Leaderboard

Chuck's Guide to the Mirage F1 is finally available! Both the Mirage F1CE and F1EE variants are covered. The page count is 570+ pages. *** Link: https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/mirage-f1/ *** In typical canadian fashion, I feel I must once again apologize for taking so long to complete this project. This aircraft is dear to my heart, and I did not want to cut any corners, which once again expanded the scope of this document way beyond what I had originally planned. C'est la vie. The Mirage F1 is a fantastic Cold War era fighter... the second the afterburner kicks in and you start flying at treetop level at breakneck speeds, you'll understand why this widely exported aircraft was loved by its pilots. The exhilarating sense of speed is something truly special, and you will definitely see why this aircraft is easy to learn but hard to master. I hope this document will be able to bring new players up to speed quickly and garner interest for this beautiful yet deadly french "pointu". Happy reading, and bonne lecture! Chuck

Hey Guys. I'm pushing the limits of DCS to see what it can handle. Currently, the Allure of the Seas AI Cruise Ship mod file size is close to 200 kb. Runs fine on my PC but it may or may not cause issues for you all. Just giving you all a heads-up. I have toned down the lights as they were too bright.

Chuck's Guide to the Mirage F1 is finally available! Both the Mirage F1CE and F1EE variants are covered. The page count is 570+ pages. *** Link: https://chucksguides.com/aircraft/dcs/mirage-f1/ *** In typical canadian fashion, I feel I must once again apologize for taking so long to complete this project. This aircraft is dear to my heart, and I did not want to cut any corners, which once again expanded the scope of this document way beyond what I had originally planned. C'est la vie. The Mirage F1 is a fantastic Cold War era fighter... the second the afterburner kicks in and you start flying at treetop level at breakneck speeds, you'll understand why this widely exported aircraft was loved by its pilots. The exhilarating sense of speed is something truly special, and you will definitely see why this aircraft is easy to learn but hard to master. I hope this document will be able to bring new players up to speed quickly and garner interest for this beautiful yet deadly french "pointu". Happy reading, and bonne lecture! Chuck

Пока нет. Мы считаем что его вид достаточен для игры в текущий момент. Да, у нас есть план переработки старых моделей, Ми-8, МиГ-15 и Сейбр в том числе.

I made a short video clip. Check for the incoming antiship missile that the SAMs or CIWS didn't take manage to defeat. You will hear the CM deploy and see the black/grey fragmentation cloud. This is of course not super realistic, but it's the only way I've found to emulate the hard and soft kill navy countermeasure solutions out there. The point is to have a last ditch defense, but it won't of course stop a large number of incoming threats.

We highly appreciate your contribution to DCS: Mirage F1. Thank you very much! Aerges

Thank you all for the great feedback, we are glad that you are enjoying the update. Our apologies again about the aim54. Good news, however and presuming all things go well, ED was very kind to look into a hotfix, so that the missing piece for the aim54 can be included and the loft restored as it should be.

Coming Soon! More Commercial Vessels. A Cruise ship and two LNG Tankers

To make multiple downloading of assets easier I'm going to implement a direct link to the folder with all the files. Edit: The link is now implemented for all countries.

Thank goodness that Jester isn’t British. I’ve had the pleasure of flying with an FAA/RAF exchange RIO/WSO on several occasions. This is what it sounded like-

Seems pretty obvious he is demonstrating centering. He is simply releasing the longitudinal input. This is basically one of the flight tests conducted IRL to evaluate the longitudinal stability of any airframe. The Strike Eagle module has what is called a “Positive Centering” characteristic in the longitudinal axis as it is currently programmed. Especially evident with full CFTs at high GW. If the nose returned to the exact same pitch attitude when the control stick is released that would be called “absolute centering.” Centering makes the nose want to bounce or snap back to its previous trimmed state (position). The positive centering effect of the nose bouncing back several degrees upon control release can also be dramatically affected by aircraft CG IRL. It has been pointed out by some really smart dudes in previous posts, that the nose in the Strike Eagle became very heavy compared to the Chuck. This moves the CG forward and increases the positive centering characteristics and also positively affects longitudinal stability (read, not as nimble). Additionally, the Strike Eagle’s CG moves quite a bit during normal flight, the CFTs and external tanks gradually empty, etc. etc.. Which is wonderfully evident I might add. Long winded and pedantic way of saying that the positive centering characteristic of the Strike Eagle at high GW might be exactly what Razbam is aiming to simulate? And thinking about it, can we do accelerated stalls in the Strike Eagle, or DCS for that matter? I’m not sure, but I am really starting to fall in love with her, warts and all. Such a cool module! Centering = The ability of the longitudinal cockpit control and the longitudinal control surface to return to and maintain the original trimmed position when released from any other position. Control System Oscillations — oscillations in the longitudinal control system (elevator and cockpit control stick) resulting from external or internal disturbances.

Here is My 2nd entry to the Livery Competition (not sure We are allowed more than one) 'Calamity Jane' - 92nd BG, 326th BS, Podington, Stn 109, Bedfordshire England 1944 Aircrew 2/Lt A.A. Lindstrom, Pilot 2/Lt G. Davis, Co Pilot 2/Lt F. McGeary, Navigator 2/Lt M.J. Rosenkrantz, Bomber S/Sgt L.H. Jodoin, Top Turrent Gunner Sgt R.G. Dutton, Ball Turret Gunner Sgt R.W. Lessard, Waist Gunner Sgt R.W. Jerome Jr, Tail Gunner S/Sgt K. Bovanizer, Radio Operator DOWNLOAD: B-17G 'Calamity Jane' - 92nd BG, 326th BS, Podington, Stn 109 , Bedfordshire England,1944 (digitalcombatsimulator.com) Please Note the improved Metallic look in the screenshots were achieved with a MOD available here:

The only aircraft who can do this would be the JF-17. All other aircraft have IFF practicly not simulated.

Its not a dynamically unstable airframe. This is why it will fly just fine with no CAS at all in most cases. Its built to be aerodynamically stable.

you are pulsing the stick and the aircraft is then entering into oscillations that are damped out by the CAS. What is incorrect about that? You are supposed to smoothly fly the aircraft where you want it, not snap the stick back or forwards and let it go. That would and should result in oscillations here.

Well by being older. I think "earlier" is more accurate than "historical" since the comment was referring to the AH-64A vs D. It's not that a modern version is less relevant per se, but more of the fact not everyone likes their planes to have the latest and greatest equipment. There's people that would prefer to have the A models of the teen series fighters like the F-15, F-16, F-18, and of course we got that with the F-14. Doesn't mean the C variants we have aren't relevant, but that some people would prefer the older versions for more analogue gauges with less screens and no FBW. To go even further than variants of the same aircraft, I would rather fly the upcoming A-7 than the F/A-18 that replaced it because not only would I no longer have MFD's but I have a dedicated light attack aircraft with a higher payload that can operate in scenarios from the 70s all the way to Desert Storm in the 90's. Same thing goes for the F-4E. The modern version is less relevant to those who want to simulate the Vietnam War because of the upgrades it received after the war. But, if you want to simulate something from the late 70's into the 80's, the version we are getting should be right at home. It all depends on what you want to simulate as to what is relevant. Another example of the modern version not being relevant is the F-14B vs the Early A. The A model was featured in movies like Top Gun and The Final Countdown as well as the Gulf of Sidra incidents. The more modern B model has no place in those scenarios. Yes they flew in more places than Vietnam and served with many countries. However, not all export F-4E's had slats. If we want to simulate an F-4EJ for instance, or even the F-4E as it debuted in Vietnam, we would need a more historical (older) version with the hard wing. That doesn't mean the one we are getting is bad or irrelevant by any means, but it IS irrelevant to those scenarios unless you use your imagination. In the same way, I hope the Naval F-4 is a J and not an S because the J has a hard wing and was also exported to the UK. To me an S would be pointless since it was overshadowed by the F-14 and the F-4 saw the vast majority of it's USN action in Vietnam, so I would prefer a version that fits that timeframe.

Probably abit too complex to design but this would be awesome nonetheless.

i have watched I/ITSEC conferences videos and photos and seen military simulators with mock doorguns and all these cool toys, beyond the reach of normal people. but DCS World and Eagle Dynamics have change this pipe dream to reality, with some DIY skill, a gamer like me now am able to have such a simulator. thank you Eagle Dynamics for making the doorgun experience possible on the Mi24P hind and UH1H Huey, shout out to @Flappie i am loving the 12.7mm rounds for the Kord, even though it is fun to spray 7.62mm via the minigun after the recent patch, some dreams came true.. amazing that this DIY setup works with the Mi24P hind doorgun position. been grateful that it has been working great for the UH1H Huey. I have shared stl files for this build, link is in YouTube video description... hoping more modules will have mounted machine guns.. Ju87 Stuka perhaps? bring it for the CH47 Chinook! Hope polychop dev's can fix the joystick response for the gazelle minigun variant in near future @Kinkkujuustovoileipä

RAZBAM Mig-23MLA

This is a submission for the B-17G Livery Competition. It includes two skins, one a detailed 'Texas Chubby' and one plain and without the distinguishing markings of 'Texas Chubby". It is a generic B-17G of the 322nd BG, 91st BS as specified in the competition rules. 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 42-31634, a B-17G-25-DL, code: LG-O, nicknamed "Texas Chubby - The J'Ville Jolter". The plane flew 50 combat missions with the 322nd Bombardment Squadron of the 91st Bombardment Group. Attacked by German fighters on 16-Aug-44 while on a mission to bomb aircraft factories at Halle, Germany and blew up in mid-air. Crashed in the Forest of Mollenfelde at Eichenberg/Thurlingen, Germany with 5KIA and 4POW. Fate of the crew: Pilot 1Lt Halstead Sherrill (KIA) CoPpilot 2Lt Frank J. Gilligan (POW) Navigator 2Lt William M. Porter (POW) Bombardier 2Lt Nicholas J. Weber (KIA) Engineer/TTG Sgt Vernon E. Bauerline (KIA) Radio Operator SSgt Richard J. Munkwitz (POW) Ball Turret Enrique T. Perez (KIA) Waist SSgt Joseph R. Morrison (KIA) Tail Gun SSgt Chester W. Mis (POW). Submitted to User Files and awaiting approval.

Remember 2 years ago when Wags showed the ability to edit countermeasure programs in the main menu “special” controls section… and then it never came to the game? I do

They tweaked the flight model AND we get better at the inputs. Muscle memory clicks, it seems.

The point of my video was to show the gunners are working, not to show you how to attack a bomber formation, just to be clear. As I said, I am unsure that the fix is even in right now, I am not feeling that it is. Edit: a fix for accuracy made it in, but sleepy gunners is not yet.

Its not supposed to require trimming in level flight. The flight control system should be trimming you to 1 G level flight (after you trim out the takeoff trim).

Plans to update old 3D models as Mi-8, F-86, Mig-15, etc.

Уважаемие разработчики нет ли в планах обновить F-18C в графическом плане? Он еше не в релиз, пока еше в раннем доступе но уже успел устореть. По сравнением последных моделей того же Ми-24, F-14, F-15, AH-64 он уже сыльно устарел графически. И вообше планируется ли старые модели улучшать (Ми-8 на пример) даже за отдельную плату если угодно. Просто я обожаю Ми-8 но когда выдешь такую разницу с Ми-24 как то грусно становится. Я уже не говорю про Миг-15 и сейбр которых больно смотреть уже.

DCS World Weapons. AIM-54 loft trajectory adjusted MP. Fix scrolling to own slot if filters were used before select role dialog was closed Fix coalitions passwords feature DCS: F-15E Suite 4+ by RAZBAM Simulations Fixed: Crash when OFF Missile is selected when in GUNS mode. Fixed: Crash when activating the A/G radar Fixed: Crash when selecting SEL BIT after jettisoning wing pylons Fixed: Corrected engine start and shutdown sounds not playing for AI F-15E Fixed: Corrected engine sounds not heard from other F-15E aircraft in multiplayer Added: Rear Cockpit MPD/MPCD display program Added: Livery Dragon Betty II. Added: Livery 494th AF00 Low Vis Combat Livery. Added: USAF AF86-183 "Number 1" Livery Added: MAN 2 default release program (chaff only) Fixed: Early Refuel numbers to display correctly Fixed: 391st Name in TMOTA livery description. Fixed: Incorrect texture name using in Livery for 48th FW Anniversary and TMOTA Fixed: Incorrect spelling error "USAF 48th FW 70th Anniversary AF92-364 Heritage" Updated: Increased and improved nozzle sound gain logic Updated: Improved gear configuration for better crosswind landing control Updated: MAN 1 & MAN 2 can now be modified by editing the ALE45_PRG.lua file

I fly a lot with the FC3 planes because there is no other options to use a MiG-29, a SU-27, a SU-25 or a SU-33. I love almost every FC3 planes.

I guess just like anything, we assign what constitutes fame and significance. The F-4 as we know served in many air forces - Navy and air force versions alike - and they made aces, shot down plenty of enemy planes and saw a lot of air to ground combat too. If we define historical significance for a fighter aircraft as seeing combat and destroying enemy equipment then there's your answer. By contrast, something like the P-38K which was only ever experimental might not be considered as historically important as it didn't do anything. That said, more or less historical significance doesn't invalidate some planes compared to others but it should by now be easy to see why the more historical version would be more popular. And there's no wrong or right about that, it's just preference.

That is very incorrect, the ASL should remain fixed, unless you fly into a different wind value, or change the bombs time of fall. In which case it will have to be a significant change in wind or bomb time of fall to change the ASL the way we are seeing it. Right now I really have no trust in the ASL or steering cues in any condition other than no wind. makes it very difficult to employ the simplest of munitions dumb bombs on a jet who’s entire reason for existence is as a precision strike fighter.

The AAR is a very bad bug, which we simply were not able to locate so far, we tried several times and will continue trying. What happens is that all AAR jokes/calls get called and looped. It is a very, very sore thorn in our eyes. Our apologies.

The whole "historical version" seems like a fallacy. How is one existing plane version "more historical" than another? Why is a modern version less relevant? And specifically Phantoms, its not like they ever only flew in Vietnam. Were literally getting the most commonly produced variant of the aircraft, which most of the export models were originally based on. The F-4E variant clearly carries the most historical significance, if there is such a thing.

Razbam discord MiG-23MLA

It is part of the bug. I tested a fix for it: no more sound as long as there's no missile on the station. Of course, the volume knob works as expected when a missile is on the station. Hopefully, the fix should be part of the next "normal" OB update (today's update was a hotfix).

I just fired 2 Phoenixes and the loft indeed seems to be fixed (as far as I can judge that) I loaded up 2 Phoenixes in the F-14 IA Caucasus free flight: the first was fired at 60NM from Angels 33 at the Yak-40 (or whatever it is) and hit its target. The 2nd at the Tu-95 from 30NM also at angels 33 was notched (by the looks of it: I followed it in all the way using F6-view) about 5 seconds prior to what would have been impact. For a short very un-scientific test I'd day it looks to me like the missile behaved as it should: before the patch even shots fired from 75NM at angels 42 never lofted higher than 62k ft.

Bei solchen Fragen, wäre es immer besser zu wissen, was denn schon vorhanden ist. Ich habe schon recht sinnbefreite Aufrüstaktionen erlebt, wo bei ->geringeren<- Geldmitteleinsatz mehr als die doppelte Performance herausgesprungen wäre, hätte man andere Komponenten stärker aufgewertet und andere gar nicht geändert. Beispiel: Vorhanden war jeweils ein Ryzen 5900X und eine 3090. Nr. 1 wurde auf einen AMD Ryzen 7590 und eine 4080 aufgerüstet (vorher AMD Ryzen 5900X und nVidia 3090). Performancegewinn: ungefähr 30% FPS in DCS. Kosten = 2.800 €, weil ja alles neu gemacht werden musste (RAM, Bord, CPU, Netzteil = 1500 € + 1300 für die GPU). Nr. 2 Nur die 3090 wurde gegen eine 4090 ausgetauscht: 75 + % FPS in DCS. Kosten = 1800 € (inklusive neuem NT) für die 4090. Deutlich mehr Leistung und 1000 € gespart. Der Besitzer des ersten Systems wollte sofort alles neu haben, weil DCS ja so CPU intensiv ist und mehr Kerne = mehr Leistung sind. Ja und nein. Als DCS noch rein Single Core war, wäre der IPC des einzelnen Kerns der wichtigere Faktor gewesen. Mit MT ist das (fast) obsolet. Es ergibt derzeit keinen Sinn so extrem aufzurüsten, es sei denn, man hat das Geld übrig. Derzeit ist GPU-Power der (fast) einzig wichtig Faktor und, so wird es auch gezeigt, der einzig limitierende Faktor (falls man nicht auf einem alte 4-Kerner rumeiert). Wenn der OP schon ein relativ gutes System besitzt (6- oder 8-Kerner (inklusive SMT oder HT), mit DDR4 RAM und PCIE 3.0), dann wäre es am sinnvollsten nur die GPU zu upgraden und dann gleich auf eine 4080 oder am besten eine 4090. Die verbrauchen dank Undervolting deutlich ->weniger (bei nur maximal 3% Verlust an der Gesamtleistung)<- und bringen am meisten Leistungsplus (je nach alter GPU mindestens 70%). Dann kommen noch DLSS 3.0 und andere wichtige Feature dazu, die die 3090 nicht mehr hat. Eine 3090 hat zwar viel VRAM und ist für VR schon ein guter Boost, aber sie kann bei weitem nicht mit einer 4080 und schon gar nicht mit einer 4090 mithalten. Zumal alle 40XX GPUs deutlich kühler arbeiten als eine 30XX (meine 4090 verbraucht in VR nicht mehr als 280 Watt (undervoltet), meine 3090 hatte immer 380 + Watt gezogen). Also, falls das jemand liest, der auch aufrüsten möchte, bitte immer die Daten eures alten Systems mitliefern. Manchmal geht dann deutlich mehr, mit viel weniger Geldmittel, als man vorher dachte.

Expensive, yes, dangerous, no. The F-16 holds your hand so much that a kid can fly it, Iron Eagle style (I was flying serious Viper sims at 14 or so, with little trouble). WWII fighters could be dangerous, and Korea-era jets outright wanted to kill you, but that is not the case with modern jets, and it hasn't been since the 70s. So stop hiding behind "it's just a game" excuse, because it's a complex one, and learning to get the most of your aircraft really helps get the most out of (non-inconsiderable) amount of money you have to pay for it. That's why a trainer is useful. It's not about crashing a cheaper aircraft in training, nor is it even about crashing an expensive one - you're less likely to crash an F-16 than an F-5 IRL, because the former is so much easier to fly. Landing is another matter, but as long as you keep crosswinds low, the Viper is pretty easy to put down, too, and the FPM really helps compared to the F-5. Pretty much the only thing that the Viper can do to you is the deep stall, and it takes more effort to get into it than to get out, in most configurations at least. And that's exactly the problem, if you get no time in a less advanced fighter, you won't appreciate what the Viper does for you, and why. Unless you're happy with moving mud, I'd recommend the F-5 just to learn how a fighter behaves without all this fancy FBW. I'm not saying you can't understand the Viper by reading about how and why it does things, but it's so much easier with some hands-on experience in a non-FBW aircraft. If it had proper tutorials included, the A-4 would've made for a nice trainer, for the same reasons (plus it's free). Lack of them is really the only reason why I wouldn't recommend it. The others mostly make sense if you like flying in multicrew, with a real instructor in the backseat. The A-4 and F-5 are particularly nice because they can hold their own in a dogfight, and if you buy the F-5, you can get some mileage out of it on Cold War servers (plus, it's a just plain nice aircraft to fly, and you can get a big discount on a sale).

The "Full screen" option is not the specific cause of the problem because you literally toggle the value each time to get the "option restart". Any option change that generate a forced restart does the trick. Changing the relevant value in the options.lua before starting DCS does nothing, a hard "Options restart" is the only way to go. A correction to this problem would be very welcome in the upcoming hotfix

Yes and I'm glad you brought it up. I would not have noticed it until I specifically looked. This shows that Polychop are on the ball with this new FM and I'm enjoying flying it as a pure helicopter experience. Pagan, Marianas. ..

I’ll take today’s sims over the golden age games any day.

Well, I create my textures in SP and don't provide livery templates. I have received a lot of help from dedicated guy like @HighMaintenanceB creating pennant liveries for my ships. I really appreciate this since I can spend my time moving forward with new assets. Once in a while I add a livery to an existing asset, like the Pantsir with the desert livery. But in general I don't have the time to create a lot of liveries.

Who do I report this to? My car doesn't teleport... obviously, since it was never a feature, it's a bug. I'd like it fixed. Even more annoying, my car isn't even in Beta! What the hell Toyota?!

Type 052D Destroyer (China) version 1.3.0 released! Changelog Version 1.3.0 Added pennant number liveries (thanks @HighMaintenanceB) Type 055 Destroyer (China) version 1.4.0 released! Changelog Version 1.4.0 Added pennant number liveries (thanks @HighMaintenanceB)

It was suited just fine for high texture settings in VR up until three months ago. Let's not turn what is clearly poor optimization and performance bloat into useless hardware comparisons. Throwing money and chipsets at the problem doesn't fix the problem.

Any chance of this puppy? the M-ATV from Oshkosh.

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.

Nice. I got sunburned and soaked on Sunday...