Leaderboard

Hey no problem you have your opinion, however the people who know best about the patch and what needs to happen are the project leads and the QA team. They are all working very hard at the moment. It will be worth the wait. thanks

Hi all, there is no patch this week, our work on 2.9 continues, testing and merging features and fixes. thank you for being patient.

I’m not sure why, but the F1 is slowly becoming one of the best modules i have ever had on DCS, and i have basically all of them right now. Yes, it still has some problems, but for sure they will be addressed and the fact that we are going to get 4 (FOUR) planes is simply awesome! I’m having a lot of fun using the F1CE for some taskings and the EE for different ones that requires the INS. It has a lot of personality and it’s difficult to hit something just due of pure luck. Thank you Aerges, please F1BE soon because i want more!

Hi guys, So RWR will be worked on after release of the BE and before the M. There's a texture overhaul to be released in the update after the BE. Cheers

Added to post under the status. thanks

WDMMW - World Directory of Modern Military Warships (2023)

Thanks for the reply. Y’all are doing a great job, keep up the great work! cheers

Thanks Guys for assisting Oban. OSA One and OSA Two twins are both in DCS. Making final adjustments.

From what I understood there are quite considerable updates/changes coming for the core engine. So thorough testing and making sure, things run smooth, especially with merging all patches and fixes of recent modules is paramount. I think it is better to wait a little bit and then be able to enjoy a decent build, rather than a rushed release with modules broken or other issues that severely impact gameplay. Appreciate the updates and Infos, though.

Это достижимо если летать с живым оператором, который сознательно управляет радугой. Это полностью его сфера ответственности. Чтобы продвинутое управление прицельной станцией Ми-24 перешло в сферу ответственности КЭ я не знаю что можно сделать. Либо вручную указывать ИИ точку куда стрелять (как именно, варианты?), либо импортировать видовое окно радуги в отдельный виджет со своими органами управления. Сделав из Ми-24 Ка-50. Один костыль страшнее другого)) Первый вариант более адекватный, но как точно указать ИИ точку прицеливания когда из инструментов только глаза и приближение камеры? Просто интересна гипотетическая процедура непосредственно в задней кабине модуля, в полете

Take your time ED, I know 2.9 is worth the wait [emoji6][emoji1303]

Насущный вопрос к разработчикам, по поводу солнца в кабине, а точнее нечитаемости индикации на RWR и дисплеях. В реальности пилот может закрыть тенью от руки нужный дисплей и считать показания. Можно нам сделать управляемое пятно тени на основе уже существующего фонарика? Т.е. нажал кнопку и навёл мышкой тень на нужный дисплей, чтобы считать показания.

The law simply becomes a tool to persecute anyone they deem worthy of persecuting. The reasons are largely irrelevant and don't need to be rational.

Thank you, can i ask for a bit more info? Will we get OG Aim-9P (smoke), then P2/3 (smokeless) and P-5 or P just becomes P2/3 with reduced smoke engine. Then even if a bit off topic, its still kinda close to aim-9s. There is huge issue with R3S and R13s and R-60 from magnitude (mig21). R3S is pulling 5-6 Gs more than it should (16Gs instead of 10-11), flies shorter and its IRCCM is 15 times better than Aim-9Bs (0,66 vs 10,0!! 15 times better with pretty much same seeker design), it should be same or atleast similar. Certainly should pull less and be multiple times worse against flares. Its CCM is currently BETTER than 9L(0,75), 9JULI (0,75 - should be better than 9L =>irccm head from german 9Li program) and close to 9M/R73 or Magic IIs 0.5 IRCCM, same goes for R13M, M1 and base model R-60 (0,66). R13s i cant find info but considering they should be copies / inspired by Aim-9D and Aim-9J/P, they should pull similar Gs due to aerodynamics - 9D/G/H were limited by frontal fin design, even stronger servos in H couldnt help it and missile pulled 18Gs max - R13M should be 18 instead of 22 and 13M1 gets same design as 22G J/P sidewinder. Cant comment on these much as i dont know how much stronger servos and different frontal fins changed 9Js pull from 9Es as its 2 things combined unlike on 9G/H where servos did nothing but when they added double delta frontal fins on H, they pushed its envelope over 30Gs (9L development program - it was made on 9H body, servos, engine). So R13M1 could be more similar to 9J 20-25Gs, its doing 35Gs now. All these missiles can track in frontal hemisphere too. Again cant comment on R13M1 and R60 but R3S and R13M certainly shouldnt do that. R3S is almost all aspect in that regard. My question is, can we expect these to be changed with sidewinders, are they worked on or we wont see them changed ever? Thank you. Adding video of R13 and R3S ignoring flares and tracking into frontal aspect - R3S (R3S should eat them from side - it shouldnt track from side at all, it was limited to around 30 deg left/right as these old seekers had to see internal parts of engine nozzles they guided on)

I'd like to say that Jester is one of the many reasons why the F-14 is (also) my favorite aircraft in DCS. I find the compromise HB found for it is very close to perfect for 99% of the F-14 A/B moments, and users of the module. Yes, there is the odd silly comment by Jester that I'd rather live without, but I solved that for myself by "blanking" the audio files that I prefer not to listen to (though it does require going painfully through all the dozens of audio files, to see which is which...). In that note, I'd like to request a simple thing to HB, so that in future this can be done easily by any user who is looking to "tone down" the ocasional silly nature of Jester. Please make a separate folder inside "Mods\aircraft\F14\Sounds\Jester" purposely placed with all the comical tone and silly remarks of Jester inside it. This way, one can go straight to the point, look for those audio files and more easily move them (all or just some) somewhere else, or replace with blanks (whatever). Then this whole story of the "grown up Jester" can be easily solved for the most part.

Happy to announce an update to DCS MovingMap! The new version includes many improvements, new features, more map styles and now supports all DCS theaters! Enjoy! Find more info, installation instructions, the manual and download the app on my website: https://movingmap.bergison.com Note: the release of the app for Android will be available in the PlayStore in the coming days.

That's great news! Thanks for giving us so much updates ♥ Big love for keeping all your love to that baby!

threads merged We have to take our time with testing 2.9 so you will need to be patient. thank you

Thank you for keeping us in the loop BN. This is very much appreciated. Fingers crossed for next week then and good luck with all this testing…

People have a weird tendency to believe the devs, SMEs and confirmed pilots rather than a random internet anon.

I do not have a Vive Pro but a Pico 4 so YMMV but on my system, the OpenXR feature is the default with the multithreading (MT) dcs.exe found in the bin-mt/ folder of the DCS installation. I do not have to use any kind of "force enable" anymore. I *think* that the single-threaded executable, on the other hand, defaults to vanilla SteamVR. I assume the same will apply with the Vive Pro. You can confirm which runtime has been used by looking into the dcs.log file. On my system the OpenXR runtime used is the one provided by SteamVR (the Pico 4 is not a native OpenXR headset for PCVR) but MBucchia's 3rd-party tools that depend on OpenXR, such as the OpenXT toolkit and QuadViews work flawlessly. From this VivePort page, I guess it should be the same with a Vive Pro.

Thanks HILOK! Releasing an iOS version is definitively on my to-do list. The app should theoretically run fine on Apple devices, but releasing in the App Store requires some effort, as one needs a Mac to do so. I'd either have to buy one (not my favourite option - I'm not a big Apple fan), or rent a Mac-in-the-Cloud device. Either way, there are some costs involved.

My heart shipped a heart beat on the BE’s post on Patch Status…My system is ready, also for the benchmarking. Bring it on!

Please read EULA before you get into troubles or contact ED to get other type of license. Seriously, FC3 aircraft on sales are $7, how much cheaper you want it? There are 2 free aircraft. If you "waste" a trial of one module just trial another aicraft - there are over 40 types!

A mercy update! I don't know about others but I'd really appreciate making it part of the Patch Status topic in the future.

Thanks Rudel - I'm okay with that.

@Aero4000, я из тех людей, которые не прыгают из модуля в модуль. Ещё в серии MFS я летал только на одном самолёте. В MFS9 я летал на Ту-154М, а в MFSX, летал на Piper PA-31T Cheyenne II. В корне разные типа ЛА, но были по своему интересны каждый и знал я их довольно не плохо. Всегда старался брать сразу самый сложный в освоении ЛА в определённой игре. В DCS мне посоветовали A-10C. Попались Вы мне бы тогда, я бы взял F-16 и летал бы только на нём ) Когда у меня ещё не было DCS, у меня уже был куплен A-10C. Я зашёл в Discord и спросил, какой модуль самый сложный и проработанный, мне ответили, что этот. Вот и летаю на нём, выжимая из модуля всё что можно, ломая идеологию других. Я прошу прощения у тех, для кого DCS это симулятор и где каждое воздушное судно для определённой цели. Но я другой и со своими странностями. В других играх я также делаю всё иначе, раздражая тех, кто считает, что я играю неправильно в его понимании. Я человек весьма странный, но для меня DCS прежде всего игра, где я с удовольствием провожу время и как мне нравится, а не как надо. Я и так то жалею, что меня уговорили взять AH-64. Может я и куплю позже какой-то другой модуль, но он должен быть очень сложным в освоении, тогда мне будет интересно. А вообще, мне нравятся модели, где реализована хорошо инженерная часть. Если бы мне понравился Apache, я бы и на нём начал уничтожать истребители. В общем, хочется ещё раз сделать акцент на том, что для меня DCS это весёлое времяпровождение, со своими интересами. Да, интересы выбиваются из ваших привычных интересов, но я хоть зашёл в эту игру, не спрашивая как пододвинуть трап, или сменить ливрею, а начал изучать модуль с другого. Нравится вам долгое нажатие, пожалуйста, я не называю вас дураками, и не виню никого за то, что летаете на разных ЛА, при этом, не зная даже банальных вещей того, или иного ЛА в DCS. К примеру, половина без карты F10 даже не долетит до точки. Зато, они наверное добились чего-то другого в DCS. Давайте всё же относиться к друг другу менее токсично. Пожелаю приятных полётов всем, уже просто на работу пора выбегать. Да, стоит оговориться, что говоря о половине игроков, я никого не имел в виду лично, я говорил о большей части игроков в DCS. Всё, убежал )))

DLSS isn’t really supersampling, it’s upscaling. But DLUS just doesn’t sound sexy

New Fulcrum coming soon! MiG-29 bort number "115" as of 2013. The plane commemorates Bolesław Gładych, a World War II pilot, flying in squadrons 303 and 302, and later also (thanks to his acquaintance with Francis Gabreski) 61 Fighter Squadron 56th Fighter Group equipped with the P-47. He was the first Polish pilot to shoot down an FW-190. He also flew the F-104. After the war, he also flew the F-104. His score is 14 kills plus 2 probable kills.

I want to thank both Heatblur for their commitment to authenticity and also SDplayer for the mod to help visibility. Personally, I think visibility is a big issue when it comes to DCS (or any flight simulator in general). In the same sense that a "player" cannot feel the plane move like a "pilot" can, a "player" also cannot see the plane like a "pilot" can. If it we had just a static screen like in the old 80's and 90's flight sims, instrument visibility wouldn't be a problem, though awareness of surroundings would be. But now, we have much better visibility of what's around us, but we lose that instrument visibility. Virtual reality users always have to deal with it due to the extremely limited FOV. Track IR users also have to deal with it because of FOV, but at least there are programs like Helios. I think that's what hurts me most (as a Track IR user)... I don't have a second monitor to put Helios on, so I can't use my head to follow a bandit, and just glance down with my eyes to read my instruments... I have to turn my head back to the instruments if I want to see my speed (or whatever else), and that requires sacrificing sight of the bandit... something that I'm lucky to get back. Sure, I could increase FOV or zoom out to try to see both, but It's difficult enough as it is to see instruments (not just on the F-14... I've been flying the F-5 and A-4 recently) when at a normal FOV/zoom level. It's so difficult for me that I've actually created a little personal app for my tablet to display my speed in big numbers so I can see it at a glance. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to work on the server I fly on. Yeah, while I'm happy to be able to fly and fight without the danger of real injury or death, I am very jealous of an actual pilot's visibility.

Looks like a really useful App … hopefully an iOS version will be available in the future, as I’d love to use it on my iPad

They don't "protect" anything here. They are simply acting according to a principle and don't care to make exceptions. It's much easier to enforce a certain principle if you don't introduce multitudes of "if"s and "then"s and exceptions.

Any news to share about Hornet's FM update?

Are you misunderstanding him on purpose? Because i completely get what he is saying and thats not it. While the current cockpit might be realistic when playing with high resolution etc there are many occasions where that is not the case and the end result is not that great because stuff in the cockpit is a bit challenging to read even with large screens @4k and max settings. If the player is not very familiar with the cockpit and labels and hes trying to read the labels looking for some buttons as a new pilot with avarage hardware and settings or a vr headset with avarage resolution the experience might not be that great if you have to spend too much time trying to figure out whats written on some label. And maybe some people just like to look at new fresh looking cockpits, now they can. Thats why we have options to turn on and off things we like or don't like - it's not a type rated sim, you can do whatever you enjoy doing with it and it's nobodys business if someone thinks its "correct" or not. No matter how difficult or unpleasant it is we are all still just sitting in front of a computer playing a game and enjoying our time, forcing someone to look at something they don't enjoy seems pointless. Luckily we have this mod and everyone can be happy - those who like it can use it and those who dont like it don't have to use it.

Anyone else tired of refreshing the dcs website, hoping for "bignewy commented on patch status" notification..

While it maybe realistic, so is rearming in a matter of a minute, isn't it? How long does it actually take to refuel the F-15E? If you're sitting around for 15 minutes waiting for each refuel, then I can see how this request could be justified. If it's just another minute or so than what the Hornet takes, then maybe not though?

лучше в какую нибудь it корпорацию, где по вашей логике деньги чужие и их не жалко. а те, кто покупают квартиры в Москве, толкают застройщиков в сторону дальнейшего повышения цен. нет бы в Хабаровске покупать. и так во всем.

DCS Patch status Current versions: https://updates.digitalcombatsimulator.com/ Change logs: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/release/ Release Version Current version number: DCS 2.9.19.13478 Next planned update: To be announced

Militariy Aircraft Mod We introduce the Military Aircraft Mod (MAM). See it as a Military Version of the famous Civil Aircraft Mod. Included are: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A400M Atlas --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B-2 Spirit --------------------------------------------------------------------------- C-2A Greyhound --------------------------------------------------------------------------- C5 Galaxy Also via Liverie with open Doors --------------------------------------------------------------------------- KC-10 Extender --------------------------------------------------------------------------- V-22 Osprey --------------------------------------------------------------------------- P3C Orion --------------------------------------------------------------------------- USAF Pilot --------------------------------------------------------------------------- They are AI Only All Models were buyed (Turbosquid) and converted/build by cdpkobra Textures by cdpkobra, BlackLibrary(MaiTai) & Urbi Liveries by crazyeddie,azzemeen & Urbi luas modifed by Graceir & nosajthedevil --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Install: C:\Users\ "YourName" \Saved Games\DCS\Mods\aircraft\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Download v.1.7.1a : https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3307071/ Download Liveries: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3310355/ ------------------------------------------------------ Changelog: v1.7 - Add V-22 Osprey Removed the Liveries to match File size (Uploaded seperate) Updates for 2.5.6 Stable v1.6 - Add A400M improvements for some models & textures P-3,USAF Pilot new Liveries added v1.5 - Add B-2 and KC-10 improvements for all models & textures v1.4 - C-5 default skin fixed & Model improvements fixed C-2 and P-3 sinking in to the ground v1.3 - C-5 Galaxy Model & texture improvements P-3 new Liveries added v1.2 - 2. Fix for C-2A turning C-2A Textur improvements v1.1 - Fix for C-2A turning endless on carrier deck ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Вот только игрок-летчик с места КЭ видит только то, что можно увидеть двумя глазами в максимальном приближении через АСП-17 или виджет-"нашлемку". Точность указания в таком случае небольшая, как для точки попадания и навести маневром вертолета и/или головы условное перекрестие на камень, ствол дерева, окно дома или выступающую из-за препятствия часть танка - надо постараться. Не с пистолетных дистанций желательно. Если конечно не городить совсем уж костыли типа предварительной стабилизации целеуказателя прицела/виджета и доводки его вручную с места КЭ какими-то дополнительными командами, может даже осевыми

@Rainmaker it's the button matrix. I printed all of them white.

Hi Zealu, it is known, we do not force head boundaries in VR, I will ask the team however about this issue, maybe remove the head on the F1 view. thank you

The two most noticable points atm would be more control over how and if a missile goes active (allowing us to correctly do AIM-54C SARH) and better control over the guidance logic. We believe we're close in regards to actual aerodynamic and motor performance but guidance is still somewhat lacking. Having more control over the guidance logic or getting help to tune it would, imho, be the way ahead for more realism. But I also know that's an ongoing discussion with ED. Apart from that being able to launch the missile at a selected point in space instead of being locked to actual targets would also increase accuracy as to how the missile should behave but I'd say it's a lower prio and likely harder to achieve.

I tested #1 about 2 weeks ago. It was right around 2600#:min. For #2, have never seen this bug at any time. If its happening for you, you need to provide a track #3. Dont look for that to be altered any time soon. Aircraft performs very well vs the data available. Thanks

Well thanks if there a few people that want these I hope they speak up and i will make a run. lets see what happens!!

I think that it would be a nice modern light attack aircraft and a great entry-level aircraft as well. It has a basic A/A and A/G radar and can carry Mavericks, Paveways, Litening TGP, Sidewinders and possibly AMRAAMs (not standard equipment as far as I'm aware). I already posted this in the general "DCS wishlist" sub-forum but decided to propose here as well because AvioDev seems to be the only third party focusing on fixed-wing aircrafts that doesn't have another project.

@Harley Davidson do you have any hard evidence to support your claims? The FM has been validated against performance data and tested by multiple F1 pilots with thousands of hours on the real aircraft. That being said, the aircraft can outturn any of its contemporary counterparts in-game when flown to its strengths. It can carry a lot of fuel for its size but going into a dogfight with the tanks full is probably not the best idea. Its strengths are good energy retention and good acceleration at high speeds, so it likes to stay fast. Nevertheless, if you find yourself going slow, it's imperative to use combat flaps, otherwise the performance loss is very significant. Pitch sensitivity can also be an issue. The aircraft works better at lower AoA and when the pilot is gentle on the stick. Make sure you have the 'Emulation of effects of stick forces on aircraft behaviour' option selected in the special menu and tweak the sliders below it in case you use FFB. Otherwise also play with curves if needed. Also, all this applies to flying against a human in MP, the performance of the SFM of AI aircraft is always far better than the PFM of the one you are flying. Hopefully this will be fixed by the implementation by ED of what they call the GFM (check the most recent newsletter). Again, the module is in EA and the FM has been tweaked multiple times after the release but we're happy with how realistic it is now and we'd need more specific evidence than just saying 'it flies like a wet fart when you pull the stick', like a specific performance issue at a certain regime...

Really enjoying that big bird.