Leaderboard

TL;DR: I'm still undecided about this one. Long version (because y'all know I love to write up the details): Varjo-Foveated was comparatively simple. It 100% relies on Varjo's own quad views support in their OpenXR runtime. All Varjo-Foveated does is: - Add the necessary setup for foveated rendering on top of quad views - that DCS isn't doing otherwise - that's the primary bit of magic; - Add the ability to override the focus region pixel density. size etc, which people love to play with; - Implement a workaround for DCS incorrect frame metadata submission introduced by MT. There is nothing that requires to touch any of the pixels. So there is no set-up in the code to do Direct3D stuff. This is also why Varjo-Foveated took maybe 1/5th of the time to implement compared to Meta-Foveated. Meta-Foveated does all the above too, but it cannot leverage existing quad views support (it's not in the Oculus OpenXR runtime). So it has to reimplement it, including: - Hooking into the eye tracker to tell DCS how to render the 4 views properly. Fortunately this code is 100% reused from OpenXR Toolkit for the eye tracker part and 100% reused from PimaxXR for the view projections calculations. So that bit was easy. - Compositing the 4 views into a stereo view. Now that's the complex one. This one requires to do some drawing of my own. First because the Oculus OpenXR runtimes lacks of certain features (which Pimax supported for example, and therefore I did not have to implement them in PimaxXR) and second because there are edge cases in the Oculus OpenXR runtime (for example submitting multiple stereo layers seems to preclude ASW). So for that last one, there is quite some significant code needed to set up drawing via Direct3D, pull data from the DCS backbuffers, setup new backbuffers to receive the produced views etc. That code does not exist in Varjo-Foveated, nor in PimaxXR. With all of that set up for Meta-Foveated, adding CAS was pretty trivial (I think it took an hour). There's also Varjo being an odd-ball which caused quite a few issues in the past, the way they manage OpenXR backbuffers internall is 100% different than other OpenXR implementations, and it requires additional logic. It would be complex to add this into Varjo-Foveated. Not impossible, but probably 2-3 days of work. I know, I sound terrible, because 2-3 days of work sound like nothing but they are 2-3 days where I'm not doing something else. I'm literally that busy. So wait and see... Right now I will focus on applying my learnings from Meta-Foveated back into PimaxXR for Crystal support. Ideally I can find a solution where Quest Pro/Varjo Aero/Pimax Crystal/others all share the same solution without having additional maintenance costs. For example, I have Meta-Foveated working on G2 Omnicept - but releasing that is an additional maintenance cost (which I deem not worth it due to low volume of users). Ideally, there would be >1 maintainer to do work like this - eg someone passionate about G2 Omnicept support willing to spend a couple of hours a month to maintain it. <long brain dump over>

Advanced inverse kinematics/pilot body animations, tail buffeting, wing fatigue damage, elements of radar modeling, it's just a few things i've noticed - all of that sets the highest standard. Good job. If RAZBAM would make a Cold War fighter variant F-15A or C as well in the future I would hardly ever leave my basement. Overall RAZBAM progress over the last few years is fantastic. It's a top notch developer.

I would if I could dear friend. but in my country the tax for credit card use in US Dollars is 71%. And Steam has prices in local currency.

The statement "oh, 15 mph slower, we lost the war!" is very far from the real things. First of all, though we have, I think, the most full collection of Mosquito reports, we really have no report with clearly figured TAS for the same plane we have in DCS, except poor FB VI HJ 679 that was presumed crippled (but without finding actual reasons of this behavior). Then we have DCS FB VI top speed at SL 340 mph Then, we have FB VI sax-HX809 with 18lb/3000 measurements, that state 354-22 = 332 mph at SL. By the way, for all other tests that have no direct SL measurements, SL speed is obtained by prolonged graphs. Then we have B IV DK. 290 tested for both types of exhaust system, that shows 15 mph difference. So, if someone wants to use this information to suggest the top speed of FB VI with normal exhaust, this speed is to be 332+15 = 348 mph (and the difference with DCS will be only 8 mph), but below I will show, why DK. 290 can not be used as a reference even for the different types of exhaust systems. Please keep in mind that all planes used for comparison have engines with the same blower ratio, so 21/23/25 have only different limitations, so, the power can be compared directly. looking at DK.290 results one can see that they are incredible high for 9 lb/3000 - 331 mph, tanks on, M.S. that gives 337 mph (6 mph difference obtained from 8000 ft measurements common for tank on and off) And we have sax-FB VI HS.918... That shows glorious 302 mph without tanks and RP at (drum roll!) 12.5lb/3000, and it directly shows without any calculations that FB VI itself is much more draggy than B IV, thus 15 mph sax/no-sax difference is not fully valid for FB VI. And then I performed some calculations to obtain more accurate numbers taking in account prop thrust and jet thrust. Radiator drag/thrust at these speeds are close to zero and thus can be neglected in comparison even to jet thrust. I omitted the calculations itself, and these are results. DK. 290 with normal exhaust shows CD0 very close to the values stated in other reports, and, that is interesting, to get -15 mph with sax, jet thrust must be reduced to~0 (I do not think, that additional streamlined construction can make such high drag). It is plausible if the gases temperature/energy was significantly reduced before they ejected backwards. Now we can eliminate jet thrust for sax-FB VI HX809 and find its drag using test results. And its drag is 1/3 more than for B IV. Using this obtained drag we can add jet thrust for 18 lb/3000 and find that non-sax FB VI must fly at 344 mph, that lays within 1% tolerance. We can also check FB IV using HS.918 results: drag obtained from the same calculations is 5% higher than for HS.918, so we have reliable result. And, by the way, it shows that these two planes will have at least 2.5% difference in top speed.

That is not a Strike Eagle, that is an F-15B heavily modified. The F-15E never had the MER's and TER's and instead went for the tangential pylons on the conformal fuel tanks. That loadout only existed on that specific jet very very early in the Air to ground F-15's development, when they had not decided on which configuration they were going to use. Well before the F-15E was ever flying in a configuration like we have in game. There is no reference for how the MER's and TER's were integrated into the software of that specific jet, and its cockpit and interface configuration would have been completely different from how the F-15E ended up being. So there is no way to in a full fidelity manner model that setup or configuration.

Спасибо, мы записали. На будущее, лучше сразу сообщайте о подобных критических проблемах, а не держите их в себе. Треки и логи всегда будут полезны.

Added future module to AviaStorm By SVKSniper

The work takes time, that will not change, we have resources and man power that have limits like any business. We will not always meet individual expectations for work rate or priority but we do as much as is possible within the work flow we have. This month we have had 2 patches, including a product launch, we were also away for a week on a whole team meeting. Next month we will have another content patch and we will continue to patch as and when the work is completed. thank you for your continued patience

50, You're 18 With 32 Years Experience - 50th Birthday

I notice 30-40% performances gain. I have cranked up the settings and DCS is have never looked better in VR. It’s unbelievable that one guy can make this big difference! Everybody that enjoy this piece of magic software should consider to sponsor this magician with some coffee money.

Mehr wie Tomcat als Hornet. Ich finde, im aktuellen Stadium ist die Maschine super responsiv und reagiert sofort und nachvollziehbar auf Steuereingaben. Im Prinzip erinnert sie mich dabei an die Tomcat - nur dass wir einen Flight Path Marker / Total Velocity Vector im HUD haben, und damit finde ich es recht leicht, eine bestimmte Höhe zu halten, was mir in der Tomcat hingegen echt schwer fällt, weil sich dort dauernd eine leichtes Steigen oder Sinken reinmogelt. Das 1g-Fly-by-Wire der Hornet hat die F-15E aber gerade nicht; da ist kein Computer, der semi-intelligent irgendeine Fluglage zu halten versucht und dann doch immer wieder komische Dinge tut, wenn man nicht auf ihn aufpasst. Ich bin noch nicht mit arg asymmetrischen Außenlasten geflogen, aber dank der CFT-Stationen hängen ja viele Waffen nah am Zentrum, sodass Waffenabwürfe nicht ansatzweise so krasse Ungleichgewichte wie in der Hornet auslösen, oder man müsste dafür schon eher kreative Zuladungen auswählen. Wenn ich ein bisschen Tiefflug mache und einem Flusslauf folge, bringe ich mich gerne mal in echte Schwierigkeiten, indem ich manche Kurven zu hart nehme, viel zu viel Energie verliere und plötzlich keine Optionen mehr habe, um einer Reihe Bäume auszuweichen - bei zu hohem AoA bringt dann auch Vollausschlag am Stick nichts mehr. Wie fett und unbeweglich sich die Maschine in solchen Lagen anfühlt, finde ich auch erst einmal sehr überzeugend und das zeigt halt sehr schön, dass selbst die stärksten Triebwerke keinen schlechten Piloten wettmachen. Also, rein vom Flugmodell kommt mir die Maschine sehr gut vor, aber ich kann das natürlich auch nur mit anderen DCS-Modulen und ein paar älteren oder anderen Simulationen vergleichen. Ansonsten sehr cool: In den Top-Tipps stand drin, dass man nicht-smarte Waffen nach einem Rearm neu einprogrammieren muss. Da standen wir dann eben mit 5 Leuten auf dem Apron, natürlich hat keiner von uns das Handbuch gelesen... hmmm, ja, Mist, wir würden ja schon gerne ein, zwei Runways mit unseren Durandals zerstören... "Hey, Leute, ich glaube ich hab's!" ruft einer, "Zurück auf ARMT, und dann unten A/G LOAD..." - jupp, eigentlich recht intuitiv. Hat alles geklappt und Groom Lake hat kurz darauf alle Landebahnen eingebüßt, da können jetzt nur noch Hubschrauber landen - oder Aliens. Luftbetankung finde ich sehr schwierig, das ist mal wieder der Endgegner - also wieder üben, üben und dann noch ein bisschen üben. (Für mich ist der Cockpitrahmen im Weg und ich muss mich ganz doof runterbeugen, damit ich die Director-Lights am Tanker überhaupt sehen kann). Macht jedenfalls gerade mega Laune, morgen möchte ich mir dann mal LGBs und den TPOD anschauen und mal sehen, ob oder wie man Koordinaten im Flug eintragen kann und wie Positionsupdates funktionieren, die wir bei dem alten INS wohl tatsächlich brauchen.

Hi Yoyo, First, I hope all is well. Explaining a few things with relation to the view point and the Option in the Special Options Menu. null The green cross hair is 0,0,0 in the model and the virtual eye point of where the view originally positioned. The red line from the green 0,0,0 eye point is exactly 8cm to the Eye. Original 0,0,0 eye point is set there for people who do not have Track IR or VR setups to allow them to see the inside MPD buttons covered by the UFC's sides due to the perspective. It simulates as if the person has their head resting against the back of the ejection seat. If a person who wants to setup their VR to the exact spot in the model we have it set to default at 8cm and go to 10cm as personal preference. For the "Monitor Eyepoint Offset this defaults for none Track IR users are able to move to the desired position or to the correct 3D Model eyepoint of 8cm as well. Take care, Tim

Its not engine noise. Its ECS, and yes, its accurate. Engines are not heard in the cockpit by aircrew IRL. Nor is AB. You go off the the EMD and throttle position.

I would really like to see options included to limit the throttle range to mil power only except while holding a button, as the F18 and F16 modules do - this makes it much more akin to having physical detents to cross for those of us without those on our throttles.

I've incorporated the F-15E Strike Eagle to my two Red Flag missions. #1 is an air to ground focused mission, while #2 is focused on air to air. You can download them at the links below: RED FLAG MISSION 1 - https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3331604/ RED FLAG MISSION 2 - https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3331605/ Hope you enjoy them!

I see the F-15E has landed, worse - without the promised announcement that we will know when EA will be released (of course it was stated that the price would be increased upon release). The situation is strange and inconsistent with what was before that there will be a release date. It's not about whether it's 30 or 50 or 20%, still 20% is a good opportunity to enjoy such an advanced bird , but the approach to this is very strange and not cool that it happens by surprise and without official notice, even 1 day before. In this respect, these are not e-market standards.

**** REQUIRES THE NTTR MAP, DCS F-15E MODULE AND RUNNING OPEN BETA 2.8.6.41363 OR LATER **** DOWNLOAD LINK: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3331602/ HAVE DRILL and HAVE DOUGHNUT was a program in the late 1960’s in which the United States obtained Soviet built MiGs and flew test missions with them from the Groom Lake test site. The goal was to explore the capabilities of the Soviet jets, and to develop tactics and procedures to counter them effectively in combat. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAVE_DRILL or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Have_Doughnut for background information) There are two versions of this mission, once having the player aircraft at the F-16C Viper, the other with the F/A-18C Hornet. Both versions work identically. NOTE: When referencing radios, UHF (Uniform) radio refers to COMM1 and VHF (Victor) refers to COMM2. My goal in making this mission was to imagine a HAVE DOUGHNUT type program, but using modern Russian and American jets. While I’m sure there have been actual programs that evaluated more modern Russian aircraft at Groom Lake, these efforts remain classified to this day. However, there have been several photographs of Russian built aircraft over the deserts of Nevada in modern times, as you can find here: https://www.lazygranch.com/groom_lake_birds.html. Below is a list of things you will need to know and/or perform in order for this mission to work successfully. COMMUNICATIONS / RADIOS I’ve tried to make this mission feature realistic communication calls and procedures. To that end, realistic comms forced on in this mission, and it will require you to tune your specific radios to specific channels or frequencies as required. For example, at the mission start, once your engine is running you will be prompted to contact your flight lead on AUX channel 16. You will need to switch your AUX radio to preset 16, and once you do, the next radio call will play. Each time you are required to change your radio channel, a text box will be visible in the top right of the screen. This message will remain on screen until you tune the correct radio to the correct channel/frequency. Once you do, the next voice over / radio transmission will play and the mission will continue. Do not forget to MONITOR GUARD! FLYING THE MISSION You are flying as the number 2 in a flight which consists of your lead, SOUND 1 (Russian Jet). Your callsign is SOUND 2. Once you check in with your lead on the ground, you will be prompted to switch your UHF radio to GROUND. Once that happens, you lead aircraft will start its engines and taxi out about 40 seconds later. Your lead aircraft will taxi fairly quickly to runway 14, so make sure to keep up. Approaching the runway, you will be prompted to switch to tower frequency. Make sure you do this prior to lead taking the runway. As your flight lead takes position on the runway, you should do the same. Try for a formation takeoff if you’d like, otherwise follow your lead’s takeoff roll as soon as possible. Once airborne, maintain formation with your leader. They will lead you to waypoint 1 (REGEN EAST), where you will orbit, awaiting your flight lead to reach waypoint 2 (REGEN WEST). One your lead is at REGEN WEST AND you are overhead waypoint 1 (REGEN EAST) the fight will commence. Do not shoot until both aircraft arrive at the merge. You must pass within 6000ft of each other before the fight starts. Failure to get within 6000ft of the opponent will break the mission, so make sure you pass close. Once you merge, you are clear to fight the opponent. You will actually fire your AIM-9 or gun, but any fire will not damage any aircraft (it’s simulated, after all). The script is developed by one posted by GRIMES in the Eagle Dynamics Forums: https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/english/dcs-worldtopics/mission-editor-discussion-and-questions/143409-training-sams-bygrimes?p=3579442#post3579442 Once a hit is registered on any aircraft, there will be a knock it off call and both aircraft will return to their respective REGEN points, SOUND 1 to waypoint 2, SOUND 2 (player) to waypoint 1. You will fight a total of four (4) fights and then return to base. On approach to runway 14, you will the overhead break and land. One last thing: There are elements of randomization incorporated into this mission. Be prepared to deviate from the flight plan as necessary. ENJOY!

Sorry @currenthill entirely my bad... I did not properly refreshed the mods with OvGME... everything is fine !

Stop making things up. To clarify that: SVKSniper has joined us with his expertise to help make the Tornado the best Tornado possible. He is a very skilled 3D Artist and we are happy to have him with us. The SU-22M4 is however still SVKSniper's project, not ours. If we can support him with FREE resources and/or contacts we will, but it is still his baby and he will continue working on it. I hope this clears the air a little bit on the relationship between SKV and AviaStorm.

Strange, I run the latest OB version and I don't have this error.

You are of course free to build a series of quick, easy-to-digest, to-the-point and also entertaining tutorial missions that cover basically every single eventuality and that always react to players doing the exact opposite of what they were told, always getting back to the current learning objective. I assume less than halfway through building a single mission, you decide no amount of coffee can get you through that process without losing your sanity, and instead you either ignore players doing it wrong, or you take the quick and easy solution of having them restart a mission that only takes a few minutes anyway - but feel free to prove me wrong.

It will depend on data gathering from this recent open beta patch and if we need to patch more to fix crash issues or not. No timescale currently but hopefully not to long.

DCS Friday Newsletter. Official Screenshots.

With all due respect, do your google search well. This value corresponds to the government dollar for industrial and livestock exports. The value of the dollar for purchases with a credit card (official) is approximately 497, maybe in the afternoon it will be 480. I'm sorry if I live in a country with serious economic problems. I just asked a simple question about something that had never happened on Steam.

Here is my first cut of the ExportScript file. I've just taken the Clickable Data items so far. If no one beats me to it I'll look into the lights/lamps/gauges etc. early next week. F-15ESE.lua

Thank you Razbam, very nice 50th birthday present for me

Well we wont know until it is actually released or they actually give a "REAL" update on where it stands.....They are either going to release it in a short order way once they finally do a massive update or they are really so far behind on it that it is still more than a year out for a release and they figure its best to just not say anything to keep the anger that would for sure be sent their way if they came out and said it was no where near a state to really be released any time soon. Personally I think they have done a very poor job managing the release . But once they do release it everyone including me will forget all this .

That would deviate from realism, which realism is the goal here. So no.

With the release of the F-15E module, I am now going to be focusing on re-building the F-15EX mod using the Razbam F-15E model as a base. I hope to have the new EX ready to drop when my YouTube channel hits 2,000 subscribers (I'm at 1,980 at the time of writing this post). In the meantime I can release the latest build of the F-15EX mod as it currently stands, complete with AIM-120D capability and the re-worked pylons, but it is WIP so there will be a few minor issues with the loadouts. @Geschirre and @Awacs_bandog and anyone else who might be interested, feel free to do some F-15EX liveries on the new model!

We have already requested it, admin will add it when possible thanks

I'm gonna try to work on it tonight after work.

Store page has everything you need to know about which version to use https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/f-15e/ DCS: F-15E by RAZBAM Early access (What is DCS World Early Access?) Requires DCS World version 2.8.6 or above! Current version numbers Latest stable version is 2.8.4.39731 Current openbeta is 2.8.6.41363

Нет, цель хватать не обязательно. Помести курсор на любом участке экрана рлс, нажми тдс, выбери нужный тебе режим TWS. Если курсор поместить на цели - конечно ты ее захватишь, но можно ведь и не на цели его помещать

New modules are usually donated from the ssa community to the software creators

A me sembra tutto allineato alla complessità della piattaforma (e del modulo stesso): ci sono moduli usciti da anni che periodicamente hanno changelogs pieni di bugfix, correzioni varie, nuove implementazioni, ecc... , ergo non si capisce dove stia il problema. Pochissimi post fa accusavi RAZBAM di tirarla troppo x le lunghe, ora che il modulo è disponibile non va bene cmq perché, a tuo dire, sarebbe una pre-Alpha (senza contare quando sostenevi che RB non sarebbe stata proprio capace di sviluppare il modulo in oggetto). Va bene che è facile (e anche legittimo, x carità) dire la propria da dietro un monitor ma sostenere tutto e il suo contrario è un po' troppo (anche x te). Bye Phant

The short answer to the OP as to why so much negativity? Because, we are by nature, grognards, "grumblers" , Not necessarily a bad thing, it's what we do. There are some misconceptions though. The Phantom was not first announced in 2022. It was FIRST announced somewhere around 2017 by Belsimtek. There were a couple of development shots and then stone dead silence. ED did everything they could to hide it except say it was vaporware. Gradually it was grudgingly leaked that it was shelved for maybe a later time. So it was, in reality, vaporware. Mind you, we got all the zot and lazer fighters afterwards, but the big open sore in ED was the shutdown of the Rhino for...the Christen Eagle, the I-16 and the Yak-52 etc. It's left a bad taste and, until it is actually on my hard drive, I have little confidence that it will be actually on delivered. So, we grumble. Then Heatblur announces they were picking up the mantle and...more silence. Not debating the devs philosophy, but, we've been here before. I take each reveal with a grain of salt. I NEVER believed a 2022 release date, and with the interminable delays of Razbam's super premium zot bot, the Strike Eagle, I can't help but think that ED will delay the release of the Phantom until 4-6 months after the SE because, truth is, some of us only have so much money to spend (ED stridently denies it). So I am HOPING to see a first half 2024 release of the Phantom. I have been playing this family of sims since the original "Flanker" was first introduced in 1995 by SSI. I am old and have been waiting for the natural evolution of the Flanker family to include the mighty Phantom ever since LOMAC. Why they couldn't toss in a Flaming Cliffs version of the Phantom years ago is beyond me, so I grumble. I grumble because as my time grows shorter and the delays grow longer, my dream of flying the Phantom in my living room before I go west just gets farther and farther away. Since I am actually OLDER than the Phantom, and it was my first and most enduring love, I declare that I have a right (maybe even duty) to grumble.

Я пробовал прошлые, поэтому ф15 не купил=D

Человека можно поблагодарить "лайком" справа внизу. Насчет выхода обновлений для модуля надо иметь в виду, что для F-16 подвесной контейнер Sniper ожидается уже четвертый год, обещанные ассеты для Виггена - шестой год. Так что и это надо учитывать, чтобы потом не пригорало. Пока F-15E - это аналог F-16 с увеличенными баками и полезной нагрузкой, что, впрочем, в симуляторе легко нивелировать, включив бесконечные топливо и боеприпасы.

Переводы с синхронным текстом костыль, который "прокатывает" с миссиями обучения, когда есть время внимательно прочитать и выполнить. В целом по переводу есть несколько моментов. Во первых, собственно перевод. Разные тексты переводятся по разному. Иногда, автор использует общую лексику (с этим проблем нет), некоторые специальную (с этим сложнее, но стандартная летная фразеология это не очень сложно), но некоторые используют жаргонизмы (тут даже специальные словари )) особых выражений, не всегда в тему. ( ). М... еще момент. Что бы грамотно перевести миссию, приходится её "разбирать" построчно. И летать потом, самому её не интересно. Нет интриги, все знаешь. ) Иногда миссия написана не стандартными средствами редактора. а творчески )). Тут без согласия с автором, никак. И в целом, сурьезные авторы просят гарантию того, что при переводе не будет искажен смысл.. Авторские права, особенно если рассматривать платные кампании. Согласие автора + администрации DCS. И последнее. Миссии в кампании содержат тысячи сообщений, для создания фона задачи, который позволяет ощутить себя в реальном боевом вылете. Озвучка русских текстов. Делали 3-х голосую озвучку бесплатной официальной кампании модуля "Газель". Но это делали толпой, а потом в коопе летали ). Атмосферрно.... Но DCS, он не статичен. Постоянно надо поддерживать работоспособность сделанного. И да, к слову, уметь "слышать" радиообмен, это одна из важных составных частей обучения военного летчика в реале. Просто в миссиях обучении внимательно слушайте английскую речь, Вам важно научиться понимать о чем говорят не по словам, а в целом, уловить смысл фразы по контексту действия. И запомнить фразу, а не слово. Говорить не научитесь, тут надо учить слова и т.д., а понимать , вполне реально. Погружение в языковую среду. О хорошем. Пишите в личку, что нибудь придумаем. Вайпер, он же Сокол ), это то, что является моим хобби в DCS. Появилось время и возможность, сейчас редактирую РЛЭ, с учетом крайних изменений в модуле. Почти год, не корректировал, к концу месяца, возможно закончу. Обычный путь вирпила : обучение - миссии - кампании - кооп(ы) ПВЕ - кооп(ы) ПВП - онлайн одинокого волка .... ) Удачи в небе ДКС!!

And we are incredible happy to have you with us.

The pilot is the same,you can see it here: As for the animation of external gauges, I think it will work. And on the cornering speed issue, it's early days yet, but the manual describes everything, so I'll do something about it. I'm also slowly working on both the external model improvements, and the cockpit animations are also in progress. And finally, let me give you one small (but of great importance to me) surprise. I have joined team AviaStorm! Keep your fingers crossed and stay tuned for news!

Hello friends. I have very long DCS startup times with the newest 2.8.6.41393 OpenBeta Update. I can perfectly replicate the issue by rolling back and forth between the last two updates - I measured the time from clicking the shortcut until the main-menu is fully loaded after second launch (DCS MT, VR and no-VR have the same loading times) - shaders folders were already re-established: DCS 2.8.6.41066 Open Beta MT: 35 seconds average (the auth-verification takes alone around 10 seconds) DCS 2.8.6.41363 Open Beta MT: 120 seconds on average (the auth-verification takes alone around 40 seconds) I already did slow repair with extra file inspection and deleted the SavedGames/DCS folder after switching between updates. Issue persists. Something is clearly off with the newest 2.8.6.41393 OpenBeta. Anyone else?

Wow, thanks a lot, animations and look of the pilot is S - U - P - E - R - B ! Undoubtedly, this is the best mapped body in VR in DCS. Congratulations. It was worth waiting .

The HUD as SOI is the last part of this training!

The F-4 and Cobra were shelved when BST was rolled into Eagle Dynamics. The conflicts with current ED products made their schedule unknown. HB stepped forward and an agreement was struck for them to take over the F-4. The use of the term vaporware doesn't make sense as it's in active development now, it was not back then. I can understand the frustration when waiting for your favourite aircraft but things take time. The Christen Eagle and I-16 were not ED products and had no impact on the Phantom at all, the Yak-52 as well would not have impacted the F-4, especially considering the fact that the Yak-52 was a professional product that was allowed to be moved to DCS based on the agreement with the customer wanting it. As for delays, they are a necessary evil in the development of these aircraft as they move through different phases of development. We do not delay products, we will schedule things to release when it's the best time but the key point in any release is the module's readiness, and this is dependent on the team working on it. The term delay is deceiving in most cases when in fact it is the readiness of the module that determines the release. The same goes with the F-4, it will be very popular and we want it in everyone's hands as soon as possible, that said it has to be ready. We have no intentions of releasing any more "Flaming Cliffs" level aircraft for DCS, maybe when MAC comes we will see these types of releases but for DCS we set the bar and want to continue to raise it. You are right, you have every right to grumble, but I wanted to make some points a little more clear. Thanks.

I was just about to work on this, thank you I am going to create a full cockpit F15E, can work together if you want

Changes/bugs are not based on ‘I think’. Also, designations are not done on ‘pressing’ the TDC as noted above. That only commands raster.

Maybe the best IRL demonstration, but only one guy in the cockpit and of course - no weapons loadout. Can't tell how much fuel... it's hard to see. Use the mouse to look around, it's a 360° video. You can clearly see the moment where he tries to find the trim position for lift off (left and aft) and does force trim to center the cyclic to that position. Also very good to see is pedal input and cyclic movements needed to have stable behaviour while hovering and maneuvering near the ground.

On May 18th 2023, your patch disabled the Mod Spotting fix. We were informed that a fix was already in test. This is the second patch release since then. Do we have a realistic ETA of when this will be out? Can anyone just give us a straight answer? Don't get me wrong love all the fixes you have made. But flying WWII mostly, the ability to spot an actual plane would be helpful in this flight sim. I would have thought somewhat a priority. Especially with a New WWII map upgrade like Normandy 2. I will stop at this, as I do not want to be punished again.