Leaderboard

RAZBAM Mig-23 develop pic

Guys, I get it. Every time our content creators get a chance to show you want you are getting it makes the wait that much harder. I love and fear the preview phase because I know what the wait is like. That said, this is yet another step in the road to release, it's pretty much like this for each and every module. I know that not all modules do pre-sales so when they do it makes this a little more painful but it is part of the process. We hope these previews will show you how hard RAZBAM has been working to make sure you have a solid module on day 1 of the release. They are still tuning and tweaking even beyond the preview build. Our Closed Beta Testers are going to be diving into it soon, which means it will be in Closed Beta Testing soon, which means an Open Beta Release Candidate. We are not far off now, aside from any bumps pinned down by Testers and even previewers. I know it's been a long hard waiting, but we are almost there, don't beat up the lucky few content creators that managed to win the SE lotto, and don't beat up each other for your own feelings on it. It's gonna be worth the wait, and all this will be a distant memory soon enough. Thanks, and we appreciate your passion and patience, even those with very little patience left

I believe that nobody doubts that. Much of the agony we see here comes from Raz trying to ride the tiger without paying the piper (to awkwardly mix metaphors). If you want to reap the benefits of modern hype (pre-sales, early access, fueled by new media like discord, YT etc.), you must also be prepared to follow through: nobody (or rather: very few) here expects RB to "Release Now Goddammit!". What people do expect that if you hype your product, you then keep up the communication. This forum is where I expect some RB's most loyal customers hang out. Where is RB? Contrast this with OnReTech's presence - regular, near-daily posts about their upcoming product, engaging with people. The contrast couldn't be more stark: OnReTech gets it, RB needlessly drops the ball. Much RB's agony I believe is self-inflicted. We don't need RB to deliver the Mudhen now. What we do need is for RB to be present, to talk about what is going on; after lighting the torch, so to speak, they need to regularly keep feeding the flame to remain in control. Just a bit. Put differently - simple minds like mine would like to be reminded that RB is still around and didn't split after they got what they wanted. Engage with us a little, RB, and I predict that much of the frustration here will be turn into enthusiasm. We don't need much, but we need something (oh, and ED and HB may want to take note...)

I am looking into the clear glass thing, but realistically, this shouldn't be a mod but a user option like it is on some modules.

I beg you, do not change the API of SD10, they are already excellent missiles now, they do not need this API, which is often very stupid and does bull<profanity>

Showcase of the new Polychop's SA342 Gazelle Update. (Flight model, armament modularity, Athos sight, Tablet...) https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1826316181

That's why they keep saying"2023 is the year of the Strike Eagle". Because all of this may well go on for the whole year. I think that bridge is burning somewhere behind us. I'm sure it will be a great module and I am absolutely buying it. But any sense I might have had of a kind of "partnership" with RazBam is gone. I've seen devs build a solid rapport with their customers with honest open communication, so it can be done. I don't think that has happened here. On one hand that's fine, because business is business. But when it's cold like that there can be a loss of patience and forgiveness on the part of the customer. Which means the discussion could be "You got 100% of my payment, so where's 100% of my ******* plane?", instead of more understanding from a customer base that feels invested in the product because of a good buyer/seller rapport.

I have reported it and requested something similar to the mod or similar to the Hornet and Viper. Also suggested it might be something to allow a server to enforce or not if they so choose.

Hey, below are screenshots showing a B-21 flying at 35.000 ft, targeting a naval group located at 160 nm, and firing several LRASM. Hit after 15 minutes of sea skimming by the missiles. The command used in the ME is "Attack group" without any other data. Great Mod ! Thanks Currenthill !

That's utter nonsense....

Jez this guy SharpenXB is the reason we host our own servers and allow players to play how ever they want on them (we have no IC checks), we allow players to make the choice not ED as the choice's ED makes cant take years to implement unfortunately. Its is a shame though that ED are allowing the 4% to rule what the other 96% can do. Mods are simple to use , we have 10 years old using them easily enough with out issues.

Is this a complaint discussion, or a WIP discussion? Has anyone ever thought that RB sent this to the YT content creators for sales purposes? If they release it as is, the bug complaints would fly all over the place. Clearly, it's not ready! The adolescent complaining here is wild!

Hi all, This is my first ever user content in DCS and like 4th post on this forum In the search for making DCS carriers "come to life" I came across the excellent LUA templates from RedKite (link to his original video: I set out to create my own templates based on his LUA files, and using the Radio command to trigger different deck layouts. Posted an initial video on YT and folks asked if I could upload the templates to User Files so I did (first time ever) and made a video explaining how to use the templates I customized. I will make another video in future perhaps on how I customized them. The templates I made are accessed through the F10 menu. They are divided into "Launch", "Flex", "Recovery", "Locked" and "Clear". Launch allows for launch only, as the Fantail of the carrier is blocked as well as the landing area. Flex allows simultaneous recovery and launch operations. Recovery only allows recovery or launching from Cats 3 and 4, as the bow of the ship is full of parked aircraft. Locked is everything blocked except Cat 3 and 4, including spawn points. Clear is a clear deck except for some statics near the island (Hummer Hole and Junkyard). The following Mods will be required for these templates: - Military Aircraft Mod (for C2 Greyhound) https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3307071/ - VSN F18F Superhornet mod - S-70B Seahawk (https://filehorst.de/folder.php?key=duuqITUb) Link to the User Files for download: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3330966/ Link to the How to Use video: https://youtu.be/rZEp81ugDmE Hope you all enjoy, feedback for future improvements is welcome. THanks Adalla null

I'm impatient and I have no problem with pre-ordering. My issue is with poor communication, and that seems to be the case with this module.

I think you are right; 19m / 63ish Feet. But that is the same with the Tomcat(19m) so maybe they share the title as the longest pre order in DCS ?

I fixed replays for the F-4 some time ago, and they work like a charm, yay! Sadly, it's not easy to apply the same fix for the F-14, so it will take some time before the changes are applied to the F-14.

Razbam MiG-23MLA

BLUF: The AGM-114L Longbow HELLFIRE is an extremely advanced and capable missile, but is limited by the skill of the crew utilizing it. Preface: The AGM-114L is an active radar guided missile, containing its own radar and inertial system, with the same warhead and motor as an AGM-114K. It is fire and forget, with no input or data links after launch. It can be cued with the TADS, FCR, or RFHO. However, it has a number of limitations that must be understood in order to maximize the weapon's effectiveness. It is not a perfect, flawless, Macross Missile Massacre, kill-all-16-tanks at once, infallible missile. Knowing when and where to use the AGM-114L is an important skill for any aspiring AH-64 crew. The AGM-114L goes into a standby mode at aircraft powerup. This standby mode is largely irrelevant in the context of DCS, but incorporates a number of PBIT features, environmental data, positional data, and other important information. When fully loaded into the standby mode, the missile will be indicated with an S. It remains in this state until the missiles are actioned and given appropriate target data, where they will shift into prelaunch mode. Appropriate target data must be from the correct source, which is limited to the FCR, TADS, or RFHO (Radio Frequency HandOver). Target points, INS coordinates, or other mechanisms are not appropriate sources, as these do not have all the necessary data required for the missile. This data includes a different reference mechanism for the missile (it is not GPS guided nor MGRS/LL referenced), angular target rate, and other important information. Postlaunch occurs after the firing command has been given. This process encompasses all the necessary steps, mostly automatic, that result in the missile launching and heading toward the target. The missile will automatically select LOBL or LOAL modes depending on the nature of the target. Moving targets will almost always attempt LOBL, while stationary targets are generally LOAL. LOBL is the longest range mode due to the nature of moving targets, and will be utilized when targets are moving or attempted when the range is less than 2.5km. Even though LOAL might be indicated <2.5km, the missile will immediately go to terminal acquisition after launch. Beware that when doing so, the missile may not go for the target you specifically want: the missile at this range can grab the first target it finds, which could be closer or further than your intended target. Utilizing the LOBL INHIBIT function can assist with hitting a target closer to a predicted position as opposed to the closest moving target to the position. A DBS trajectory will not occur at ranges less than 2.5km as the distance is too short for effective DBS. Beyond this range, DBS is utilized on stationary targets. DBS may also occur if a moving target stops mid-flight, but only if the range is greater than 2.5km. The trajectory of the missile is based upon the range to the target, where the maximum range will yield a maximum altitude of 3km. DBS trajectories can displace laterally by up to 1km. There are three possible ways to provide targets to the AGM-114L: FCR, TADS, or RFHO. The FCR and TADS are the only self-designation options for the AGM-114L. The FCR is the only one to provide primary and secondary targets to the missile, and at that will only do so if the primary target is stationary. TADS and RFHO are the only ones capable of engaging stationary targets at maximum range. Currently, TADS is the only mechanism available, and thus can only be utilized by the CPG. To use it, the CPG must sight select TADS, at which point the "TYPE" field on the WPN page becomes disbarred, allowing RF to be selected (if SAL missiles are also loaded). Current best practices are to utilize the LMC to align the TADS on target, followed by IAT to track it. A steady lase is required for three seconds to properly pass target data to a missile and failure to do this can result in erratic target data. Hold the laser as long as possible to maximize accuracy. Do not wait long after the target data has been passed to fire, because the greater the time delay, the greater the error in target position. If you're expecting to be able to lase, then hide, do not expect the missile to hit exactly what you're aiming at. Acquire and fire as rapidly as possible. This will be vital when the RFHO arrives, as it too is vulnerable to data errors over time. Plan, assign, and engage rapidly. When launching a missile, keep in mind the relative bearing of the target to the missile's centerline. If the target is to the left of the missile, a DBS profile can cause it to shift right, vice versa if the target is right. The clearer the picture the missile has, the better its overall accuracy. That means you might need to shift the aircraft left or right to present the missile with the best view. Further, if utilizing LOAL and DBS, you can launch missiles that approach from different directions by altering the heading to ensure a left or right trajectory. The closer to the missile's centerline, the more random it may be. Within DCS, after launch the missile immediately gives track warnings, so if the target has a RWR, it is likely to know about your missile. The missile has extremely limited energy potential, so targets with high agility (ie fighter jets) have a much narrower engagement envelope. However, nobody likes the rapid "deedle" of an active-radar homing missile on their RWR, so even a long range shot can alter a potential threat's decision matrix, and the AGM-114L is extremely hard to notch. Helicopters are more vulnerable and they must take significant evasive maneuvers to defeat the missile. Moving targets, while easily tracked with moving target mode, present some additional difficulties. Currently, DCS ground vehicle behavior defaults to dispersion when a unit is hit from the air. In a mobile convoy, this means that after your first missile is shot, if you have any others in flight, they may not track the right target. This is due to a variance in predicted target position at launch versus actual position. The missile is likely to grab the target closest to predicted position, not actual position, so keep this in mind if engaging mobile units. This can also apply to static units that disperse after a hit. If absolute precision is required and a target must be destroyed, then a SAL missile should be the primary tool utilized to destroy it. Remote engagements are far more flexible with SAL missiles, with greater options for masking and targeting. RF missiles are in their element when used against large columns of units where all must be destroyed in a rapid fashion, regardless of order. They should also be the preferred weapon against rotary wing threats and aerial threats, though with the understanding that the more aware the threat is, the less likely the chance of a successful hit.

Well, it's a pre order of the Early Access.

Which is hardly odd and unexpected, given that's how pre-release marketing very often works. Give early not-necessarily-complete copies of your product to people that have influence over potential buyers....

No, not at all .. I used the MKLINK command to link the /Saved Games/DCS/ important folders, with cloud locations. It looks like this: The folders that I backup on the cloud are: Config Kneeboard Liveries MissionEditor Screenshots and StaticTemplate I don't backup the Mods folder, because its content is already a copy of my OvGME library, so no need to back it up. This scheme has worked fine for me so far, and the versioning ability of OneDrive allows me to recover any of my missions to a specific point in time: Cheers! Eduardo

Agreed. Then again, who do you think pre-orders? That patient ones? Really?

LE SOUHAIT DE ZELENSKY / ZELENSKY WISH

Well, some say there will be a lot of bugs for closed beta, some says there will be a lot too during EA, and some says it is okay to have bugs as long as they had it. No judgement here. Just an observation. Poor comm for sure, ORT has a good one (love the cover poll). And they have no date hype, nor they have taken our money, but gorram sure they will have mine on Day 1. Watching the cold start video. Spud one is very detailed. Good watch.

100% agree.. and the frustrating thing is we know how wonderful a company can be because of OnReTech’s communications on the Sinai map has been over on their thread.

Thanks for the in depth info A more graphical rep for those like me who can't read...

Don't think i've seen anyone else mention it so i'll throw this into the mix. Seems the manual will definitely be made public ahead of the actual release.

Bad behaviour in the past is no excuse for poor public relations in the present. As for Reddit, I have no idea what goes on there, but I have heard it's a dumpster fire.

And that's fine. It wasn't a case of the savings, it was being left out in the cold, so to speak, without a word from the devs. Their total silence came off looking like contempt. Which I think it was. Devs like IndiaFoxtEcho and OnRe build customer loyalty and good relations by speaking with the customers. RazBam, I think, just doesn't care because they know people will buy it anyway, so why waste energy on good public relations.

I normally don’t type the followings for free, because of what Joker in The Dark Knight says… Any development, not just software, comes with 5 components or factors: cost, resource, time, scope and quality. Some says 6 but I just say 5 for relevance. How much to spend, how many people or tools available, what the deadline is, what features will be present and how good the product will be, respectively. The fun thing is, you change one of these, the others will shift also. So I suspect why it is still 2-weeksTM, is that the resource and funding are rather fixed (I guess some of the later comes from our pre-order money), and there is a pre-determined list of features must be completed, like to be able to take off and land correctly, etc. Quality level may be up to debate, but I respect RAZBAM and ED have concerns and “standard” over this in particular, and in software development, it is very hard to control (remember when patches break things?). Then the only flexible thing left is time, unfortunately. If ED/RAZBAM sets a deadline, it will be, as an old Chinese saying goes, picking up a rock and dropping it onto your own foot (Hong Kong has a more colourful version, but I don’t want to be banned), because either the quality or scope or both will have to be adjusted. From a customer POV, this may be worse than waiting. Look at what Cyberpunk 2077 release did, it can break a company. And this is also some of the reasons why most Government projects go over-budget and delay. One may say, why not get more people. And then Han Solo will say this is not how the Project Management works. It is a TL;DW, I would recommend the classic project management book “The Mythical Man Month” to those who are intrigued.

It probably wouldn't be a problem if an approximate release date of EA was given - even a month would be ok. June, July, later, first half, second half. Simply because of mutual respect. Basically, it's all about that. We know that the relese is close since December'22 (or before even). We wait and wait and nothing. It causes frustration. If you can plan a wedding or whatever, why is there still no goddamn release date for the module ? That's weird. Of course, we will find out before the end of the pre order, because it has already been said (plus we will have the manual), but since others are already flying, I think that any intelligent person is able to estimate the amount of work and how much time it will take in the final stage. Project management is challenging but not impossible, including setting deadlines. For some reason, the relese date is not given on purpose.

Sorry not sure I understand this, yes we blocked the raw mod from working in DCS, but we are working on (and have the first version for testing internally) adding the mod plus some additional fixes to DCS, and hopefully in a meaningful way that players and server owners can control. Everyone needs to calm down a bit, including Sharp, please.

Хотелось бы чтобы информация о дозаправщиках добавлялась автоматом в планшет, как это реализовано с информацией об авианосце (такан, частота)

Happens every time they don't get their instant gratification bone stroked, sucks a bit because you have to skim over all the whining just to try and find some real info.

You are very much correct. But I got excited, here's the list of which weapons will be included in the release version 1.0.0. AGM-154C JSOW (8) AGM-158B JASSM-ER (8) AGM-158C LRASM (8) CBU-103 WCMD CEM (18) CBU-105 WCMD SFM (18) CBU-87 CEM (18) CBU-97 SFM (18) GBU-28 Penetrator (4) GBU-31 JDAM (8) GBU-31 Penetrator JDAM (8) GBU-38 JDAM (40) GBU-57 MOP (1) Mk-82 GP (40) Mk-84 GP (8)

Having canopy glass that you can clearly see out of is hardly an unfair advantage.

Reflections in canopy glass exhist, but it's the execution and consistency of the effect that becomes important in the sim. These vary from module to module, and sometimes it hurts the immersion more than it helps. My opinion is that, starting with the first DCS 2.7 OB (about two years ago), the introduction of these new reflections was a step back on some modules, but on others it's fine. It's the inconsistency in the execution that makes it quite negative on some modules. I wouldn't say DCS 2.56 was perfect, but I'd say it was better in this aspect of reflections. It wasn't a problem then on any module (that I can recall), and maybe it should have stayed that way.

Right now it seems everyone who has a YouTube channel has a free copy, while those of us who paid for it are......waiting.....still.....waiting......

Core has Reduced included. I just updated IFLOLS mod files to include optimization. I've forgotten about that mod. I need a list of my mod to keep track of for myself. Yes to your procedure. I wasn't sure what Surik75's file does, I'm assuming it optimizes the ones I didn't bother to optimize. If that is the case, install it as separate mod and shouldn't conflict. That's basically what I do on every DCS update.

Impatient people should never preorder.

Devs can never win. Give a date, chances are it'll be missed for some reason and people get upset. Don't give a date, people get upset. Honestly the best thing they could probably do would be no preorder and just drop it one day out of the blue, since clearly many people simply can't cope with waiting for stuff

не про авиа, но какой шикарный ffb

We have watched the same videos and have been in touch with both. We are investigating as there is a conflict with the available performance charts for the Block 50. Both former F-16 pilots flew the Block 30 and not the Block 50, and the Block 50 is much more heavy aircraft that MAY explain it. Again, we are investigating and seek to make the most accurate simulation possible. thank you

Based on DCS history, it takes several years apparently for ED to implement something useful like this.

Guys, you're being trolled. You can't reason a troll and you're just wasting time. Your responses are just feeding more of the same. To ignore - move your mouse and hover (don't click) over the name to the left of the post. A dialog will appear which you can click an IGNORE button. As for the IC check - I believe this might also destroys all Taz's wonderful work that allows many in VR to get the performance they need with optimized textures, etc, so I really hope that ED's response to this isn't just to fix the 'dot' visibility.

Hi folks, we have no plans to change our current payment system. I have merged the threads. thank you

I'd encourage everyone to use it. I flew the Tomcat in the early 2000's - before transitioning to Supers. The Tomcat (at least the B/D models) are well overpowered, and DLC was useful in making fine adjustments in glideslope without having to reset power. Basically we flew in a slightly overpowered condition and "bumped" down DLC to keep the jet on glidepath. In a pinch (e.g. low at the ramp) DLC up could also save the day. This was a feature that was sorely missed when we transitioned to the Super Hornet. I know it's not specifically asked, but I'd also recommend landing with the speedbrakes extended and for extra drag, land with the external tanks. Even during CQ, we'd fly with empty tanks just to get some more drag on the jet. Boarding rates were notably lower with slick jets apparently as even just a very minor power addition was enough to cause the jet to float over the wires.

I don't know tbh, you would have to ask a pilot. From my understanding they did not hear much else than the ECS. But sound in games is a good way to replace haptic feedback. Like for example hearing the AB kick in, whereas irl you would not as much hear it as you would feel it.