Leaderboard

DShK HMG 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Miltech-5 / PD (Bo-105).

Presents! Up-Date 24/9/2023 By request. A Weapon add on. A Victory Flag! Uses arg 325 This makes it comparable with any jet. Props are not yet supported. Inside the folder, you will find, The max and edm, 2017 The max to edit or modify as you see fit. I share it freely. The textures used. A folder with other flags which need to be resized and converted to dds. A png for the image GUI folder. A lua declaring the flag as a "pod" A example pylon code line showing its use. Please note, after adding the edm, and textures, and declaring them in your entry lua, You must set the position of the flag. This is done int the code line for the pylon, the position code, attach_point_position F/B, U/D. L/R both positive or negative. It may take a few tries to get it correct for each qaircraft. May be positioned anywhere on the aircraft. Will stay there while in flight! No warranty on shredded flags! Good luck! https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/e2qh1qe0x7tb24jnteku2/victory_flag.rar?rlkey=bj1madzgdflss94iiakd3vbyb&dl=0 Up-date 27/8/2023 Version 1.04 New flags added. New animation added. All the originals have been left in the folders and are available. Try the new ones! With Thanks to Currenthill for the advise! https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qbw4adg4k2mcdp1ijus0z/Flagpole-Mod-V-1.0.4.zip?rlkey=lhrsw5yp31xdqxi25s0q3zwml&dl=0 The Flag Pole Add On for All Nations Herein is a add on which gives you the ability to place a waving flag anywhere on the map you wish. There are found under air defense. I have included a few samples for you to check out. Inside the livery folder, There is another folder with additional textures for making more liveries. Follow the examples included to add your own. There are four versions to choose from. Two full Flag poles with Flags waving at the top, One approximately 40 meters and one 20 meters. There are also tho Half mast versions, of the same sizes. All use the same liveries. The animation, although not perfect, is a close approximation of a waving flag. If I improve this, new edms will be added in a later up-date. Saved Games install location. OvGME ready. If not a Mod Manager user, work down to the root folder, and drop this folder into the saved games location. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Honor of The Fourth of July! And to all nations displaying their flags with pride! One quick note, If the animation arg in any ship for a radar rotation is changed to arg 11, These may then be place upon the deck, as a static vehicle, and you now have the flag of your choice, anywhere you like, on the ship! I hope you enjoy them! https://www.dropbox.com/s/scfkzby98eqpenc/Flagpole Mod V 1.0.0.zip?dl=0 If you create any new liveries, Please share them here for all to enjoy. Cheers!

you realize it is early access right? it was released 12 days ago. just like every other module that has been in early access, it will improve over time. i find it gratifying to just try what is available now. and to fly it at 200 ft at 750 knots.

If you can not share your source and data I suggest you move on. It will be a pointless exercise to go back and forth here, you have given your feedback and the team have listened.

@Phantom_Mark good to know! I hope you find it works well with the new stick too and can report back your impressions. @Thinder I reply to you just to clarify a couple of things but I don't get the impression that your criticism is intended to be constructive. Developing a module for DCS is a massive undertaking, teams are generally rather small and sometimes some things have to be prioritised over others, so sometimes things have to be adjusted after release, that is what EA is for. For us, release was a point in which the module was ready enough for it to be an enjoyable experience for the users and for them to provide valuable insight into bugs, useful features... We have used the time since release to continue working with our SMEs feedback and with the customer's feedback to solve any possible problems, bugs, things that didn't work, or that we had missed or had been broken during development (also happens). Regarding the anonimity of your sources. It's understandable that you want to protect their identities but again, not useful for us if we don't get more precise feedback, if we can't contrast their feedback to that of our current SMEs... If any of them wants to contact us instead of you giving their details, we're also happy doing it in this way. Finally regarding the wing loading discussion. I just don't get your point... I said in certain regimes and fuel configurations, not everywhere all the time. I included the disclaimer that my knowledge of the performance of the other aircraft is incomplete. And the MiG 21 has 23 m^2 of wing surface and comparable thrust so I don't know why the wing surface of the Mirage III or the Mirage 2000 would matter.

The Fleet of the USSR. We want a strong opponent. For a full-fledged aircraft carrier connection of the USSR, a destroyer of the project 956 "Modern" is needed. This is an anti-ship and anti-aircraft defense ship.

I find it very hard to fly something else now that I have the F-15E. Even the mighty Tomcat sits in the hangar now. I am having so much fun with this, and the cockpit feels amazing in VR. As someone else already stated in another post, think of the F-15E as being in an early '90s state at the moment. You can do Desert Storm-era missions just fine with the current state of the module I hope the priority bugfixes are the gun pipper and the inconsistent accuracy of AUTO-bombing. Other than that, the state of the module is very very very good in my opinion!

An alternate perspective would be: - The E has three MFDs, one of which has a useful moving map - I’ve yet to experience a CTD despite continuous use of the HRM mapping mode. Lucky I guess. - The E has the AMRAAM. - The E has a NAVFLIR that displays on the HUD. - The E has a fairly reliable and sophisticated IFF, along with NCTR.

Full Fidelity isn’t holding back DCS. Full Fidelity is DCS. MAC is going to be a separate game from what I understand so it has little to do with DCS except as a starter sim.

Steregouchtchi Projet 20380 and French frigate Forbin please Thanks !

Now Available. Download link in 1st post. AI only RQ-4 Global Hawk / MQ-4C Triton asset mod The RQ-4 Global Hawk is a high-altitude, long-endurance, remotely piloted aircraft with an integrated sensor suite that provides global all-weather, day or night intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capability. Global Hawk's mission is to provide a broad spectrum of ISR collection capability to support joint combatant forces in worldwide peacetime, contingency and wartime operations. The Global Hawk provides persistent near-real-time coverage using imagery intelligence (IMINT), signals intelligence (SIGINT) and moving target indicator (MTI) sensors. ------- included liveries/variants: - USA 092038 (default) - USA 168461 (MQ-4C) - NATO SA-0015 (Blk 40) - AUS RAAF 9SQ A57-001 -------- Changelog: v1.0.0704: 1st Release -------- Notes: The plane will be alphabetically listed with the C's (Cowboy's Livery Pack RQ-4 Global Hawk). As always, this is my artistic representation based on photos of the actual aircraft / my modeling skills, and not necessarily 100% accurate. ============== USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Installation: unzip the files and copy the entire contents of the 'Mods' folder in the zip file to your DCS user files folder, example: C:\Users\[YOURNAME]\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\ (You should end up with a "CLP_RQ4_GLOBALHAWK" folder under Mods/aircraft, example: "C:\Users\[YOURNAME]\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Mods\aircraft\CLP_RQ4_GLOBALHAWK\") ===== To UNINSTALL: simply delete the "CLP_RQ4_GLOBALHAWK" folder from the above location (Do NOT delete the entire 'Mods' folder as this will remove any other mods you may have installed) ===============

Admiral thanks so much for your selfless dedication to bringing us all these great ship mods from your one man shipyard - very much appreciated. Hope you are feeling better. Enoy & DJReonic, you can add your own tags / naming convention by editing this line in the lua file GT.DisplayName = _(" ") The text between the brackets & quotations _(" ") is what is displayed in the mission editor & in game - if you use labels (FULL) For example, with Admiral's latest USS Lewis Puller ESB-3 mod, the description is GT.DisplayName = _("USS_Lewis_Puller ESB-3"), you can edit this to what you want e.g. _("[ADM] USS_Lewis_Puller ESB-3") Just edit the text within the quotations " ", I've provided the whole text, just for context. Where to find lua? Usually found in the main folder or Database sub folder & has the file extension .lua File is normally named for the mod or close, I wouldn't touch the other files - if there are any (e.g. weapons etc.) For the USS Lewis Puller ESB-3 mod the ship's lua is actually within a sub folder of the Database folder called Navy, named USS_Lewis_Puller ESB-3.lua How to edit lua? Maybe create a copy of lua, before you edit - just in case. Can open with any text editor (Notepad or Notepad++) Use "Find" function to search for GT.DisplayName = Edit name, as per above & save. Load mod & enjoy. Sample of line in USS_Lewis_Puller ESB-3.lua to edit (highlighted blue) Personally I set up naming structure as Nation / Ship Class / Description / Author e.g. _("USS ESB-3 Lewis Puller [Admiral]") , but that's because I've edited all mods (>500!) & DCS descriptions, so they stack according to my preference in the mission builder & Encyclopedia. Please don't worry - I am seeking help for this affliction But does create order in the Mission Editor & Encyclopedia, and once you start you can't stop! Apologies for long explanation, but I am an Idiot & appreciate the "Idiots guide" approach to learning things for myself - but hope it helps

No pretty pictures for you all today I'm afraid, but perhaps something approximating a roadmap. I am currently less than three weeks away from the final hand-in for my dissertation and so my entire focus is on the degree at the moment, and will be until the end of the month. I then intend to take a couple of weeks holiday, which after six years of university through pandemics and other challenges, I think I've earned. When I come back, some point in mid-August, I'm going to take a review on the 3D model I've built so far and see how I feel about it, as keen as I am to get the 1.0 AI Tanker version released ASAP, if the 3D work is going to need a complete overhaul anyway before the 2.0 flyable release, I might as well do it this summer whilst I have time between Uni and entering industry. Additionally, when I return from my summer break I'll hopefully have some help to make the 3D work go faster, and although I won't put dates on anything yet in terms of when I think releases will happen, systems engineering is my dissertation, so hopefully that and the flight modelling will go significantly faster! I would like to thank everyone for their interest already, what started as me being very bored in January and buying some flight manuals online has now lead to a bunch of strangers on the internet actually taking interest in something I'm doing! Jim - Spearfish 1-2

It isn’t, that’s why I have him on ignore since long ago … I wouldn’t waste time debating with him.

Hey Admiral, on my wishlist for some time now : - the italo-french destroyer design Andrea Doria (French Chevaler Paul and Forbin). All their radars and armement (main guns, Exocet, Aster 30 missiles, etc) already exist in various DCS Mods, including yours. Screenshots below, the Forbin along the brand new oiler Jacques Chevalier (also an italo-french design). Thanks for your superb Mods, Admiral !

One little update, I got a pile of knobs and things printed out, and decided to give a shot at printing whole panels on my printer. Laser-cut acrylic is still going to be more accurate, and I might redo these later if I get the option, but for now I decided to run a couple of trials. Results aren't too bad, but I don't know whether the back panels will survive drilling for mounting yet. Just the nature of printing them, the filament tends to shred. I can probably reprint the backplates with holes pre-cut, but I might need a new print bed surface before I do it, since it's getting difficult to keep big flat panels stuck down, and I'm not sure the biggest panels will work.

INST mode is just a one press, brings up the HSI and ADI immediately button, otherwise there is no real difference between INST and NAV.

Yep I know that they don't use the exact same names or brands, you're right, but I don't think it's a trade mark. Let me tell you: Adana = a city name of Turkey. Şehir = "city" Hastanesi = "Hospital" It means "Adana City Hospital". So, we see it as "Adana Hity Cospital". If they do want to change something, they may not use the city name there; just "Şehir Hastanesi", that's it. Whatever. Not big deal, just wanted to say that it looks weird for local people.

Hey folks! The SE is out, the F-4 looms just beyond the horizon. The long watch is almost over… Possibly. For this reason, I wanted to get a bit more familiar with the Phantom II, and I started with taking a look at the cockpits. The DCS F-4E is not out yet, the old screenshots from Belsimtek are not great, so I have found an alternative, and put together a quick video. Moving the first steps with a new aeroplane is never easy, especially if the game does not match either. I have used MilViz's F-4 for FSX, and this seems to be a DVST Phantom, whereas I am looking forward to the later upgrades, to fit in the best period DCS can imo replicate (late 70s, early 80s). Nevertheless, the difference should not be huge, and this is a good means of familiarising with the cockpit. I am sure there are errors in the video, as I am brand new to the Phantom and I have spent only a dozen hours studying the documentation. So, if you have observations, please do share them, and I will put the corrections in the comments. Thanks! UPDATE 10/07/2023: GUNS & SLATS The F-4E featured two peculiar upgrades that separate it from the predecessors and its Navy brothers: the presence of an internal gun, and the nre wing supporting leading-edge slats. UPDATE 14/07/2023: AIR-TO-AIR WEAPONS EMPLOYMENT An overview of the basic avionics and instrumentation required to employ AIM-7 Sparrow, AIM-9 Sidewinder and the M61A1 20mm Vulcan. UPDATE 23/07/2023: RADAR BASICS & CONTROLS The details of the Radar Set Control Panel, and the purpose of the instruments here installed. UPDATE 03/08/2023: RADAR QUIRKS & FEATURES A discussion about some cool features of the radar and avionics, such as the nutating antenna pattern, or the Computer Automatic Acquisition mode. UPDATE 17/08/2023: AIR-TO-AIR INTERCEPTS - THEORY A two-parts refresher on the basic concepts useful to intercept and engage a target with the F-4E Phantom II. This first video covers the theory. UPDATE 29/08/2023: AIR-TO-AIR INTERCEPTS - PRACTICE The second part of the Air-to-Air Intercepts sees some practical examples using the F-14's DDD B-Scope in Pulse mode.

Being able to set up which MFD pages appear when toggling to each Master Mode is awesome, but when you start in the air a lot it's a bit of a pain to have to set them up every single time. Could we have some defaults built into air-start A/C please, or perhaps be able to set them up in the Specials menu?

$1.50 for early access hype. $2.00 for signed pictures. The Only Fans account is a steal at $5.95 a month, buy 12 months get one free, and this includes bare metal photographs and personalized responses to comments.

This guy made a airquake PvP server with 60 tik tok users battling to infinity and now thinks everyone thinks like he does, he is a good video maker that's for sure. But he is forgetting not everyone wants a balanced PvP game, there are other games that go for that. I think that many many people fly in DCS cause of high fidelity of those FF planes and we love it. I really enjoy just taking off with full preparation from Nellis and going for a course around Nevada fly to tanker and drop few bombs and return to base, with as much procedure following as I can and know how to do. I don't need adversary balanced for this. And If I encounter adversaries I don't expect them to be on pair with my jet, they have their advantage and I have mine and I try to use my advantage as best as I can. In real world there is never a fair fight and that's what DCS simulates. I love to loiter in the air coordinate with and wait for SEAD/DEAD flight to do its job so I can run in drop 2 JDAMS on some bunker that is my target. sometimes it will take an hour, in the meantime I'll watch the air battle on my HSD or SA page and cheer when red contact fades from being shot down by our escort. Or I'll do the SEAD/DEAD job while other flights prepare to run in. I love modern jets cause of lots of systems I can fiddle with inside them, and I'm happy with every new update to them. We all know documentation is hard to come by, and that module development takes a lot of time and we are fine with it. That's what I love about DCS, and that is why I'm here and I'm sure many others are too.

That exactly is the difference, the Razbam Devs do care...

Thanks, Guys I appreciate the input not only on the models to create but just general Input. In my future mods, I will add the Prefix in the front if that makes it easier for you. Thanks, ggrewe, I appreciate that. Seems you have been around a while and understand DCS file lingo. Good Information. I just normally create the mod names based on the old fashion way. I have never really seen something in writing about how they should be named but I can implement the new naming convention as long as no one gets confused with it. One thing I am trying to do is improve on the creation of the model making. Your feedback helps greatly because it gives me an idea of what to improve on and I thank you all for that. So the Adams Class destroyer still has a good lead with Forbin Class Frigate coming up the rear.

Further, if you want to avoid the clutter on the F10 Map when running your (complex) missions, you can also add (after the DispalyName line, or edit if it already exists) the line : DisplayNameShort= _("USS Lewis Puller ESB-3 "), and modify it to your taste , for example : DisplayNameShort = _("L. Puller"). You will thus avoid overlapping labels for your armada. It's that simple.... Enjoy !...

The weapons are usable, only the Mistral is faulty, but this is not Polychop's fault. FM is a thousand times better than the old one, I really like flying with the new Gazella! But.. the FM is still WIP - don't forget that.

When I made more space on my hard drive, the standalone version copied the Steam files instead of downloading them, which is what I expected. Thank you very much DCS

No, this is not constructive criticism. According to these people, Viggen should be the best dogfighter in history. And the B-2... When you guys get F-4, you're in for a bitter surprise. You'll see, I can't wait to read complaints.

CVN-80 "teaser" video. Hello all, Good and bad news regarding the Ford Class Carrier Mod. Bad news. Texture updates and a few other issues remain unfixed. This due to issues with the original model and new issues updating the model for player aircraft to work correctly. Good news. A new model is in the works and we believe we have fixes for the remaining issues that will be corrected with the new model. I will be posting a Beta "early access" version July 5-6th using the current model with what are mostly visual errors that do not really effect operations but are clearly not right. For example, static deck personnel/objects will spawn and "float" a few inched above the deck. A light or 2 may be on during the day and/or float next to the ship. And I think I still need to fix a backwards flag or 3 All weapons are working and AI fight deck operations work well with F-18C lot 20 F-18E/F/G Super bug and VSNF-35C. (24 planes take off-16 landing) Most carrier aircraft mods should work but maybe not at the full 24/16. Player take offs and landing do work but minor damage is caused to the ship (6-18%). I do have a working player take off-landing version but the static object "deck height bug" is much more noticeable. I will make that version available by request as there has been very little player aircraft testing at this point. So to sum it up the first release will be meant for AI use only and limited player aircraft operation. Many thanks to all for the interest and support. NOTE, Video is a "story board" pre production video for CVN-80. I hope to do one for each ship in the class and this one will be redone when the new model is ready. Hope you enjoy

B-17 Mk.III BU-E KJ177/G 'Take It Easy' 214 Sqn RAF (it has roughmaterial inside just in case.) About - https://www.214squadron.org.uk/Personnel/Personnel_W.htm#59 There is a clean version in the file. - https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3331831/ I just completed this livery with the information I could find. If there is a mistake, please do not hesitate to say it, it can be corrected.

No, and no. In essence the Mach 5 claim was not accurate to any actual demonstrated and documented performance, in reality you're looking at more like low Mach 4s when firing from high altitude/speed and at ranges where the missile can loft properly. NASA never actually tested/fired the Phoenix in the hypersonic proof of concept presentation. DCS missile behavior is still very problematic and lofting can't be adjusted to more specifically match what the Phoenix attempts to do. But in at least some of the few documented shots with enough data available, the DCS Phoenix's ballistic very closely matched those shots. The issues with notching and inefficient lofting profiles are squarely on the ED missile model and HB has no way to further adjust specifics of lofting angles nor seeker performance.

Agreed. From the Air Quakers to complete idiocy such as landing on the Supercarriers without proper comms or, worse, with non CV jets...some IDIOT landed a Strike Eagle on a carrier recreantly. I have 2 issues with that behavior: it's an affront to reality and, also, that jet cant use the catapult andso the only way back off is maybe a complete take off run from the ramp forward andso endangering everyone else on the deck. I desperately want to gun those people. There are few servers in which such stupidity is forbidden and bannable (as it should be).

Could you be more specific, like what angle of AoA they said, what the weight of the aircraft was and what flight regimes? And with a cited primary sources to back it up? If that is not possible for privacy reasons, let the pilots try the DCS module and contact Aerges themselves with what parts are wrong. Vague statements like "The flight model is wrong, ask 'people' " is wasting everybody's time.

I will ask the team but can make no promises. thanks

Radiocheck... Hi fighters! For a long time we did not get in touch, but all this time the work did not stop. Improving, optimizing, adding, introducing something new - everything we worked on was connected with these words. Today we will show new night lighting and some hangars. The update includes many minor improvements - we made sure that the map is relevant and fresh. So what's most interesting: New lighting technology added. Added right-hand traffic in Cyprus. Map description updated. Added kneeboard (yeah, this fix has long been waiting in the wings) Mission generator updated. Added helicopter landing sites on GUI map. Optimized trees in forest. Simplified trees collisions. Optimized and improved building models. Added objects at road and railroad crossings. Two types of gas stations have been added. Two types of road-side cafes added. Improved cars. Added right-hand drive vehicles. Improved city and field assets. Improved road and railroad assemblies.

I second this. With the impending F-4E, plus just the general trend toward interest in the 1960s-1970s Cold War, having the pride of the Soviet surface fleet during the 1960s - 1970s would fill a solid need. Once the Kola Peninsula map drops, doubly so (Northern Fleet).

I kinda get the tags thing but feel it's not important to all, My preference if there were tags would be to group it by nation like already done with the USS in front would be the most logical approach after all if your building a fleet your generally going for the same nation anyway, obviously doesn't account for multinational fleets but that then comes down to more ED not setting editor to be able to place multiple nations in the same group. Yeah deffo need more Russian ships i want to fly over Russian fleets as much as i do American British Japanese Chinese and Korean

Thank You very much, I hope You can find more inspiration for more future AI mods

Apart from the fact that weapon systems are a bit more complicated to integrate than bolting the missile to the plane, there's the whole other issue of training and TTP. Successfully performing a SEAD mission is a bit more complicated than pointing a HARM in the right direction and pressing a button. If F-15E crews never trained on the SEAD mission, and the USAF still had operational F-16C squadrons that specialize in that mission, why would they ever bother strapping a HARM to a Strike Eagle? Let the Viper drivers do what they've trained for, while the Strike Eagle pilots focus on the missions they train for. The idea that every plane and every pilot must be able to do every mission is very much a DCSism and is not how real life works, except sorta with the Hornet, as it's often the only strike fighter in a carrier group.

would it be possible to add russian and us subs with kalibr missiles for russian side and tomahawk missiles for us side? or would it be possible to retexture tu-95sm/tu-160 and add some more cruise missiles?

190 is still quite fast. Based on the rule of thumb I posted above, that indicates you are landing with roughly 18,000 lbs of fuel and ordnance. You may be on speed, but you are going far too fast to slow down effectively. Rule of thumb for airspeed that estimates on speed is 155 plus 2 knots for every thousand pounds of fuel and ordnance. So if you are at 190, thats 35 knots/2 = 17-18,000 lbs which would require roughly a 17-18,000 foot runway. You can be on speed and exceed the nose wheel gear limit (210 knots) if you try and land with 30,000 lbs of fuel on board. recommend shooting for something in the 160-170 knot region for on speed and it will be much more comfortable.

@Thinder You seem to have expert knowledge on all kinds of aircraft. So why, instead of putting the developers on public trial (disregarding the limitations they have to work around),... don't you offer them your help in a less public environment, where your sources and credentials may be openly discussed with them? The way you do it know just suggests attention craving..... Just an idea.

4-HARM F-16 was squadron-dependent. Some had aircraft with an additional plug in the wiring harness to allow data/video transfer for the inboard stations. Changing laser codes from the cockpit in the Hornet is a stop-gap until the codes can be set on the rearm panel (same could be said for the A-10).

1. Don't ever compare FMs to the AI, because they are not accurate at all, that MiG-19AI might outrate an F-16. They are UFOs as you said. 2. If you can't control your speed and you just get a "wet fart" out of it, maybe learn to fly it, and try again? (btw the MiG-19 is a very good rate fighter, it might outrate the F-1 for real, this does not depend on age, the MiG-17 and 15 will also outrate it for sure)

1) no, there is no E bracket, you just fly the digital readout 20-22 units of AOA. 2) The ILS needles are supposed to be directors in the F-15E not raw glideslope/localizer indications, this appears to be implemented incorrectly right now or WIP. The Raw Glideslope indications is the bracket that shows up on the left side of the HUD and the raw localizer indications is the HSI arrow that is displayed in the HUD.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-idNb_Ybtjc

@Harley Davidson do you have any hard evidence to support your claims? The FM has been validated against performance data and tested by multiple F1 pilots with thousands of hours on the real aircraft. That being said, the aircraft can outturn any of its contemporary counterparts in-game when flown to its strengths. It can carry a lot of fuel for its size but going into a dogfight with the tanks full is probably not the best idea. Its strengths are good energy retention and good acceleration at high speeds, so it likes to stay fast. Nevertheless, if you find yourself going slow, it's imperative to use combat flaps, otherwise the performance loss is very significant. Pitch sensitivity can also be an issue. The aircraft works better at lower AoA and when the pilot is gentle on the stick. Make sure you have the 'Emulation of effects of stick forces on aircraft behaviour' option selected in the special menu and tweak the sliders below it in case you use FFB. Otherwise also play with curves if needed. Also, all this applies to flying against a human in MP, the performance of the SFM of AI aircraft is always far better than the PFM of the one you are flying. Hopefully this will be fixed by the implementation by ED of what they call the GFM (check the most recent newsletter). Again, the module is in EA and the FM has been tweaked multiple times after the release but we're happy with how realistic it is now and we'd need more specific evidence than just saying 'it flies like a wet fart when you pull the stick', like a specific performance issue at a certain regime...

It really should be. ED makes the list in the first place, they have to update it as modules evolve, and the kneeboard isn't the most user friendly thing in the world anyway. Plus they ruined the much easier briefing screen by making it pause and still haven't reverted it or offered an option to revert the behavior.