Leaderboard

Greetings all! One of the biggest issues DCS has with the implementation of the SA-5 is the lack of possible search radars available to it resulting in it having much shorter range than it would in real life. @Recoil16 and I (almost entirely Recoil) sat down and hacked together an SA-5 Mod to utilize until ED adds the P-14 and PVR-13/PVR-17 height finding radars to the game and SA-5. The end result is an SA-5 with some teeth. As a test, I flew an F-16 at Mach 0.9, at 25k feet, on Syria, and was locked at 94miles and engaged at 80 miles. This is significantly better than the about 50 miles of the default SA-5 in the same conditions. Download at the GitHub Page: https://github.com/Recoil016/DCS-107th_SA-5 You'll be able to use the following Radars: -ST-68U Tin Shield (Default DCS) -P-19 Flat Face (Default DCS) -55G6 Nebo-U/Tall Rack (Default DCS, Added for those who don't want to use other mods) -P-37 Bar Lock (SAM Site Asset Pack/2SAP) -P-14 Tall King (P-14 Tall King Mod) **See Known Issues** Known Issues: -Comes up as an "Unknown" on RWR. Because of the way ED changed how RWR indications work, we cannot hijack the default SA-5's RWR indications like we could if it was an "older" SAM site like the SA-10. Therefore, on NATO RWR's, it will come up as a "U" for Unknown. -The P-14 Tall King Mod has an error in it's Sensor.lua which needs fixed in order to work. On their mod page (https://forum.dcs.world/topic/328269-p-14-tall-king-radar-v-10/#comment-5257238), at the bottom, you can see the fix. Easy enough! -You CANNOT mix the default SA-5 launchers or track radars with this mod and have them work. -Skynet Compatibility hasn't been tested. Install: Installs into your DCS Saved Game's Folder. File structure should allow for a direct drop into the Saved Game Folder or use of a mod manager. Bugs, etc: If you find any bugs, let us know here or on the GitHub and we'll try and work through them! Thanks!

Heavy nuclear industry from countries of the former USSR! A lot of work has been done and there is still a little bit left.

In the DCS F-16C we still cannot set burst altitude nor spin RPM for the CBU-87, unlike in real life where they are adjustable. "Fixed open height" is simply the altitude ED has chosen for the CBU-87 to burst at in DCS. The point is that the CBU-87 does not use the burst altitude settings with NOSE fuze set, it should dispense the bomblets immediately after release irregardless of burst altitude setting. It even says so in the DCS F-16 manual, so I don't know why this is marked as "correct-as-is"?

The only reasons I still have FC3 installed: No FF F-15C; No FF Mig-29; No FF Su-27. I do hope ED has more information to share regarding the Fulcrum, is it even going to happen.

The DCS Sea and Ocean Mine Add On A Add on created by Admiral189 And Hawkeye60 Using free models from Sketch Fab A saved games Install. Place bunched together or ships will try to avoid them! The collisions may not work. So destroying may not be a option, at this time. We will see about a fix. For now, they behave as proximity mines. Give no way points. We do hope you enjoy them! https://www.dropbox.com/s/nls6vd08vl93bc4/Sea Mine Add On V1.0.zip?dl=0 A Bit too brave Captain! Yea, they are quite effective! Enjoy!

Problem is Virtual Pilots take that "Lore" as Law, When most of those stories are exaggerated stories exchanged between pilots that eventually were published in writing or video otherwise, without a shred of evidence to prove the scenario actually happened, despite the laws of physics, 20 Gs would kill anyone and the wing box of the tomcat would be destroyed, causing both wings to detach. I was in the hanger for most of the 90s, hung out with pilots, sat in tomcat pits as they told me stories, as a teen, it was cool to hear them, as an adult that knows more about aeronautics and physics, they are complete bull hardy. Then again, so where the stories anyone told us growing up..

It's an awesome pack for beginners. But as soon as you decide to try any FF aircraft, then its hard to go back to FC3.

Incredible work! Honestly, it would be an amazing addition if it was only the 3D model in game and nothing else. The Ka-52 has been missing for a while. Невероятные работы, друг!

Fixed. Thank you all for your reports. It will be included in next OB updated.

Starting to look photoreal in places

But the issue is that the NOSE fuze setting shouldn't care about any of the parameters, hence there shouldn't be a "out of parameters" drop. It just releases and activates, disregarding any burst altitude setting. Even if we get the ability to set burst altitude in the future, it will still constitute bugged behaviour if you need to drop it above the burst altitude with NOSE fuzing selected.

the Mi-26 would be an instant buy for me. I saw one in real life many years ago and man that thing is just amazing. Mabye it could be possibly in a few years to get hands on an havok. or a newer version of the MI24

Unfortunately, in the common BFM arenas of DCS, many (I may even venture to say most) Tomcat guys now spend more time gaming the edge cases of the flight model than flying actual BFM. They’ve figured out exactly how many G they can get away with (it’s in the vicinity of 20G if pulled progressively), use flaps jammed at 400kts for extreme turn rates and AoA excursions, manual wing sweep forward, and things like the MCB breaker. This results in an aircraft that performs wholly outside the realm of where it should, enabling basically instant 180 degree turns and unreal turn rates that they exploit into head-on passes to again exploit the fact the tomcat pilot cannot be “pilot sniped”. It’s all about playing to one exploit after the next. It’s really too bad, because one can’t enjoy proper BFM in this module anymore since the community has found every little edge case that I’m sure was never intended by the devs. If you try and fly it “proper”, you have no chance anymore. I only say this as context as to why this MCB has generated so much discussion. It’s players wanting to find yet another exploit in a module full of them. I do not mean this as criticism to the module (I love this thing), and other modules have their own exploits (paddles and overrides are the norm rather than the exception). However, the nature of the Tomcat not having FCS makes it more susceptible to these exploits, and it has become the reality on open dogfight servers.

For me obviously full fidelity is way better than low fidelity simplified FC3 standard in every possible regard. It's even easier to learn without the need to bind and remember some 40-50 abstract functions, but having interactive cockpit. The only reason i fly FC3 sometimes is FC3 modeled the sexiest late Cold War jets, with the sweet spot 1980s/1990s F-15C, MiG-29A, Su-27S, A-10A, Su-25 semi analog-semi digital era, when air combat and ground attack were close and personal for the last time during 1991 Desert Storm. Obvoiusly i would greatly prefer full fidelity versions. I hope we will see them in the future.

Attached to First Post. 7.10.2023.33 - Corrected Mis-Link of LocalSource Params in "Update All" Function. - Corrected Null Value in User Profile "Config" Copy/Backup/Delete Function. - Added "Build Name" to Config Backup folder name. - Revised About Page Info and 3rd Parties List. - Revised Splash and App Logo. - Adjusted Splash Text alignment. - Integrated User Option to Remember Last Known App Screen Position. - Adjusted Font Sizes on Most of the Tabs (Further Tweaking to come). - Added SZS Facebook Button and ED Forum App Discussion Button to About Page. - Depreciated Updater Settings Button/Label will hide unless within Version Threshold. - Rewrote Preset Import Functions (Presets will now save after importing from another Preset). - Adjusted Layout of all preset editor controls. - VR Preset Tab Page Completed w/ all Missing Options for VR. - Minor Tweaking to Thread Order. - Created Custom Textbox Control to eliminate theme problems. - Tweaks to Theme Colors when using Alternate Tab Style. - Team Red Theme Added. - Enabled Per Build Multi-Thread Mode Setting.

After coming back to the FC3 modules with a VR headset and a better HOTAS I realised that almost everything I needed was bindable to a button, lever or dial. So I eventually forgot that FC3's are "not clickable". I like the flightmodels and even the cockpits very much.

Hey guys, I understand the confusion, it’s not so much a VaicomPro thing as a Voice Attack thing. The way Voice Attack deals with profiles is via import and export. I needed to wipe out some dead aliases that existed in the old default profile. These caused a conflict with the new keywords and meant that there were two versions of a single command, one leading no where, the other to the recipient. If Voice Attack picked the wrong one the command did not execute. I took the opportunity to update it to include everything so new users did not have to do the finish step. And could learn at a slower pace. I fully understand the want to install over the top and just use your old profile, however it will pay dividends in spades to start fresh. VaicomPro is now fully compliant with the latest DCS command tables and message tables. In the background we have also changed the way it interacts with DCS. Hopefully going forward it means faster work flow for us and faster updates for you. I would like to move to auto updates again, however the old update code doesn’t suit our free model. We are investigating other mechanisms that I have seen like Open Kneeboard uses for instance. I’ll hopefully Hot Fix a few bugs I have fixed once the Beta team confirms I didn’t screw it up more! Anyway I’m personally going to fly more and code less this month as I think we are pretty stable now.

If you're not interested, that's absolutely fine, but I have no idea how you figure that the only changes between an A and our current CM are "minimal" especially compared to the differences between our current legacy Hornet and a Super Hornet - especially considering that if a Super Hornet were to be developed it would very likely be either a Block 1 or at best a very early, pre-APG-79 Block 2, of a similar era. For the Block 1 and Block 2 Super Hornet there aren't really a whole lot of differences outside of the different airframe, engines, 2 extra pylons and slightly different displays (in that some are larger and in the Block 2 are all full colour). You largely have the same avionics (including more-or-less the exact same radar, RWR and DECM) and would have the same weapons (aside from maybe a buddy store, which aren't currently supported by DCS AFAIK). The cockpit would be very familiar (aside from minor changes to the displays, UFC and engine instruments they're more-or-less identical). I guess as a module, if it was an F it would have more differences on account of the 2nd seat, but apart from that it wouldn't really be filling anything that the current F/A-18C doesn't already fill, either with regard to era or capabilities (though I'd still be in favour of a Super Hornet, preferably an F, just for the sake of completeness for the SC module, unless it was an early Block 2, I don't think I'd be all that interested, especially considering the difficulties we're having completeing the legacy). In comparison the cockpit of an F-16A is almost completely different to the F-16CM, aside from some instruments and control panels (though many of them are in different places). You could say the cockpit is more like the Mirage 2000C's cockpit than our current F-16CM Block 50. For avionics it has a different radar on a significantly different display which in turn is in a completely different place; it has a different RWR and it doesnt have any MFDs like we're familiar with. The airframe is probably not as big of a difference compared to the differences between a legacy and a Super Hornet, but it does have a different FLCS and a different engine (which also isn't a derivative unlike the F404 and 414). An F-16A would also fill a role that currently isn't really filled by anything else, especially if you go down the route of having maps, modules and assets being coherent with each other (again, the closest counterpart is the Mirage 2000C which was far less prolific, especially in a Cold War setting where only France is a relevant operator, compared to the US, Norway, Belgium and Denmark), and would fit right at home on the upcoming Kola map. An F-16A (at least as a stand-in) would also fit on the Syria and Sinai maps (being used by Jordan, Egypt and Israel, though Egypt also uses the 2000). You are right that in terms of capabilities, an F-16A would be a downgrade and going backwards is likely to be a harder sell.

I fly FC aircraft when they are the only option for the job. I.e. flying the Su-25 and A-10A for ground attack on the Enigma Cold War server. I would likely fly them more if they had interactive (clickable) cockpits (not the mod),

Resurs or Redut is actually a naval version of the S-350 system. There is already an S-350 mod, so there is something to start from. Just to add, the missile on the thumbnail for this video is a missile from the Buk-M3 system, it's not from the Resurs / Redut system.

Oh, thanks. First post updated.

Exactly. Hence the title is specifically chosen that way… just „fly higher than 1500ft“ will surely solve the problem, however Nose fuze option was made for exactly when the situation requires lower ingress altitudes than the preset burst altitude… oh well… from the manual, page 348;

For those who don't want to open LUA files, here is the "fixed" LUA file for the P-14 to work correctly: sensors.lua Just replace in your Sensors folder to get it to work as a radar: C:\Users\XXX\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Mods\tech\P-14 Tall King\Database\Sensors And if you want to use it in something other than just as an EWR, here is a modified SA-5 which can use it as its search radar!:

Sure, I'll correct you: The F-15E with CFTs weighs in at some 36400lbs empty, IIRC. It also has massive drag because of the CFTs compared to the F-15C. The F-15E has a far heavier nose, and that causes issues with AoA performance, CFTs or no CFTs. The F-15E's engines eat fuel a lot faster if you want more of that thrust. F-15E pilots don't do A2A unless it's against low threats, or if for some reason the F-22's and F-15Cs, and in some cases F-16's are not available. And at this point, F-35s will outperform them just due to stealth. Think for a moment: The USAF never re-engined the F-15C after the -220s. There's a reason for that, given that they've received other significant upgrades. But I come back to the most important thing: F-15Es do not take over F-15C duties because they do not train for them - basically if you're using F-15Es for front-line A2A you're desperate.

@tripod3 Line 60 of sensors.lua should read declare_sensor(TALL_KING) it currently reads declare_sensor(BAR_LOCK) Due to this small error, the radar does not actually properly detect targets, as it has no valid sensor.

Sorry, it's not like they locked just a few files. Entire shader folder is off limits now. Not much I can do. I left the MP version links for those running older DCS version. I don't think I will bother making any IC compatible versions going forward for any of my mods unless situation changes.

Good news: I'm able to reproduced the crash in OB, but not in ED internal build. Chances are it will be fixed in the next OB update.

Фуйню вы городите, товарищи! Кто, хоть раз ощутит (даже виртуально) волшебство перемещения по трем осям, тот на монитор будет смотреть косо и с пренебрежением. Не смотря на всю мультяшность окружающего мира в шлеме. И я ответственно заявляю, что те, кто считают это голословным заявлением, ни хрена не поняли сути явления! И, скорее всего, по причине несовершенства и недоработки девайсов, посредством которых и возникло "недопонимание".

Cross post for those who are not on the Razbam discord

Hot news. Iraq buys PAC JF-17 Thunder aircraft (12 for now). So the new skin incoming?

SAMP-240 (540 lbs) and SAMP-400 (794 lbs) do roughly twice the amount of damage compared to Mk-82 (503 lbs) and M117 (919 lbs) respectively. Unless SAMP-250/400 are special in a certain way, I would expect that bombs of roughly the same size should do equal amount of damage. This report is regarding consistency between bombs of the same class, not whether bombs should do less or more damage in general. SAMP-250_400_damage.trk

Unfortunately there is little interest. Sometimes it kinda sucks being an aviation enthusiasts in a simulator becoming more a d more dominate by gamers.

Quite a lot of things don't add up here. Please, post a track.

To answer your question directly, no, we don’t mix engines w/in a squadron. Eglin Test maybe the only squadron that would because they are a weapons test unit that also operates a detachment in Vegas. At one point 86-0190 had GE motor’s during a test cycle. Of course it’s in a 220 config since it’s a SJ bird now. SJ is pure 220 base. I can’t remember if MO operates both, but at least one squadron is 220. LN is all 229 now same with WA since the the albino’s left. The fastest way to ID a 229 is to look in the exhaust. 229’s have a “white” flame holder. Supposedly, 10 years from now, SJ is losing it’s Strikes. Heat exchanger doors for 220’s are no longer the case. Those are being changed to scoops like the 229.

Again, it looks like you are messing with both the throttle (power) and the collective. Leave the throttles at FLY and only use the collective. If you enter VRS and the helo starts to shudder and shake as you drop out of the sky, you need to use the cyclic to fly out of your vortex; forward, sideways, backward, whatever. Just adding in more collective will often not allow you to recover. If you are in a hover and you want to descend, lower the collective slightly and take your time on the descent. Once you get your vertical speed dropping too fast, VRS is likely to follow.

I know that Crazyeddie has liveries for the Sea King 0.5.. I privet messaged Crazyeddie and he was kind enough to give me some liveries! So I would just ask him, I'm sure he will help! Best of luck and enjoy@ Timex 3

there is a sort of auto throttle system. but i dont remeber the name the bird need to be flown realativly gentle the whole time. you can do hard stuff but this takes a lot of praktice. in transition from flight to hover you have to be very gently with the collektiv. if your sink rate is to high you will get in the VRS an lose the bird. it will take time to learn but you will get into it. espezialy with helos, slow is presice and prescise is fast

Just for FUN

Not soviet, but rather a mix of blue and red. Gazelle was actually produced in Yugoslavia and incorporated modified soviet weapons. Here is demonstration of Gazelle with Strela-2m missile (in addition to 4xATGMs)

I have spent a lot of time on the phone with my ISP's support and all their tests show that their equipment is working, and the rest is not their problem I followed your advice and installed VPN software, and I could finally start DCS World. Thanks!

To fly the Su-27 and, to a lesser degree, the MiG-29 followed by the Su-25, and Su-25T. I’ve been flying the Flanker, since ED came out with her in the late 90’s. If she ends up MAC-only, then that’s where I’ll have to go as well.

Two separate terrain shadow issues are being addressed by devs. I'll check your track in ED internal build. I hope I'll be back with some good news.

You misunderstood. The F-16's official name is Fighting Falcon, named after the USAFA mascot. The alternate name "Viper" for the F-16 was taken from the name of the fighters spacecraft in "Battlestar Galactica". null

When DCS Combined Arms lurkers mess around with the FARP base assets https://9gag.com/gag/aMEOLzW Jet Fuel aMEOLzW_460svav1.mp4

I found the solution and it is pretty easy. Heatblur heared the gripes and implemented the ICS Volume knob. If you turn it all the way down, Jester will behave and act grown up, listening in awe to his master in the front commands and work them flawlessly.

Jeff - you love it and you hate it. It's like a screaming toddler that getts puppy eyes at the end of the day. It has TWS but not helmet mounted sight. It has fox3, but fox2 sucks. It has array of weponry, but short legs. It has missile warning system, but it's slow... Things I really like about it, is that it seems to be very well modeled and feels like a real aicraft. And oh, yes, it has PROPER IFF modeled! Not this DCS - toy IFF.

Thank you! I will check textures. Arranging unit names is also planned. One of the soviet/russian VVER-type reactors.

Another solution is to provide texture settings per aircraft. Having textures at High makes huge difference in GPU memory usage between huey and apache. The latter goes 105% in my 3080ti while huey stays around 80-90%. The apache with these settings is unplayable. I recommend adding this setting under the special options or even better calculating your GPU memory and offering the best option per aircraft.

Having some fun with VF-143 "Pukin Dogs"