Leaderboard

Thanks! Well, I can only do so much with the tools DCS provides. But I will probably implement a SM-3 model in the future. I'm planning to make the M3. I just tried them with no issues. Thanks for the suggestions.

Possibly limited just to WW2 infantry but issue noted as fixed is still definitely present with the WW2 infantry Example:

Talking on air defenses to consider down the line. The Buk M2/M2E (SA-17 'Grizzly) and Buk M3 (SA-27 'Gollum').

Hello, just some updates ... getting better ... step by step Cheers TOM

What is your secret to harm them without killing them? I'm tryin to reproduce the issue. Could you attach a short DCS track?

A user on Razbam's Discord asked to see how the map looks with the terrain textures set to Low. So I went and made a few comparison screens. Posting it here in case someone else might find it useful. Left = HIGH, Right = LOW:

Content creator might be a bit of a grandiose word. But I do make dcs youtube vidoes and I would really love a proper replay system. Right now all (almost all ) Content creators are basically fighting against DCS to make nice cinematic videos. I myself have to have use up 170gig extra in my computer to have dedicated server running to run my own singleplayer missions because the dedicated server tracks are a bit more functional (don't break within seconds/few minutes) than singleplayer tracks.

Sharing videos that might not be known to the non-Russian speaking crowd of the V-80/Ka-50. These are meant to be informative on what Ka-50 was/is as a combat platform, a visual representation of what the helicopter is capable of (though not limited to), as well as recollections from the era when it was being actively developed/used. All these, as a means to further the knowledge and understanding around the platform. These videos are mostly collected by @deninferno - all thanks to him for sharing them! A couple of points to note: - The videos are of varying quality, please understand that most of them predate the time of "GoPro" and the likes. - The videos are practically all Russian, as such, you'll mostly salvage them for their visuals. - Most of the videos are purely about Ka-50, however in one or two instances, it's about helicopters in general or Kamov Design Bureau JSC, where Ka-50 occupies only a small part of the video. - Lastly, there are a two clips of Ka-50Sh as well as one related to equipment tested for LLTV (Low Light TV). I wish to point out here, that these are videos of it being tested and flown back in the day, however, with regards to the strict requirements for the platform, it was deemed an "unfavourable" system and thus didn't progress any further. The reason being that the LLTV-equipment proved to be heavy enough, such that it introduced a shift in the centre of gravity of the helicopter forward, making it "nose-heavy" and thus resulting in undesired aerodynamic effects. For reference, you will notice that Ka-52 has both a "thicker" fuselage (read: more weight), as well as having it's optics pushed back, relative to the rotor. Because of that, the helicopter becomes heavier, but retains its natural stability and centre of gravity (The offset weight affects the platform less due to shorter working arm, as well as being lighter relative to the rest of the aircraft. Imagine a 500kg load on the wing tip of a Cessna vs. a 20 tonne plane.). Therefore, I ask that these videos do not be used as a means to "harass" ED by requesting a Ka-50Sh - "Because there is a video showing one.". EDIT - Adding the last few videos that I had to find in my library: https://youtu.be/v55OPldA6hA - Ka-50 in Chechnya (hyperlink not working, use the address) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyIhZVQ0DBk - (hyperlink not working, use the address)

The Nevada map is an awesome map, but it could use some love, like the addition of the Las Vegas Raiders' stadium. Maybe add a bit of the Grand Canyon to it as well.

Hello there, i can finally refuel my F-18 and to be honest, the physics in generally are outdated. I always wonder how DCS became such modern Sim, nice graphics, detailed aircraft and at the other side, it seems the devs just forgot something years ago to update. At firs i saw the Eurofighter Typhoon footage in DCS, where they did air refuelling, and that was something awesome. I usually played Falcon 4.0 then later BMS and then when i discovered DCS World i upgraded my PC and i love this Sim. Today i was looking for Air Refuelling videos and i saw one from BMS, i thought, i will click on it just for fun. There is an Mirage but it use the F-16 MFDs etc. Its not a real Mirage. When you look this Video, go to Min. 2:39 and look from there the physics from the basket and even when the basket is connected, you will see the fuel coming out, like in real. I was looking like a mad dog at this video and asked me, why DCS, whyyyyy? At 4:54 you will see after finishing, it will come gas again out, looks amazing man... I hope, ED, you will improve that. I am even thinking about to install BMS again only for this LOL Crazy

Maybe this is not allowed to post here but i just have to say thank you for this module! it is so awesome! The best module i have by far! There are some buggs and stuff but i bet it will get fixed! I just love this thing! Anyway that was my "rant" Cheers Wags and the team!

In a perfect world, the aircraft/LCAC would be full fidelity and ships would all be player controllable. AI almost never does what you want it to do. The AI CH-53 is worse than just low res, it isn't even close to proper scale. We really need a better implementation of combined arms and a way to allow players to man ships and fully control a naval task force. Imagine planning and executing a Marine landing with 20 or 30 of your online friends performing tasking to ensure its success. Getting the forces required to places they are needed, keeping them supplied and supporting them with air support and naval gunfire would be quite interesting and would need good teamwork to be successful. The instant gratification crowd probably won't like it, but those guys aren't really fun to fly with as they don't really have a concept of what teamwork is anyway.

I'm sure someone will make an early Cold War server that will allow it to not be outdated. The Skyraider, F-100, and F-8 are all coming as well which, in addition to the already excellent A-4 mod, gives us a decent early Bluefor lineup. Then we have the MiG-19P(maybe S at some point if RB is still doing that?), MiG-17F, and possibly some kind of Fitter(OctopusG or Mag3?) to round out Redfor. Maybe add in the F-5, F-4, and MiG-21 depending on time period and with a little imagination you can do missions on the Sinai and Syria maps and use Caucuses or Marianas as a quasi-Vietnam. It won't happen quickly as that's a lot of modules yet to release but they are at least coming and the 17 isn't out yet anyways so plenty of time for one or more of them to finish up.

I'd really like to see Eagle overhaul amphibious warfare, and not simply add new units. I do want the new units. The ability to land vehicles and troops on landing craft the ability to spawn amphibious vehicles and landing craft from amphibious warfare ships More amphibious warfare ships More surface warfare ships especially battleships - I would love to see a 1980s Iowa in DCS core, as well as some supporting destroyers, firgates and a nuclear cruiser, and in the WWII asset pack I want to see the overlord fleet and both sides on the Marianas campaign

Hey, I really appreciate some of you are still enjoying and playing this mission and the fact that is still running on current versions. I like your idea of adding static targets and I do think it is possible. First thing to check is if all required Moose functions are available for static objects as well (not sure). Apart from adding the statics in the mission editor, it requires adding a new category to the script. This will take some edits. Maybe I can have a look when I’m back from vacation

Do you have a proof in a matter of saved tracks, and share with us?

The ECM pods on DCS F16 can be employed in both Noise (Mode 3) and Deception (Mode 1 and 2) jamming modes, as described in the manual. I've personally done testing in this regard and have had many instances where missiles have simply blown past me when I was jinking around trying to egress from a target area when I was out of chaff. As with many things in DCS, if improperly employed, it will have limited effectiveness or no effectiveness. If doing air-to-air missions, I don't bother carrying it because I prefer to maximize my maneuverability (can't jettison it). But when doing SEAD or air-to-ground strikes against targets defended by SAMs where Im trying to rush in and rush out, it can actually be quite useful.

В весенний ручей упала слеза И с ним вместе покатилась по склону Фудзи Улитка плачет

Did the same thing. And yeah, ED should fix that. Though there should be seperation tab or line or something to easily distinguish whats vanilla and whats added by the user.

they are just chilling a bit with a cigarette while on guard duty.

Complete. Uploading.

They only existed on the MPCDs, and even still, the displays are not really NVG usable. What really needs to happen if for NVGs to be properly implemented, at least in VR, to not be full screen to allow the look-under technique as IRL.

Yes, it's like "the most annoying sound in the world" on Dumb & Dumber............x 100

Callsign of the user that's donating the contact to the network. ED = Enfield CK = Check (available on F/A-18) SE = Snake (available on F/A-18) F-16s can change their alphanumeric callsign from page 2 in the DLNK menu.

There is nothing in OpenXR Toolkit that precludes motion reprojection (well except Turbo mode). Motion Reprojection (aka motion smoothing) is a setting in Pimax Client, completely independent of OpenXR Toolkit.

As you can see, it's something like that. You can set it in different direction before adding to map.null nullBut if you'll try to set it to different direction after adding on map, it will not be together.nullnull And, if you want to make it for a few locations, you can save it as static template so in case of creating new mission on the same map, you just can load it into it or different mission on the same map. null null For example, once I made my own static templates for most of airports with all objects. With new mission on Caucassus, I can choose with airport I want with objects or not. null

Sure, type the waypoint number 'M1' etc into the UFC scratchpad (you'll need to use the SHF key) and then press PB#17 on the TGP page.

I'd go further than that. I was trying to build an MP base capture/roadblock mission that centers around a Marine landing force. The lack of assets was glaringly obvious. I would go further than the LCAC and Wasp to include San Antonio, Whidbey Island, Austin, Lewis Puller, Montford Point, Newport classes of amphibious ships. I'd also want smaller vessels to support the landing force such as LCM's and PC's as well as a more fleshed out air wing that includes CH-53E, UH-1N, AH-1T/W, CH-46E, MH-60S, and possibly MV-22B. A wider variety of vehicles such as more HMMWV variants, LAV-AT, LAV-M, LAV-C2, LAV-R, M777, FMTV, MTVR, LVS, LVSR, Cougar and JLTV would also be appreciated. The only native DCS USMC assets are the LAV-25 and AAV-7. The Tarawa, KC-130 and AV-8B were added by Razbam and I do appreciate them very much for adding those to DCS world.

Well, looks like you have to choose sources more carefully. First of all, "new Soviet MiG-17" didn't exist in 1964 because production of this aircraft was stopped generally in USSR in 1957 (altough in 1960 was produced extra 40 aircrafts for special order, 38 MiG-17F and 2 MiG-17PF, 1958 - 0, 1959 - 0) , from half of 1955 in production was exclusivelly F variant and her derivatives (PF, PFU ). In 1952 works were started over fighter-bomber variant, there was at least 5 prototypes with different pylons and weapons layout. Finaly 170 aircrafts was produced as quite simple variant with additional pylon located between main landing gear and external fuel tank station: This variant didn't had dedicated name. Later in late 60's idea of fighter-bomber MiG-17 back. In 1969 prototype was built but due of few mishaps she conduct first flight in 1972. Aircraft got modified BD3-60-21 pylons borrowed from MiG-21, about 150 MiG-17/MiG-17F aircrafts were rebuld to this standard. Official name in VVS documents was MiG-17AS, no matter on which variant based on, 17 or 17F: Now look on the Cuban aircraft. Do you see differences? Conclusion is very simple, Cubans got used aircrafts from Soviet Union, and those aircrafts were rebuilt into fighter-bomber variant locally. It is rather certain they got Soviet help in that matter, firstly because they didn't had own aircraft production/modification experience, second Cuban solution is very ressemble to one of Soviet fighter-bomber prototypes, only pylons were moved more outward from the axis of the aircraft: From modified aircrafts, Cubans were adapted few of them to use R-3S missiles, how many? Hard to say but looks like no more like 10 aircrafts were modified, Soviet aircrafts wasn't able use them. I think, source of most confiusions is a fact that with the time all fighter-bomber variants were start called AS in many books. Other thing, many people believe that Soviet production aircrafts, Chinese aircrafts, or Polish, Czech production are the same, but unfortunately is not. In module we will have MiG-17F and those aircrafts never had any AAM. DCS is a simulation game, developers choosed one variant with all cons and pros. Demanding some never existed frankensteins is wrong.

Not doing very much DCS or visiting this forum these days but I know someone who said they got the Tu4 going again. No promises but I asked them to stop by and advise what they had to do.

So anyway I downloaded version 2.5.6 The very very very first thing that I noticed was at the seas were much much more realistic than they are 2.7 or 2.8 I am wondering if we can go back to the Sea state in 2.5.6 I don't know what happened that we lost it but we really need to get back there Since you already did it once that should not be very hard to do I would think Maybe I can do it just tell me where to start

At what point did you think placing a cursor over a knob in an F-14 screamed realism for you? Personally, I think the word "cursor" was the first red flag that we stepped outside the boundaries of realism. I am all for more visibility options especially for VR users. What harm could it possibly be? We have an entire F-menu for communications, a Jester menu, and you can literally hover over any switch, knob, or button and the game will tell you what they are. None of that is realistic, and exist purely to help the user. Why would hovering over something with a mouse pointer but now tell you what channel you are in finally break the immersive world we have? I think some rules for realism can be bent for a better user end experience. No need to shoot every idea down. You have nothing to gain.

I created a tank which will deploy a pontoon bridge.

LOL, I did have some tightening in personal areas watching, but I'm just teasing

What’s funny about the mod is at least the maker was nice enough to make it public and not just keep the advantage for himself Who know how many other cheats were running around with that ability before… amazing that such things weren’t locked down in DCS all along.

Could whomever did the original civilian aircraft mod please contact me? I'd like to make improvements/expansions but want to preserve as much of the original as possible, especially relevant 3D models. I'd also like to contribute several thousands of $$$US to expanding the stable of aircraft with high-poly models and I want there to be a centralized/coordinated effort to this.

Practice makes it better, simple as that, stop crying and practice. Yeah, because in real life you can actually feel that aircraft movement, in DCS we don't get that feeling, so it makes it harder simply by the fact that when you focus on those lights you can't notice your mowing up or down, left or right, but with practice you learn to notice that too, and in turn it becomes easier with practice. Formation flying is also good practice for AAR. Eventually we will get boom/basket psychics too;)

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:

This is exactly why we are not allowed to discuss other SIMs on this forum. You just proved why we have certain forum rules. Calling others mentally is not rude, it's bullying, which says a lot about you.

+1 Also the WPN dial for Sidewinder tone does not change tone volume.

Very much needed. I’d also suggest the ability to set a fixed IAS for the tanker, rather than TAS which can lead to significant changes in IAS with winds aloft.

Problem: A bug where the "BST SYS MAL" light does not turn on immediately when the L/H engine is shut down when starting with ramp-hot. Principle of operation: After starting the engine normally on the ground, when turning off the engine, the EMER GEN relay should operate immediately and the BST SYS MAL light should turn on. Guess : Guess: My guess is that the 30 second relay setting was applied without thinking to make it work even in ramp-hot conditions.

this will make all of you feel better

You need the latest beta., like it says...

Hi, hoping that the Mig Killer remains on track. I am sure the developers have already found this research materiel but I figured I would upload for everyone else's purview. F-8 analysis.pdf

I read the explanation about T.O, but I don't understand it. T.O clearly states that it is a two-position rocker switch. As you said, a two-position rocker switch is correct. and If it is a two-position rocker switch, it is correct that the power is turned on when it is pressed before the power is turned on. However, in reality, MPD/MPCD does not turn on, as stated at the top of the thread. I actually turn the MPD/MPCD off and on every day while doing maintenance work. I was bored so I tried going back and forth between ON and OFF. At least once, after pressing ON, there must have been times when the power was applied in that state. But what is certain is that the act of pressing the switch before turning on the power has never caused the MPD/MPCD to turn on.

Not sure if its meant to work like this, but in the current build, you dont have to designate anywhere if CDES is boxed, CDES is Constant designation, so it is always redesignating. In the practice mission i made, all 4 moving targets, i just box CDES, with PTRK, and tap auto aqq. press once, if it doesnt grab first try, dont press again (i think this is how it changes back to area track), just move near the target with tdc slew, and make sure your polaritys correct (obviously the bigger the contrast between target an background will hold better track). EDIT, just made a new mission n track to show u what i mean F15GBUPTRK.trk

That is really fantastic! I have only one suggestion. Make the rivet line discoloration more subtile, like here: Just a friendly suggestion