Leaderboard

Sneak peek of what's coming next...

New shots from Milteh-5/PD as well:

That is very much correct! HQ-22 launcher with four canisters HQ-22 H-200 Search and track radar HQ-22 JSG-100 Search radar

Damn, more modern Chinese Assets is always a plus to DCS.

If it’s the G we definitely need Italians skins from 3 Stormo, a recce group which operated out of incirilik iirc during desert storm. (They even had the ALE-40 countermeasures external pods) And the mighty Oplympus!

The Aerges Team is happy to announce that the Mirage F1 BE (two seater) is now entering the final testing phase before public release. This version will be ideal for training purposes; it will provide the opportunity to fly with friends in multiplayer, having both cockpits fully synchronized in multicrew. As new features, it will include a sight repeater in the rear cockpit, unique in DCS. It can also be equipped with ventral and underwing cannon pods, turning it into a very powerful supersonic gun platform. We are also very excited to present to the DCS world our upcoming module: The F-104. This airplane requires little introduction: It is an American 1950’s interceptor that took part in several conflicts including the Vietnam war, and it held speed and altitude world records in its time. Our target is to put to good use the knowledge acquired in the development of the C-101 and the Mirage F1 modules to create the most accurate simulation of the F-104 ever made, with the same passion that we’ve always tried to dedicate to our work.

Wow, now this is absolutely amazing! Currenthill has done so much for the DCS World Community. I want to personally thank him for bring life to DCS World! Timex 3

Tonight's USAF RQ-4A (callsign "FORTE11") special operation) Taking off from an airbase in the former Soviet Republic of Georgia, doing its job and returning after 24h to its base.

DCS Screenshots

I don't get why most users only want the latest version of any old aircraft, looks like they don't want anything without an MFD or digital HUD on it. I prefer to have the most used variant, the one with most liveries and operators, as it allows for a wider variety of missions. On the F-104, for me that variant is the G.

A few more rare Italian liveries. The first one was an experiment for a low vis livery in the early 90s, unfortunately they went with the boring NATO grey instead: The first F-104s were delivered with metal colors, but with anti-flash white on the wings:

Starting in the early 70s, german jets were converted to the J79-MTU-J1K engine, which manifests itself by the long afterburner nozzle. With that mod, the engines lost most of their howl. Late Luftwaffe jets got ECM antennae: The odd-coloured panel on the rear fuselage was a crash-safe data-recorder: Marine jets had the ALE-40 CM dispensers, verysimilar, but placed slightly differently to the late canadian CFs:

Some more interesting stories&information from Andy Bush,including it’s capabilities in flat scissors vs . the Topgun F-5s https://combatsim.com/review.php?id=5 Plus this amusing story where he and his wingman outsmarted a duo of F-15 and gunned them.There he also mentions the ability to sustain 7G at around 400kts with the flaps . https://theaviationgeekclub.com/starfighter-4-eagle-0-that-time-two-f-104s-scored-four-simulated-kills-against-an-f-15b-in-a-single-training-mission/amp/

You are a legend.

Also, for the 104C, check out Annex G of this one: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD0372500

HQ-22? Sweet!

Couldn't agree more. I'd like to have F-104C, if it's not possible F-104J since it's last pure air superiority variant. But TBH I love F-104G for their history. I visited 2-days ago Luftfahrtmuseum in Unterschleißheim to see one of those beauties. Slick, sexy beast I have advert for Aegres: "A module which makes your puberty hair grow" Anyway I'll fly any of them. I am finally in heaven. F-104, F-4, A-1, A-7, MiG-23, MiG-19... A shame that there's no proper MiG-21... The one we have is full of bugs and simplifications. It's kind of half - fidelity... @edit: here is the reason why I think that MiG-21bis is half fidelity: SAU not working properly, ARU not even in slightest way working properly, Radar much to efficient at low altitude, Strangely modeled elevator behavior at high altitudes (over 15 000m) pulling hard with ARU in manual mode set in position "Take off" (strangely it's also the same position in "Auto" mode on these altitude) gives slight, gentle turn with about 2G, while it shall cause a lost of control, due to excessive AoA and stability lost. Other case is gyro sight - switch positions give different effect as expected: in pure Gyro mode only 300m range works as expected, auto ranging works different as expected (based on original flight instruction), A2G mode - shooting unguided rockets with rdr ranging and gyro gives also wind correction -> way too acurate, A2G bombing sight is a pure fantasy. It gives you precise hit point for FAB's with wind correction. A ballistic table for manual bombing with various dive angles and sight deflection angles doesn't exist. Also MiG-21 Cluster bombs are able to kill every server since I play DCS, Letherneck / Magnitude never attempted to correct these issues. Lowering gear makes your nose ... pull up instead of drop down. Aerodynamical moments are modelled upside down and nobody cares. Engine flames out after exceding 1300KIAS which is a total fantasy (and explanation given in DCS manual is made-up total fiction. It doesn't fit liquid mechanic, or jet engine behavior). Speed shall be limited by loosing longitudinal/directional stability and there is a proper description how it works in real MiG-21. And "the devs " are well aware about it. Modelling a proper behavior is too much effort i suppose? Engine flame out (due to over-speeding) is pure fiction (and a lie). RSBN - Is not modelled. Curent work is based not on RSBN/PRGM net, but ...after FC3 MiG-29 module! Every AF has RSBN/PRGM if you fly MiG-21bis. And channel doesn't match the F10 data. ARK-not correctly modelled (some stations are missing ), also ARK landing approach is not possible. That is why I say it's half fidelity. True- learning to fly it - I used original Polisch flight instruction, but if you set up the plane to take off according to instruction (SAU - Aileron and Elevator stabilisation on) - you will deeply regret it. SAU destabilise a plane and is nothing like its original design. One shall fly MiG-21 with SAU applied at least to ailerons, but actually it's hardly an option in magnitude half fidelity module. There are also some funny "easter eggs" - like "1,5Ma Test button" - literally nobody knows what it's made for. Including MiG-21bis real pilots (I know and asked 2 of them) and the devs. Anyway. I gathered all the nicknames of the "104" after wikipedia: "missile with a man in it" Super Starfighter" these was used by Lockheed "Oh-Four", but when the F-100 Super Sabre began to be referred to as the "Zip-Zilch" (for "zero-zero"), the Starfighter acquired the similar nickname "Zip-Four"; this was eventually shortened to "Zipper" or "Zip" Eiko (Kanji: 栄光, "glory") The Japan Air Self-Defense Force "Gustav", "Witwenmacher" ("widowmaker") or Fliegender Sarg ("flying coffin"), Erdnagel ("ground nail") - Germany The reputation of the Pakistani F-104 was such that the Indian Air Force referred to it as Badmash ("hooligan"), "Scoundrel", and "Wicked One" Spillone ("hatpin") Among Italian pilots Vestfjordoksen ("the Vestfjord bull"), due to the immense roar of the aircraft based in Bodø, at the southern end of Vestfjorden. "Lawn Dart" "Aluminium Death Tube" and "Flying Phallus" In the Canadian Forces, due to its shape. "Silver Sliver" and simply "Starfighter" NASA's F-104B Starfighter N819NA acquired the nickname "Howling Howland".

I really hope we're getting a proper air to air focused USAF/Guard variant with (for its time) eye watering performance. An upgraded, overweight ground attack variant of an iconic fighter would be missing the mark for me.

null

We like to call those "skill issue" players.

Planned Aerges Mirage F1 BE, external picture:

RAZBAM Mig-23MLA

That is a sure thing, and I'd wager even the people with strong opinions would take what they get. The good news is the developers did such a good job with the Mirage 1 we can all be hopeful they'll continue that trend with the F-104. I should really get that thing out and enjoy at least one froggy evening! Amazing the amount of knowledge around here, though! Holy crap, these guys have forgotten more about the bits and pieces that go on various models than I ever knew! There's one at the air museum down the road; now I have to take what I've learned here and go check it out again!

I don't know why, but it's a lot harder to find good 3d models of western SAM systems compared to Russian and Chinese. The difference is enormous.

Advise 64gb ram, dcs tends to use over 32 and you want it as a kit.

I want to have both "S" and "G". Can't they take my money twice?

Maybe just ask devs for a special option on the Viper to have Mavs already boresighted could do the trick, I dont know how receptive ED could be with such thing

I want the version with 4 AIM-9X, 6 AIM-260, and 12 GBU-24s all carried internally, carrier capable with VTOL, entertainment system, wet bar, hot tub, billiard table, and of course a five piece bath, but no cell phone service. And metallic chameleon paint. As an alternative something that looks more or less like an F-104 and flies. Since DCS is really all about me I think it's past time the F-16 isn't the sexiest aircraft flying anymore.

You have plenty of choices not realism based around the game universe. If this kind of things annoys you some much i suggest just move to something not so " hardcore " and enjoy your spare time on that because almost any "study level" module in DCS has this kind of feautures like: Wait 90 seconds in the Harrier for the Mavs to be ready to use, everytime. Wait several minutes to align any DCS module with a real INS modelled from a cold start. Wait for GBU´s selected to align before they can be used on the Hornet or so. Warm up the right way engines on the warbirds if you dont want to kill them soon. There are so many examples of things, procedures, steps, you must do in order to flight properly a combat aircraft that if boresighting is to much for you to the point to uninstaling the Viper, then maybe is time just to rethink about your preferences and just move to something more fun for you from your point of view. But dont take my advice to seriously, i´m enjoying with my squad team mates simulating a LOLA zone in the Airbase with some triggers and sound files just to simulate we are arming the weapons before take off, and the same when we arrive with some ordinance hanging. Crazy. Isn it?

Turn away, and not get shot at by SAMs, drop on multiple targets at the same time, spring obviously to mind.

Большое Спасибо за ссылку! Это то, что искал.

I hope for S/ASA-M: having MRM like Sparrow and/or Aspide might be a really good thing.

It’s not half fidelity, it’s a forgotten full fidelity. A payed rework might bring it back to its greatness.

The CF-104 has a better cockpit layout with that fat abbajabba in the center, while the 104G was a bit more awkward. CF German 104G

The recon orpheus pod would be awesome. As for the refueling probe i think depends on the version: C, yes, G no (there was only a test on the S

You have couldnt agree more. Currenthill is way better at creating Mods, that's just my opinion!

wasn’t complaining about variants, I just don’t want the initial module to be about a late-life model … hope my preferences are as worthy as yours. anyway this is a byzantine debate, I will leave it on the hands of the developer and just enjoy whatever variant they decide to do.

I hope the engine sound is recorded from the real aircraft because the F-104 without this sound is not F-104. https://youtu.be/wdUKeDyNT28

Yea to me losing the gun is no big deal, but being purely a2a would be a letdown for an aircraft that was supposed to do a2g as well. Oh and speaking of capabilities, there's a 1996 F-104S manual online (which I won't post here because rule 1.116) with a performance envelope that shows a) a max G-limit of 7.3 at 500 KIAS between 0 and 30000 ft, so that's roughly Mach 0.8 for a (instantaneous) turn rate of ~12-16 deg/s and more hilariously b) a max speed at sea level of 750 KIAS. The 104 will leave even the Viggen in the dust for low level high speed strike.

1.2601 up... Fixes a small bug where the 6 key on the ICP starts out pushed in. Not a required update unless you are having problems related to that. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3332539/

Just throwing in some one-off Italian ones:

I can say with some confidence that this idea can be accomplished. All that is needed is a collision shell. As @crazyeddie has said, the difficult part is finding the flat area. Otherwise clipping occurs, and this ruins the effect. You all thought you could not spawn aircraft upon the ocean? I am here to tell you, this is now possible! It is all about the collision shell. However, I have already done something similar! Try THAT with the F-18! The best part? They leave a wake upon taking off! Who Knew?

I'm looking forward to the kill the pilot competition between F104 and MiG23

there is no reason to convince you otherwhise, going within engagementrange of the AI is just asking to die, the Apache is still one of the best helis in DCS tho for exactly this reason, unlike the Hind for example, wich IRL realy sets alot more emphathis on Rockets than missiles , the apache can just comfortably stay outside engagement range of 90% of the units and just fire off hellfires, its just a core DCS problem, wich tbh i dont see them fix anytime soon, i realy once thought that when they made the hind the just HAD to work on the AI aswell but here we are a few years later ....

Aerges has made great modules so far. If they manage to create those flaws too, the F-104 could be one of the most interesting cold war jets. I mean this beast is unforgiving to pilot errors like no other in DCS.

Apart from the F-104 announcement, the newsletter contains screenshots from the BE, including a look at the sight repeater.

COMPETITION ENTRY https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3332722/ This is my only entry for the Livery Competition as I need a good long lie down now. B-17G-35-BO 42-32024 WA – L, “Swamp Fire”­ 524th Squadron, 379th BG, 41st Combat Wing of the 8th USAAF based at Kimbolton, Cambridgeshire Feb to Dec 1944. Completed on 15th January 1944, she was flown to England on Valentine’s Day and 1 week later began her active service. In just short of 10 months, Swamp Fire completed 117 missions, becoming the first 8th AF aircraft to achieve 100 missions without an abort on 1st November 1944. In December 1944 she was damaged in a landing incident by a rookie crew and struct off. But her service wasn’t over and she went onto fly a further 30 weather observation missions before finally returning to the US on 12th July 1945 where she was sold for scrap in December 1945. In her time with the 379th, Swamp fire had 20 engine changes, a new tail, 3 wing replacements, large sections of a new nose and over 1000 patch repairs. The feat of keeping her flying without fail earned her crew chief, M/Sgt Dominic DeSalvo, the Legion of Merit. As Depicted Swamp fire is depicted after her 99th mission as we already have a 100-mission skin. This episode of her life is well documented photographically enabling me to match wear and tear quite accurately to the real deal across many parts of the airframe. She’s depicted with a replacement tail, the new outer port wing installed after her 69th mission and replacement port cheek turret (something, along with the tail that was replaced within her first 25 missions). De-icing boots have been removed and the bare metal overpainted. In making the skin, I referenced around 20 photos of the aircraft along with about another 50 of contemporary aircraft. There is very little paint flake seen. I put this down to a good build, a pretty young aircraft (she was under 8 months in service at this point) and the well documented flow of replacement parts. Wear and Tear The skin uses several wear layers that I’ve created just for it including: Service wear on the wings and over the saddle of the plane just behind the dorsal turret. This is referenced from photos of Swamp fire. Chips and scratches. Quite subtle. I have attempted to match these to photos of the real thing, especially around No2 engine and the port side nose and port horizontal stabiliser. Patches. As above, Ive tried to match the patches seen on the real thing to the skin. Patches are also given some depth through their inclusion in the custom Normal DDS. These also some Duct Tape in there too as it appears to have been used on the most obvious patch on the nose. Mud and grime around the undercarriage. Stencils and nose art. The nose art and stencils have been created from scratch. The additional “graffiti” is based on what I could make out in the photos and what I deemed highly likely. Some decal and colour plate references have additional art but I can find no evidence elsewhere so have not included it. The name “Emma” on the chin turret is a guess based on 2 images that I found. The Victory Cross is deliberately poorly drawn and replaces the equally shonky Swastika to better suite modern sensibilities. Generic Skin This retains the old, overpainted code triangle. An image of Swamp Fire after mission 69 shows the larger yellow Code triangle still absent so indicates it was a later addition to all BG aircraft. I’ve made the assumption that Swamp Fire isn’t showing this marking because of a tail refit and that it was likely a widespread feature on many original/older aircraft in the BG. Template alterations and corrections At least half of the 220 hours I’ve worked on this has been spent on editing the existing layers to both better suit an Olive Drab scheme and fix a few faults. Not a full list but this includes: Editing the bright highlights intended for bare metal finishes present on the engine cowls, cheek turrets and saddle joints. Editing the baked part layers to suit the painted scheme and correcting rogue shading (on the starboard lower aileron for instance) Editing many of the general and weathering texture layers to reduce rogue elements near skin joints. Correcting the Seam layer on the wings that is combined with a general texture treatment in the stock template. This eliminates the effect that makes the starboard wing look darker in game. Created the missing identification lights under the fuselage using edited lighting elements from the template. Editing some of the pant layers (clack mainly) into components to better control representation. WARLORD64’s JSON mod. The skin is a compromise between what is standard and this mod. Spec maps are adjusted to tame the effect of the mod if used but not so much the aircraft appears completely flat in the standard game. Much of the chipping has been given a matte treatment in the Spec as I don’t like the in-game darkening effect in certain lights and am not convinced those areas would be so reflective in any case. So it really only affects larger, factory present, bare metal areas. THANKS To everyone for the help and advice. Special thanks to Helles Belle for sharing his Hex code for the Olive Drab.

Over multiplayer there are still issues with aircraft side numbers/states getting swapped by the DCS ATC, even if they are in separate groups.