Leaderboard

I am attaching some screenshots. The settings are the same

UPDATED last 5/4/23 16:30 *added filter to check for client countryID and spawn the crewchief with that country so blue players get a blue crew chief and red players get a red crew chief. *cleaned up the script with the help of the MOOSE guys. -- *added extra check so that the crew chief does not spawn if you spawn on a ship. *added option for crew chief to spawn with random liveries. If you don't want this comment out line 25 and 32. *changed the position of the crew chief to be compatible with Caucasus and NTTR shelters so that he does not spawn on the roof. MULTIPLAYER: Multiplayer usage of the script is tested and works. Hey guys! I thought some of you might like this. I wrote a small script to use with the asset pack crewchief which will automatically spawn a crewchief related to your player/client aircraft and automatically salute when you leave the ramp or come back and he will despawn if you go out of your aircraft. You don't need to make any more triggers or flags. The script will take care of all of it. If you want to use this with a helicopter simply change line 1 from: FilterCategories("plane") to FilterCategories("plane", "helicopter") How to use the script: 1. Mission Start > Do Script File > Moose.lua (needs to be the newest version of moose) 2. Mission Start > Do Script File > DynamicCrewChiefV1.2Public.lua 3. In ME, make 1 late activated group, select M92_Personell_salute and change the gorup name exactly to "Crewchief". Here's a small video demo and the script is attached. This should work in Multiplayer too but i have not tested it yet. This is the very first working itteration, if you know lua you can change the position and heading of the crewchief. If you spawn in a shelter the guy will be on the roof, there is nothing i can do about that. I'm planning to script the parking guy next to appear when you leave the airfield and when you come back be at your parking spot and put his hands up to brake. Cheers! DynamicCrewChiefV1.2Public.lua

Alligator Sniper AMR 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Howdy, y'all, there's a quick bugfix release out download: Version 2.1.1 - 27 Apr 2023 Fixed: Sounder interfering with ground units sounds. Nav Systems breaking in some missions Debug line being printed to the screen during sidewinder launch. You can download the upgrade from: https://github.com/heclak/community-a4e-c/releases/tag/v2.1.1

And for good measure here are the variables you can change if you want to alter the position of the crewchief. nullnull

Many of you probably know this youtuber called Enigma. He runs this DCS cold war server which is very popular. He said currently, in DCS, the Cold War period aircraft are the ones that are truly playable. I kind of agree with him. Because you have so many iconic planes to choose from, and for both sides too. Especially after the announcement of F-4E, J-8II and MiG-23MLA. More importantly, most, if not all of those weapons are retired. Therefore, we shouldn't have any problem obtaining information of those weapons. So, I am going to create wish-lists for Chinese cold war vehicles because if those vehicles were ever made into DCS, we would have a more realistic battle environment for the eastern part of the world. The Soviet was officially dissolved on the 26th of December 1991. Therefore, any weapons which did not make to the service will NOT be the focus of my wish lists. As I have mentioned before in a La-7 thread, the reason we need to add more vehicles is all about adding new pilot-environments interactions. Each interaction is a type of mission/experience we can enjoy. There are only a few types of mission or pilot-mission interaction. 1: Fighter-to-fighter action 2: Ground attack (We already have vehicles from other nations, so we need some Chinese ones to form the basic Chinese transports convoy in missions.) 3: Anti-air weapons (Use them to protect transports and other installations. They allow players who fly in opposition force to have more believable and challenging mission settings and create a safe zone for the friendlies to fall back to.) 4: Ground assault vehicles for Close Air Support Missions. (For the opposition ) 5: Some long-range artillery can be used as target for elimination or protection. The best if such artillery can seem clear from the sky when firing. Katyusha type of weapon would be the best. Just imagine you are tasked with protecting the arty. After some tough fighting, you don't even know if you have done the job, and all of a sudden, every rocket from the ground start to fire. That would be a sight to behold. This thread will be focused on the AAAs and SAMs only. I will gradually make wish-list for other vehicle types which contribute to other types of missions. OK, let’s start with the short-range ones. HN-5 series The original HN-5 was a licensed copy of the Soviet 9K32 Strela-2 man-portable SAM system with minor modifications. This variant entered the service in the 1970s. The Chinese military wasn’t completely satisfied with the performance of this missile, because it doesn’t have an all-aspect seeker. They started to develop a new variant right way. HN-5A: Initially, they were planning to send this to north Vietnam to support their war effort against the US. But by the time HN-5A enters the service, the war was just about to end. So it didn’t see any actions in the Vietnam War. The A variant has a new indigenous seeker that allows you to track and attack a jet from any aspect. It is a bit longer body and a new rocket motor for better range. The A variant is said to perform slightly better than the Soviet 9K32 Strela-2M. HN-5 HN-5A Length 1.423m 1.463m Operational Altitude 0.05-2.3km 0.05-2.5km Operational Range 0.5-4.2km 0.8-4.4km Warhead 0.5kg 0.6kg HN-5B A further improved variant over the A variant. Some sources claim that it is partially based on the Strela-3. The B variant entered the service of the PLA in the mid-1980s. \ Pakistan purchased the copyright of this weapon and is producing it domestically as Anza Mk1. HN-5C A further improved variant over the B variant. And it is designed to be vehicle mounted with an electro-optical fire control system. It entered mass production in 1986. HQ-5 The HN-5B missile was made using Western standards and renamed HQ-5. It has been exported to many nations. The list of the nation which purchased HQ-5 include: · Albania · Cambodia · Colombia · Ecuador · Pakistan · Iran · Philippine · Thailand · Turkey · Vietnam DK-9 SAM/AAA Integrated Air Defence System Also known as the 930 System is a tactical air defence system designed to provide tactical field air defence at the army or divisional level. It is the predecessor of the current DK-10 system. As the threats of modern attack aircraft and choppers grow, conventional AAA weapons are no longer capable of providing the AA cover the ground forces need on the battlefield, while SAMs, are too expensive to be deployed in vast quantities to cover every corner. One solution to this problem is to combine the two systems to form an integrated AA system. In a typical engagement, the SAM would be used to engage targets at a longer range, while the AAA is used to engage targets at short range and lower altitude. Additionally, by sharing the same target search radar and fire control system, the users do not have to deploy 2 separate systems, which would reduce the unit cost and simplify the crew training. The PLA began to deploy this system in a combined unit to provide improved AA capabilities in the mid-1980s. A typical DK-9 battalion includes: Battalion Company X 3 Battalion C3I post X1 IBIS searching radar X1 Electro-optical director X1 Company command post X1 Type 702 fire control unit X1 SAM launcher (4 missiles) X1 Twin-35mm or twin- 37mm AAA X2 Company command post X1 Type 702 fire control unit X1 SAM launcher (4 missiles) X1 Twin-35mm or twin- 37mm AAA X2 Company command post X1 Type 702 fire control unit X1 SAM launcher (4 missiles) X1 Twin-35mm or twin- 37mm AAA X2 Radar: Some source claims that the radar used is the Type 702 fire control radar. It is consistent with an X-band search radar, C-band search/tracking radar, a K-band tracking radar with TV/IR tracking system, IFF and various latest electro-optical technologies, thus guaranteeing superior multi-target engagement capability, accurate and longer range tracking capability against ultra-low level and small-RCS target, short system reaction time, good all-weather engagement capability, ECCM capability and LPI characteristic, quick system positioning and deployment capability, and excellent reliability as well. The X-Band search radar has a maximum detection range of 22 km for fighter aircraft and 9 km for cruise missiles. The C-Band search and tracking radar ad a maximum detection range of 32 km for fighter aircraft and 13 km for cruise missile, and tracking range of 32 km for fighter aircraft and 13 km for cruise missile. The Ka-Band tracking radar has a maximum range of 15 km for fighter aircraft and 6 km for cruise missile. Look! A picture of the radar control. This can be used for the Combined Arms module. Missile: The SAMs used in DK-9 is the PL-9D, the SAM version of the PL-9C air-to-air missile. The missile is capable of +/- 40 degrees off-boresight angles and uses an all-aspect cryogenic liquid nitrogen gas-cooled seeker head unit utilising proportional navigation guidance techniques. The missile delivers an 11.8kg HE warhead at a speed of Mach 2 to a maximum range of 5.5km and a max altitude of 5km. The standard configuration of the missile launcher is mounted on a 4-wheel cartridge, but it can also be carried by a wheeled armoured vehicle (6x6 WZ551). The missile is said to have a single-shot hit probability for a single missile launch at an approaching target is 90%. AAA: The system has 2 AAA options: the twin-35mm Type 90 or the twin-37mm JP-113, both of which are automatic systems that can operate in either radar, optical tracker or manual mode. Let’s start with the 35mm Type 90 AAA. It is a licensed copy of the Swiss Oerlikon GDF-2. It can be used as a part of the DK-9 system, or as a stand-alone AAA in conjunction with Type 902 radar. That’s my way of asking “please make the stand-alone version too. Type 902 radar for the AAA The PLA also developed a self-propelled version of the gun (please see the picture below). But they gave it up in favour of the Type 95 SPAAG. The JP-113 is the land version of Type 76 twin-37mm naval AAA. A complete DK-9 system includes up to 8 battalions, with 48 AAA guns and 24 SAM launchers to cover an air space of 3000 square kilometres and engage 45 airborne targets simultaneously. Type 74 Twin-37mm AAA This was one of the most prominent AAA in Chinese service. Back in the 1950s, China imported the Soviet M1939 single barrel 37mm AAA and produced it as Type 55. Since a single-barrel gun doesn’t have a firing rate adequate to fight modern high manoeuvrable jets, so in 1965, China developed a twin-barrelled version called the Type 65. Later, the experience in the Vietnam War showed that the manually operated AAA couldn’t turn fast enough to track fast jets of the Vietnam War era, so Type 74 was created by adding auto-motors to operate them. The crew can now also operate them using a remote control at a safe location (usually nearby since they still need to reload them). An electro-optical director plus a target-searching radar was also added to support the AAA. Type 65 Type 74 Gun elevation -10 to 85 degrees -15 to 87 degrees Rate of fire 320 rounds/min 360 rounds/min Range 8.5km Muzzle Velocity 866m/s Horizontal movement 360 degrees Type 87 Twin-25mm AAA The first AAA was designed by China, which did not use the Soviet cartridge. And after that, China never used Soviet cartridges ever again for AAA…. With the exception of the 14.5mm, but that’s smaller than 20mm, so technically, that’s a gun, not artillery. Therefore, I am not wrong . The Type 87 AAA is mounted on a two-wheel cartridge with 2 magazines, each carrying 40 rounds. It fires the WB041P HE rounds with tracers with a rate of fire of 700 rounds per minute and a muzzle velocity of 1050m/s. The system is also fitted with a Type 86 IR tracking sight for night operation with a range of 7.5km. The gun elevation/depression is -10 to 90 degrees. They can be mounted on trucks. They can be mounted on Type 63 APCs They can be mounted on a Tieying Jeep. (Notice the missiles in the centre) Exported to Indonesia Now, let’s talk about the self-propelled AAAs. Type 63 A Type 65 gun on the hull of T-34-85. PRC supplied many of those to North Vietnam during the Vietnam War. Since we are getting F-4E, and there is a Vietnam map coming to DCS later, this will be a great addition to simulating the Vietnam War. However, this gun is not very effective against fast jets of the Vietnam War era. (see more detail above, in the Type 74 AAA section) Type 80 SPAAG This gun is mostly a copy of the Soviet ZSU-57-2, but with the following changes. Firstly, the hull is based on the Type 69-II MBT, not T-54/55, which provides it with better cross-country capabilities. It also has a Type 12150L engine with 580 horsepower instead T-54’s 520 hp. A new indigenous proximity fused round was also developed for better effectiveness. Compared to older SPAAG like the Type 63, its turning and elevations are operated by electrical motors instead manually. Type 88 The first radar equipped SPAAG designed by China. It uses an improved Type 74 AAA on a Type 79 MBT chassis. It has an effective range of 7.2km and an effective altitude of 4km. The elevation of this weapon is -5 to 85 degrees. The gun has a turning speed of 60 degrees per second. Now let’s move on to the tactical air defence HQ-61 The HongQi 61 (HQ-61) is a short-range, low- to medium-altitude surface-to-air missile (SAM) developed by Shanghai-based 2nd Mechanical-Electronic Bureau (now Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology, SAST). The missile was initially developed as a ship-based air defence missile, with a land-based variant HongQi 61A being developed at a later stage. The HongQi 61A is the first Chinese SAM to be developed especially for ground forces to provide tactical air defence. Because the HongQi 2 SAM was designed to intercept medium- to high-altitude targets, the PLA required a low-/medium-altitude air defence missile in the early 1960s to provide air protection for its ground forces against low-flying aircraft. The missile development was initially carried out by the Beijing-based 2nd Space Academy (now China Academy of Defence Technology) in 1965 under the designation HongQi 41. In 1967 the development was taken over by the Shanghai-based 2nd Mechanical-Electronic Bureau, and the missile was renamed HongQi 61. Initially, the missile was developed with both land-based and shipborne uses in mind, but a decision was then made that the shipborne (naval) variant should be given higher priority. (I will talk about it in the future navy thread) The shipborne variant HongQi 61 was not successful until late 1986 (I will talk more about it in a future Navy thread). The development of the land-based HongQi 61A began in 1976. The associated ground guidance station, electro-optical director, and fire-control vehicle were developed at the same time. The HongQi 61A passed its certification tests in 1986 and the missile’s design certificate was issued in 1988 prior to production commencing. The air defence brigade subordinate to PLA 38th Group Army in the Beijing Military Region fields the HongQi 61A, HongQi 7, and Tor-M1 (SA-15) SAM, and 35mm AAA guns in amalgamation for field air defence roles. The HongQi 61A missile has four front canards mounted on the middle of the missile body and four larger delta-shape control surfaces at rear. The front canards and the rear control surfaces arrangement are not on the same geometric plane but on a 45-degree angle. The missile uses radio command and semi-active radar homing. A twin missile launcher is mounted on a YanAn SX2150 flatbed 6X6 truck with an azimuth range of 360°. The truck is equipped with four hydraulically operated stabilisers which are lowered in preparation for the missile launch。 A typical HongQi 61A battery (company) consists of 4 trucks, each with two ready-to-launch missiles, mobile generators, command post vehicle, a tracking and illuminating radar vehicle, a target indicating radar vehicle, and 24 spare missiles. The C-band radar system called Type 571 had two elliptic parabolic net-type reflectors. Other features include moving target indication and frequency hopping agility. A typical target engagement would take place as follows: The target is first detected by target indication and radar vehicle. After being confirmed as hostile, the target is tracked and illuminated by the tracking and illuminating radar vehicle. When the target is within range, one missile is launched. The Type 571 radar has been designed specifically for low-altitude warning and displays both the slant range and azimuth of aircraft targets detected. No details of the tracking and illuminating radar have been disclosed, although photographic imagery examined shows a dish-type antenna with a TV camera mounted coaxially to the right for use in an ECM environment or passive operations during clear weather engagements. Some source claims that this missile has a single-shot hit probability for a single missile launch is between 64% to 80%. Length 3.99m Diameter 0.286m Wingspan 1.166 Min Range 2.5km Max Range 10km Speed 3 Mach Operational Altitude 8km HQ-64 This is an HQ-61 upgraded with Aspide technology. The HongQi 64 was designed to engage low-/medium-altitude fast jet targets, low-flying helicopters, and sea-skimming anti-ship missiles. The missile is guided by the radio command with artificial interference capability. It claimed to be the only medium-low-altitude air defence missile in the world that used microprocessor intelligent module technology at the time of its introduction. The surveillance radar detects the target aircraft and then hands it over to the appropriate tracking/illumination radar unit for engagement. The system continuously waves semi-active homing guidance principles, and, with the allocated assets, the battery can process up to 40 targets, track 12 and engage three of them simultaneously. The use of the moving target tracking processing system and frequency agility technology also gives the system good anti-jamming capability. System reaction time is 9 seconds. A typical land-based HongQi 64 battery fire unit comprises one 4X4 truck-mounted surveillance radar, three 4X4 truck-mounted tracking/illumination radars, one emergency power supply vehicle, and six 6X6 truck-mounted transporter-launcher platforms. Each of the launch platforms has five ready-to-launch missiles in individual sealed containers. The fire unit is complemented by a technical support unit which comprises a transport and reloading vehicle, a test vehicle, an electronic maintenance vehicle, an electromechanical maintenance vehicle, a tools support vehicle, a spares and meter vehicle, and a power supply vehicle. HQ-64 Aspide HQ-7 Length 3.89m 3.7m 3m Diameter 0.208m 0.203m 0.156m Wingspan 0.68m 0.55m? Min altitude 0.03km 0.015km? 0.03km Max altitude 12km 11km 5km Min range 1km 1.3km 0.5km Max range 18km 15km 8.6km (400m/s target); 10km (300m/s target); 12km (helicopters) Speed 4 Mach 4 Mach? 2.3 Mach? Reaction time 9 sec Single shot hit probability 60 to 80% I honestly don't know when did this missile enter the service. Probably after the dissolution of the Soviet. But once again, probably not. However, I still wanted to list it here because this might be the only modern Chinese SAM we can get for a long time. Anything newer than this are highly classified. Things like HQ-12, HQ-16, HQ-9 etc., are just way too new. Even the HQ-9 is currently the working horse of the PLA. IMO, there is no way we can get enough data or permissions to make them in DCS anytime soon. HQ-64, however, though it is still in service, is at a stage in which it is getting its superannuation in order and looking to purchase a house in the countryside. HQ-2B This is probably the only Chinese long-range regional air defence system we can get in DCS. As I have mentioned earlier, the new ones are too new. In 1965 the PLA began to develop an improved SAM based on the HQ-1 (a direct copy of S-75). 2nd Space Academy (now China Academy of Defence Technology, CADT) was responsible for the general system design, with 139 Factory and 786 Factory in charge of missile and ground stations respectively. The main design targets were to improve the missile’s accuracy and resistance to enemy electronic jamming, as well as to increase the missile’s operational zone. The new SAM, which was designated HongQi 2, passed its certification test in 1966. Since then, the HongQi 2 has been produced in mass numbers for the PLA to protect China’s major cities, military bases, and industrial complexes. The PLA has also introduced a number of improved variants, including the HongQi 2A and HongQi 2B in the late 1970s and early 1980s. On 8 September 1967, the PLA air defence troops fired three SAM (two HongQi 2s and one HongQi 1) at a U-2 spy plane, and one of the HongQi 2 missiles hit the target despite the plane’s use of electronic jamming. The latest score of the HongQi 2 SAM took place on 5 October 1987, when the PLA air defence troops shot down a Vietnamese Air Force MiG-21R (Fishebed-H) reconnaissance plane using the HongQi 2 SAM near the China-Vietnamese border. In 1984, the PLA conducted a series of HongQi 2 tests against the Tuqiang-3 guided target missile. According to reports, the HongQi 2 and the Tuqiang-3 were launched approximately 100km apart and the HongQi 2 SAMs were fired in “salvo shots” of two to three missiles per Tuqiang-3. Four out of five target missiles were shot down. In more tests the following year, the HongQi 2 shot down seven out of eleven guided targets. In light of these two tests, the PLA expanded the HongQi 2’s role to include anti-missile functions. The HongQi 2 is a large two-stage missile designed to intercept high-altitude targets like strategic bombers and spy planes. Its radar guidance guarantees a single-shot hit probability of 68%, but according to the American's experience in the Vietnam War, this ratio drops sharply when the missile is used in a strong electronic jamming environment. The improved HongQi 2B is said to have much-improved capability against various active and passive jamming. The second stage of the HongQi 2 missile is a large liquid rocket, which makes it inconvenient to be maintained and transport. Each missile is carried by a semi-trailer towed by a 6x6 truck and needs to be loaded onto a fixed launcher before firing. The loading usually takes about 5 minutes, but this really depends on the training and experience of missile operators. The basic operational unit of the HongQi 2 SAM is a battalion, each including six fixed launchers, 18 spare missiles, early-warning radar, target illuminating radar (ground guidance station) and support units (command, power, communications, etc.) HQ-2A The modifications on the HongQi 2 SAM began in 1973 to enhance the missile's low altitude target engaging and electronic countermeasure capabilities based on the experience of the Vietnam War. The firing tests of the HongQi 2A were undertaken between 1978 and 1982, and the final design certification for batch production was issued in June 1984. The 144 modifications on the HongQi 2A include increasing the horizontal firing angle to ±75° from the original ±55°; increasing the speed to 1,200 m/s from the original 1,150 m/s; increasing the G limit; adding optical/TV guidance system and improving the missile's electronic countermeasure capability. HQ-2B The concept of HQ-2B was considered in 1978 as a further improvement on the HQ-2, and the design work officially began in 1979. The PLA requirements for the missile include improved electronic countermeasures capability, expanded operational zone, shortened preparation time, simplified and mobile launch equipment, and the ability to attack high-speed targets. Operational tests and design certification trials took place during 1980~1986, and the missile entered service with the PLA in the early 1990. HQ-2B firing Compared to the basic variant HQ-2, the HQ-2B features some fundamental improvements in its design. The main improvements include: Missile: Redesigned fragmental HE warhead and more powerful fuse for increased blast radius; New improved rocket motor for higher speed and expanded operational zone; Encrypted digital radio command guidance for better anti-jamming capability; New onboard power unit with much-reduced weight; Increased G limit; Ground station Computerised fire-control system to improve the missile’s accuracy and reliability; Extra high-frequency range-finding radar, electro-optical director and mono-pulse radar on the ground guidance station; Multiple guidance (radar, electro-optical) for higher resistance against active and passive jamming; Automated command and control (C2) system with a large display screen Launcher Self-propelled (tracked) launcher with self-adjustment capability and onboard power unit for increased mobility and reduced reaction time; Simplified ground support equipment; If necessary, the missile could also be launched from the older HQ-2 launcher. This is the Radar of the earlier variant. The Radar of the B variant HQ-2B is retired and was replaced by KS-1. So we shouldn't have any problem getting them in DCS. Phew finished. I have been writing this for a whole day. I bet I have missed some detail or made some mistakes in there since I am tired. If I spot them, I will add them later. Ciao. Going to sleep now. Enjoy the read.

No, you bought a map years ago and now you got an updated v1.5 for free (they've been too generous if you ask me), the low detail areas from before now are still low detail but detailed nonetheless since it were just barren before and now it has a low detail but detail after all, including aerodromes you didn't have. If you see that kind of graphics inside the previously detailed area something is going on, do a repair (or several, sometimes it helps even though it looks like it does nothing), check FXO and Metashaders2 folders deleted, all that kind of usual stuff. If you got those screens outside the previous high detail area, yeah, that's what you get now, but bear in mind before there were not just "low detail", there were better said "no detail", nothing at all, not even grass. Now you have something to see (even in low detail) and you're compatible online with people who bought the upgrade, including all the aerodromes. Inside the previous high detail area in your N1 map, it's updated and similar to N2 in detail.

Someone, please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the lack of Phoenix success due more to ED's missile tracking implementation than due to its flight performance? In other words, it doesn't matter how much energy and velocity the missile has, it's really up to the extent of how ED programs chaff RNG, the size of the notching envelope, the random flight path when tracking is lost, and also module developers' level of realism in their RWR systems' coverage. Combining all of those things may very well make the Phoenix perform much worse (or better if at the other extreme) than it would in real life. Kind of like when a video game has a visible red laser on every sniper rifle or when a boss flashes red before an unblockable attack... what should be a truly scary and lethal threat can be made almost negligible by simple changes (even if not intended). And that's not even taking AI omniscience into account.

^ what he said Initially ED only planned for the Black Shark, none of the rest of it existed. There were no other modules. Plans changed, and they developed it into a platform that supported other aircraft as modules. Multiplayer was not included in the beginning, it was single player only. They changed their plan and added multiplayer support. VR did not exist yet, but the changed their plans and added VR support. Also, all third party development is done with ED's support. No third party is developing something ED does not want them to develop. Your argument is invalid, sir. We have late war pretty well covered on both sides. Having a mid-war Bf 109-G to go with the allied mid-war modules like the Spit and eventually the (exciting) La-7 would be a good thing. Having a Bf 109-E or F-2 or something to match up with the I-16 and the Mosquito would be a good thing. If you can't understand that I don't know what to tell you. If you disagree that's fine. But I agree with the OP, a 109-G would be a nice addition.

Ramstein full wrap camo. The ORIGINAL angry-birds!

...from Twitter:

Oh I agree, its a sad truth that developers cant be fully honest without some people getting angry. How devs cant give estimates, because theyre taken by a tiny but loud/angry minority as promises, and who treat delays like betrayals. No matter how much the dev presses that hes just giving internal estimates. But on the other hand, not everyone is that immature, and there is also giving too little information. I feel with the F4 Phantom its the other direction, we know so little that the few tidbits we got only create more confusion. We dont know whats going on with the project. Eg it would be nice to know if they think a release in the next 3 month is realistic, or if its at least 6 months, something in that fashion.

Way ahead of you, sir

I click the NWS switch when im rolled out on the target.

Onretech Sinai Pics

No post processing/re-shade. Just stock lighting.

Version 1.0.8 released: https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-input-command-injector/releases/tag/1.0.8 * More defensive handling of table joins when the original keyCommands/axisCommands table is nil. Now if the original table is nil instead of being joined with the injected table it is overridden by the injected table. * Processing of axisCommands tables are now skipped for the "Keyboard" device, this prevents axis binds from showing up in that column since keyboards don't have any axis. This also fixes issue #5 that occured when an injected keyboard/default.lua contained an axisCommands table. * Logging now includes the device name that triggered the injection * Paths and device names are now wrapped in quotes in log messages

Some comparison shots:

Yes, the plan is to alter all seasons.

Yeah, I hear you man. I really like the marriage of the real world and the sim itself, so closely mimicking reality. I've had Viggens fly over my head, just surprisingly popping up out of nowhere. I remember one time, in 1989, it was almost dusk, I was outside our house, playing around with a soccer ball, when I heard a roar. Instinctively I looked up across the roof of the house, then a splinter-camouflaged Viggen swooped over in a slight left hand turn. I could clearly see the red light on the spine, and the lit "slime lights" as it continued its turn. My jaw dropped and I followed it with my stare as it roared away from the area. Now, that's a single Viggen, at dusk, flying low and slow over a densely populated area. Stuff like that really leaves a mark. I've had a couple more experiences like that, one was with a JAS 39 Gripen. I was living in a two story building, in Linköping of all places, around 1995 and one morning I heard what could be a jet fighter engine. So I ran into the kitchen, looked up and outside the window, it was rather random. The next second a Gripen passed directly overhead, I could basically see inside the engine outlet as it flew by. Strange timing but really cool! At this time the 39 was new and it flew regularly at the SAAB airfield, so I got to see it fly a few more times, which was cool. Another cool thing I witnessed was on a summer vacation trip. We were driving with our car and caravan in the southern parts of Sweden, driving through a small village. Suddenly, there was a roar like thunder as a Viggen passed over us. The roaring continued, so we pulled over and went outside to have a look. There was now four Viggens in a dogfight, right over us! What!? That just doesn't happen! The manoeuvring continued for at least five minutes until they left the area. We got back in the car and continued on our way. I couldn't believe what I had just witnessed, so cool! I kept looking outside the car window as we drove away, looking to the sky, maybe there was more action to come....but that was it. These are just a few of my memories of the Viggen and it may be the reason for it being my favourite fighter jet of all time

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:

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

BETA Release - Fixed AJS-37 Viggen. - Fixed F-86 Sabre. - Fixed KA-50 BlackShark. - Fixed Spitfire IX (minor issue remains options command not working). - Fixed P-47D (minor issue remains options command not working). - Improvement UH-1 Huey (ground operations only). - Improvement Mi-24 Hind (ground operations only). Known Issues - Other modules that were broken may have minor improvements but remain WIP. - Loss of options command does not prevent manually calling up the Comms Menu if required Requests - Feedback on Mi-8 Hip, MiG-15 MiG-21, Mosquito and BF-109/FW-190 via our Discord would be appreciated they remain untested at this stage. https://github.com/Penecruz/VAICOMPRO-Community/releases/tag/v2.8.2.5-beta Disclaimer **This BETA may have potential new bugs along with the fixes listed and recommended only if you don;t mind testing **

1. go to aerobatics servers 2. follow people 3. have fun 4. get a little closer when you feel comfortable 5. go back to step 3. month or two later, voila... you can now refuel with your right hand while typing a message with your left hand. If ED adds some crutches that compensate for the DCS-isms which make it hard, such as better representation of G-forces to "feel" the acceleration, pitch-up, etc, or gives you some rough indicator of how far the thing you're looking at is to compensate for lack of depth perception, I would quite welcome it, but any "cheat mode" refuel just waters down the realism that's already being watered down everywhere. I don't want another warthunder or IL2. But AAR isn't some magic, it's like driving. After a while, you just know how much to turn the steering wheel or how much to step on the gas and how long to wait for a response from the car. Obviously, it does take tens of hours, and if you don't do it for a while, you become a little rusty, although not completely. Coming behind a tanker and wobbling 100 meters in every direction is completely normal in the beginning. So much time gets wasted on those endless discussions, just imagine how many more people could refuel if all those hours were invested in some formation flying instead.

The forums are packed with people with expectations and being upset when something is not done according to an update. Patience is a virtue.

Very nice performance vs spec…

That's not 100% correct. There was a flight sim in 1990, called: "Flight of the Intruder". It featured an A-6 besides a F-4.

DTOS still gives you an ASL upon designating. also youd use CCRP until you can visually see the target, then switch to CCIP. Switching modes mostly happens on the final wire to the target (after the pull down and roll out) thats why OAs are so important. By stepping through the sighting option you get steering information to the offset aimpoints (thats how you fly a proper pop-up profile as per the manual). CCRP is for level flight, but not limited to it. toss profiles are far from level flight and CCRP is much more accurate than LADD

Key word here is requirement. You can fly the whole campaign without the Channel map. However, should you own both maps, a more historically accurate version uses Channel map in some missions. You will get two campaigns in the game selection screen.

This cloud aliasing problem seems to be totally neglected for me. There was some improvement at the end of last year but after that nothing has been changed. In VR some cloud layers are horribly aliased: check out the Mig-21 take off instant action mission on the Nevada map. With that sun position nearly ALL of the clouds are very ugly when flying above them. Really distracting, totally ruins immersion, even induces "cross eyed" feeling to watch them. Dear @BIGNEWY is there any plan to fix this cloud aliasing at once, or the fix is closely related to the incoming DLSS anti-aliasing technique and / or Vulkan implementation? Is there any reason that this massive bug is still untouched for years now?

+1 We definitely need more MANPAD, especially the more modern ones, the currently available MANPADs in game are all from the 80s.

https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=58149&p=460975 I can't account for all 175 F/A-18Cs with the uprated motors, but I can account for 113 of them going to Kuwait, Finland, and Switzerland. The in-Game Lot 20 accounts for a total of 10 airframes that went to the USMC. Looking at the first -402 powered hornet 164693 shows a USMC bird. https://www.airhistory.net/photo/280806/164693 I suppose one could spot check all 51 remaining tail numbers, but it's not much of a leap to say they were all FMS or USMC. Okay I spot checked at least one tail number from every block and saw a USMC jet. Let me know if you find otherwise. Looking at the Block lists in the NATOPS I see 364 F/A-18As and 301 -400 powered F/A-18Cs compared to at most 62 US F/A-18Cs with -402 motors, seemingly all of which ended up under the USMC.

That’s good news. I was about to have a heart to heart with my crew chief . Now I can just buy him a beer.

Also with option 3. I'm not sure if it's just a muscle memory thing being used to the damping of the SCAS or a general skill issue but holding FTR at a hover goes about as well as lighting myself on fire.

Can someone report this issue please? Currently the tag says missing info, which doesn't make any sense because the problem is absolutely crystal clear. So is the solution, but it's up to the developers to do something about it.

I would love to see some modern MANPADs like the FIM-92J to go along with this. The FIM-92J compared to the early models we have ingame has ECCM a proximity fuse and is very maneuverable. A very deadly threat to enemy aircraft. There is also the Type 91, Starstreak, and Mistral among others. - Gundamator

You misunderstand. The TID is clueless. One return splits and the TID track is dead because it can’t make a call on which return to assign to the old track. If you STT on what turns out to be 2 targets, it will select the more reflective one to stay locked, but it has to drop its tracks and start over in TWS mode because it’s running on Pacman level hardware.

No. Retextured maps hardly ever produce any performance hit.

Yep, I know but we can change/swap/switch textures (to spring/summer/autumn)

Nice job I hope you are going to make winter textures too

CMWS control can only be performed by the pilot, because the panel for it is only in the aft crewstation, but both crewmembers should hear the audio alerts over the ADF audio channel. If one person hears it and the other does not, it's a bug (assuming they both have their ADF volume knobs turned up of course). I've submitted an additional report regarding this issue, regarding RLWR audio, the CMWS audio, and to ensure the state of the ADF audio channel itself is being synced between clients. (ie, ensuring that one player doesn't hear NDB morse code audio over the ADF channel when the other is hearing CMWS audio over the ADF channel).

Hey widen76! Thanks for sharing your stories! I always think of the high risk the guys were exposed when flying low ... birds, model planes, etc ... My experiences with the Viggen were far less specatucular, but nonetheless impressive. I visited litterally every Airpower event in Austria, so starting with - I guess - 2000, I saw many displays. My favourites were from 2000 (https://youtu.be/V2IMdFkK3O0?t=826) and 2003 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIg7C2EWS8k), they flew a bit more aggressive than the historic versions of today. Nevertheless, the Viggen - for me - is still the most impressive aircraft of all times. I hope HB finds some more time to take care about their module ...

With Temp panels. It was the lighting panel and the stores jettison panel that bubbled. For now Ill sand them back down and reprint the adhesive label. All is not lost....

OP did not post in wish list, topic was moved to wish list.

A tiny handful, but they make an enormous amount of noise. They may have large monitors, but I guarantee they aren't running 4K or 2K resolution. I bought one of the largest monitors I could find when I upgraded a few years ago in the hope that the size of the display would offset spotting issues. It didn't. Large and expensive 4K monitors are probably better than smaller 4K ones, but the spotting is still dire. I had a crazy situation with the friend I flew with where we'd swap spotting tasks - his VR headset rendered distant aircraft like housebricks while I was blind - yet once we were approaching gun range I had to tell him which aircraft were friendly and which weren't because they all looked like Lego to him. Of course, the people who run the servers could just implement neutral dot labels, but that's not 'realistic' is it ? I had one of them tell me that labels were a cheat, which is fairly insane considering that it's built into the software and available for anyone to use by pressing a key combination. I refuse to run DCS at anything other than 4K though, I'd rather just not participate in MP if the spotting isn't going to improve. I mean I'm hardly here for the realism anyway, not when I can drop a 250kg bomb 5 yards away from a truck and not damage it

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.

Yup. Really too intense and needs to be reduced. On the Malta missions I've been building and posting, I keep the canopy open (which is historically accurate) and the vision improvement is amazing.

I will send you a message. Here one new render