Leaderboard

HQ-22 SAM (China) version 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Haha, thanks for the deep insight regarding my process. Unfortunately you couldn't be more wrong, and I'm not a big fan of assumptions to be honest. There are a couple of main reasons why I can release assets at a high pace. The fact that I buy the basic 3d mesh isn't the secret sauce. The main reason is that I prioritize the release of new AI assets, which (understandably) ED don't. They are a company and need to make money to keep running. If ED wanted to release AI assets, they could release them in numbers that immensely would surpass mine. But in order to do so they would more or less have to shift all their business priorities. Back to my process, here is an overview from the FAQ on my site. HOW DO YOU CREATE ALL THESE ASSETS - DO YOU MODEL THEM? It's a combination. I first try to source a suitable model (checking format, vertices, quality of the mesh etc). But even in the best case scenario where I find a really nice model, there's a lot of work that I need to do with the mesh. I restructure the model, group objects, split objects, rig it for animation, create uvs, add missing details, add additional objects, replace stuff that doesn't look good. I then either increase of decrease the amount of vertices. Lastly I animate it and export the uvs to SP and continue with creating the textures (I make my textures from scratch). In some cases where I really want an asset and there's no suitable 3d model available, I make it myself. But since I have bought a fair share of models and already created a lot of stuff I can often put stuff together with what I have. That's what's good with the military stuff, there is a lot of standardization going on. And that really makes my life easier. So while the work on the model (mesh) is a lot of work, that's just one part of the process. I also model more or less every missile/projectile myself. Here's a quick overview of all the steps involved: 1) Research, 2) Mesh, 3) Uvs, 4) Animations, 5) Textures, 6) Code, 7) Sound, 8) Destroyed model, 9) Collision model, 10) Testing, 11) Documentation, 12) Publish, 13) Support I have created a very efficient workflow, which relies on me being the only developer. But as I mentioned in the forum thread, I cut some corners since I do this as a hobby and do not work for ED. For example, at the moment I don't create several LODs, and I don't spend too much time on optimizing the model (mesh and textures). This makes my assets pretty heavy to run. But these are cons I'm prepared to accept to keep getting now assets released. But that is all I'm prepare to accept, I really try to keep the quality high in regards to realism of the weapons, I make every ammunition and weapon type myself so that I can tune and optimize their performance. I add all the details like small detailed animations on the assets, custom sounds etc. I'm not interested in creating the same assets with different 3d models. And as to the part of a "bit of coding", I don't copy paste code. I have written and maintain almost 100 000 lines of code for my assets at the moment. Another thing that takes time is R&D, since I have to invent new ways to emulate modern weapons in DCS. A lot of my weapons or systems doesn't have an equivalent or template in core DCS to use. And finally, in regards to AI aircraft. ED hasn't released the new AI flight model (General Flight Model, GFM). So until then, all AI aircraft share the same basic flight model (SFM). The SFM configuration doesn't become more advanced because an ED employee enters the numbers.

null

We like challenges.

Moin auch meinerseits, und ja es war zwar ein kleine, aber um so illustere Runde - großes Dankeschön an @OPEC auch für die Idee mit der fantastischen Location Hier ein paar optische Eindrücke für diejenigen, denen andere Termine oder auch die vorgezogene Herbststurm-Wetterlage diesmal keine Teilnahme ermöglicht hatten: Dass es trotz meiner Leidenschaft für Fotografie nicht mehr Bilder geworden sind, ist schlicht dem Umstand geschuldet, dass wir vier die ganze Zeit viel zu sehr mit Spiel, Spaß und viel Fachsimpelei beschäftigt waren - und auch schnelle Autos bringen in dieser Aufmachung nochmal deutlich mehr Action unters Popometer. Deshalb an dieser Stelle auch nochmal ein fettes Dankeschön an den freundlichen Betreiber des "Fliegonodrom" (der mit dem roten T-Shirt im Bild), der uns überaus gastlich aufnahm, obwohl er - auch der permanenten Unwetterlage der letzten Tage in der Region geschuldet - gestern Abend eigentlich schon gar nicht mehr auf Gäste eingestellt war. Trotzdem nahm er sich, noch dazu völlig gratis, mehrere Stunden Zeit, uns auch seine genialen Simulatoren ausführlich zu zeigen und zu erklären - und natürlich waren dann auch unsererseits ein paar Proberunden darin angesagt. Und ja: so ein um die Längsachse (+/- 30° Bank sind möglich) mitdrehendes Rig kickt nochmal deutlich mehr. Und für weitere Ausbaustufen wie Rotation der Anlage um die Hochachse, Gurtstraffer je nach G-Belastung usw. hat der Betreiber schon viele weitere Ideen und Konzepte. Man muss das aber am besten selbst erleben. Und da es am meisten Spaß macht, wenn man sich dort im größeren Team austobt - aktuell stehen in der Halle 10 solche Rigs - gab es auch gleich ein super Angebot, wenn wir unseren nächsten Stammtisch dort planen, dann hoffentlich mit der Möglichkeit für mehr Teilnehmer hinzukommen. Und wer vielleicht eh aus der Umgebung von Allershausen ist, schon lange eine neue Location mit Spiel-Spannung-Spaß für Feiern mit Freunden, einem Live-Geschwader-Abend, Firmenparties usw. gesucht hat oder einfach schon immer mal den v.a. aus Verkehrsfunkmeldungen zu Staus auf der A9 bekannten malerischen Ort Allershausen besuchen wollte, für den empfiehlt sich durchaus auch ein Stop der besonderen Art in diesem genialen "Fliegonodrom": https://fliegonodrom.de/ Ich habe jedenfalls meine - auch Dank Wetterlage - knapp 2,5H Anreise keine Sekunde bereut. Und der Live-Austausch mit den echten Gesichtern und Namen hat halt auch eine deutlich andere Qualität, als die sonst übliche Kommunikation per Forumsdialog. Die paar Stunden vergingen jedenfalls für mich wie im Flug und ich werde sicher den nächsten Termin, sobald er feststeht, rot im Kalender für alles andere blocken, um wieder dann in vllt. auch größerer Runde dabei zu sein VG Michael "schmiefel"

Wow this is amazing! I was just asking about that a few days ago. You made my dreams come true!

Choo-Choo! All aboard the hypetrain! Let's post videos about the 104 here. I'll start with a dutch TV snippet from 1965 - at the heart of the "Starfighter Crisis" - containing an interview with a german Member of Parliament, and some interesting additional information (in Dutch, though). Like that 63% of all pilots who had crashed at this point had less than 1000 flight hours. This was at a time when the Luftwaffe in particular was playing catch-up while trying to handle a space-age moder jet fighter at a time when qualified personnel was hard to get and when logistics and the administrative structures were no beneficial for getting more than 700 (over 900 in total) of those jets within a relatively short time. You may want to give the channel itself a visit, too!

we are working on trying to generate a better mesh but this takes time. we are currently working within the constraints of DCS. As you can imagine the map is massive

All in german, but you might get away with using the subtitle function. Some really good info in there. Three playlists by Frank Heinevetter (F-104 and Tornado pilot). Flying the 104 - from the pilot's seat. Starfighter Stories Starfighter pilot memories

Nice image, I also like to customize my DCS background image, but instead of putting it into the DCS programs folder, where it could be overwritten by the next DCS update, I prefer to place it within /Saved Games/ and use it as a "User Theme", on this way: The result looks like this: A side benefit is that you can also include custom music. Here is a sample, so you can check the folder structure employed: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ai6cuX3YQI26irAjzHWJQdHLh2hdnA?e=rOe7o7 (Its a link because of its 55 MB size, music takes up space)

Thank You@Currenthill, another excellent mod. To complete Chinese SAM Systems we need HQ-9, HQ-12, HQ-16

No whatter what you think it is, I think we can agree on one basic fact: It's sexy as duck!

@Chap2012 Yes I have! But fixing the aircraft first. Then the carriers, THEN the vehicles.

They ARE being worked on, just give them some slack. They do have an entire sim to work on to keep (most) people happy, not just a mod. Failing that, you could maybe submit a resume? Or just enjoy what you have whilst waiting for that which will come.

i would love supression beeing implemented, nothing worse than shooing a position with rockets, APCs, and Inf compleatly engulfed in Dust and smoke, and out of this thick, dense cloud come multiple tracers, flying directly towards you

Splash damage is still very underwhelming in DCS... I fear this will not be fixed anytime soon. The second problem is that there is no suppression system. A manpad standing in the middle of a rocket attack without a direct hit is 100% able to attack you while rockets exploding left and right of him. In reality this guy will lay flat on the floor crying for his mum or running for his life. But I dont think he will be able to attack anything in this moment.

Announcement! Historical Description The Lightning was Britain's first supersonic fighter with a maximum speed and climbing rate that exceeded everything but was limited by its short range and average weaponry. The Lightning was the result of the P.1A which was designed after the demand in 1947 for a supersonic research aircraft. The first of the three prototypes flew in August 1954, and later showed supersonic capabilities thanks to two Bristol Siddeley turbojets without afterburners. It was clear that this type had the qualities of an interceptor-fighter and the name was changed into P.1B witch flew first in April 1957 with two Rolls-Royce Avon turbojets. After a long development period with 20 pre-production aircraft the Lightning F.Mk1 came in use in 1960 with two 30 mm. cannon's and two Firestreak air to air missiles. Malta Aviation Museum Lightning F.2 Single-seat fighter (an improved variant of the F.1), delivered in 1962. A total of 44 built with 31 later modified to F.2A standard, five later modified to F.52 for export to Saudi Arabia. Lightning F.2A Single-seat fighter (F.2s upgraded to near F.6 standard); featuring Avon 211R engines, retained ADEN cannon and Firestreak (replaceable Firestreak pack swappable with ADEN Cannon Pack for a total of four ADEN Cannon), arrestor hook and enlarged Ventral Tank for two hours flight endurance. A total of 31 converted from F.2. DCS Aim to create a player flyable model Accurate EFM Gear simulation 2x IR Guided Missiles Exterior model Exterior animations and livery Interior avionic systems modeled to recreate the Lightning F.2 Ferranti AI radar and HUD Ejection Seat Damage model Updates will be posted bellow Currently on hold

The problem MIGHT be fixed... So, I deleted the Shader files as described in the screenshot, and I flew PGAW at night for about an hour without issue. However I want to test a bunch more before saying this was causing my issue for sure.

Nope, but I added the SR for 360 coverage. The base setup consists of the LN and the STR.

So from our testing with our own systems in VR we are getting better FPS that there was before. for the buildings we have included some key details like window surrounds, window sills IMPO this make the buildings look more realistic rather than just a picture of a window stuck on the side of a building (like some other maps) I am a helo guy and want to see as much detail as I can What I will take a look at are the LOD values of the other lods because there maybe something that can be done there by reducing all of the models to their most basic forms thanks Specter

Thanks for all the good advice people, I greatly appreciate it. Starting fight with a plan sounds like a good idea, I'll try that. I'll also start reading into things more. I tried getting into the actual manouvers but couldn't seem to understand them, though when I started flying again just after reading your replies things started to get much clearer and it seems that I'm doing some of the manouvers already though I didn't know it. Might not be perfect but at least it seems to be a start. A few months ago I started with the BFM missions but even after dominating the entire fight and being 100% hot on the tail of the F5 I still couldn't land a single shot on target. After reading a post about AI being extremely aggressive and above natural and therefore near impossible to get a gun kill on I jumped to ACM (the 2v2 fights). This week I tried the BFM again, but now I manage to get gun kills on the F5 (see the first video below) and upped my game today to Trained level (3 manouver kills and then the 1 in the video) and then I tried against a Rookie level F15 and won that as well after needing to work hard for it (see the second video). I tried using the flaps as well, the effect is huge, until you need speed and forget to retract them far enough. I need to learn how to get the flaps in manouver with my lever (I use the throttle lever on my VKB Gunfighter stick) to get better results.

AIM-260 JATMs! Up to 8 can be carried currently, I'll try to add double rail launchers on the wings for them at a later date.

That the real one is a minimal movement/force sensing and that one is made as a rotary switch. I understand that the force sensing would likely be cost prohibitive, but DX buttons would have been a much better/closer to realistic option. I do not own either of them. The two things that would have probably gotten me to bite on them would have been that switch being better implemented, and their finger lifts having actual DX button functionality too. A bonus would have been the radio switch being updated from the 2 direction slide to the 4-way which happened when they added the extra radio...but that wouldn't have made/break it for me.

Sitting here waiting for the none heavy weapons US infantry pack to make a video...

15th. Air Force 99th.BG, 346th.BS "2nd. Patches" took part in Operation Frantic, the first shuttle mission to the URRS on 2 June 1944, Landing in Ukraine. This unit gained her nickname from the amount of battle damage it suffered and the extensive new metalwork applied, including a new fin and rudder and a rear crew entry door donated by a cannibalised natural metal aircraft and never repainted in green camo. Delivered Denver 13/1/44; Lakeland 1/2/44; Morrison 9/2/44; Assigned 815BS/483BG Tortorella 30/3/44; transferred 346BS/99BG Tortorella 31/3/44, then 429BS; 41m two killed and 8 RTD when ship skidded on airfield PSP into railway embankment and broke up crashed on take off for Pardubice, Czecho. 24/8/44 and sal. Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/es/files/3332760/

Did a long flight in the night and I can say that I reproduced the issue, it's very random, I have also another issue that instead of going black it goes FULL White. For me it happen a lot with the F5 view, I will give my DCS.log here can't give a track, but the issue is there! (I flew on syria in a F-15E). dcs.log

Sorry, I meant at the bottom of my post: i9 10900KF 3.70GHz (5.30GHz Turbo), MSI RTX 4090 OC 24GB, ASUS Z590-E GAMING Motherboard, CORSAIR Vengeance 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, 2TB Intel 660P M.2 NVMe SSD, Virpil Alpha Joystick, T-50CM3 Throttle, MFG Xwind rudder pedals, Pimax Crystal VR.

I can't tell you happy I am to see an F-104 module and from the awesome devs at Aerges on top of that! Day 1 buy for me.

Hey Scoobyon, Just so you are aware, that overwing type B roundel that you are using is a postwar pattern. The WW2 type B should have the folllwing ratio diameters: Ratio 2:5 Blue 56" Red 22" http://woodair.net/Aviation/roundels/RAF_Roundels.htm

like you know it's still BETA, every thing can be submit to changes, you can at any time report bugs or request features in Discord Server, hot fixed can be done by us or any community member, since the code is cleat to public, leak of time and focus of the team on the EFM may not make us flexible regard the updates also working in free time also is a major issue for that too. We are always open to any one want to give a help and contribute on fixes and updating code, lining up with our vision of MOD development. We apologies to no be flexible and active regard the updates, but it's out of our willing Thanks

Die Herren, Es war mir wie immer ein Fest. @schmiefel Schön, mal ein Gesicht zum Namen zu haben. Nachdem nach dem Stammtisch Bekannterweise immer vor dem Stammtisch ist - Nächster Termin im Oktober?

Not sure if I'd call it magic, lol. You'll need original mod. Replace ship lua and make a scripts folder. Put the "runway" lua in the scripts folder. PM if you have any issues. Weapon mounts are not animated on this edm so there's not much I can do. 4 Runway and 8 Spawn points for Harrier added. I only tested takeoff with Ai. I do not recall if helos or landing work. I updated all ship stats. Should make a decent Ai asset. Runway lua is a little rough. I try and improve it later. Enjoy AsturiasRunwaysAndRoutes.lua Príncipe_de_Asturias.lua

This. Also keep in mind that we don't know how many people ED have working on these projects, vs projects that ultimately make them money (the modules). I don't have an issue with ED focusing on making sure the game is financially stable. Now, that said, I think ED should make some a better mod support system, so that we players can better contribute to DCS, like how the Skyhawk guys did.

Yep, Aerges is a good developer. They still communicate with us. Poor souls.

Oh yes. That’ll be good, different skins to choose from. You’ll have the Canadians drooling after a skin template ya know , everyone else for that matter. Looking so good.

It passes IC as far as I know! To be honest. ED should just incorporate this in the core since this awesome community does the job for them. Kudos to Heatblur for adding these community keybinds to the Tomcat, and kudos to India Fox Techo for adding keystrokes to ALL of the keybinds in the MB-339, even if it lacks a lot of keybinds. @uboats Why don't you guys take a look into what @Munkwolf already made, and just apply it to the module while crediting him? Then IC won't be an issue for the Jeff in any case! Cheers!

No.1: This is a submission for the B-17G Livery Competition. It includes two skins, one a detailed 'Irish Lassie' and a second one plain and without the distinguishing markings of 'Irish Lassie" and named "322nd BS - 91st BG_Bare Metal_Plain". 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 44-8475, a B-17G-65-VE, code: LG-C, nicknamed "Irish Lassie". The plane flew with the 322nd Bombardment Squadron of the 91st Bombardment Group and is depicted with 18 combat missions. I could find only black and white photos so the colors are my best guess. DCS: World War II Assets Pack is required. 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 Never Forget... Irish Lassie (44-8475) Falkenmayer Crew, 324th BS, 91st S/Sgt. Walter S/Sgt. Walter Walker, Ball Turret Gunner; S/Sgt. James Wyant, Waist Gunner; S/Sgt. Lawrence Spanbauer, Waist Gunner; S/Sgt. Edward Shea, Radio/Gunner; S/Sgt. Ralph Burke, Top Turret Gunner, 1st Lt. Monty Armando Grosa, Co-pilot; 1st Lt. Charlie Falkenmayer, Pilot; 2nd Lt. Bob Lyle, Navigator Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3332762/ No.2: This is a submission for the B-17G Livery Competition. It includes two skins, one a detailed "Lassie Come Home" and a second one plain and without the distinguishing markings of "Lassie Come Home" and named "322nd BS - 91st BG_LG Plain". 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 42-31673, a B-17G-25-BO, code: LG-C, nicknamed "Lassie Come Home". The plane flew with the 322nd Bombardment Squadron of the 91st Bombardment Group and is depicted with 69 combat missions. I could find only balck and white photos so the colors are my best guess. DCS: World War II Assets Pack is required. 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 Never Forget... B-17G-25-BO, Lassie Come Home (42-31673) Lt. LaHood's Crew, 322nd Squadron, 91st BG BACK ROW - LEFT TO RIGHT: Homer Glass, Navigator; 1st Lt. Louis LaHood, Pilot; Joe Stolber, Co-pilot; Manuel Canter, Bombardier FRONT ROW - LEFT TO RIGHT: Gail Garner, Ball Turret; Ernest Ellington, Waist Gunner; John Anding, Engineer; Bob Megchelsen, Tail Gunner; Bob Hettinger, Waist Gunner; Norman Mansfield, Radio Operator Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3332763/

I'm afraid that can't be correct -- Vn diagram suggests maximum lift of around 5g without flaps at that speed. A rough calculation of maximum lift with takeoff flaps and wingtip sidewinders (from stall speeds in TO 1F-104G-1, which should scale up relatively well since F104 "stall" is actually a stick pusher at a fixed aoa) gives CLmax of 0.96, which means 7g still cannot be reached even instantaneously until about ~500kias. Obviously if you have a different primary source I will review my numbers. FWIW that is a slatted F-4E with TISEO (not specified in the title but you can tell from the weight). For the reason I explained above, the best possible case is that an F104G could match the Phantom if it sustains its maximum lift at M0.85. However I am highly skeptical because the Starfighter has less t:w, lower wing aspect ratio, and higher wing loading than the F4E. To back that up, the TAC Mission 857 report (which @Bremspropeller linked above) shows 5g performance contours for the F104C and F4C at sea level. From where they intersect 0 Ps, we can tell the F4C is sustaining 5G at just under M0.6, while the F104C is sustaining 5G at just over M0.6. This is for the light 104C and the hard-wing F4C. Between a slatted F4E and the weight-crept F104G there is no chance (in my opinion). For context, as I have said before and will say again, the subsonic sustained turn performance of the F4 is really exceptional among contemporary M2.0 capable fighters. For the F104 to come anywhere close to a Phantom is impressive enough. Overall the 60s USAF assessments were correct regarding how the F104 needs to be flown. It will rely on subsonic/transonic climb rate, where it trashes ALL F4, Mig21, Mig23, Mirage III/F1, and even the F14A. Combined with semi-decent turning energy retention at >M0.8, that makes loops and climbing spirals very viable and dangerous. In that sense the F104 can absolutely dogfight, just not in the horizontal plane. Regardless, I am trying to derive an approximate doghouse plot for the F104C from the TAC report. That is not straightforward due to the way the data is presented, but I have been unable to find subsonic turn data for the Starfighter anywhere else so it's worth a shot.

Wait, looks like you were right in the first place. Current DCS version shows me Falklands campaign for F-14 greyed out. When I hover over the name it says "Missing module: Falklands" - which is true.

I think the AI is in need of much more work as well as splash damage. I was flying the Hip on the practice range with ground troops as targets. I was spraying them with the mini gun pods and you would see the whole area covered by bullets, but there would be some that just remained standing. No running away or ducking, just standing and firing accurate as hell. Hopefully, one day this will get better. Maybe it’s how I set them up, maybe they need instructions on what to do next, but it would seem like they would at least run for the tree line .

Sneak peek of what's coming next...

The S was the second most produced variant, after the G, it was the backbone of an entire air force, but we shouldn’t have it because you don’t want it if doesn’t have a gun? (Btw as already stated the FB variant of the S and S/ASA had the gun) Shouldn’t we hope for just more variants? It’s the best performing 104, with a beefier engine and reworked nozzles. I’m betting my money on it being the second variant we’ll see: it’s very similar to the G, it requires little 3D modelling modifications, the cockpit it’s pretty much the same and it brings interesting capabilities. The A/C start being a little more work: different cockpit layout, different landing gear, major differences in the tail etc etc

New shots from Milteh-5/PD as well:

Hi guys! The BE has actually required a significant coding effort, a different type of effort than the M requires but still. Even planning for a two seater in advance, some amount of refactoring is required and some other things are just not possible to have 'automatically' coded for the rear cockpit. In any case, we're very close to give you more news about it.