Leaderboard

Type 022 FAC version 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Miltech-5 / PD. Marines skin done. and Iraqi skin. Duch skin.

@currenthillWhat are your thoughts on a small pontoon bridge that would fit across the small rivers on the various maps? Maybe with a separate bridge vehicle?

@Tanuki44 Salute Sir for an excellent mod. I don't know if you are aware but using this mod breaks the tank engine sounds when they are driven in either Combined Arms or using the WWII Asset Pack. Myself and a squad mate DD_Sid discovered this and thanks to the guys over at the A4-E development team (their mod also broke the sounds as well as the Bronco) who produced a fix, we reverse engineered their fix and ported it across to the Bronco and also your Black Hawk mod. Our work can be found here:- I was therefore wondering if you are planning any future updates you would consider including the following simple fix in your release. 1. Within the "Sounders" folder rename the "Tools.lua" to be "uh60l_Tools.lua" (this reads uh'sixty' lower case L) 2. Within the "Engines" folder (contained within "Aircraft") update the file "uh60l_engine.lua" by editing the first line which says dofile("Tools.lua") to read dofile("uh60l_Tools.lua") 3. Within the same file add an additional line just below the above edit that says dofile("Curve.lua") We have found that is all that is required to resolve this issue. Many thanks once again for the time and effort that goes into this excellent mod. Kind regards DD_Friar

Hi guys. Again a little tutorial for the Rest of the cockpit. Rather a lot of talking and not so much Info, but anyway

To manually correct INS drift while the EGI is not functioning you have a couple of different things you need to do. the simplest thing is to correct positional drift via a position update. You can perform this by selecting the “Update” cursor function on the A/G radar or Target pod. You will need to have a steerpoint that you know the location of in PB17 in the target pod or radar, put the cursors on the steerpoints position in the real world, and command update via TDC press in the front cockpit or in the rear cockpit trigger full action. This will update your INS position based on where your cursor is. If you have your cursors over the wrong point on the ground you can induce more error and make your positional error even greater. So be careful. Not implemented currently is the overfly update or HUD updates that can be used to do the same thing visually. To help reduce how much the INS drifts you can perform an INS PVU or precision velocity update. this will “calibrate” the INS via the radar and will reduce the rate at which it drifts. it cannot permanently remove the drift over the course of a flight, but it will reduce the magnitude of the drift. To perform an INS PVU be in command of the A/G radar in RBM and press auto acq down. This will switch to the PVU page. MN PVU is selected by default, this will only really help with radar maps being cleaner currently since there is no mission Nav (MN) implemented currently, so I will leave this one for later. along the bottom of the PVU display select INS. Wait a moment as it begins measuring velocities. As soon as you see values populate press the TDC to begin the PVU. The lower values will go away and you will see a single value which represents the total remaining drift. Let it sit and cook and perform some gentle turns and climbs/descents and you will see it quickly start to reduce. Once it is low enough that you like (0.2-0.1 is achievable pretty quickly) press auto acq down to accept the update and return to the radar. Drift will continue to build up after this but it will be at a much lower rate than prior to the update. You should only have to perform this INS PVU once per flight, multiple PVUs are not really going to help much but one INS PVU will significantly reduce the drift rate. Of note, there is a land/sea option in the PVU screen, make sure to select the correct one for what you are flying over/your radar is pointing at. If you perform a INS PVU with land selected but your radar is measuring mostly water, the movement of the water can significantly mess up the PVU. Same thing can occur if you set it to SEA and perform a PVU over land, it will compensate for non existent water movement introducing error. Normal process for this would be to perform the INS PVU early in the flight or prior to fencing in, once accomplished perform an update on a well known point, and then your system should both be fairly accurate and have minimized drift for the tactical portion of the flight. Have several steerpoints or aimpoints/offsets on easily identifiable features in your planned AOR, so that if you notice drift starting to become an issue you can easily map or cue the targetting pod to one of them and update your system.

Hi guys, We've corrected the problem that made the aircraft have a tendency to go left when braking on take-off (there was an initialization issue in the rudder trim, and it was left the majority of the time but it also went to the right at times). The braking instability still remains, we are investigating what adjustments might be needed. Keep in mind work with the BE might take priority, so bugs/problems/features might take a bit longer than usual to be resolved.

DM me your info. I have a proposal. They release 3 years from now, I'll buy your copy. They release inside a year from now, you buy mine. They release outside a year from now, but not 3, draw. *Not joking - one time offer, I could really use a free module.

A little annoying detail that exist from the beginning... The HUD symbology is masked by HUD frame while it should not (see image below). The good news is that I found how to fix it, so you even won't need to search how to solve it. This is indeed because HUD symbology is tested against the Z-buffer while it should not. To solve this you only need to add one line to two files: - In HUD_base.lua you need to set the TFOV (total_field_of_view) z_enable propertie to false : total_field_of_view.isvisible = false total_field_of_view.init_pos = {0,-37.5,0} total_field_of_view.z_enabled = false -- add this - In HUD_definitions.lua, you need to do the same thing for the symbol object within the setSymbolCommonProperties function: symbol.parent_element = parent or default_parent symbol.alignment = align or "None" symbol.z_enabled = false -- add this

let me give you some background: I don't have a lot of free time to fly DCS. Maybe a few hours on the weekend if I'm lucky. I've got a job and family. Here is a log of my typical DCS experiences, which pretty much sums up the situation EVERY time I get a few hours to fly. DCS shouldn't be this difficult OTHER than learning to fly your chosen platform. fire up DCS, find user-created mission that seems like the one you want to fly**. **when I want to fly a strike, I don't want to be tasked with a CAP. When I want to take out a building, I don't want a SEAD mission... ---or-- try to create a simple, coordinated mission with AI SEAD, CAP, and OPFOR response patterns etc... (this alone is an all-day task WITHOUT flying) Fly the mission: 10 minutes for startup, 10 minutes for taxi, an hour for marshall, etc... the missions doesn't perform as expected for whatever reason (parking issues, static templates overlapping, AI taxi issues, AI crashing on takeoff, etc). Mission editor, try to fix mission. 1-2 hours. Change, fly, debug, change, fly, debug... the AI doesn't perform as expected (tasking issues, ignored orders, terrain following, etc). Mission Editor, try to fix AI issues. **most likely will include lua scripting. Change, fly, debug, change, fly, debug... Another 1-2 hours. get the mission to a "workable" condition, start the sim, fly for an hour and ... go to step 2 again. More AI issues. Mission editor, try to fix mission. 1-2 hours. Change, fly, debug, change, fly, debug... Fly the mission: 10 minutes for startup, 10 minutes for taxi, an hour for marshall, etc... on target and now have weapon issues. CBUs not effective, static objects non-destructible, weapons won't perform as expected (module bugs), can't lock targets, AI ignoring orders and doing *whatever* they want... Back in to ME to fix THOSE issues...another 1-2 hours. Fix, debug, fly, ME, Fix, debug, fly... So far, I'm 3-4 hours into DCS --WITHOUT EVEN COMPLETING THE MISSION I DESIGNED OR GETTING TO FLY AT ALL. ***** That's it. 3-4 hours. My free time is gone for the week, I've barely flown for less than an hour and I've got nothing to show for it. Let's try again next week after updates change *everything* and I have to re-learn *everything*. ***** TLDR; --> ED: Fix your core bugs. DCS stands for "Digital ***Combat*** Simulator. What you all have created is (albeit the best and most wonderful in the business) a "Empty Sandbox Flight Simulator". My advice to you is to focus on the "C" of DCS instead of releasing "early release" modules that will NEVER be completed (because you've already got my money (F16, F18, Normandy, etc)!!)

Yep, and makes for a pretty devastating swarm attack. I think they have eight of them in a group, which means 64 antiship missiles fired from 180 km per group.

DCS mystery ! Kh-59MK2 is a custom weapon, I think DCS make difference when AI or human, for now we just have Human, we don't have all how to, will try to fix that in futur or maybe creat 2 variants.

I'm almost finished with this one. adjusted the Engine nozzle Roughmets, Exterior, and I've added Flight Suit Patches with Normals for Pilot and WSO. I've also added the option to fly without the WSO if for some reason you ever want to... Also, I've discovered that the exterior Paint is in fact NOT vinyl decals, but actually paint. So no normals for the exterior needed.

OK, this is finished! 359th BS_303rd BG_BN-U_Thunderbird This is a submission for the B-17G Livery Competition. It includes two skins, one a detailed 'Thunderbird' and one plain and without the distinguishing markings of 'Thunderbird" as specified in the competition. Speculars are used but I will change to roughmets if the developers decide to upgrade the B-17 to PBR. The detailed skin depicts Serial number 42-38050, a B-17G-25-DL, code: BN U, nicknamed "Thunderbird". The plane flew 112 combat missions with the 359th Bombardment Squadron of the 303rd Bombardment Group. She reputedly was crewed by 538 different airmen, none of whom suffered an injury aboard Thunderbird. Returned to the United States after the war, she was sent to Kingman Army Airfield, Arizona, where she was scrapped. This plane is the subject of a large mural in the World War II Gallery of the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C., entitled "Fortresses Under Fire", completed 1975–1976. by Keith Ferris and depicts Thunderbird on her 70th mission to Wiesbaden. I spent quite a bit of time working on details and weathering and want to note some of them. 1)Overlay ("Scab") patches are placed as depicted on the original photo. Normal map modified to simulate the thickness of the overlaying patches. A flush patch is on the inboard #2 engine cowling.* Paint was worn, discolored and chipped as per the original photo. 2) Mud spatters added to areas of the landing gear bays and mud stains added to tires. 3) Actual photos of the turbo and exhaust piping overlayed to better simulate those areas. 4) As per the profile by Mark Styling the rudder is shown as re-coverd but in only silver dope. Also, the de-ice boots have been removed showing bare metal (I have real life experience removing boots and the toluene solvent used to loosen them and remove the adhesive would surely dissolve any zinc chromate primer and paint thus leaving bare metal). Special thanks to Warlord64 for showing how to keep the prop domes black with engines running! Submitted to User Files. Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3332180/ Israelis finished as well. This is a submission for the B-17G Livery Competition. This includes two skins depicting S/Ns 44-83851 No. '23' and 44-83811 No. 21. Although these are beyond the dates specified in the competition, I thought that they may be useful for missions on the new Sinai map. The history and color schemes noted on the web vary quite a bit. Original photos of what I assume to be the delivery flight show them as being very heavily worn. Some accounts say that they were subsequently re-painted and I have decided to depict them freshly painted as shown on the accompanying profile picture. I did not include 'plain' versions since they both have only the small '21' and '23' individual distinguishing markings. Speculars are used but I will change to roughmets if the developers decide to upgrade the B-17 to PBR. All accounts agree that Israeli acquisition agents managed to purchase 4 surplus U.S. Air Force B-17s. One Fortress was seized on its way in Portugal and so only 3 arrived in Czechoslovakia. On the way home to Israel, one B-17 bombed Cairo and the other two bombed Egyptian forces in Gaza and Rafiah. 1956 saw growing diplomatic tensions in the Middle East, tensions that would soon culminate in the Suez Crisis. The B-17s began flying daylight operations and the squadron supported the Israeli push towards Sharm el Sheikh, on the southern tip of the Sinai. 69 Squadron was finally disbanded on March 1, 1957 and the B-17s placed in storage and were finally scrapped in 1958. No. 69 Squadron was reactivated at Ramat David on November 1, 1969 and is active to the present operating the F-15I Thunder out of Hatzerim. Submitted to User Files. Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3332179/

Edit: With DCS Open Beta 2.8.7.42583 RAZBAM did change the TO behavior, thus Method 1 (by the book) is now the preferred one. The 12° is your optimal fly out attitude. You must not establish that right after TO. Clean up the plane, trim 1G and then establish a 12° attitude. Made a little Vid to demonstrate, 65k GW, light Wind/ Turbulence; first TO is by the book at 140, second at +10 where you basicly rotate and TO in a fluid motion.

Here's a glimpse of what's coming up...

Elaborating on @fausete's good answer. We’d like to point out some specific performance data that was mentioned in this thread. Considering always ISA, except when mentioned: Mirage F1’s ceiling, complying with a rate of climb of 500 ft/min, is 52,200 ft at ISA or 53,000 ft at ISA -10°C. Maximum speed at flight levels between 38,000 and 50,000 is Mach 2.1. Maximum speed at 20,000 ft is Mach 1.7 and at 10,000 ft is Mach 1.26. Note that these values are the theoretical maximum and they might be out of the envelope. Landing speed at S.L., with 9500 Kg and an AoA of 10°, is around 160 Kt. We get all those values with very high precision when tested in our simulation, as well as any other values regarding takeoff, landing, climb, cruise, rate of turn or any other flight model aspects. And it shouldn’t be otherwise, since our simulation is based on real engineering data of the Mirage F1. In fact, the whole set of aircraft performance was extensively tested even before we signed the contract with ED, as it was a requirement to prove the fidelity of the module. Though, obviously, we kept making adjustments when needed. We can’t post any real tables, but you can find some data in our Flight Manual. Some flight manuals of other Mirage F1 versions are available online, if you are really interested. There will be differences in the systems but the performance should be the same. We also get constant feedback from real, highly experienced Mirage F1 pilots, as @peyvolt already stated in this same thread. All in all, we can say that our simulation represents the Mirage F1 to the highest level of accuracy, making it a professional approximation as a simulator of the real counterpart. Nevertheless, we keep working on improvements, based on our own research or on user’s feedback, which we highly appreciate when they are discussed in a polite manner. In particular, we keep investigating and improving the aircraft behavior at high AoA, and asymmetrical loads as there’s not much real data at such regimes.

Tell me about it. When I was playing strike fighters 2 some 9 years ago, I only dreamed of DCS having F-86's and F-4's and yet here we are - and they're so realistic. We're customers, yes but we're also spoiled!

The same just happened to me: I reproduced the bug in different Huey slots, saved the track, and it won't show the bug. I took a video. It should motivate devs to try and try again until they see the issue and understand how it happens.

Trust me - would be much better to see reviews from regular everyday users in these forums.

James B

you can change the channel with PB19(number) and PB 20(letter) on the display that you have the A2A radar on. you can bind those to buttons

What he said ^^^ All working perfectly for me, no commandline switches, VR tickbox ticked, openxr toolkit and QVFR.

It is still modern gfx problem that needs smart programming, like anything else. https://loopit.dk/banding_in_games.pdf

Just a headsup and thanks to Mbuccia , but a new revision for this was released today. v1.0.1 - works just as well for me as before. https://github.com/mbucchia/Quad-Views-Foveated/releases/tag/1.0.1

ZOMG!!! I had to stop playing DCS because of how frustrating this entire situation was and this has made my day. Just knowing there is a light at the end of the tunnel is awesome Thank you

Not in a study-level sim that rides on the premise of making it as real as possible. I agree these upgrades were made for a reason IRL, but we're here for the exact things our metaphorical grandpas were using because that's all they had. And yes, I'm still waiting for MiG-21 PFM that actually did rounds in Vietnam.

At 5:30 and around 6:00

Oh,My God !, you unexpectedly produce this 022 missile boat !! it's my love !

Just wanted to say a thank you for all the effort Aerges has put into this module so far. It is easily my favourite airframe to fly. And to echo the statements of CrazyGman, the thing is not at all to be underestimated in cold war PVP, be that 2-circle or even 1-circle fighting. ECW stats were reset recently for the quarter, so this is unfortunately everything, but suffice to say the thing is lethal. Probably about ~50% or more of these would be gun kills. It just takes a bit of time to get used to and has to be flown to it's strengths.

Входной порог не просто высокий, а очень высокий. Начиная от железа, доп оборудования, заканчивая большим количеством времени чтобы с этим всем разобраться. Это норма

null

One problem I have with DCS modules is that they are almost always the latest, most advanced variant rather than the types that were historically significant. The F-4s I want to fly are the F-4B/C/D/E/J variants that flew in Vietnam and over Israel. The principal RWRs utilized by F-4s in combat were the older strobe type. I have no choice but to settle for whatever Heatblur and other 3rd parties provide. But my preference is for aircraft versions and equipment types employed in combat that are historically correct. In the case of the F-4, that means Vietnam and Yom Kippur era variants, which did not have digital alpha-numeric style RWRs. A mid-70's F-4E with slats and TISEO is close enough for me to enjoy it in Vietnam era missions, but I would much rather have early hard wing F-4Es with the original gun muzzle or even better yet, F-4B/C/D/J variants with the appropriate field changes to accurately reflect what was flown in combat.

Thank you, @Ironhand. Issue reported.

Taiga rather than sand Trees. Swamps. Ice. Snow. Did I mention no sand? Mosquitos. The real kind. Bigger than the one in DCS, and a lot more dangerous. Can't wait for a real Mosquito to start stabbing the life out of that wooden monstrosity. Played a role from about the beginning of time to the end of it, which makes it practically perfect for every plane in DCS. The possibilities are virtually endless. There are some beastly air bases around there It's not a desert. It's not a thin strip of not desert surrounded by desert. It's not a delta of not desert surrounded by desert. When this comes out it will probably be my go-to, if only because there's not a trace of bloody desert anywhere near it. I swear, I will never pay for another map that is mostly desert. Probably not if it's even a little desert. Beach...maybe. We'll see.

Chemical processing plant (oil refinery). It's supposed to be modular unit so you can scale the refinery by copying the unit around. IMG_1370.MOV

Порог Высокий.

Yes, Sinai is flat ... but has beautiful sceneries. If you want mountains, you might want to trial the South Atlantic Map ... there is little content for it, so you would need to edit your own missions, but the scenery is really different from any other DCS map ... for example:

Checkout DCS Web Viewer It can also load remote files when you append the url, i.e. from DCS User Files https://dcs-web-editor.github.io/dcs-web-viewer-deploy/?load=https://files.digitalcombatsimulator.com/userfiles/a88/o1qgvnmm4i4r4kd9b9j3b07iev1268mh/Operation_Scarlet_Dawn.miz

Лет через восемь покажут РУД

imo the closest thing the apache has to area track is via hitting the store button after lasing the range. this creates a coordinate in memory that can be slaved to regardless of line of sight.

Railways are done! Again, many thanks to @okopanja and his worthy tool, SharkPlanner.

from Razbam's discord, stick of the MiG-23

First post updated. While the larger industrial facility is still being prepared, an Eastern European conventional power plant has been added. Thermal power plant (Soviet, Eastern Europe and Russian design) There is one complex building with smokestack, turbine hall, two walkways, room of water and steam preparation, gate, several pipes and compressor. There is small yard between two buildings where you can place military units. Damage model included. Building is named "TPP..." in ME. DOWNLOAD

Hi guys, I was on holiday so didn't have access to the documentation which I needed to answer this properly. But basically, everyone answering that using wikipedia data to back your claims is a bad idea is right. That data is either suppositions or specific fuel/speed/altitude situations that cannot be blindly applied to all cases. For example the landing speed. Our F1 module is capable of landing at 140 kt, but only when very very lightly loaded (almost empty of fuel). If you are trying to land it full, it won't be possible to do so at such low speeds. It is the same for the real aircraft, according to the performance data we have. This is what wikipedia is refering to when it says the landing speed is 140 kt. It means the minimum landing speed is about 140 kt, not that the aircraft can land at that speed always. Regarding maximum Mach: the limiting factor is the maximum impact temperature of 135 ºC (as others have stated), this corresponds to about Mach 2.1 for the altitudes with the coldest temperatures (so above 35000-40000 ft). Obviously for altitudes below that, it's impossible to reach such high Mach numbers. This matches the performance data we have. About the operational ceiling: I don't know where wikipedia gets its numbers from but what we know is at what altitudes the aircraft is capable of maintaining a climbrate of 500 ft/min and our module complies with them with a high degree of precission, and that corresponds to altitudes much lower than those 66k ft. @IvanK is a Mirage III pilot and has provided some interesting insight. Again, as has been mentioned before, endurance can reach 2:15 hours with the described payload easily as long as the aircraft is flown with the right profile: Mach of around 0.6-0.65 and altitude of 20-25k ft. Obviously the value stated in wikipedia corresponds to the aircraft being flown in maximum endurance conditions, it doesn't mean that no matter what you do, you'll have 2:15 hours of flight time with that payload. In general, we appreciate the feedback of our customers and it has been crucial for the development of the module (both bug fixing and feature addition) over the past year but I think this thread is not serving that purpose anymore. At this point, it has taken away many hours of module development in testing claims and checking documentation. You are free to continue discussing but we won't intervene anymore unless evidence from reliable sources (or contact info to said sources) is provided.

Hi and hallo. Sorry for beeing very quiet on this forum. For everybody interested in the developement of the VSN F-4B/C MOD: An update is approaching with some new stuff in it: - Ripple-Timer-Switch (0.06, 0.1, 0.14) - Cluster-Drop-Mode (kind of pairs in ripple) - clickable Radar and RWR-switches - clickable Warning/Shrike/Sidewinder-tone-volume rotary - Shrike targeting system - Radar-Cues: - DynamicLauncheZone-Circle - Closing-Speed-Circle - IFF-response indication Navigation: - TACAN navigation (only for fixed map-objects like airfields NOT for placeable objects) - ADF navigation - Waypoint-Navigation (12 WP) to name a few. Here are the links to the videos present:

I know many will probably disagree but all I can say mate is good on you for being honest and willing to contact them and work through a solution instead of saying nothing and keeping it. I have no love for Amazon, but it shows extra character when a person doesn't change their values because of another's lesser values. Good on ya mate!