Leaderboard

Pretty impressive!! please can you make some landing ships included the one below? by the way this idea. IRL depending on the target condition (lateral speed and distance) this missiles can be used without SR radar. Can you add that difficulty? Of course the terminal guidance is active radar but my question is we actually have in core code active radar for sea missiles?

US Infantry (USA) version 1.2.0 released! Changelog Version 1.2.0 Added M4 AR soldier Added M240 GPMG soldier Added M249 LMG soldier Added M4/M203 AR/GL soldier Added FIM-92K Stinger soldier Changed M136 84 mm HEAT projectile model

I was doing some research on the AN/ALR-56M RWR and came across some information that describes some behaviors that are not in DCS. How did I get this info? If you look up "CDC 2A354C Volume 3" (Better results on something like DuckDuckGo than Google), you'll find several practice test websites with flashcards all containing the same (or very similar) questions & answers made all by different people with different dates. From what I understand, a CDC is a Career Development Course, basically a test that airmen take to prove their qualified in certain aircraft/systems. That specific CDC Code is for F-16C/D avionics and systems. The best one I found is this one (pages 4-5) which specifically talks about the ALR-56M. Behaviors 1. The LAUNCH Button When you press the LAUNCH button, it should play the missile launch audio, and presumably test the LAUNCH button lamp. 2. System Initialization When you power up the RWR, there should be a *3* minute long initialization process where"I" should be display in the center of the RWR display (Same place as "S" or "L" when using the Search & Low functions). Side note: You can still hear the Hornet's ALR-67 power up sound in the F-16 when you turn on the RWR, this is leftover from day 1 when the F-16 had all Hornet RWR sounds. 3. BIT / SYS TEST When performing the BIT on the RWR, there is currently no Lamp test portion, all the buttons on the threat warning panel should be lighting up like a christmas tree! (Added in Feb, 2024) Also the audio test part of the BIT currently in DCS is pretty questionable, but I don't have enough info to say what it should exactly be. 4. Symbol Positions While Maneuvering I interpreted this one as; Since the ALR-56M has the navigation data (including heading), when you are turning, the symbols on the display should be changing their position/azimuth in real time. Currently, the symbols only update their position every time the emitter scans the aircraft. So, if a radar scans me every 5 seconds, and I make a 90 degree turn in 3 seconds, the symbol would be showing in the completely wrong spot (90 degrees off), and then jump to the correct location. This can get really disorientating when trying to notch, as I'm sure most of you know. Conclusion I know ED will most likely not use this data, since it is not a first-hand source, but I hope having knowledge of these supposed behaviors might make it easier to find usable documentation since they'd know what behaviors to specifically look for. Or, maybe ED already has documentation on it and just misinterpreted it, who knows. If anyone finds some more information, or thinks I'm interpreting this wrong, I'd love to hear ya'll out. Also, this is not meant to give ED a hard time, I know finding documentation on these kinds of systems is difficult, it's all just in the spirit of creating the best F-16 sim!

Thanks, Eddie and Marroux, it does seem weird by the placement of it but I see it on my end as well but it has been corrected. It was a stray object. See below. Thanks for checking checking for me.

The new gang assembled...

Я бы еще от нормального мануала не отказался. В текущем, например, радиостанции вообще не описываются, а это не самая очевидная часть вертолета.

Just a short review on the new PTO 2. The thing that first pops out is that it's larger than the original...about a third larger overall. The case is made of plastic with brass inserts in the back for mounting. I like the look, especially the quality of design and placement of switches/levers. The switches feel more positive and easily identified due to the differently shaped switch levers. The gear and hook levers are now pull before actuation. I really like the panel and will be incorporating it in my pit very soon. I'm not going to go into the pros and cons as this is very subjective and I'm sure they will be more in depth reviews in the coming days.

Yeah! So open the miz file in your choice of archive editor (I use winrar) and change that Mission.file to Mission.lua. Go into the mission editor and get the X and Z coordinates for where you want to put the object and override the existing one in the lua file! for your viewing pleasure. A sea tor!

Well I've owned both and used both extensively. The first thing I'll say is you can't go wrong with either headset. They are both heads and tails above anything else. I am making observations from my own experience owning 10 different VR headsets and every expensive Consumer VR Headset made to date. VR Flight Sim Guy isn't really a DCS pilot. I know he does some flying in DCS but the majority of what he does is MSFS. I've used ET and DFR in the Crystal Beta for a while now and it surpasses the clarity of the Aero with more FOV and with the exact same performance FPS and smoothness wise I get in the Aero. And, we haven't received the Wide FOV Lenses yet which should give it a bit more of an edge. I'm running the Crystal at 300% Foveated area resolution and 5% peripheral and it is pretty much 4K level clarity. I still think the Aero is awesome and will be ordering a Aero 2 Day 1 if it comes with more FOV than PImax, if I haven't already gone to 12K because Pimax is getting it right this time around...

Thanks, Slyfa, yeah I see I added one too many zeros. Distance is actually 30 km at Mach 3. Please try the attached update below and let me know what you all think. PM me your thoughts. Thanks. Project_956_Admiral_Ushakov SA-N-11 Update 1.0.1 https://ln5.sync.com/dl/f79b603f0/j5ybxcvd-9ucwqeut-iy85d54s-j7g2gee2

Not only were a few B's made, but all of them are different. They were all experimental designs that were evolving in real-time, so there is no consistency between B airframes. Other than the fuselage speed brakes on the A (which were welded in anyway), there is really no airframe difference between the A and the E. The E, as someone else posted, was a solid state upgrade to DIANE. Yes, the "kicking the drum" thing from FOTI was real in the A. The cockpit difference is the radar repeater on the pilot side is gone in the E production model, though it is present in the E upgrades. I'm not sure if it worked though; the reason it worked in the A is because there were two separate radars in the nose, so the pilot always had the standard ground radar even when the B/N went into attack. Bottom line: we can still fly Vietnam missions with the E. Use the E as a B for STARM, and use the E as an A by removing the TRAM pod and loading dumb iron only. The only difference is the solid state DIANE, and it's debatable whether we would really want to model the analog system anyway. It will be challenging enough to fly DIANE without dealing with the slow processing of the A. EDIT: Personally, I wouldn't mind getting a SWIP version that had GPS and could handle JDAM, SLAM and HARM. You can always not load a feature you don't want to simulate period, but you can't bring an older airframe into a modern setting and expect the newest gear to work.

I'm sorry, kneejerk reaction from an honest person, my bad. If I do enable 2FA, and I lose everything on my PC, my HDD dies.... whatever, will I still be able to recover my account without anything other than ED's record of my account as it has stood in the past?

I'm sorry, but at this time it's the best we can do and still limit abuse to the system. Thanks. I personally do not or have not seen an issue with something like Google Authenticator, It worked great and I use it for close to 20 different logins on different types of sites, I even use Steam's Authenticator App as it makes my life a little easier. I mean at the end of the day we can remove this, and continue to watch trials be abused and people brag about it, and eventually, the trial option be removed completely, we think this is the best compromise for now.

I made new 84 mm HEAT projectile for the M136/AT4.

Whenever you try to spawn on the Supercarrier but get the 'Your flight has been delayed' message (mostly due to other aircraft already on the deck), the aircraft's performance substantially changes for the worse IF the player changes slots before the deck is clear to spawn. It appears like the plane's weight becomes much higher than it should be from what can be seen in the ME/rearming window. To test this, I created a mission which tries to spawn the player on the catapult, which is initially blocked by AIs. Once the AIs despawn (after 15s), the player spawns in. Taking off and flying on-speed in landing configuration showcases the issue. If you DO NOT change slots and wait for the AI do despawn, on-speed is 144 kts. If you DO change to the other slot (which has exactly the same loadout), on-speed is 158. This corresponds to roughly 8000lbs in weight difference. I remember there was a similar (if not the same) bug back before the SC got released. HB eventually fixed it, IIRC citing issues with fuel weight initialization which done twice for a delayed flight with slot change. Two tracks are attached to showcase the issue. If somebody wants to reproduce himself using the attached mission, do the following: -Choose a slot -Choose the other slot within 15s. -Wait for your spawn Aircraft weight is set to 60000lbs in the ME (no rails) for both slots. For comparison, do not change slots prior to spawning and you will not see the excessive weight. This issue has been haunting our wing's (and probably several other peoples) MP missions for quite some time and I hope HB can come up with a solution. Takeoff_without_weight_bug.trk Takeoff_with_weight_bug.trkF14_weight_bug_test.miz

Hey Guys! Just found this out, thought it was pretty cool! If you use the Condition, "X: Cockpit Indication Text Is Equal To" INDICATOR ID=5 ELEM NAME=txt_RPM_(L or R) VALUE=(enter rpm number) You can use the RPM of the Hornet to trigger any action! Like ending a mission on engine shut down, or playing a sound when the engine is shut down!

Dear all, I just heard from our testing lead that director routing is being done with the F-14 in mind as well. So as it stands now this should work with the F-14 upon release, another promising note is that it fixes some issues with blocked CATs as well. Thanks

Just an idea. Could you maybe take an approach similar to Steam's limited accounts? Let's say if your account has more than 30 dollars worth of purchases (aka you own a single full-fidelity plane or a single paid map), it will become verified and you will be able to start trials without needing extra authentification. The two-factor requirement would therefore only be used if the account is absolutely fresh. That would make having multiple accounts to run infinite trials (which I assume is what the restiction is about), pretty costly while having minimal impact on regular customers or even relatively new people.

The Admiral Kasatonov asset were renamed to Project 22350 Admiral Gorshkov Class Frigate a while ago, the latest release is 1.5.0. If you still use the Kasatonov (which is just an older version of the same asset), you will of course get conflicts that makes DCS crash.

Это записано в дорожной карте и входит в топ-10 самых востребованных фич:

In the meantime: The video was shot before the cooler fix, the files are already updated.

Agreed. Please reinstate the Daesh skin that was deleted. Or... Please delete all skins with swastikas. Please delete all skins from WWII Axis powers. Please delete all cluster munitions from the game as they are problematic from a humanitarian standpoint. Please remove damage models from all religious buildings on all maps. Please delete damage models from any vehicle or building displaying a Red Cross or Red Crescent. Please delete all skins with artwork of women being displayed in a sexualized manner. And of course - please remove the damage/death model from the cows, as it has both humanitarian and religious/cultural implications. There is much more, but this is a start. Thank you.

Wait, what - people are *complaining* about 2FA in 2023? The mind is boggled.

Our Hornet is only a 2005 Charlie in name. Don't turn on datalink or CIT, do not enable JHMCS, don't turn to IFA. It's seriously not different enough. The radar, our "APG-73", is being modeled off of the APG-65 as it is. We have a -65 that's being called a -73. All of the core MC functions that were added with the C model, don't exist in DCS anyway... Save for datalink and the modern weapons, a full F/A-18A, even a fairly early model should be much more capable than our current DCS Hornet. If you want what we have now just stripped down, it's unrealistic. If this existed in DCS as you want it, you would jump in and notice the engine gauges, the AMPCD/HI is flat at the top, and the DDIs lack AZ/EL, MIDS, NET, and TGT data. That's really it. It probably doesn't apply to you, but there is a major misconception amongst the community that an early Hornet is like an early Viper, with it's radar and stores display really being the only digital elements. It's either a shrunken F-4, or overgrown F-5. The very first delivered Hornet's in 85' had more radar features than our DCS model did as of a few months ago. The "F-5 cockpit" version of the Hornet doesn't exist. Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

I wouldnt say the Viper is very complex, it's more purpose built and pilot/human interface oriented. Lots of things on it is simplified compared to a Hornet or even a Tomcat IMO. Flip side of that is its not truly a multirole like a Hornet or Mudhen. You're like that woman in the bar that just wont stop teasing but when you approach her she's not interested. Come on son! Get her out there!

I'll see if I can get an answer.

Hey Flag, Honestly not sure where those foreign objects are coming from but as mentioned she will be recreated. I will check mine to see if I see them as well. Supersylph, Thanks for that update. Cattmury has been working on an updated version of her. I will take her down and upload the latest version. After I release the next AI Ship Mod. I will start working backward on the older mods. Thank you all for notifying me of the Mod issues. You can also PM me if you have issues. Below is a Taiwanese version of the Kidd. A few of the Kidd DDGs were sold to Taiwan. The USS Kidd, Callaghan, Scott, and Chandler. I will also create a Spruance version of the model as well. Everything that's colored will be removed from the Spruance Class and replaced.

Well, I guess it depends. It's no secret that my assets in general require more performance since I use more polys and 4K textures. I had 200 M4 soldiers take a stroll over a field without any drop in fps. I run a 13700K/RTX3080/4K. At 500 guys I noticed a 10 fps drop.

Многим в первую очередь хотелось бы исправления багов и контента в виде миссий и кампаний, а не дополнительных свистелок-перделок и новых багов.

I have 32 fps. That's way too much. More polygons plz

Its a sad situation, I added this dude to my Ignore list, because its the only way I have to avoid forgetting his wrongdoing.

LOL I found out about the price drop because of his video and was coming here to post it.

This is good news all around. At $990 the Aero is a steal as it is the 2nd Best Headset on the market behind the Crystal IMO. They are obviously getting competition from Pimax and that will be good for everyone. Would love to see Varjo come out with an Aero V2 with more FOV.

@Moxica In addition to the relatively new flight helmets (late 90s) that upped the sound protection game, army pilots typically use something called a CEP or communication ear plug, essentially wired airpods with wire to the back of your helmet. I don't recall them being noise cancelling, but the combined effect of the helmet and the ear plug makes the ambient noise really low. I actually preferred not to wear them as I couldn't hear the ambient noises of the aircraft well enough.

@Dangerzone, thanks for your tip. I will look into this work-around and report back ASAP in case other's are after a solutions. Later... ...after verification & setup testing of the WinAuth app I can confirm that this approach has solve and unlocked my free trial 2FA capabilities...thus allowing me to test 3 planes before end of the 15th anniversary saving oppertunities. Thanks again @Dangerzone for the fine tip that you have proposed. For my part, this posting is solved. Everest...Out!

В развитии DCS очень не хватает внимания к разным интерфейсным мелочам и не мелочам, которые тянутся и тянутся с доисторической эпохи. В то же время пилятся фигуры пилотов и голосовой чат, которым никто не пользуется. Ну, начальникам виднее.

An officer and a gentleman. Many thanks indeed for your understanding kind fellow. Unfortunately, I fear I may already have succumbed to the gloom and may need chocolates, beers, whisky and money just to cheer my soul a little.

Sure Silver_Dragon . I know the circumstances and I am not suggesting that because ED was able to do the Su-25T and Ka-50 earlier, that they could necessarily also do other test aircraft. I was merely saying that as far as operational status is concerned, there would be no difference, and that those other test aircraft wouldn't be any less "valid" candidates for DCS in this regard. Besides, there are lots of discrepancies with both the Su-25T and Ka-50(and even the Su-33) implementation in sim, where lack of information meant that either omissions or "best guesses" had to be made.

Насколько я понимаю, сейчас DCS World в целом не умеет "настраивать" JDAMы и конкретно F-18 тут не причем (он как раз умеет, так все эти параметры задать можно). JDAMы же должны работать на любых модулях, которые умеют их применять. Полагаю, что этим занимается отдельная команда и по каким-то неизвестным причинам они это еще не сделали.

from their Facebook

I'm not sure if I'm missing something here, but my understanding of 2FA (in the way that ED is implementing it) is very different to what people are sprouting here. Half this thread seems to be giving miss-information. Here's a few things that are needed to clarify the 2FA authenticator method that ED is using: 1) It does not have to be linked to your mobile phone number, or even your mobile phone. 2) You are not forced into a particular application, or company. (It's a open algorithm) 3) You don't have to pay for applications in order to use it 4) You can use a free, stand-alone, open source 2FA applications on your PC if you want to go that way (see below) 5) You do NOT need an internet connection, or mobile phone network, or anything to use 2FA. The only requirement for this method of 2FA to work is that the device you're running the application on (whether it be phone, PC, or some other device) has an accurate clock. In the same way, I don't see how this has anythign to do with ED not trusting their customers. It doesn't help them trace anything back to you. It only confirms future logins are from the same person who setup the 2FA option to start with. It makes the users account more secure (which maybe in turn, makes things more secure for ED - I have no idea how many hacked accounts they're dealing with, and maybe this is the way to get more people to start using 2FA). But all the objections I've read here seem to either account to many people having no clue what 2FA is (they're worried about being forced to reveal phone numbers, or use smart phones, or use Google, of which none of this is true), OR I'm missing something big here. So my question is this - WHY is 2FA a "deal breaker" for so many people? (I'm genuinely wanting to understand). Is it that there is great misunderstanding of the 2FA that ED is using, or otherwise what am I missing? As for free apps you can use that don't require a phone, try WinAuth https://winauth.github.io/winauth/download.html Instead of scanning the QR code, just copy and paste the manual code given by ED into the app.

As Tanuki said. You need access to the helicopters 3D file to do this. The Huey edm is protected and cannot be substituted. The problem is the animation. If an animation of a payload is possible, instead of the helicopter itself, it needs to be controlled via the cockpit switches. If anyone knows how to control a payload animation it is maybe possible, but without physics. I tried this many times without success...

So basically another 2 years.

"R550 Magic 1 - rear aspect heater => Seeker magically uncages itself. Eats flares like I eat éclair" The R550 Magic 1 IRL Default mode is a 30 x 30 (+-15)auto scan with auto lock very quick and useful. (sadly Not yet implemented) This scan can be overridden and the Magic 1 put into Boresight (HOTAS press and hold 300/600m Missile unlock) mode 5 x 5 with auto lock/uncage . If the 300/600m missile unlock button is released without a seeker lock missile reverts back to 30 x 30 Autoscan The Boresight mode is the only mode currently implemented Once locked Gimbal limit is + - 30 degrees.

The sky's the limit. I never rule anything out. And I don't plan.

I think it would be awesome if some fire was added to the pods

Sorry @Swiss-Sim but everything what you wrote about the TrackIR is bull<profanity>. I know VR is not the best when it comes to performance. Did you really ever own TrackIR5? I don't believe you! Before i got my TrackIR last week, i tested FacetracknoIR and it was horrible, the delay was like 3 seconds, i trashed it after 30 minutes. Then i installed the OpenTRack and AITrack and yes it was way better. I tested my 30 FPS webcam, it was nice, but it felt like DCS runs on 30 FPS. Then i purchased a 60 FPS webcam for 50 bucks and yes it was much better than the 30 FPS, make sense right? I actually was looking for 120 FPS webcam, but those are more expensive than TrackIR5, no point to get such one. I used the 60 FPS webcam with Opentrack + AITrack and every time i was playing, after 30 min. my eyes were hurting and had bad headache. Then i realized it is because of the head tracking, it didn't run smoothly enough for my eyes. Then i played with several settings and spend some hours, but i was not able to resolve this issue. Then i finally got my TrackIR5 Gaming Set for 260 bucks. I would even pay 300 or 350 bucks. This is the best investment ever made and every penny is worth it. Its just smooth, easy to set up, very good software, it runs almost like VR 1:1, no headache any more, eyes are not hurting and i can set up my profile as i wish within seconds. This product may be old, but it simply works, absolutely not issues and DCS make so much fun now, as never before. For sure, for those who cant effort TrackIR5, OpenTrack + AITrack + 5,- Bucks 30 FPS webcam will do the job, but if you can afford, for the sake of your eyes get the TrackIR5, you wont ever regret. I have no idea, why it works such good, but i dont want to play DCS never again without TrackIR5. There is nothing comparable or alternative to TrackIR5, prove me wrong! Thank you

I would certainly ignore anyone that suggests hot jet starts as a workaround. Also, when are chocks going to be replaced with chains?