Leaderboard

Tigr-M (Russia) version 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Testing the next asset...

Dear Fighter Pilots, Partners and Friends, DCS 2.9 is coming soon! You can expect to see the all-new Voice Chat Radio features, warbird improvements, new 3D models including the S-300, the S-3B, the B-1B, B-52H, support for Nvidia DLSS and much, much more! Please read the details below to see what’s in store. Also in progress are Multiplayer GUI updates that will improve spawn point selection. Currently, the new functionality is being reviewed internally and will soon be released to a larger testing group. We are incredibly thankful and grateful to our talented community of artists who have taken part in the B-17G Livery Competition. The top five entries will receive the following prizes: 1st place: 3 modules 2nd to 5th place: 1 module of choice. Thank you for your passion and support. Yours sincerely, Eagle Dynamics https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/newsletters/8ee1c3ca60f9edbd7bec24a7c8a1a56e/

Any compression or antialiasing will have compromises, DLSS works well, but you will have other options including DLAA thank you

That's a nice surprise, DLAA!

New S-3, nice.

I'm just hyped for the F1BE, but I'm special anyways.

Hi every one, here another batch of updated "wake files" from Admiral189's works: Madrid_Maersk.lods.ship_wake Allure of the Seas.lods.ship_wake CMA_CGM_Jacques_Saade.lods.ship_wake CPL_Shipping_Line.lods.ship_wake EVER_APEX.lods.ship_wake Feeder_Ship.lods.ship_wake LNG_Tanker.lods.ship_wake LNG_Tanker_Mozah.lods.ship_wake CMA_CGM_Benjamin.lods.ship_wake CSCL_Star_Shipping.lods.ship_wake For this last one, i needed to rename some files of the "shapes" folder and you will need also to replace this file CSCL_Star_Shipping.lods As I was working on them, i found 2 problems, first on "the Allure of the Seas" mod, the center of the ship is not aligned with the wake file: Second, on the "MS CSCL star Shipping" mod, there are lights in the water on the right side of the ship about 500 m: CPL_Shipping_Line.lods.ship_wake

Some progress, I've reworked the fuel gauge and now im working on the caution pannel.

Maybe it will be in the future but there is a lot of work to get it to ED standard, we are just 4 guys doing a 7 man aircraft. Before and after of tail sections, Havent had time recently to take screenshots so the other ones might be reposted elsewhere

I giggled when I read coming soon

Looking forward to hook up with that Viking! Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

Thank you for these wonderful assets. As a defender against the SHAHED 136 LM, may I suggest the OERLIKON SKYNEX® AIR DEFENCE SYSTEM by Rheinmetall? As it seem to become more relevant as of lately.

Really hoping at minimum we get the new AI models.

Somebody was asking for WW2 UK Liveries for the ED C-47. I did these when the aircraft first came out a few years ago, waiting for an ED template which never appeared, so I never really finished them as I would have liked. I think they still work. There are quite a few more, civil and military, all within the 2 packs. You are welcome to do anything you want with them. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4kejgxpd9g7opp73kmwnh/CrazyEddies-C47-Skinpack-Military.zip?rlkey=sw1jtq3l4sr2c3ia3dhz410bv&dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/7hkfe68jmn40th5xxiass/CrazyEddies_C47_Skinpack_Civilian.zip?rlkey=e0gus99etepcs8vz6uxg3kv2x&dl=0

I mean all of FC3 is oversimplified for the most part aside from maybe the FM's and there is still debates about those not being right. Honestly i half expect to laugh if/when ED releases the FF 9.12 version of the Mig-29 because literally it will be worse and harder to use if they actually model all the major systems right and all the big redfor guys will cry because its less capable than FC3 or because they can't exploit FC3isms in MP. Radar, will be far more janky with both look down issues as well as processing overloads and the controls if people use them realistically will be more difficult to use correctly. IRST, same thing, shouldn't see through clouds and really aside from HMS cueing was mostly worthelss due to limited processing abilities and having to deal with clutter etc but DCS doesn't model IR at all at this point. HMS actually needing time to lock and not displaying stuff etc. The only upside might be Lazur, but we will likely get that with the 23 and again, really depends on how well that is actually integrated into the core of DCS. Sadly I expect it to be some sort of simple point you at a target system like the M2k TAF, which basically ignores 90% of its actual capabilities and how it was used IRL. All the same would also be true for a FF Su-27 but add in DL stuff being more complex/worse for it.

3.0 is probably Vulcan. And new High resolution DCS logo

Is Nvidia DLSS version 3.5? This is going to be very good! I always download the latest version and replace the DLSS of supported games. https://www.techpowerup.com/download/nvidia-dlss-dll/

Looking forward to some escort action with those lovely new B-52 and B-1B models. Probably spend an hour just looping around them and enjoying the eye candy.

What about the clouds / weather engine ?

Looks delicious!

i am nearly 50 as well.. 48... wow. i mean i still feel 38... there was a time when there was no in game multiplayer browser, and we had to use hyperlobby.. lately i been learning the tomcat. totally enjoying the moment. 50 is a scary number!

Maybe we'll get them together? The only other thing I'll say is that the AI A-6E was announced just over 5 years ago, the Phantom wasn't teased until a little under 2 years ago and wasn't formerly announced until early last year. Meanwhile the AI A-6E, was shown off in game just under a year prior (just so people are aware of it, I did bring this up on hoggit, to which this was Cobra's reply, if anyone is interested in reading it). Now don't get me wrong, I don't really have any preference for what I'd like to see first, just that the AI A-6E, at least superficially, looked to be closer to release compared to the F-4E (though I assume the latter has priority, I am aware that the A-6E is last in line for HB to deliver, out of their currently announced projects). In any case, they're both occupying close to my top spot for what I'm most excited to see in the near future and I'm completely confident they'll both be incredible once they get released.

Hello @Raz_Specter, do we have any chance of getting these performance changes in the next patch (2.9, beginning of October I think) to see it? Just a question :).

For those who speak Russian. I’ll translate key points of the interview soon.

I picked Su-25. But I still would like to point out that there are other planes that can be a great addition to DCS too. For starters, Su-7 would be good too. I heard that at its introduction, no plane can chase it down at low altitude, or something like that. Then there is MiG-21S and/or MiG-21PFM. According to the Wikipedia, there are 3 generations of MiG-21. The most capable one of the last generation is the bis which we already have. The most capable version of the second-gen was the MiG-21S. However, PFM was the most exported one. Either one would be cool. They would fill the hole of that part of the history of the Red Side in DCS. By the way, did you guys know that MiG-21S has a night vision? It's very cool for a plane of that era.

С радаром придется подождать. Над остальным работаем

Seems to work for ai! But player sinks into the ground a bit. A collision up-date is needed. Runway needs love. No trees added

Still both the Ka-50 and 25T might as well be prototypes. The J-8PP while it did fly was a prototype etc. Its just if you have enough docs on hand. I'm sure Deka did the PP because they couldn't do the actual "in service" Chinese versions. But hey a an outdated airframe with outdated western avionics built in cooperation with the west? Yeah even the CCP can honestly say yeah, nothing sekrit there the west doesn't know about since they helped build the things. And yeah I'm sure the recent political situation in russia is not great for developing much of anything.

I'm using DCS in VR only, and don't experience the clouds wobbling which was a bug at the beginning with version 2.7. Heavy aliasing is experienced because the semi transparent cloud layers don't handle MSAA well, so I have to use strictly Ultra clouds to minimize this issue. Right now at least MSAA 2x is also required for VR, because the black covering VR mask in the view is only displayed correctly if MSAA is on. But even with MSAA 4x some semi transparent surfaces, shiny edges and transparent textured objects (like power line pylons and fences at airports, and the leaves on the trees) are sometimes not anti-aliased at all with shimmering as hell. In 2D this is not experienced. So DLAA will be a HUGE blast, because you can get rid of the performance hungry MSAA implementation while having a proper temporal AA which is finally able to smooth all edges and get rid of shimmering once for all. Great news!

They haven‘t posted all new features and improvements comming with DCS 2.9. Let‘s wait and see. I assume there will be improvement of weather and clouds

Always 2 weeks! Just...not always from now.

The ED in its official capacity may not be willing to deal with projects requiring access to classified Soviet documents - and that is totally understandable, we know that and we are not asking for that. In the meantime, third party developers AND specifically the community members who are not bound by any official capacities, are free to research in any way they want within the reasonable constraints. A lot of folks here speculate about lack of documentation with a premise that lacks any evidence. And if you do, feel free to contact and we’ll discuss it. At the end of the day, we talk about searching for materials to develop software for a computer simulation game. There are many countries where redfor planes were exported, and finding the documentation is a matter of efforts and some time UNLESS all those attempts, in reality are failed - no one can convince us that something is not possible. Cheers. P.S. Not sure who was trying to hire a lawyer but it was not me

No news about the clouds, DCS 2.9 ??

Just want to say thanks everyone - great perspectives and advice. I'm sure a lot of this is going to play out as I gain experience and comfortability with the knobs and buttons and beeping and lights, Oh My!! It's so much fun and I love this learning phase. Thanks again.

The Dragons Eye is not the onboard radar, it´s an AESA-radar carried as a pod, and given the imagery from other fighter size AESA-radars I have seen, the image will be more like a black and white photo rather than the grainy imagery we´ve used to in DCS. Vehicles will most certainly be visible. Ground radar has the advantage of not being hindered by clouds, something that can be a problem when relying on optronic sensors.

Yeah, many of them have been teased for quite a while now. HB did plan to have the AI A-6E (& KA-6D?) out this summer, so hopefully they'll make 2.9.

The engine shouldn't (and doesn't) cut out in hot-started missions all by itself, even with nothing but mouse and keyboard plugged in. Must be some controller issue on your side, do you have something in your HOTAS bound to "mixture lever cut-off" command by mistake? Trims being animated but inop is a sign of game flight mode being used, applies to all warbirds in DCS. Unlikely to be fixed when devs said numerous times they plan to remove the game flight mode form the sim altogether.

Add area of high detail to that.

I dont expect new weapons, the intended changelog for the Strike Eagle is: Added: TFR Added: modifiable steerpoint MEA in UFC and Mission Editor Added: Delete steerpoint by selecting "0" steerpoint on UFC Added: INS based wind estimation Added: Any waypoint (Routes A/B/C, offsets, base, bullseyes, avoidance, mark, list) can be added in ME Added: List points can be bound to steer points Fixed: markpoints starting at M0 Fixed: active route display on A/G radar map Fixed: bug where TWS freezes the radar in presence of AoJ returns Fixed: TWS struggling to convert a HoJ track into full track in some cases Fixed: Pressing PB1 on SP edit page past last route point Fixed: Blank steerpoint (zero coordinates) showing on maps and selectable on sensors Fixed: TSD route switching Fixed: ASL wrong with INS drift Adjusted: INS drift rate Improved: BOT aiming Fixed: WSO LANTIRN TGP HOTAS Fixed: RWR Volume control not working Fixed: A/A TACAN distance readout shows two decimals (X.XX) Fixed: Missing hyphen in HUD bullseye Fixed: HSI ground track diamond is cyan, not amber on the MPCD Updated: ILS volume set to OFF at mission start Even so, I'm happy with thr changes

What? Not quite multirole, but multipurpose. It was an interceptor, that could also drop a couple of bombs. Not neccessarily during the same mission. It's more useful than being a single-purpose jet like the Tu-128 or Su-15, though. I like the Su-15 better, because I like the aircraft better. That hardly makes me a russophobe. But if you want to play the victim-card here, go ahead, whatever you say. The MiG-25 couldn't intercept the SR, because it evidently didn't. Had they been able to squash a Blackbird, they'd done it and we'd know about it as they'd have run the propaganda game, thumping their chest over that achievement. There's only two reasons why they'd not shoot somebody down: 1) They legally couldn't. Ask KAL how well that rule turned out. 2) They physically couldn't. Like Mr. Rust in his R172, who wasn't shot down because "he wasn't deemed a threat" and yet PVO proceeded with some personnel-shuffling in the aftermath. Everybody who wasn't in their airspace by invitation, got an explosive memo. Intercepting an enemy with an aircraft that's slower than the target and with missiles that are only for a fraction of their flight-time faster than the target itself isn't quite a child's play. It requires an orchestra of GCI and command-control assets to work just right. It only takes one person to mess up and the intercept goes to hell. Just look how much of a clusterduck the KAL007 intercept was - and that was a plain vanilla 747-200, not trying to evade anybody, jamming or chaffing.

Major General Jeannie Leavitt, the USAF's first lady fighter pilot, retired recently after a career spent flying the Strike Eagle. She left the service with 3,000 total hours, including 300 combat hours in the F-15E, flying in Operation Southern Watch, Operation Northern Watch, the war in Iraq, and in Afghanistan. As a 1st Lieutenant in Southern Watch, she once took out a Roland battery threatening an RAF Tornado. (Who says an F-15E can't do SEAD?) That's just one pilot...ten percent of her flying was in combat, and she did all of it in Strike Eagles. Your post indicates what seems like a common misperception that combat aviators will only execute their mission when there's little risk. ("...the battlefield is rarely cooperative...Will the eagles have to jettison often...and RTB empty handed?") What you're describing is what fighter pilots I've known and worked with would call, "risk averse." To most fighter pilots, the key to success is to accept that one cannot eliminate all risk, so the only way to complete a given mission is to MINIMIZE risk...to accept that one might have to grit one's teeth and fly through the AAA barrage or into a short-range SAM envelope in order to put warheads on foreheads. Risk Management is an art. There are certainly very few hard-and-fast, if this then do that rules for setting an acceptable level of risk. There are risks you absolutely wouldn't take until you get in their air and you're the only one who can help a platoon of Marines pinned down by enemy fire. I strongly recommend William L. Smallwood's book, "Strike Eagle: Flying the F-15E in the Gulf War", which is available on Amazon and was written shortly after the end of the first Gulf War. At the time they arrived in theatre, the Strike Eagles were barely certified, and did not yet have LANTIRN. The first-hand accounts of combat are genuinely harrowing.

Well this is a hot one. I will share my info for ya. I threw down on a Monster tech a year ago. 47yo 6'5" 240lb fella. Lots of bad joints-esp hips and low back. Car racing will do that. i have used all kinds of chairs and even built my own with the ol junk yard chair. I have never been more comfortable and happier than with this chair. It wasnt cheap and if I had to do over i would bought it sooner than i did. I went ahead and got all the crap on it i wanted and just bent over. It has been well worth it and i will have to say now that i have it, you dont get the shaft, you get a DAMN good chair. Hope i helped. Later Tater

Select burner, airplane goes faster. It’s really that simple. I appreciate you wanting the realistic experience, but there’s not much to it. If the light-off detector doesn’t sense a burner flame, there’s an “AB NO LIGHT” message.

US Infantry (USA) version 1.3.0 released! Changelog Version 1.3.0 Added M249 missing textures Added M120 Mortar team

Another screenshot from the Discord

Done. It's just one texture for Revetment_SAM4. Thanks for Barthek for permission. Now, more fun with grass, concrete and red-white stripes, etc. With CTR, MCTR, TMA. ATZ, R and P areas too.

Yes very interesting, the tanks are engaging outside a reasonable range for sure. I took control and while I could hit a tank... not easily, the AP did no damage as expected, the HE seemed weird, if it hit the ground it exploded as normal but if it hit the tank it didn't seem to explode, I am not sure it would be effective but it should still explode as normal. It's not far-fetched to expect a tank to work in a mobile artillery role, but not against other tanks. So I will report the engagements outside a viable range. I will wait for that to be looked at before I report the interception range as that might be messing it up. Although worth testing with other units until then. I will ask about HE rounds seeming being duds if they hit a tank at long range. I need to test further. Bonus report, I do not like the Binoculars 1) have all that fancy modern stuff in WWII tanks 2) seem to not remember where they are looking when I switch to the gun and back. I'll leave this open for now. Also if you go into CA, and use the target help, it says the enemy tank is in range, I would think this should not be the case.

@KetchupWarthogMind you, according to real manuals from B- to N- variant, 425 rounds per gun was "maximum" load, while "desirable" load was listed as 200, 267 or 300 depending on gun configuration (6 or 8 ) and on... manual you choose to follow. I guess ED decided to choose 300 as best compromise option. Still, logic suggests that ammo bar in the editor set at 100% should yield max physically possible amount, so 425 I'd say.