Leaderboard

Project 11356R Admiral Grigorovich Frigate (Russia) version 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Admiral Grigorovich defeating a surfaced sub with its RBU-6000. Not very useful since we can't make it work under water. So it's just for fun. But I managed to get it working against partially submerged subs.

SA-7 is so prolific it can't be ignored. It's was pretty much present in every conflict during the Cold War and is still present today. With all the Cold War and helicopter modules coming, we need a "SAM with a low pk". The SA-7. A modern SA-18 is more or less a sniper unit in DCS, head on. Instant kill I want to be able to create missions that are exciting. Seeing a sneaky MANPAD come whizzeling by without bringing down me or my buddies every single time. It will fit a large range of missions, from Cold War to Modern Day insurgents. An interim solution might be for ED to reuse current 3D assets and just input the SA-7 data. Make it bad, make it fun.

Hello!Would be cool to see SS-21 Scarab A (Tochka) for ukraine,very want see that rocket

Please ED, remove unnecessary liveries from DCS builds, put them in separate packs, for optional download. MiG-21 livery folder alone takes 6GB, Christen Eagle's takes ~4GB... all in all, it's like 20GB of unnecessary liveries that I have to remove every time a new OB update comes around (due to limited space in SSD). Since the last big update, I'm forced to migrate the DCS folder to my HDD, update there, remove unnecessary liveries and then migrate back to SSD... it's no fun. I think it would be better for everybody to keep non-essential liveries as separate packs (faster downloads, less stress on the servers, fewer complaints from me...:lol:).

Александр Владимирович! Время педалей с обратной связью пришло. И для модуля Ми-8МТВ2 это необходимо как нигде. Вроде как многого для этого не требуется: распространить действие протокола обратной связи на педали модуля или добавить возможность экспортировать данные о положении центра оси педалей в файлы экспота

Normal maps in DCS How it looks in photoshop Tiger Force Lancaster

For those who desire a factory-like clean cockpit for the F-14. This cockpit mod is still currently a WIP but I've decided to release it early as it is mostly complete but I won't have much time available in the coming months after working on this on-and-off for nearly a year. Feel free to ask questions in the comments, on the forum post, or pinging me on the Heatblur Discord (my discord username is @dsplayer) and I'll try to answer them as quickly as possible. **IC Compliant** UserFiles Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3333027/ Manual install: 0. If you want to have this clean cockpit mod both for the F-14A and F-14B, be sure to make a copy of the "F14B_cockpit" folder included in the 7zip file and rename that copy "F14A_cockpit". Then continue to follow the next step. 1. Drag and drop the "Liveries" folder into your DCS Saved Games folder (make sure you do not have any other F-14 cockpit mod installed). 2. Replace all the files that you need. 3. Done! OVGME Install: Coming soon™... --Changelog-- V0.0.1 - Initial Release V0.0.2 - L FIRE and R FIRE lights + Master Caution light fix from Magic Zach. Things To Do/Things I Need To Refine since I hate their current appearance: - Finish the majority of the screws - Finish the lighting for the CAP panel buttons - Finish the knobs - Finish some normal and roughmets - Refine the switches - Refine the handles upfront - Texture hidden panels - Redo the flooring and siding - Do the circuit breakers - Clean up some of the in-cockpit lights (Fire lights, etc.) - Have a dedicated F-14A & B version included that has different labeling (ex: Nozzle Percentages, Airstart/Backup Ignition) Screenshots: Pilot: RIO:

Thanks! That would be great!

From the newsletter "At a later point, we plan to add a second data link option that will be compatible with those other aircraft. Stay tuned!"

Now I think we are getting somewhere. I think the distinction that @wowbagger pointed out in his screenshot is the failure happens when a Task is assigned to Go To Waypoint, which is the way you would tell a group to go somewhere through scripting. With a heavily scripted mission, you would spawn a group, find a point on the map, then task the group to go to that point. Here is my test, performed at a different location with different units, on a different map, without scripting, but using the Perform Task method of routing the vehicles. The Bradley group coming from the north moves to WP1 on their own, then when they reach WP1 they are tasked with going to WP2. At this point they depart the road and cut the corner toward the bridge, then the first unit stops before crossing the bridge. The truck group coming from the south follows the road properly, and if the bridge weren't blocked, would arrive at their destination. (You will note, however that the trucks in the truck group initially spawn facing their WP1 instead of aligned with the road, as the heading would indicate when viewing the group details.) @NineLine Track and mission files attached. Bridge Test.trk Bridge Test.miz

This mod fixes ED's B1B bomber not being able to perform anti-ship missions! Download link:Release B-1B bomber · liwenHAO5105/DCS (github.com)

The only thing that's irrelevant here, is this ^ point, right here. Whether storage is cheap or not, is utterly irrelevant to whether I should store data I don't need, want or use. Even if I've got loads of storage space (I do), why should I clutter it up with data I don't need, want or use? Why should anyone buy a new drive so they can store data they don't need, want or use? How does storage being cheap mean people should store data they don't need, want or use? Answer? It doesn't - it's a non-sequitur, the conclusion doesn't follow from its premise. I don't fill where I live with things I don't want, need or use, even if I've got space for it. I don't fill up the car I drive with stuff I don't need, want or use even if I've got space for it. I don't download apps on my phone that I don't need, want or use, even though that's got the space for it. So why should I fill my SSD with stuff I don't need, want or use? Filling whatever up with unnecessary stuff you don't want, just because you can (either you've got the space, or space is cheap), is the mentality of a hoarder. Find a better argument than "storage space is cheap" - it's red herring nonsense that doesn't even begin to justify why I need to store stuff I don't want, that I don't need to store. [citation needed] It's a checkbox Sharpe... One single checkbox... I somehow doubt that something as minor as a single additional checkbox is going to cause "a big pain" for players, especially when they only need to interact with it if they see fit.

No it doesn't - the total amount of liveries remains the same, just extra ones needed to be installed. For the record, I'm not as onboard with that idea, I think any new system should leave it as it is and if people want to delete stuff, then only they should need to use the manager. For those that don't, they need not be concerned with it. The OP wanted to only have a small amount of liveries installed and the rest in optional packs, the livery manager idea does more-or-less the same thing, but by default leaves things as they are. Neither option would take away your freedom to have as many liveries as you want and neither option means new liveries don't get developed - nobody is trying to stop you. Okay, great. Why does that mean I should store data I don't want, need or use, that can be deleted with little to no consequence? Admittedly I haven't heard you say it explicitly, but then what's prompting the disagreement? In either the OPs case (both the post and the title) or the livery manager wouldn't entail what your argument suggested. But if you aren't opposed to a livery manager than fine - there's no quarrel then. Which is and should be your call to make.

Exactly - it's bordering on the mentality of a hoarder. I somehow doubt that Sharpe downloads random files off of the internet that he doesn't want, need or use, that can be deleted with little to no consequence, because hey, just buy a new drive, they're cheap now, don't you know?

Absolutely! An early Lot 11 F/A-18C or earlier would be great for late cold war/Desert Storm/early 90's scenarios. APG-65, no GPS, -400 engines, no MIDS, no LITENING/ATFLIR, no JHMCS and limited to AIM-9L/M and AIM-7F/M's would be perfect. Not having a F/A-18 or even an F-16 available for cold war scenarios is a shame. Truthfully, I wish ED had the foresight to include something like that from the beginning. When the -18 first entered early access it was almost an A model in capability... and was still fun to employ against the Russian types as they were similar in capability, and I had a lot of good fights with and against the Hornet back then. Since the data link and JHMCS were added the capability disparity has jumped to such an extent that few pilots now want to fly red on our MP servers. Another plus for an earlier Hornet would be that it would be much easier to learn systems wise.

Gunsight repeater on the way

Hey guys! This time, I have just a small update of the RC2.1 for you. Update 2023-09-30: - page 283: Replaced "DIVEBOMB" with "BOMB DYK", thanks Machalot - page 285: Added detailed description of HUD for figures 208 and 209. - page 286: Added reference to "Fixed sight mode". - page 329: Reworked description of BX6 - Repaired broken references to many figures (numbering didn't match anymore, if you see one, please report thank you!) - Moved subchapter "Flight control system cockpit overview" from page 84 to page 80 (in RC2 Landing gear was a subchapter of flight controls, now it is a separate chapter). - Applied about a quarter zillion small text corrections here and there (note: only a quarter zillion, last update there were more corrections to do ... :biggrin:) Hafe vun and kind regards, TOViper

C’mon Aviators, Please give this thread some love to show ED and the other creators that there is alot of support to create this amazing aircraft!! Bring on the mighty PIG (what aussies called the ardvark). I’d buy it in a heartbeat.

Aerges F1BE pics FB

After working on the B-17G Livery Competition I noticed that several of the other WWII AI aircraft were very lacking in regards to liveries. I decided to work on the A-20G first. The Ju-88 also needs some love but Warlord64 (keefyboy) has already done a few and also has a template posted: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3313581/. If anyone want's my template for the A-20G (it's a bit of a Dog's Breakfast but functions) please post in this thread and I'll provide a link. Anyway, Here's "Little Joe": *UPDATE* 26 Sep, 23: Moved underwing Star and Bar rondelle to correct position on Right wing. Added a generic skin with Bort letter enabled (I kept the skull over the guns since several other planes used it in the Pacific theater. Skin title: USAF_389th BS Pacific Generic Presentation Livery represents Douglas A-20G Havoc “Little Joe”, bureau number 43-21475 from the 389th Bomber Squadron, 312th Bombardment Group United States Army Air Force,1945.US A-20Gs were used on low-level sorties in the New Guinea theatre. An A-20G 43-22200 , bureau number is displayed at the USAF Museum painted in the markings of "Little Joe". This aircraft is in much too clean a state however. I would imagine that the original "Little Joe" would show much more wear and this skin is representational of that. I also altered the normal map to represent what appears to be black rubber (leather) coaming around the gun turret. Aircraft History Built by Douglas Aircraft Company. Constructors Number 21122. Delivered to the U.S. Army Air Force (USAAF) as A-20G-40-DO Havoc serial number 43-21475. Disassembled and shipped overseas to the South West Pacific Area (SWPA). Wartime History Assigned to the 312th Bombardment Group (312th BG) "Roarin' 20s", 389th Bombardment Squadron (389th BS) at Gusap Airfield. Assigned to pilot 1st Lt. Leonard W. Happ with crew chief SSgt Thomas Dobrowski. Nicknamed "Little Joe" with the name painted in white in a cursive style on both sides of the nose. The front of th nose cone had the skull and cross bones motif. On the left side of the nose was a scoreboard with bomb markings indicating missions flown. Tail letter T was painted in white on both sides of the tail. On April 16, 1944 took off from Gusap Airfield piloted by 1st Lt. Leonard W. Happ with gunner Sgt Nathan B. Adler on a strike mission against Hollandia. Returning, the formation experienced a severe weather front including severe thunderstorms and clouds. This aircraft managed to spot a hole in the clouds revealing the Ramu Valley and was able to land safely at Gusap Airfield but ran out of fuel on the runway. During June 1944 operated from Hollandia. During November 1944 operated from Tanauan Airfield on Leyte. On January 7, 1945 took off from Tanauan Airfield piloted by 2nd Lt. Thomas H. Jones on a low level strike against Clark Field on Luzon. Inbound to the target, the formation flew near the U.S. Navy invasion fleet off Mindoro. In late January 1945 operated from McGuire Airfield (San Jose) on Mindoro. During February 1945 operated from Mangaldan Airfield (Honey) on Luzon. In April 1945 operated from Floridablanca Airfield on Luzon. In August 1945 operated from Yontan Airfield on Okinawa until the end of the Pacific War. Fate On September 30, 1945 this A-20 condemned as obsolete and scrapped. Uploaded to User Files. Link: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3333030/

Thanks we have already reported some issues we have found and have asked the devs about some others, feel free to keep the examples coming, on other maps even if you see them.

Hi. This is a quick "war story", maybe it can help someone. I ran DCS about a year ago with a HP Reverb G2 Rev. 2. DCS crashed a lot. At the time this had two reasons, which made diagnosis cumbersome: One, the cable shipped with the G2 (even the Rev. 2 purchased directly from HP) was still faulty. HP shipped me a new one, this resolved my issues with OTHER games in VR. Not with DCS. The DCS crashes only subsided when created a Windows page file (I had initially operated under the assumption that "32 GB ought to be enough for everyone" (miss-quoting a certain MS founder here), and that no swap would be needed. My DCS demanded an extra 10-20 GB of swap or so. Then it ran, in VR, mostly fine. Some days ago the crashes came back. What had changed? I had begun to fly in VR and multi-player. It would appear (my) DCS demanded more than 50 GB of total virtual memory to be the sole, single player on a Nevada map with a handful of AI assets. Madness? I ordered another 32GB of RAM (more RAM to the airplane gods!). Alas, in between the order and the shipment arriving, I solved the problem. I had custom graphics settings set initially for the PC screen and my RTX3080. These were set not THAT high. Alas, when I switched to VR, I left them in place as is. Before the RAM arrived, I did one thing: Reset my graphics settings to the "VR" preset. That solved my problems, the multiplayer Nevada mission now runs fine on 32G plus some swap (and possibly doesn't even need swap, I haven't checked). What changed? Good question. Unfortunately I haven't logged the old settings. I think terrain textures went down one step. My preload range was already set pretty low, I reduced it and the tree cover a bit more. That is all I can identify. Alas, if you have crashes in VR, or excessive RAM usage, the lesson here is to reset the FX settings to the preset, not leave them on "seemed reasonable for flat screen" settings - even if that gave more than 90 frames/sec even in VR. Over and out.

The mission must be engrossing and compelling. Detailed briefings with characterization, objectives, well-built slides; in-game radio messages convincingly voice acted; objectives that force one to think outside the box; an actual impression that you're working as part of a larger team and not all alone.

Realistically we need a low digit sam mod. There were like 3-4 major variants of the SA-2 for example.

Say you? [emoji6] You spin me right round, baby right round like a record, baby Right round round round... Enjoy your Saturday guys! [emoji482] Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

I have a Valve Index. I use it occasionally for VR games (or at least I used to), and for a while I still hoped at least once in every new module to see the first person perspective and scale of the cockpit. But I gave up on actually flying in VR for the quoted reasons. But it‘s just not for me. Maybe I try again, when VR headsets have half the weight, double the visual fidelity and double the performance of today (and a proper climate for your face). For the time being though I may try TrackIR alternatives still to get rid off the head gear (face tracking), but so far none that I tried was convincing enough to ditch TrackIR.

Since virtually no other 3rd party dev, except OctopusG, is making WW2 fighters for DCS I fear sadly no one. There are dozens of iconic WW2 planes besides the F4U other devs could have done, yet even 11 years after the P-51 was released we only have the ED birds and soon two Russian fighters.

I just bought two ssds, 2tb each at over a hundred quid a pop. That didn’t come easy as I’m on a budget. Storage isn’t cheap for everyone. I had to save a fair bit to get me in the DCS air at a time when most of the country was forbidden to work and earn anything. My point here is for some, the fact that they have a computer capable of running flight sims with all the peripherals, modules and wotnot doesn’t mean they can afford to spend money without it stinging. We all need storage whatever we do though. As for the skins, I think the core liveries should be installed whatever. Custom skins are optional. If there are skins in the core I don’t use I don’t delete them but don’t see the harm in having a checkbox to decide what I want to install. When I got started I had DCS stable installed and it’s fat but is par for the course. I installed OB too and had them both for a while before uninstalling one because my C drive got a little sunburnt and went red. It’s fat enough. I try not to install anything on any device that I don’t want but I don’t take it as far as stripping out parts of the package of things I do want. There’s no need for anything to be taking up space if those things are unwanted. You wouldn’t put up with it if you jumped in your car and it was full of someone’s luggage would you? Unless there was a luxury holiday ticket with it addressed to you, then you’d have the holiday of a lifetime. Nor would you enter your bathroom naked expecting to shower if you found it jam packed with the finest looking dancing girls you ever saw in your life. Ok, I relent. Maybe we would. I need more sleep and like posting when drunk, sleep deprived posting should be avoided for the sake of sensibility. I’d just like to take this opportunity to wish everyone the cleanest of socks, the brightest of smiles and hope the day is marvellous for all.

Issues reported. Thank you, @virgo47.

This would be great for making cinematic missions while limiting performance impact

Tested in OB MT Just now. P-47 on deck! Download the attached below. Saved Games location. OvGME ready. With a big shout out to Eagle Dynamics for granting, and not breaking, My request! You may edit the entry lua file to suite. Eagle Dynamics Carrier Based aircraft V2.0.zip

They wouldnt be, like multiple users have already pointed out our biggest problem with fitting the DCS hornet in these early scenarios are the link-16 and the JHMCS and like vampyre already said PvP scenarios before these systems were added into the module did just fine, an option to restrict these systems would go a long way but if im to ask i'd rather get the full early hornet package with the rest of the little bits and pieces that differ from ours what i want is an F-18A from the mid/late 80s or the very early 90s as said in the title and first post

AFAIK Bunyap built that campaign based on original documents, so whatever happens in the campaign happens in real life. And radio discipline was much stricter in WW2.

Nostalgia aside, probably makes no sense… I've tried in the past to install the old LOMAC and previous software (old discs lurking around, you know) out of curiosity and… No, it makes no sense, it feels stupid having the same map and aircraft in very good and current quality to go flying those old maps and aircraft, old menus and GUI, old and limited options, but mostly the same at least in the surface since they aren't the same at all, so… quick installed, quick saw it, and quick uninstalled… Yeah, you have the Crimea map in old versions, but it's so old and low quality by today standards it isn't worth it. The old half of Caucasus map makes even less sense, you have all of that available "for free" in DCS with way better graphics.

Even easier to make a proper separate variant by just disabling post 1991 systems. F/A-18C entered service in 1985, exactly like F-15C MSIP in USAF or Su-27S in USSR. Both Su-27S and F-15C MISP are bread and butter of 1980s DCS SP scenarions and MP servers. 1985 early F/A-18C without JHMCS, Link 16, MIDS, earlier -400 engines and few other small changes would be at home as well in such scenarios.

So why did you use false statement?: Such false information mislead people who read the forum and have no knowledge about the relevant versions.

Well, aren't you in luck? Nothing has been suggested that would do that, even remotely. You'd have exactly as much freedom of choice as you do now and not one bit less. I don't appreciate users seeking to restrict my freedom of choice, for quite literally, zero reason. And seeing as nobody can just add a few dollars of disk space, you're expecting them to fork out for a new drive to store data they don't want, need, or use, that can be deleted with little to no consequence. Even if I have plenty of storage space (I do), why should I clutter it up with files I don't need, want or use, that can be deleted with little to no consequence? Why am I storing them in the first place? Even better, a system is already in place for modules, maps and campaigns that does the exact same thing a livery manager would need to do. Is that reducing your freedom of choice? Is it restricting the standard modules, campaigns and maps? Some of these campaigns also only represent a few dollars in storage space (if that) and yet there's a system for uninstalling those, so it's not the fact that they take up relatively low amounts of storage space that's the problem here - so why can't it be done with the liveries? And you still would be perfectly free to do that, if a livery manager was developed. I even suggested that its default behaviour should be to install everything, like what happens now. That way, only the people who don't want that to happen need touch it, for those like you, you'd be hard pressed to tell if its even there. This comes at no disadvantage to yourself, I don't get why you and several others are perfectly fine with the exact same system for our modules, campaigns and maps, but so opposed to one for the liveries. Sharpe, there's nothing complicated about it - the system already exists it just doesn't for the liveries. The repair utility is already able to detect which liveries you have/have not installed, it can even tell when the files in those liveries match with what's on ED's internal system and then redownload only what's missing/different. Not only does it do liveries, but it checks (for my installation), nearly 90,000 files in over 10,000 different folders and can do so fairly quickly. So all the under-the-hood functionality is already done, all we would need is a way to control which files it redownloads.

Мне конечно как бы по..ю на ваши тут всякие подобные хотения.Это конечно же хорошо если разрабы будут учитывать и делать все возможные варианты для всего и всех.Но,мля,кушать кактус?На педалях без ффб?То есть ты до ффб кушал кактус?Или это у тебя просто напрочь так снесло чердак от ффб и ты еще от впечатлений и эмоций не отошел,как сектант с пеной у рта везде доказываешь про неимоверную необходимость ффб на 24ке?Я еще могу понять игроков поршневиков.Но вот здесь вот эти вот лозунги ваши вообще не канают.А каналом направления не пользоваться да запросто!Просто на панели прямо слева тумблер вниз и канал этот автоматически офф.Все чёткие водители 24ки так делают.А вы летайте там с каналами и мегапедалями.Лично я кактус не кушаю.Я просто летаю как хочу,и нагибаю в онлайне наземку как хочу,на мой взгляд очень даже эффективно,особенно по сравнению с большинством,которые ниже ста метров не опускаются и впитывают в себя всё пво,и я уверен что там же среди них и ваш брат с ффб.

An all out effort was put in today to remove the forward windscreen structure with the last of the rusted out bolts and hardware either ground out, drilled out or cut out! The removed forward windscreen section and associated parts will be boxed up and sent across to [MVP] IndianaShane in Western Australia, where it will be used as part of his F86 Sabre sim pit build. Hopefully he starts a forum post and we can follow his build too!

Thanks a lot. That would be really useful

Hey @JackHammer89! You can still enter them in degrees, minutes, decimal minutes, works like a champ! No need to convert.

Great find. Thanks. I have always been amazed by your research skills. I didn't find those even though I speak the language. But you somehow always find them even though you can't speak Chinese. I really wish that I had met you when I was writing my research paper.

seems so, the manual of the real F-15 says: "The FUEL LOW caution may come on with more than 1500 pounds of fuel remaining if fuel transfer falls behind engine fuel consumption because of transfer system failure or sustained high speed afterburner usage."

Passend zum Thread nochmal in aller gebotenen Kürze, bezogen auf die A-10C (beide Versionen in DCS): Es gibt immer nur einen Sensor of Interest (SOI). Den kann man mit dem Slew-Cursor manipulieren. Es gibt immer nur einen Sensor Point of Interest (SPI). Das HOTAS-Kommando "Make SPI" (TMS Forward Long) setzt den SOI als SPI-Generator. Das heißt, von diesem Zeitpunkt an generiert dieser Sensor den SPI. Manipuliert man diesen Sensor, der gerade SPI-Generator ist (TGP slewen, HUD Cursor slewen, TAD-Objekt hooken, HMCS-Objekt hooken, anderen Steuerpunkt auswählen, ...), dann aktualisiert das Flugzeug direkt und sofort den SPI. Wenn man einen anderen Sensor zum SOI macht, ändert das nicht den SPI. In der unteren linken Ecke vom HUD wird immer angezeigt, welcher Sensor gerade den SPI generiert. Für CCRP-Angriffe und beim Übertragen von Kontakten per Datalink wird immer der SPI genutzt. Hat man dieses Konzept einmal verinnerlicht, ist es super mächtig und es wird klar, dass fast immer unterschiedliche Wege zum gleichen Ziel führen.

ED has done nothing to support these claims. This module seems very SP-oriented (ATC alone should prove this point). How many virtual squadrons are testing your upcoming SC changes?

Clearing the deck for recoveries needs to be sped up, if nothing else is. I also doubt crew would be this slow during combat tempo.

Here's the OG Picture Cobra posted on Discord.

Hi, the problem was fixed internally a couple days ago. The fix should be part of the next OB update. @FrostLaufeyson Your track proved very useful. I ran it in current OB and saw the problem, then ran it in ED internal build and saw the problem was fixed. It took me 5 minutes. This is one of the reasons why providing tracks is so important when posting about an issue. Thank you!