Leaderboard

Some EFA news by Cobra

Your welcome Tromp! Not in the near future Toni! It is on my radar like so many other models. Hey Guys. Happy Sunday! I have updated the USS Oak Hill LSD-51. I was told it wasn't appearing and functioning properly. I've updated the weapons so she's able to better defend herself now. I will be releasing the update sometime this week. Stay Tuned!!

Dealing out 14.5 mm long range hurt.

M270 MLRS 1.0.1 released! Changelog Version 1.0.1 Fixed missing tracks textures

Here's a sneak peek of the Ukraine Snipex Alligator 14.5 mm long range anti material rifle. Taking out a fuel truck at around 2 km. I'm testing some new concepts like animated reloads and sounds etc.

Finally a new update is available, inside a lot of new panels for several machines. It took me a while, but there were a lot of changes, especially in the application code, because what "you can see" is maybe 20% of the changes. I fixed a lot of things, including some of the ones described here in the forum posts. But for sure there is still something to improve so now I'm going back to work... changelog for 2023.0430 - A-10C: added V/UHF radio panel ARC-210 / autopilot - FA-18C: added IFF/ILS/VOL panels - AV8: added SAAHS / Fuel panels - AV8: added ELEC / VUHF / ACNIP panels - AV8: added Lighting panels (internal/external) - JF-17: added ELEC / ACP - JF-17 changed font on UFCP - JF-17 MFCD added support for switches - F-5E: added Lighting / Weapon panels - F-14 the entire engine panel has been changed - F-14 ACMP fixed Master Caution button - F-14 Lights changed the font size on the knobs - F-16C UHF: fixed radio frequency knobs - A-10C AAP: changed handling of switches - F-16C ICP: fixed display of DED in portrait mode - FA-18C UFC: LCD display improved - A-10C CMSC improved data display - Ka-50 fixed Datalink panel - Ka-50 PVI fixed swipe panels - M2000 PPA fixed AUTO switch - changed a large part of the graphics for: A-10C / AV8 / F-16C / F-14 / FA-18C - resized buttons of some configurations for better handling - removed graphics on some panels - fixed context menu on MFD and JF-17 panels - information on setting the IP address has been changed - some switches changed - application code optimization

Please ED adopt/adapt this, it levels the playing field much more and I can barely enjoy actual combat in DCS at 4k even on a 55" screen up close due to the issue, but the screen also displays 1080p poorly due to not being native resolution making that "cheating" option even worse

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

Miltech-5 / PD Bo-105 progess develop

The summer set of textures is almost ready. I haven't touched the remaining seasons yet. I think I will publish them separately so that you guys can have it quicker. Best guess is tomorrow but don't take it as a promise.

A few more:

Madness continues. 10. / JG. 2 and KG(J) 27

Thanks to the creator of the mod. It's shocking that the problem of spotting has been ignored for years, even though it keeps popping up as a problem here on the forum, on Reddit, YouTube, etc. It can't be that you must play the game at a low resolution and then upscale it. Give us the ability to enjoy high res on WW2 and Coldwar scenarios… for what we have Normandy2 now in high details, when we are bound to low Res. because of spotting?!? In WW2 and Coldwar, the ability to see the pixels is the basic requirement to be able to play at all. This problem should be very high on ED's list of priorities...! It is not "good as it is"! This is my first post here in the forum, but I've been flying DCS for years and live with all the bugs... I just let ED do her thing and I'm very patient. ED should act urgently here.

Hi , Currenthill ,your healthful is not only belong to youself ,it's else belong to all of your fans ,please protect it for us !

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.

M270 MLRS 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Good video. Shows how sloppy some protections were handled. Also shows how unlikely this is to actually occur due to a cascading of issues that culminate is a catastrophic failure. As for countering the issue... I've ran at a manual SOC (1.2-1.25v) since day one due to manually tuning memory. Other than that, update the BIOS and carry on with your life.

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

It's probably not for you, but I have the distinct impression that it is for some other players here. People who believe themselves to be superior players to others because they have mastered something, and that this accomplishment sets them apart from mere 'average players', and especially 'noob players'; they tend to see their ability as a status symbol - one they are eager to defend. These players often want to protect their self-defined "higher status" by strongly and vociferously protesting against anything that would 'cheapen' their feat: if others can do the same without putting in the time and effort that they did, their supposed superiority is challenged. It has nothing to do with realism. This is a game, and people want to have fun. If there is an AAR helper OPTION, it's the player's decision to use it, no skin off anyone else's nose. Those who claim otherwise often have other motives: it doesn't really cheapen the game, but it does cheapens their own perceived "superior status". Can we please put this silly discussion to rest. Optional AAR helpers are a niche game element that can make a part of the game DCS more accessible to some.

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

I've been given this a go in various scenarios and the improvement is definitely felt while using headtracking on a 1080p monitor: I've always struggled with tracking an opponent visually even in supposedly ideal conditions, but with this modification I can actually keep track and reacquire reliably like I can in other sims. It's far from a perfect solution but it's still much better than how it has been for years. I've been around a long time and I understand your frustration.

In my opinion HB's PR strategy is very good - to publish only a few updates, but of high quality. However, I also have to say that I misjudged the release date. After it became clear that it would no longer be released in 2022, I expected an early Q1 release. Now it's Q2 and we're still waiting for the big announcement. I don't even want to talk about the release. I don't mean that in a judgmental way

Попробую... Так треке есть и в описании к треку. Ручка вперёд от нейтрали, жму триммер, ручка неподвижна и виртуальная и физическая, вертолет увеличивает тангаж на пикирование при каждом нажатии кнопки триммер. Ручка на себя от нейтрали, все то же самое, только тангаж увеличивается на кабрирование при нажатии кнопки триммер.

OK, thanks for that. Great work!

This is indeed a valid argument! If I am not mistaken, Normandy 2.0 and the channel map are the only two DCS maps that overlap in some places. If one wants to fly from one of the new Normandy 2.0 airports to say, Manston near Margate, using the Normandy 2.0 map, no way... because the Manston airport does not exist in Normandy 2.0, only on the channel map..... As do many other airports, present in Normandy 2.0, but not on the channel map. And... viceversa....

Весёлые картинки Подробная опись оборудования приборки Ла-7... качество картинок конечно так себе .

I believe this is what people mean when they say "gatekeeping" - and it's difficult to see it yourself when you are the gatekeeper. In your analogy you see yourself as Modric, the hero who has invested time and effort: and you do implicitly look down on others who sit around in bars stuffing their lazy faces, as you seem to think. You see yourself as someone who has accomplished AAR, and if other people want to do do that, by god they'll have to get off their lazy asses and put in the hard work; there should be no shortcuts to your lofty position. Now, you may not really think that - I don't think that you do - but you very much come across like someone who thinks that. DCS is a game, and different people have fun differently. You revel in the difficult task of AAR. But that's not everyone's cup of tea. I often enjoy shooting precision approaches (in the confines of DCS 'sorta-precision', but I digress. Everyone else in my group can't be bothered. Yet DCS allows anyone easy landings, ignore all procedures without any consequences. That is good. So instead of denying an experience (be it landings or AAR) to everyone who doesn't want to do just like you and I ("only the tough can do it"), I would argue that we allow people a softer approach. It may look like driving the car on the back seat with a fake steering wheel - but that shouldn't be mine nor your problem - as long as they enjoy it.

Колёсики вообще положено выпускать на висении у земли на случай отказа двигателя. Достаточно посмотреть любое видео демонстрационного полёта с манёврами у земли и без стрельбы из пушки, и там тоже колёсики выпускают. А вообще это эпично... Сколько я уже не летал на этих модулях (8 и 24), полгода примерно, может побольше. И так нихрена на них путёвого за это время сделано и не было. Триммер на Ми-24 - как работал через одно место, так и продолжает работать через то же самое место. Фары на Ми-24 - тихий ужасссс... Мультиэкипаж на Ми-8 - балабеска... Перевозка десанта на Ми-8 - через то же место, что и триммер на Ми-24... ВК РВ на Ми-8 - полагаю, что так и не сделали - я прав?.. Ах, да! Добавили возможность устанавливать и снимать ЭВУ на 24-ке. Потрясающе полезная опция, но до Ми-8 она почему-то так и не доехала.

Many thanks, Currenthill, for this blazing update !

Заметки о том как точно узнать угол визирования, который следует избегать для предотвращения «взбрыка» TGP. Голова не умеет смотреть вверх в чистом виде, просто «поднимая снизу вверх направление взгляда». Для этого ей надо провернуться вокруг продольной оси. Просто пробуем вводить при помощи UFC разные значения понижения в OSB=[]B-S, начиная с -75mil, уменьшая значение по модулю (минус вводить не надо). И наблюдаем визуально за самим контейнером на подвесе и символикой HUD. Получается, что голова контейнера при -70 ещё не перевернута, а при -65 уже перевернута, при -68 занимает промежуточное положение, провернувшись на примерно 90 градусов вокруг продольной оси. На HUD при этом отображается маленький символ куда смотрит TGP. От mil -70 до -65 и есть те самые значения, когда TGP точно взбрыкнет при атаке. При этом, если смотреть на HUD в момент ввода -65 вместо 70, то видно, что отметка TGP описывает маленький полукруг (по краю воронки ограничений, о которой ниже). Важно: если в ожидании «взбрыка» всё же сильно опустить нос, но заходить специально левее или правее, то взбрыка не произойдет. Выходит, что у контейнера имеется некая воронка, или конус, направленный вперед по оси контейнера, внутри которого он не может физически направлять свой взор. И ось конуса наклонена на -68 мил относительно оси самолета, а угол при вершине этого конуса около 5 мил. Это всего то 0,3 градуса, однако в него попасть достаточно легко, как мы видим. Каким инструментом можно визуализировать эту воронку ограничений? Да просто при помощи Depressible Piper - тот самый пунктирный кружок, что по умолчанию показывает нам направление строительной оси самолета (и по которому можно отсчитать значение тангажа относительно шкалы HUD). При помощи DEPR rocker на UFC опускаем его вниз на значение -68 (цифры бегут в левой части HUD), а при заходе на цель просто не допускаем попадание оной в этот кружок! Всё! Его диаметр соответствует примерно 25 мил и он, хоть с виду маленький, с запасом перекрывает угол воронки ограничений (5 мил). Примечание. При графическом и более наглядном методе выставки Depressible Piper по уже выставленой метке [-68]B-S TGP получается, что DP надо опускать точно до значения -70 mil. Но не суть, смысл тот же. Картинки ниже. Кстати, на третьей картинке видно, почему именно при атаках APKWS TGP часто слетает, ведь если ещё немного опустить нос и наложить прицельную марку CCIP на цель, то она (цель) попадает в этот (будь он не ладен) конус, помеченный нами с помощью DP. Не нужно так точно наводиться.

still think about this one idk how they lost all the files without having anything backed up or older versions to revert to. seems like they just called it quits when they could’ve had one of the most popular mods in dcs

You would have enjoyed the "game mode hud", but it was removed early this year because very few people actually used it:

1) You don't like the light green camo tracks? Thanks for reporting this, I managed to leave out the track texture when zipping it. 2) I've heard others mention it also, I'm going to try to reproduce the behavior. 3) Strange, make sure the C-RAM is set to alarm state red, so it has time to engage the target. I just tried it, and the C-RAM had no issues shooting down the 9M729 GLCM, if positioned well. Yep, I will release a fixed version shortly. Yep, for the same reason I didn't spot the issue before release. If DCS can find a texture with the same name it will happily use it, and I had the wrong name defined. So it uses a track from an other asset.

I don’t think that is an Apache thing, but a DCS-wide issue. here’s a great thread about upgrading to higher quality chart maps, but one of the most recent posts mentions the “holes” in the Caucasus maps at certain scales.

I am unable to hear ATC in single player instant action. I get the typed message in the upper left hand corner but the voice drops out immediately. I can hear my own voice and the ground crew responses to commands but no ATC verbal response. Any suggestions. Sorry to have posted this, after using the gray matter a little which I seem to fail to do at times I figured out the problem. It simply was the F-16 mods I downloaded off the web site and put them into the Core Mods; livery; F-16c file caused the problem. I just removed them to a desk top file if I ever decide to use them again and ATC worked fine. Thank you in advance. Sparkman Kim Liles

So why are you here?

Criticism and opinions come from passion most of the time not hate ( I’d like to believe). We are all still here playing because we love DCS! Deep down the vast majority of us really appreciate everything the ED team does for us! Never said enough, but truly thank you guys for all of your hard work and dedication!

Oh dear. Where’s that pic of the can of worms? Personallly, I’d love it. I don’t see it happening somehow (prove me wrong, I beg ya). I’m loving the new airfields on N2 but when I can take off from West Malling then fly over where Hornchurch, BIGGIN HILL, Manston, Hawkinge etc are yet not even see the fields? Errm … All too much nonsense, even for me and I’m speaking as a fully certified Professor of nonsense. I love both Maps and their fields, and their landing grounds. And their streets, and the beaches, we shall never merge, never the twain etc… Maybe someone will not only merge the two but stretch the map of Britain right up to Scotland? Would love to see it further North (Bomber Command etc) either way but DCS seems to be focused towards anything post ‘44. BOB era seems to be well catered for elsewhere and to me it seems ED wouldn’t want Mk1 Spits & Hurris having a go at He111s or Stukas? It’s a bit mind-boggling at times but I can’t get off the sim long enough to be troubled. Tick tock Vote for merge make the stretch map the fields

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.

The external scan lined up with the new fuselage model

Ми-24П "как с конвеера", который делает ED: Ми-24, который хотят:

@Sabre @Koziolek The news about Pico and OpenXR support is only about native OpenXR API support for standalone Android VR apps and games. You can ignore this. In PCVR mode the VR runtime on the PC manages which API is getting used and SteamVR as a runtime, can do both, the OpenVR API and the OpenXR API. This works for a couple of years already. In SteamVR settings, you can check if SteamVR is set to do that. It shows "Current OpenXR runtime: SteamVR" if everything is in order.

I don't think so - many would be perfectly willing to use a helper. It's the vehement opposition to this helper that I find puzzling. It would not affect anyone who doesn't want to use it. Why oppose it? Agreed. But not everyone thinks it fun to learn AAR or perform AAR, yet it may be a requirement in some missions. I'd say don't fly the mission if you can't do it, but OTOH I have no truck with anybody on my team who'd be using a helper - as long as I can do as I please. And having fun in a group is my goal, so I'm happy when everyone joins in. To me it's a matter of accessibility and individual fun. If the helper only affects the player who uses it, I see no reason to be against it. To me it's like auto-start: some days I use it because I can't be bothered with busy work (and would even prefer hot start), other days I enjoy going through the list. It should be my choice, and it affects nobody else.

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.

No, none of what you said is accurate sorry.

Dear all, If I might stick my nose in on this: We hear you and understand why you wish to retain the currently modeled TGP However, for the following reason, we’ll later (no time frame) adjust it to be an accurate LANTIRN TGP. Due to some incorrectly labeled videos and bad SME feedback, we made an earlier mistake of believing our modeled TGP was a Litening. We were wrong. Despite some initial resistance by us, we eventually agreed with your feedback that we were in fact mostly simulating a LANTIRN TGP. In fact, you all did a great job finding images and references of Block 50s sporting LANTIRN. These partly made us reconsider our stance on this. Thank you. We are doing our very best to model a USAF F-16C Block 50 using 4.2+ OFP. We chose this specifically due to the availability of documentation that we can cite if needed (very important in these times of sensitive information being leaked and resulting investigations). All our available TGP data is limited to LANTIRN and Sniper ATP. Even if we could confidently verify Litening TGP for an OFP 4.2+ F-16C (not secondhand accountings), we have zero reference data for this TGP that we could cite. Anything we put into our simulation must have supporting evidence that we can point to. As mentioned earlier, we still plan to add Sniper ATP. We have good and citable reference data for this, unlike Litening. If at a later point we come across Litening TGP data for OFP 4.2+ or earlier that is complete and citable, we’ll most certainly consider it. Kind regards, Wags

its my own design.. --> STL's https://github.com/RaptiF-35/DCS-A-10-Cockpit/tree/main/CAD-Files/Left Console/Ground Safe Panel