have a completely different layouts in the Normandy 2.0. And more than a few have been simply cloned: Ugra literally took one airfield, rotated it and pasted under a new name, with all the little details such as bikes and crates at the exact same places. These might be hard to spot when you have seventy aerodromes, but I do and it bothers me.

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.

Изо всех сил сейчас пытался понять ход ваших мыслей но не смог. Я вам говорю что есть серьёзная фундаментальная проблема а вы мне отвечаете что я вру. Ну вот какой мне профит вас обманывать? Какую цель я могу в этом преследовать? Какой для меня во всём этом смысл? Заходить на форум, тратить своё время и стараться вам что то объяснить. Мне честно говоря много раз говорили о том что то писать тут бесполезно. Всё равно не услышат, ничего не исправят, ты тратишь время, это всё зря, мол мы все когда то пытались но так и не были услышаны, ничего не будет сделано, смирись с тем как это работает сейчас или просто не играй. Ну и всё в таком духе. Думаю подобные настроения слышало всё коммунити. Как минимум в РУ сегменте. Но я на самом деле не верил. Ибо тут прям когнитивный диссонанс. Это же частная фирма которая шкурно заинтересована в увеличении прибыли. Ведь люди бросают и уходят из игры из за таких фундаментальных проблем как видимость контактов или движение наземной техники. Про наземную технику к примеру я первый раз поднял вопрос в 2018 году кажется. И был уже не первым рассказывая о том что она не работает практически полностью, застревая на каждом повороте. Прошло 5 лет. С техникой не изменилось ничего. Как застревала так и застревает. Особенно на какой-нибудь Сирии. Огромное количество моих знакомых бросило dcs по причине сломанной наземки. Что с ней нельзя как то разумно взаимодействовать и она сломана или практически сломана и нет никакой надежды на то что ситуация в корне изменится. В 2020 году вы написали что будет динамическая компания, а это косвенно означает что наземную технику наконец то починят. Но сейчас уже 2023. Ничего к сожалению не изменилось. Сейчас многие летают в 4к или на ультрашироких мониторах и имеют проблемы с видимостью. Об этом говорят буквально вот все. Даже по количеству лайков под сообщениями по видимости контактов можно увидеть что это не единичная проблема каких то нестандартных настроек "сглаживания" а массовая. Но вы мне в открытую заявляете что я вру и проблемы нет. В прочем подобное было и в моментах когда я писал про наземку. Мол проблемы нет а оказывается мы просто не умеем ей пользоваться. В общем ясно. Я пытался достучаться, и сделал наверное всё что мог. Не вижу больше способов вам доказать существование проблемы. 8к dcs не потянет даже лучшая карта. У меня amd 7900xt и на высоких настройках есть места где dcs проседает даже в 4к выдавая ниже 60 fps. Например над землёй когда смотришь на скопления деревьев. В общем в 8к будет небось 30 или ниже с жутким слайдшоу. Так что нет конфигурации которая бы поддерживала нормальный fps в dcs в 8к

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.

In my group (DCAF, 119th FS) we specialize in Wild Weasel mission and rely on the HTS for our Hunter Killer hops. In such we try to filter the HTS classes to remove uninteresting emitters and lower the HTS scan times. With all classes active the HTS scan times are well over a minute whereas if we filter it to one or two classes the scan times are reduced to under 10 seconds - quite a difference when you're traveling at 350-400kt, trying to build SA. However, I have seen no real difference in how fast the HTS picks up an emitter, regardless of the current filtering. This makes me think that feature is just cosmetic at this point, and is yet to be modeled. Can anyone chime in with more insight on this topic?

Hey it's a topic can't be answered easily. Given the fact that we mostly want to know the "when". I'm curious if ED could share some information on the next planned update for the F16. There has been many small changes since January but nothing substantial after that. From reading the previous announcements 2021 and 2022 are the following items are still in progress to be released anytime soon ? Network the flight together for HARM HTS TDOA mode to more effectively triangulate emitter locations - Assign air-to-air target sorting between flight members / Further work on Link 16 - CAS mission assignments and reception - Tuning air-to-air performance including look-down and search to bug target delay. - Air-to-Air datalink assignment functions. - Digital Maneuver Cue (DMC) and Loft indications. - IAM loft cue - Radar Velocity Search mode. Respectfully, Thanks.

Hi, After 2 weeks of trials I Finally found a bigger LCD that is fast enough to handle the radar altimeter. I had to try a few and work a lot on color management, not sure I understand everything I need, workflow is difficult, lots of trials and errors trying to get Photoshop 16 bits colors to match TFT screens RGB565 and get something at least viewable without too much color shift. Have to work and understand Vinc_Vega's sketches on PWM for ESP32, last time I tried I couldn't make it... I simply couldn't understand,still home works to do. IMG_1631.MOV

Well, as far as I figured, built-in VOIP is basically directly using your aircraft radio to talk to people, so pretty good, and simpler to set up than SRS. A good integrated solution will always beat an external app.

even though it's being paraded everywhere like everyone and their mother uses SRS in reality it's not so, not even close. SRS is daunting at the first sight, it has so many options that the first time users are lost in what's required, and how to even operate it. Watching some youtube videos to explain the operation of a tool is a poor approach to app design. If ED manages to create a VOIP client that is similar to discord/fps games with SIMPLE/ADVANCE setup it will cover both hardcore and noob radio users.

Stored heading alignment is implemented, but currently not working properly. Aerges is working on this.

edit: Cant remember how to do pull requests, but Ive created an issue for the AGM-154Cs incorrect naming: https://github.com/spencershepard/DCS-Scripts/issues/11 Did that for the AGM-154s, since I noticed the C doesnt seem to do any AoE damage: After firing the AGM-154C, I get the lower of the messages, so I guess internally the weapon might be called "AGM_154" without the C? edit: Yup, renaming the "AGM_154C" to "AGM_154" fixed the issue and now the JSOW is even more glorious than before Until this is implemented, you guys can fix it yourself by opening the file with a text-editor and removing the C. This makes me happy (tbf it only killed 1-2 densely stacked tanks, but at least they dont survive 1m miss anymore). Thanks to everyone that wrote/added to the script! This legit makes my planes loadouts so much more versatile. Doesnt feel like im limiting myself outside of Maverick/CBU-105 Vipers, even if theyre still best against armored columns.

There you go, i merged maps for you. No thanksgiving needed

I also think this is a very valid argument. Adding a Channel map would open the way to a new DCS chapter DCS: Battle of Britain so Emils, Spitfires Mk 1 & 2, Hurricanes, Stukas, Bf-110s, He-111 etc. There would be lots to do so the gain is obvious! Btw. this is a map of IL-2 Cliffs of Dover. So even Normandy 3.0 would be a bit bigger. Channel, on the other hand, is a map too small for BoB.

No offence, but the VoIP got no advantages over SRS (that already got all required features and beyond) - why bother? The SRS is pretty much the standard on all MP servers and works great... BTW, can you share any news regarding the B-52 and the S-3B? Thanks.

28. April 2023 Liebe Piloten, Partner und Freunde! Wir arbeiten weiterhin an der Verbesserung unserer integrierten Sprach-Chat-Funktion, um die bequemste und realistischste Audio-Erfahrung für Mehrspieler-Missionen zu bieten, die für die Koordination von Strategien und die Ausführung komplexer Taktiken entscheidend ist. Wir sind sicher, dass unser Sprach-Chat auch zum Mittendrin-Gefühl beitragen wird, und wir sind fest entschlossen, dass diese Funktion sofort funktionieren sollte, ohne dass zusätzliche Programme oder Einstellungen erforderlich sind. Die Entwicklung der DCS: La-7 nähert sich der Ziellinie. Der Fortschritt sieht vielversprechend aus, und wir möchten euch ermutigen, die Details weiter unten zu lesen und euch die Bilder aus der Entwicklung anzuschauen. Unser Angebot für die DCS-WWII-Jagdflugzeuge gibt es noch bis zum 21. Mai in unserem eShop. Wer die DCS Steam Edition nutzt, kann noch bis zum 5. Mai 2023 von diesem Angebot profitieren. Lasst euch diese Gelegenheit auf 50 % Rabatt nicht entgehen, und fliegt mit unseren Warbirds über die neue Karte DCS: Normandy 2.0. Vielen Dank für eure Leidenschaft und Unterstützung. Viele Grüße, Eagle Dynamics Sprach-Chat Entwicklungsfortschritt Wir haben die allgemeine Stabilität der Sprach-Chat-Verbindung zwischen den Spielern verbessert, auch bei Verwendung eines VPN. Wir arbeiten jetzt an realistischen Funk-Soundeffekten und der Möglichkeit für Spieler, ihre eigenen Funk-Soundeffektprofile zu erstellen. Wir haben statische Geräusche für eine bessere Immersion und eine Mikrofon-Normalisierungsfunktion mit einer aktualisierten Mikrofon-Testoption hinzugefügt. Außerdem wurden viele Fehler behoben, die bei Funkgesprächen zwischen verschiedenen Flugzeugmodulen auftraten. Wir haben auch die Möglichkeit hinzugefügt, einzelne Spieler stumm zu schalten und die Lautstärke bestimmter Kanäle anzupassen. Dies gibt den Spielern eine bessere Kontrolle über ihre Kommunikation und reduziert mögliche Ablenkungen durch den Funkverkehr während des Spielens. Die Verbesserungen am integrierten DCS-World-Sprach-Chat-System sind signifikant und werden das Gesamterlebnis deutlich verbessern. Wir freuen uns, euch mitteilen zu können, dass sich diese Verbesserungen in der abschließenden Testphase befinden und bald veröffentlicht werden. La-7 Entwicklungsbericht Das OctopusG-Team hat an der vollständigsten Simulation gearbeitet, die jemals für dieses ikonische Kampfflugzeug des Zweiten Weltkriegs erstellt wurde, indem es sorgfältig umfangreiche Referenzmaterialien studierte. Sie haben die Einstellungen für die Bewegungsbahn abgeschlossen, die Massenträgheit, aerodynamische Eigenschaften, Propeller und Motor umfassen. Derzeit entwickeln sie das Druckluftsystem, die Steuersysteme mit Gier- und Nickkanal-Trimmern, Treibstoff, Hydraulik und andere Systeme. Das Team arbeitet auch an dem 3D-Modell, einschließlich des Schadensmodells und einer breiten Palette von Bemalungen. Zu den Bemalungen gehören deren berühmter Asse und verschiedene nationale Bemalungen, sowohl historische als auch alternativhistorische. Dinge wie die Schnellstartanleitung, 2D-Grafiken, und Sofortstart-Missionen müssen noch fertiggestellt werden. Für eine Vorschau schaut euch dieses Tutorial an: DCS: La-7 Start-up. WWII-Jagdflugzeuge Exklusiver Rabatt von 50 % Unsere WWII-Jagdflugzeuge sind nur für eine begrenzte Zeit im Angebot! Spart 50 % mit diesem unglaublichen Angebot und erlebt den Nervenkitzel, einige der kultigsten Flugzeuge des Zweiten Weltkriegs zu steuern. Dieses Angebot ist bis zum 21. Mai 2023 um 15:00 Uhr GMT in unserem e-Shop verfügbar. Wir sind außerdem dankbar, dass wir ein identisches Angebot für die DCS Steam Edition anbieten können, das bis zum 5. Mai 2023 läuft. Wählt aus einer Reihe von authentischen Flugzeugen aus verschiedenen Ländern, jedes mit seinen eigenen Stärken und Schwächen. WWII-Jagdflugzeuge mit 50 % Rabatt: DCS: Spitfire LF Mk IX DCS: P-51D Mustang DCS: BF 109 K-4 Kurfürst DCS: Fw 190 A-8 Anton DCS: Fw 190 D-9 Dora DCS: P-47D Thunderbolt Egal, ob du ein erfahrener Pilot bist oder gerade erst angefangen hast, dieses Angebot ist eine perfekte Gelegenheit, deine Sammlung mit einigen der berühmtesten Warbirds aller Zeiten zu erweitern. Schau in unserem eShop vorbei. Abermals vielen Dank für eure Leidenschaft und Unterstützung. Viele Grüße, Eagle Dynamics

Открою Вам секрет полишенеля - она так и делает. Ездит по дорогам даже во время боёв. А танк это всего лишь трактор с пушкой а не "звезда смерти". И щебень построек и доски на дорогах между развалин не делают их чем то другим. Посмотрите хотя бы с десяток видео с коробочками из Сирии что бы понять что мягко говоря "искажаете" действительность.

I agree too.

Thank you for communicating that. I wasn't expecting any dates. I understand thats a promise hard to keep. Appreciate all the work. Looking forward for more stuff coming to dcsw.

The tiny handful of people I have seen that defend the current state of spotting (and it is demonstrably a tiny handful) have always had expensive high resolution monitors and their reasons for never wanting to improve spotting tend to be completely delusional and in direct contradiction with any facts, convention, or data. I have never seen that opinion come from somebody with average or below average hardware. It makes no sense either, because they would also benefit from a good spotting system. I think the ultimate irony of ED's official stance of "spotting is perfect, your monitor is the problem" is that spotting gets better at lower resolutions due to the dot system. They seem to completely deny the dots exist and how they work, and live in a reality where they never implemented them. Maybe ED should just remove the dots altogether and put us back to square one so at least their arguments can have some basis in truth.

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!

La-7 Oficial ED Screenshots

The RAF repurposed Croydon Airport (the UK's first, and at the outbreak of war, only international airport) as a fighter base and then as a transport hub. Very close to Kenley, it's true, but ever so important.

Reply from a post on reddit asking about the Eurofighter.

I'm expecting that it'll probably be a low resolution base map with low-ish resolution satellite textures, largely relying heavily on landclass and autogen. I'd expect at least major aerdromes would have the correct layout, but maybe using generic structures and textures. But what I'm hoping is that we still get terrain add-ons that overwrite the areas they cover (kinda like most civilian flight simulators), which would also allow for historical maps.

I'd like to see the KA-3

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

Already in the making: Cheers!

Sorry, but when in a Rift S I can instantly see a fighter at more than 30 miles because there is a big fat dot appearing, something is wrong. Irl spotting a jet at this distance is insanely hard, borderline impossible if you don't know where to look. Meanwhile people at 4K have difficulties spotting anything at more than a few miles. Knowing that ED is satisfied with that is unbelievable to me.