Leaderboard

By the way, with this pack I just passed 100 released assets! Yay! US Infantry (USA) version 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

A video featuring some of my upcoming assets, the US Infantry pack. The first release will include: M2 HMG tripod soldier Mk19 AGL tripod soldier FGM-148 Javelin ATGM soldier (mobile) M82 AMR soldier (with and without camouflage cover) M136 AT soldier (mobile)

Project 956 Admiral Ushakov Class Destroyer WIP Photos. So far the Sovremenny Class Russian Destroyer AI Ship mod is working out well. Still a lot of work to do. Weapons testing in progress If someone would like to volunteer to create Liveries that would be great as I don't plan to create any. Currently, there are only three in Service. Two are being overhauled and four were sold to China.

Если кто вдруг соскучился)

Another oldie but goldie request. Please add the EWR task to ships, so that ships can act as EWR and provide target information to AI aircraft. Doesn't seem like this should be too hard to implement. Carriers/ships controlling aircraft is a common concept.

More front turret work and Rebecca ariel

As the title, if any aircraft is connected to Catapult 1 no F-14 can taxi up to and get directions to connect to catapult 2. I know this is a legacy of the og undersized Stennis model, where two F-14s wouldn't fit side by side without wing overlap and the risk of collsion on launch but given that this legacy issue is now a non-factor can we please amend the logic to consign this now needless restriction to the waste bin? As the CO of a multiplayer Tomcat squadron, this is providing needless nuisance in getting our Air Wing off the deck in a timely manner. Many thanks.

Does ED consider the AI simulation to be in a good spot? The modules are becoming more and more realistic and that often results in limited capabilities (flight dynamics, radar detection limits). Which is a good thing because it's realistic, but meanwhile AI aircraft and ground units are enjoying such a simplistic model that ignore a huge number of real life limitations and act like aliens from the 24th century. - They can see through clouds (Good luck fighting AI warbirds on a cloudy day) - They can spot you instantly anywhere from any angle (behind them, in front of them, above them, below them) within a certain range. Example: I was below and behind them they instantly saw me. Meanwhile I'm sitting in my metal tube and can see like a quarter of the sky. - They react immediately: Instant reaction and dodging of incoming missiles. - They have a perfect radar. Example 1: My AI F-14 wingman saw all and engaged targets at 100nm further out as separate contacts, whereas I had to wait to get to 60 nm and then a 2-ships showed up as one contact. Example 2: My Mig-21 radar has a range of around 20km on a good day and theoretical maximum of 40km. My AI wingman in Mig-21 called out contacts for me at range 100nm = 160km??? They don't have to contend with ground clutter, merging of contacts, have fixed and easy range limits, have scan a huge chunk of the sky instantly. - They have a perfect RWR - They don't seem be too affected by flight physics, a lot of them flying like UFOs. Example 1: I was in F14 accelerating to maximum speed, full burner. Told my F-14 wingman to engage the enemy. He just puts in ... full-erer burner (???) and overtakes me?? Another Example2 : Me Mig-21 vs AI Mig-21 dogfight. He still has 3 tanks on, is faster, can accelerate faster, can turn harder and loses less speed on turns. What? - Infinite flares: when engaged in a dogfight, all AI aircraft will pop flares continuously and never stop. Good luck hitting something with older IR missiles. - Ground units always see you. Perfect situational awareness, they can look into all directions at once and instantly react. - Ground units have perfect aim. Me flying Hind at 200 kmh doing maneuvers at 3 km away, guy in an AK47 lands perfect hits. If that's realistic, I would love to see a video of ED programmers with an AK trying to hit a maneuvering target at that distance lol BTR's are more dangerous than ZSU-23. They always know where you are, they always know where you will be when their bullet hits. You can not surprise them, you can not evade them. Fly within 3 km of them and you are dead. I understand that (supposedly) I as a human have an intelligence advantage over AI, but surely, all of this unrealistic behaviour is not supposed to compensate their otherwise dumb decision making process? Is this game made exclusively for Multiplayer, or why is the AI so simplistic and unrealistic? Like, this isn't just me whining about the wrong number of rivets on a plane. These issues make the game NOT FUN with certain modules in certain situations. For example, only being able to engage BTR from a distance deletes a huge chunk of the Mi-24 gameplay of going in with rockets. Having perfect radar and visibility kills the gameplay of most older fighters. Being able to see through clouds makes all WW2 missions with clouds pointless. What's the point of adding more and more modules and single player campaigns that you can't enjoy because AI is both perfect and idiotic at the same time?

Потому что только эпоха колдвара предлагает +/- паритет в фулл фиделити модулях, кликабах по-русски. Летать на ГС3 против Хорнета и прочего 4го поколения не всем заходит. Кроме всего прочего, эпоха колдвара это золотой век развития авиации, и все эти "ненужные самолеты" это доведенные до идеала машины, проверенные временем. МиГ-23 призван скомпенсировать перевес с появлением Фантома, и что то мне подсказывает оба самолета станут имбой. Для колдвар серверов.

Чтоб не плодить разные симуляторы под каждый самолёт разной эпохи. Он найдёт своего покупателя и эксплуатанта как в моём лице, так и ещё многих. Ждём))

We'll see Thanks! The Lancet is on the list, but it might be hard to emulate its abilities, we'll see. Thank you! The reason I don't link directly is the extra work involved, with the risk of link errors etc. There are enough steps I go through with every release as it is. So I have outsourced the remaining two mouse clicks to my users. As mentioned, there's already a project in the works. And it looks really good.

I think there should be a module that allows someone designated as s flight instructor the ability see and interact with the student and controls (by permissions setting). This would be for the function of the aircraft only and will not have the ability to stop the game or troll the student. The module would allow the student the ability to input the gamer tag of the Flight Instructor and the server where the training takes place. These conditions must be set in the game. The instructor would request permission from the student and the student will acknowledge either ‘give control’ or ‘deny control’. Much like how Microsoft Teams works. The instructor will have the ability to point to and highlight switches but not actually control anything unless that setting is toggled in the game settings. I think this type of module would be value added and provide a better and more realistic way to train. This would apply to squadron and public severs with the word ‘Training’ in the server name. The module will actually verify this condition. Or the server owner can toggle 'Allow Flight Instructor'.

US Infantry (USA) version 1.1.0 released! Changelog Version 1.1.0 Fixed missing muzzle flame textures

Yep, I started with the heavier stuff. But on my list I have the M4, M4/320, M249 and M240.

I don't mind if you modify my mods for personal use, but I would ask you to keep this thread on topic. You may contact me in Discord or modding forum threads.

Hi @BIGNEWY and/or @NineLine; any chances to influence the authors of this map and performance problems reported here and in bug section of this corner of SA map? We trusted that it's EA and the map will only get better, meanwhile it's the other way around, and adding new objects makes it worse. The map clearly stands out from other maps in terms of performance, offering significantly smaller tracts of forests or buildings, meanwhile it works much worse. There is also a serious problem in VR. We are a more than year after the release and it's still bad. Pretty please. VR issues was reported here:

I just had to do it

can't wait! next time Can you release a Russian infantry pack?

I got no axe to grind. But it seems you do? The past... you mean the particular time in the scene that you admited not even having experienced, right? Which is curious. Then how can you even form an opinion at all, or even make a comparison? About my own opinion... it's similar to that of so many others in this thread (the majority, from what I gather?) and of other similar ones on other forums in recent years. Maybe that means more than "rose tinted memory"... Here's another opinion - bringing nonsensical statistics just make it look more and more like "grasping at straws". What's now the purpose or supposed outcome, I don't know. Now I'm reprehended for the word I've chosen for it... fine, substitute that with "ubiquitous". Better now?

We don't have to convince you of anything. You still miss that point, 5 pages later in the thread. Once and for all, and this is consensual here too, for us that lived simming in that era, yes that's a Golden Era compared to today. For obvious reasons that those who didn't miss entirely. The variety and speed of progress in gaming and simming, along with the hardware constant leaps, was at light-speed if compared to today. It was a great time to be in it. This is a fact that is impossible to miss if we get to these "then and now" comparisons. And that's it. It is what is is. Sales numbers, popularity of the specific genre, numbers of houses with computers, none of that really matters for comparisons. It can't break what was so good then. The flight-sim genre has plenty history to read if you care to look for. It's rich, and was popular. It's why people persist with it, the few developers and us as end-users. We technically have the most complex, jaw dropping beautiful simulations and controllers today. Far and beyond anything that supposed "Golden Era" had, undoubtedly. Head-tracking is pretty banal today, and even VR usage is quite spreaded today. Those weren't even a thing then (at least not for the general userbase). BUT.... the lack of choice and variety in the recent market, and steeper costs once you dive in, impose restrictions that weren't really there then. And as good as things are today, it all kind of feels stagnated. Remember, we still don't have perfect products, as good as the (very few) modern ones we have today became. I haven't seen Dynamic Campaigns/Missions like I'd see in quite a few of those old titles (endless re-playablity), as much as some mods try to workaround and disguise that. Or worlds that somehow felt a lot more alive (as archaic as they look now) than what we feel today in modern sims, no matter how many pretty static objects get to fill the space. Also, the awesome details and complexity of everything we get to have now, comes at a cost of extremely long production times and costs. Which result in necessary higher prices for the end user. And, to some extent, a "far higher patience requirement" from the consumer, who has to wait YEARS (literally, in plural) for every single module after its announcement for the exhisting sim. It's all certainly well justified, absolutely. But a sad reality nonetheless, IF we have to compare.

After seeing Glowing Amraam's latest video I was reminded of this mod. It's still a bit rough around the edges, though. Ingame, the mothership is available under the ship class (ET Mothership). As a ship, it doesn't fly. It will steadily hover at around 1000 ASL. It can move pretty fast. I've modeled a basic interior inside which you can fly in(I recommend helos but you do you). No pics of the interior, I'll let you explore... DOWNLOAD There are 2 variants: - "ET Mothership" = Regular spaceship - "ET Mothership Crashed" = Spaceship with a "sinking" animation (just like my sinking ships). Over the span of a hour the spaceship will slowly lose altitude and sink into the sea.

Thanks! Thank you! Thanks! Unfortunately not, I can't really make one big asset pack, since it (currently) would be around 30 GB. And if I make one small code change you would have to download all 30 GB again. That's why it's distributed in smaller parts. But I just added the option to download all per country, for the first timers. I could maybe add the option to download all countries at once also.

A-7E development progress from FlyingIron's discord null null

Блин спасибо тебе, добрый человек! Я даже зарегался, чтоб это написать. Столько страданий было с этим стим виаром а лечится одним файликом!!!!!!

No, problem! The flight manual is a bit vague about the purpose of TEST OXY.

I am sorry to say you do not have the F4U yet as the F4U is not ready to have. When it is ready, you will have it. Continue to follow M3 for updates on its progress. If you have deeper issues with us (Eagle Dynamics) feel free to send me a DM. I am closing this thread for now as there is nothing new beyond development is ongoing. Thanks

Hey All, I have found that the front UFC is difficult to read during the day with the visor down. The lettering just gets really dark and relatively hard to make out. The rear UFC is another story... If the sun angle is just right, it is down right impossible to read anything. I find myself putting my head or hand over it so that I can make out the lettering as if I could actually shade the panel. But, then I have a laugh with myself realizing that my head or hand are not really in the WSO seat at all. Anyone else? Caldera

'S' FK186, No. 220 Squadron RAF / Generic RAF Coastal Command Camouflage, 1943 ED User Files Download Page A paint scheme of a Fortress in RAF Coastal Command camouflage from 1943, includes a generic skin with no squadron/aircraft marking as well as markings of an aircraft from No. 220 Squadron RAF ('S' FK186). Includes specular textures for compatibility with @Warlord64's JSON mod, however the mod is not required to use the skins. Eample picture with the JSON mod: Also Includes a reskinned crew in a more RAF style. Update: 9th of August 2023: Added download link Adjusted camo colours Added specular textures

As having had anti-air defensive training in the army I definitely would expect them to miss no matter what skill setting (!), or even more realistic only take shots on approaching aircraft. This is hammered into your head during training, as trying to lead a fast moving aircraft flying away(!) from you is basically a waste of ammunition. A ZSU-23-4 with its radar can calculate lead in realtime, but not a human gunner eyeballing the target, laser rangefinder or not. The concept of defensive Anti-Air (Fliegerabwehr) is trying to deny the airspace in the direction of a target by putting as much tracers/bullets in the air in front of the aircraft as possible to scare the pilot into maneuvering, failing the approach. If you hit the aircraft it is more by luck than any skill involved (talking about a jet at 500 kts, not a slow moving helicopter). In real life the ground forces will only fire at an aircraft flying towards(!!!) their position and stop firing, when it passes the 3/9 line of the gunner. Air defense against jets is what SHORAD like Roland or Gepard were designed for. Autocannons against slow or hovering helicopters is fine, heck, even Tank crews train snap shots against helicopters with the main gun in the simulator, but not against fast movers, as it would be waste of precious ammo. This is a long standing issue with the AI. It's a constant gripe, since DCS: A-10C Warthog days, that BMPs especially, but also BTR, MBT with Anti-Air MG hit jets perfectly at their max engagement range, making them a bigger threat than dedicated AAA. It's not just a simple skill setting issue. I would love to see the AI no longer shoot jets with a DSHK after it already passed overhead and with a perfectly timed lead in 3 dimensions adjusted for 500 KTS snipe it out of the sky.

I meant to specify that, like Timex3, I had everything installed in the same way. That said, I must apologize. I looked through your previous answer and for me, the historical filter did the trick as it doesn't seem to work for mods. Sorry about that and thanks! Timex3, just to clarify, did you turn OFF the filter? It should look like this at the bottom of the mission editor: NOT like this:

Please fix the map.

Here's the link to my "E-4C"... or whatever you want it to be. https://www.mediafire.com/file/bqrv4j3wv93iz9w/E-4C.zip/file

1. Nuclear power plant IRANIAN design. New detailed models. DOWNLOAD Installation: delete old mod from your tech folder and paste new one from archive. The set includes a destructible reactor (VVER-1000 inside), several auxiliary buildings, two chimneys, basement for main buildings, aNPP_IranLand.mizn electrical substation, and an electrical transformer. You can also download the mission, where all buildings are placed in the right way. v 1.01 reactor armor reduced: 2x2000 bombs for destruction unzipped textures removed Please support by donation if you like such assets. 2. Thermal power station Name is "HPP tech building and chimney" in Editor DOWNLOAD 3. Nuclear research facility Names are "NRR..." in Editor DOWNLOAD 4. Nuclear power plant (common design) This type of PWR/PHWR reactors are known worldwide and present on all continents. In asset you will find reactor building with damage model, 2 technical buildings (IRL they are "turbine halls") and electrical substation. There is also technical building with build-in transformation substation. All units are named "NPP Old..." in ME. DOWNLOAD 5. 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 6. Large national thermal power plant - 2 cooling towers in various combinations (doubled, separated, with and without ribbed walls) - Main building (IRL it for 4 boilers, turbines) and smokestack - pipes for delivering steam to cooling towers - secondary building with forge, filters and pipes - small tech buildings - power line Almost all buildings have damage model. Units are named "CPP Big ..." in ME DOWNLOAD

You mean the one that's no longer there, hence the reason users created this thread.

На Баддиспайке 80-х место точно займёт. МиГ-23 - знаковый самолёт, который по праву займёт место на ближневосточных картах. Против F-4E будет весьма интересно. Плюс, опять же, люди делают на энтузиазме то, что им интересно. Ты ничего не делаешь. Вывод очевиден.

Thanks again @Sedlo - your efforts are much appreciated

After you enter your channel click on it and remove the asterisk from T/R. That´s a current bug that will get fixed soon(ish).

Благодарим за столь подробный технический анализ. Сделаем более точную сетку в одном из обновлений.

THIS IS THE WAY! You have the right to do whatever you want with it! I even appreciate the interest, effort, and work you're putting into improving the experience! Thanks very much!

Hey guys. Sorry I've been quiet, I am away from my gaming rig for almost two months, so there is only so much I'll be able to do to fix bugs / check things until September. Last time I flew M11 (a patch ago) it worked fine for me. The problem I am seeing more often, that there are bugs that some people experience but don't exist for other users, based on the strength of the machine they have (more bugs are apparent on older PCs), whether they fly the MT version or not, if they have 3rd party mods installed etc. Which makes the troubleshooting extremely difficult. In any case, I'll have to look into all the Raven One and Raven One Dominant Fury missions because of some cool upcoming DCS features which will heavily affect both campaigns, so I'll be busy with that in the next month or two, trying to fix any bugs along the way.

Yes, but only a part of it, including Aleppo power plant and Lafarge.

Designating an offset designates the target point associated with it. The idea for offsets is not they are more targets, but a relative location to give you steering to the actual target. When you designate with an offset in PB17 it designated the associated target point at the relative bearing and range to the offset. so for example target point 4.A with offsets 4.01A and 4.02A 4.01A is 5000 feet due north of 4.A 4.02A is 3 miles due west of 4.A if you have 4.01A in PB 17 and squeeze a designation with target cursor function, 4.A will snap 5000 feet south of your cursor location and will be designated and you will get steering to it. If you have 4.02A in PB 17 and squeeze a designation with target cursor function, 4.A will snap to 3 miles east of your cursor location, and will be designated and you will get steering to it. This is how offsets work. you use them to locate and cue you to the target point, not as targets on their own.

This is a submission for the B-17G Livery Competition. It includes two skins, one a detailed 'Wee Willie' and one plain and without the distinguishing markings of 'Wee Willie" 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 42-31333, a B-17G-15-BO, code: LG-W, nicknamed "Wee Willie". The plane completed 128 combat missions with the 322nd Bombardment Squadron of the 91st Bombardment Group. DCS: World War II Assets Pack is required. Many thanks to SOLIDKREATE for providing his research and advise and to Warlord64 for his JSON Mod and for assistance on the spinning props. Please Note: This skin will work with the default JSON file included in the game but to see the skin at it's best, use the improved Metallic look MOD by Warlord64 available here : https://forum.dcs.world/topic/319116-specular-reflectivity-from-brushed-to-mirror-effect/#comment-5150016 On 3 February over Wilhelmshaven "Willie" took some serious flak damage just above the ball turret. The repair is depicted on the skin. Wee Willie was part of a mission on 8 April 1945 The 322nd Bombardment Squadron was tasked to an attack against the locomotive repair facilities at the railroad marshaling yards in Stendal, Saxony-Anhalt Germany and was on it's 129th combat mission. Wee Willie was the oldest B-17G still in service with the 91st Bomb Group, and the next to last B-17 lost to enemy action by the group before cessation of hostilities. The War in Europe came to an end with the unconditional surrender of Germany just 30 days later, 7 May 1945. It's demise was captured on a series of dramatic and heartbreaking photographs. Never Forget... B-17 42-31333 / Wee Willie Crew Position Rank Name Status Note P 1LT Robert E. Fuller POW - CP 2LT Woodrow A. Lien KIA - NAV T/SGT Francis J. McCarthy KIA - ENG/TT S/SGT Wylie McNatt, Jr. KIA - RO S/SGT Ralph J. Leffelman KIA - BT S/SGT William H. Cassiday KIA - WG S/SGT James D. Houtchens KIA - TG SGT Le Moyne Miller KIA - TOG S/SGT Richard D. Proudfit KIA - Download link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3332471/

https://www.google.com/search?q=f-16+flying+in+lofoten&oq=f-16+flying+in+lofoten&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIKCAMQIRgWGB0YHtIBCTIwMjk0ajBqNKgCALACAA&client=ms-android-huawei-rev1&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8 Royal Norwegian Airforce F-16s filming from the cockpit. Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

Das dynamisches Wetter, welches momentan im Editor einstellbar ist, wird nicht weiter entwickelt und ist vermutlich nur noch für Rückwärtskompatibilität enthalten. Ein neues dynamisches Wetter, was sich die neu entwickelte Wolkentechnologie zu Nutze macht, ist in Entwicklung und wird das alte dynamische Wetter irgendwann ersetzen... Bis dahin würde ich jedem empfehlen die statischen Presets mit der neuen Wolkentechnologie zu nutzen. Das alte dynamsiche Wetter sollte zwar in der Lage sein, Wolken zu generieren, aber die sind dann doch eher hässlich, im Multiplayer nicht synchronisiert und verschwinden manchmal einfach komplett...

Thanks for the answer, as this change in behaviour had me confused.

So you want the sim users to turn off "Game Mode" in a Sim? DCS World is a Simulator First and Foremost, asking ED to make Game Modes default to where anyone that wants realism has to turn them off, is the Opposite direction and target audience for DCS World, Here's the Rub, Game Mode Avionics, requires a separate set of systems for each module, it's simply not feasible anymore with all the modules, and new systems being integrated w/ almost every patch. Game Mode Flight Models, requires a separate flight model for each module, again, simply not feasible anymore. Half of the Game Mode Flight Models are broken and unsupported. Turning on Either of those throws out any sense of realism. If you want to just jump in a blow stuff up, then FC3 (and eventually MAC) is what your looking for. As Game Mode throws away any sense of realism with exception of the Visual Representation of the aircraft. Its being depreciated because it doesn't fit with the DCS World Target Audience or the core of the Sim anymore.

I can’t imagine enough people used Game Mode to make it worthwhile for the Devs to devote resources to it. I agree with the decision to remove it. Now this time and effort can be better spent on other things.

hi if you're reading this, i just wanted to say after browsing this forum for about an hour I feel really sorry for you guys. you're doing a great job keep it up!

DCS Kola map (ORBX). The new answer.