Leaderboard

Dear Virtual Fighter Pilots, Partners, and Friends, During the past 30 years, we have worked hard to bring you the most realistic combat flight simulators available for PC. Be it a WWII aircraft or a modern fighter our aim was and remains to offer realism and fun to the entertainment market. With the exceptional technical progress made in hardware and software, it is difficult to tell the difference between DCS and real-world footage. This is wonderful for you and for the industry in general. However, in the light of the current situation unfolding in Israel and Palestine, it is paramount to refrain from generating images which could be misconstrued and potentially put lives in danger. Therefore may we beg you to be sensible and avoid using DCS to create videos of this nature. Our thoughts are with everyone during these uncertain times, and we thank you, our dedicated and caring community for flagging such content and bringing it to the media’s attention. Fake news of this nature is too serious to be left alone and needs to be called out by those of you who know what to look for. Thank you for your understanding and for your support. Kind regards,

Good Morning & Afternoon to you all. Thank you all for your concerns. I really appreciate it. Modeling is my medication so as long as i'm modeling i'm doing ok. Thanks again. Thanks Freddie. I wasn't aware of that. The Russian flag has been update. Thanks. The OSA Missile Boats has been released. Thanks to HawaiianRyan for providing the 3d model and Marroux for creating the Encyclopedia file & wake mod. Enjoy!! I disabled the Manpad surface to air missile launcher onboard OSA Two until i can declare a proper surface to air missile file. The Project 205 Moskit[(mosquito) more commonly known by their NATO Reporting Name Osa, are a class of missile boats developed for the Soviet Navy in the late 1950s. Until 1962 this was classified as a large torpedo boats. The Osa class is probably the most numerous class of missile boats ever built, with over 400 vessels constructed between 1960 and 1973 for both the Soviet Navy and for export to allied countries. Osa means wasp in Russian, but it is not an official name. The boats were designated as "large missile cutters" in the Soviet Navy.

RAZBAM Mig-23MLA Progress Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk

Hey Tripod3. I'm aware of some of the issues you mentioned. This is a BETA Version. There will be another update coming. So when it comes to configuring the missiles to launch. Either they are too strong or not strong enough. At the moment they're configured at Mach 0.95 so if I increase the launch speed it will be faster than the specs. So it's a give or take. The issue also is the missile is launched at I guess about 20 deg angle. The minimum distance entered is 500 meters and the max is 80 km. If you make the minimum distance too short the OSA will be hit. I will further configure the turrets on the next release. So just a little 3D modeling education for you all to know. So below is the starboard launcher with a helper and or pointer added just to the bottom of the launcher. (The arrows) If I raise the helper it will make the missile stick outside of the top of the missile launcher. I will try configuring the missile launch configuration again but not sure I will be able to stop the missile from hitting the launcher itself. In real life, they are on a rail. Only so much we can do in DCS. Also, keep in mind the DCS Game Engine controls the missile launch. Looking at the photo below. I'm not sure how the missile was launched as you can see it's launched at a steeper angle. Thanks for your feedback Tripod3. On another note all. At the moment I will be working on older and recent AI Ship models in the Shipyard. I'm going backwards trying to fix some of the issues that have come about. It will take some time but I will get it done. Thank you all for your interest.

Leaving whole segments of the combat sim market to the competition does not sound like a good business strategy for ED, and I don’t remember any other full fidelity ww2 sim being available … let’s hope ED won’t be following your suggestion

whatever you want guys, you can basically create it yourself, it’s not that difficult, but it does, however, require a lot of time for initial understanding and debugging. Let CH do whatever his fantasy desires)

Open beta is and always will be a public test branch, there is always potential for disruption or for known issues to be included. Of course we do our best to catch everything we can in closed testing. thanks

Я жду, то что никто и не обещал. А именно толковый ИИ и оживленный с его помощью мир DCS. Чтоб можно техника сама умела воевать друг с другом используя какую то тактику. Чтоб ПВО само развертывалось там где само решит и периодически меняло свое местоположение. Чтобы в любом свободном полете, на любой карте, сразу при старте, автоматически генерировалась гражданская жизнь. С трафиками ( морскими, наземными, возлушными), с движухой на аэродромах. Чтоб вылетев с одного аэродрома и совершив посадку на другом , при следующем старте можно было бы продолжить с крайнего места. Генератор погоды. ( не так чтобы сам сидишь и настраиваешь, а нажал кнопку и система сама выдала вариант, так чтобы тебе только оставалось выбрать) Чтоб можно было сгенерировать тренировочный полигон в любом подходящем месте карты ( возможно в виде какого то шаблона) Чтоб система генрировала мне различные задания. Будь то военные или гражданские (доставка грузов, поисково спасательные операции, тушение пожаров... Чтоб транспортировка грузов имело какую то экономику и оказывала какое то влияние на процесс. Чтоб боты умели в тактику пускать нары с кабрирования. Чтоб можно было, выпиливать какие-то вражеские сгенерированные укрепления в оффлайне, с запоминанием результата, так чтобы можно было разделить это настолько отдельных вылетов, насколько потребуется. И чтобы во всей этой системе я был лишь винтиком выполняя пусть однотипные шаблонные задачи, но разнообразные настолько, что позволяли бы мне использовать возможности конкретного модуля на 146% И все это ее личное шаманство в редакторе, а автоматическая генерация. Иной раз хочется просто облететь всю карту , чисто по-путешествовать. Но не хватает общей движухи с антуражем и сохранения пройденного результата.

2.9 is next

Напрягает то, что в анонсах информация о дин. кампании отсутствует. Вообще ни где ни слова. Выглядит - будто проект приостановлен (

In this DCS video, we’ll discuss the changes coming to the free and integrated Voice Chat in DCS version 2.9. The biggest changes are realistic radio effects and powerful radio creation tool, and improve and consolidated interface, and improved microphone settings. This video is provided to get your head around the basics of using Voice Chat in DCS version 2.9. First, within the Options, Audio Tab, all Voice Chat options have been consolidated. Along the right, you can adjust microphone input level and decibel levels, and as before along the right, you can set Voice Chat input and output audio devices. Pressing the Start Microphone Test, you can also test your microphone levels. One of the biggest features is the Dynamic Radio Options button. Upon pressing it, we can select an aircraft in the top left of the page and then view the associated radios below it. For instance, if I select the AH-64, we see its five associated radios. If we select one, its properties are listed on the right side of the window. Clicking in the Sound Filter Options button at the bottom of the window, we can view the sound filter options for the selected radio with the ability to test it. In addition to these defaults, you can also edit existing radios and even create new ones. In the bottom left corner, we have the option to Create New Radio. You could first select an existing radio and save it or create a new one from scratch using the windows along the right side of the window. Or you could important an existing radio to the selected aircraft. This is a very powerful tool that allows the creation of radio effects across a broad range of eras. Use of modified and created radios are server enforced. Coming back out to the Audio tab, be sure to check the Voice Chat and TURN-Servers for Voice Chat boxes to use Voice Chat. Next, selecting the Controls Tab, we can set up our input controllers to use Voice Chat. We can do so through individual aircraft, or the Voice Chat drop downs. Using the example of the AH-64 Pilot, we’ll select Cyclic to transmit over the selected radio or the intercom over Voice Chat. On the Actions list, we have PTT/RTS Switch – RADIO (VOIP) to transmit over the selected radio using Voice Chat and PTT/RTS Switch – ICS (VOIP) to transmit over the intercom. VOIP stands for Voice Over Internet Protocol, and map these to transmit based on your aircraft radio settings. Scrolling to near the bottom of the Controls list, selecting Voice Chat provides a wealth of Voice Chat radio options that you can bind. This allows you to set radio binds for Flaming Cliffs 3 aircraft. The two most important are at the very bottom. Show Voice Chat Window allows us to toggle on an off the Voice Chat window whilst in a mission and the Voice Chat Push-to-Talk Mic. Mode: On/Off Voice Transfer will allow us a Push To Talk, or PTT, option to transmit over a selected Common, Coalition, or Private Room. Now that we’ve covered the basics of setting Voice Chat up, let’s look at it in operation. First, based on the control input we set, enable the Show Voice Chat Window. Here with the AH-64, we have five Integrated Radio Units, the same ones we saw earlier, and the intercom. For all the radios, we can see the currently selected channel and frequency. If we change these in the aircraft, we can see them reflected in the Voice Chat window. We also can enable encryption and set the secure voice channel. This allows you to transmit between coalition members on the same encryption that will not allow the opposing coalition to listen in on. This interface is optional. To Voice Chat transmit, simply press, and hold the selected radio transmit switch we defined earlier and speak into the microphone. When transmitting, the yellow box will turn green or red if there is no recipient, like in this case. Along the top of the window are Radio Push-To-Talk, or R PTT, and Intercom Push-To-Talk, or or PTT. If you are in an aircraft with multiple player positions, you can also use the intercom transmit switch to speak with other aircraft members. If you are in a single seat aircraft though, I PTT is grayed-out. Clicking on the antenna icon allows us to select chat rooms using Voice Chat. These include a Common room for all players in a mission, Coalition for just your side, and you can create private rooms. To create a private room, type in the name of the Private room in the bottom dialog box, and then press the plus sign to add members. Upon selecting one of these, you will see the participants listed. You can delete or remove yourself from a room by selecting the red trash can. Along the top, you can click the centered box to toggle between a hot mic, or Mic On, Mic Off, and Push-To-Talk based on the room chat transmission binding we set earlier. That’s an overview of how to use the Voice Chat in DCS 2.9, but it is not the end. We will continue to refine Voice Chat with more options like interfacing with popular user-create mods.

So you are basically saying, because you can't accept the reality of complex, modern software development, and the fact you bought an early access product to get your hands on the "good stuff" as early as possible and safe a few bucks, requires a vendor to heed your expectations and change their roadmap, planned release cycle and maybe contractual agreements? The "DCS-related problems" seem to boil down to customers unwillingness to abide by the fact that early access is by all means and definition not a finished product that ships with an expectation to be ready to play and gets immediate, or short term bug-fixes based on severity and available ressources. Early Access requires patience and the willingness to grow and mature with the product, accept bugs and issues on the way, live with adjustments to roadmaps and features. Early Access is not finished, does not mean every bug found, small or large, will be fixed as quickly as possible, etc. And to put it into perspective, other titles sell Alpha, Beta Testing and Early Access, as a "privilege" for customers willing to pay more, for the chance to get a glimpse and the option to participate in the feedback and improvement of the product. DCS gives you a discount to be able to access the product during testing and give feedback that is included into the development.

Can we start to consider the F-16A Block 10 again? This is a huge distinction from the F-16C we have now. This would be closer to the F-5 than the modern F-16, in fact. It would be able to add a lot of 1970s capability to what we have in the F-5, without compromising the need for skill.

My Pimax Crystal Review This will be brief, to the point, and opinionated of course:) This is the 4th headset i have used now - Odyssey+, Quest 2, Reverb G2, now Pimax Crystal Alternatives I considered before buying the Crystal: Quest Pro, Aero, waiting till next year. What I use it for: DCS, FS2020, XPlane (not yet tested) My system: 13900K, 32GB Ram, 4090 Comfort/Weight: worst by far of all the headsets I have experience with, the Apache strap does help quite a bit, cant imagine a long session without that. With the thick foam pad (additional purchase) you can wear glasses, but the headset then puts pressure on the nose. I will be ordering lenses from Hons VR, I think that will address that issue. The cable pulls down on the headset to a degree that I never noticed with G2. Still considering ways to address that. I don't expect this headset ever to be as comfortable as the G2, but with those mods, it should be "tolerable". Screens: the best part of the crystal, huge upgrade from the G2. It is NOT crystal clear all the way to the edges, but it is clear enough most of the way out not to affect game play. You only notice if you look for it. There is also some coma at the edges. I do have the glass lenses for anyone wondering. Honestly, this is the only thing that makes you keep the crystal and put up with the other deficiencies. It's a FANTASTIC view. FOV: vertical is really nice, I can see the edges if I really look but that it's a really nice VFOV. horizontal is really not much better (if any) to the G2, if it is better it does not improve game play, speed perception, or anything else in the game. Setup: Went pretty easy for me, but that was ONLY because of tremendous amount of doc/video from the web. What you get from Pimax is not much help at all, although they link to a video on their website (that they didn't produce) that get's you started. 72hz: not GA yet, didn't test Motion Smoothing: doesn't work in the current version, fix promised in the next release Performance: I get more stutters with the pimax than i did with the G2, that may be due to not being able to use motion smoothing yet, but I'm sure it's also due to the sheer number of pixels being pushed. I can use the headset at full res, but I get better performance with PiTools at .75 and XRToolkit at about 3600. Still a work in progress here, but DLSS, 72hz, motion smoothing will affect what is ultimately achievable. Even with out those I'm mostly happy, but I miss butter smooth that I had with my G2 at the moment while I continue to tune. Quadviews, PimaxXR, Dynamic FOV are all must haves, without those, the headset would not perform adequately and would be going back. Am I keeping it? Yes

Block 15 or even Block 10, depending on how big you are on the TGP. I'd actually want to see a small tail Viper from the 80s, with the original APG-66 and no chin hardpoints, but that would be extremely old-school. Then again, why not both? FM would be the biggest thing, and also 3D work would be required, but the two blocks could share control schemes and they are otherwise very similar.

Ooooh, I see what Aviodev did there! Consider it reported. I'm sure I'll find more surprises with other modules.

I did already for both CEII and MiG-21. I spent an evening checking all LODs. Two Gazelles lack a few LOD levels. The AI "F-18C" unit, the new Kuz, the HMS Invincible and the 25 di Mayo have none. All are now reported. A few legacy units also have no LODs but they are so low-poly that it's not worth reporting them. Thanks for mentioning the F1, it had gone under my radar, if I may say so. I'll check.

null Screen Space Shadows. SSS improves environmental shadow casting basically.

Of course Sim can be harder than Real life - but only for those, who can do it in real Life and find it comfortably easy there. Of course it is "harder" for _them_ in a Game - as it´s a different thing. It´s faulty logic to interpret this as a statement like "if you can do it in a Game/Sim, you can do it in real life". Also a quote like "FYI, the T-38 and so on does not teach flying. " is another huge misunderstanding of Aviation and Gaming you´re showing. There´s quite a reason why T-38 starts with a Contact Phase and why almost everything done in T-6 is done again in T-38. A high performance Jet flies rather differently from a T-6, one learns all that while flying the T-38. And a lot more as the envelope expands dramatically. The T-38 in fact teaches very, very much of flying. No, you don´t always need/do Sim-Lessons before going to the real Tanker. The first time I refueled from a KC-135 was from - the real one. That´s a bit airframe specific as ours didn´t have a fancy Dome-Visual - but it´s nothing we need anyway. At this point in training we´re flying fingertip comfortably which is more complex than following a tanker. It´s just about getting to know the sight picture (and getting used to CG-changes). Sims and VR are a Training-Tool for very specific parts of Training. They hardly replace any real-world-flying, they add to it. The huge Difference between a Computer Game with it´s Limitations and Real Life is obvious to almost everybody here and anywhere else.

Depends on price. Current used (second hand) prices on such components of that list are roughly like this, in a good scenario for individual components (on EBAY): CPU: Ryzen 9 5950X 16 cores, 32 threads ---- 360€ Graphics: ASUS RTX 3090 24GB TUF Gaming ---- 670€ Motherboard: ASUS ROG Strix X570-F Gaming ---- 220€ RAM: Corsair 64GB (2x32GB) DDR4 3600MHz CL18 Vengeance RGB PRO ---- 150€ SSD: Samsung 980 PRO M.2 NVMe SSD 2TB ---- 100€ TOTAL -- EUR 1500.00€ / USD $1578.00 / GBP £1300.00 You need to add some inflation on final price for a full working PC with those components, because it has to also have a good quality ~1000W PSU (100€+), a good spacious ventilated case (100€+), and a good CPU Cooler on it (100€~), and all has to be in very good condition. That, and Win 10/11 OS to be ready to game. That full working rig if somewhat close to EUR 1800.00€ / USD $1900.00 / GBP £1560.00 is a great second-hand PC purchase. Not overkill and definitely not too little - it's in the "goldilocks" zone for DCS - good performance on a 4K monitor (or TV) and eventually for VR as well (with adjusted settings). That said, it's DCS we're talking here with all its shenanigans... don't go in believing that it's guaranteed to be peachy, as hardware doesn't solve everything. Plus, we never know when DCS gets another performance hit in future (got worse in last few years). Meaning, what's great today, may not be so in just a couple of years time.

This document deals with specifications for LRLS replacement: https://www.sbir.gov/node/1208423 When it reads "the current system", it means ous LRLS. So as you can see, the real LRLS is far from perfect. Again, if you do have videos showing an approach in daylight or nighttime where the LRLS is clearly visible, please provide them. I can't ask devs to set it brighter if it's not in real life. It's a sim, remember. I need proof.

And I never said it was. It is merely evidence that motor skills (which is what AAR is about) transfer both ways. Stop putting words in my mouth. I even put the actual point I wanted to argue in bold. Could you please argue with that instead of with a strawman? Also, FYI, the T-38 and so on does not teach flying. They do that on a T-6, including formations. And yes, they do very extensive sim courses before letting the trainees anywhere near an actual tanker. Also, how do you think pilots get qualified on 5th generation jets, none of which have a two seat version? There are many reasons why real world training is still needed, and most of them have nothing to do with how easy or hard it is to do AAR in the sim versus the real thing. And finally, yes, USAF at least is moving towards VR to supplant at least some of their sim rigs, so they clearly think playing a game is worth their money and time. There are some things you can't quite teach in the sim (notably anything involving Gs, so all combat), but there are also many that you can.

Vince’s “guess” was “30 seconds”, not five as Maxin misquoted. I ran into Aiello in a pilot lounge a long time ago, not too long after he was hired. He had already done a podcast on the F14. I asked him about why he didn’t push back on some of the BS that was already piling up from his interviews. He basically shrugged his shoulders, and the gist was that the show was about entertainment, not a documentary, and he didn’t have the technical expertise to argue against whomever was on the show. I got the drift that the purpose was about clicks and cash, not so much accuracy. He was a NFWS instructor at Fallon by the way, a very different course and mindset than Miramar in the 1970’s and 80’s. The interview does highlight one aspect that is ignored by Tomcat lovers. The F14 was unreliable in comparison to the newer fighters coming online, which was the main driver of its retirement. Everyone points to Dick Cheney as some sort of Darth Vader character, but had the Tomcat had 85% FMC numbers and maintenance man hours in the teens, we’d still by flying the F14E/F strike fighters today. My view is that to achieve Gen 5 reliability, the entire F14 airframe would have had to have been gutted with redesigned systems (not all) and updated avionics. Possible, but costly given the changes in threat and focus when the decision was made. One of the RIO’s in our squadron ended up making RADM, and was a CAG, XO of USS Constellation, held posts in OPNAV in Air Warfare, and Commanded THIRD FLEET. He mentioned that Tomcat maintenance became a morale issue. The Hornet wrenches were sitting around their shops playing cribbage and acey-duecy, while F14 troops worked all night to get enough jets up to make the flight schedule for the next evolution. It was Naval Aviators, based on operational and cost considerations, working in the groups described above, who ultimately made the recommendation to kill the Tomcat.

Yes, and the alternative was dumb bombs or the manually guided Bullpup, which required you to come even closer. Compared to them? I'd say the Mav was really good for the era it appeared in. You could get to one mile, lock on and pull away. No staring at the tail flare, no fiddling with the zot box, no missing with the whole damn stick because the target had moved a little to the side. Of course, we have better PGMs now. Back in A-7's heyday, when they first appeared, the A model Mav was revolutionary. Even if they did like to go for a tactical bush once in a while.

Thanks Tromp. Since releasing that post i have slowed down a bit. Still modeling just not a mach speed anymore. The OSA Missile Boat AI Boat mods are complete. I will release them soon so i can move on to repairing the older ships in the Shipyard. This will be BETA release until i can declare the proper script for the SA-N-5 Grail and add hull numbers. Below are the countries currently operating the OSA Missile Boats. Whether they are in operation i'm not sure. Each OSA Mod has livery flags for each country. Weapons: 2x AK230s 30 mm CIWS along with 4x Styx Anti-Ship Missile Launchers. I installed a Manpad Launcher onboard OSA Two but i'm currently using a RIM Script to launch the SA-N-5 Grail Missile until i can declare the proper script for it. DCS has a way of not liking the names we use for the missiles we declare. No matter what i tried it didn't work. The Missile has the proper specs for the SA-N-5 though. OSA One -- GT.Countries = {"China", "Egypt", "India", "Germany", "North Korea", "Poland", "Romania", "Syria", "Yugoslavia", "USSR", "Russia", }; OSA Two -- GT.Countries = {"Algeria", "Bulgaria", "Egypt", "Cuba", "Finland", "India", "Iraq", "Libya", "Russia", "USSR", "Syria", "Vietnam", "Yemen",}; Stay Tuned, Admiral189

Rotor downwash new effects should be in. Full change log will have more details. thanks

Not hard at all, it took me 30 seconds to fix the conflict issue. I've asked Gonzalo to include the fix in their next update. But here are the needed changes. (The three files belong to the Lechuzas Negras team Eurofighter mod, with the addition of my changes to fix the conflict issue). Eurofighter.lua Weapons.lua EurofighterT.lua

An early Blk15 was the most prolific, exported, and versatile while still being old school. But I'd be fine with either at 10 or early 15. The late 15's are mfd monsters like our current Viper, don't want that.

I do, in fact, like to configure PTT buttons roughly as they are on the real thing. Though TBH, it seems VAICOM just plain doesn't like my accent, and no amount of training seems to fix that. It's also more restricted than I thought it would be. Often you have to say a command like it is given in DCS, not like it'd be said by a real pilot, which irks me a bit (nobody I know in aviation says "wheelchocks", for example, but it looks for that exact word). While VAICOM is a nice idea, but I found it clunky and gamey in its implementation. You can control the AI with your voice, but it doesn't feel like talking to a virtual wingman. Some of that is general crappyness of DCS AI comms, but part of it is on VAICOM. An integrated system would hopefully support a more natural way of talking. Speaking of comms, an interesting idea came to my mind: since we can now simulate radio distortion effects for human voices, why not apply it to voice actors for AI? Have them record in the clear, then apply appropriate effects based on what radio they're talking on. This would add some variety and distinctiveness to AI comms.

And this one is very interesting as well. now we know they thought about their collective design…..

That's only a problem if you insist on mapping different PTT buttons per aircraft. And if you must do that then there are workarounds via more sophisticated programming within VoiceAttack. Many of us have been using VAICOM alongside SRS for years without any problems to enable both voice chat and voice interaction with the AI. ED has some catching up to do. I'm encouraged, however, by a Wags video posted today that closes with a hint that the new DCS voice chat will (perhaps not right away) enable a variety of user-created options.

In the ED video about DCS voice chat 2.9 tutorial video, we can see 2 new settings : Anti-Aliasing = DLAA Upscaling = DLSS And a third one that could be interesting : LOD Switch factor (cursor)

hehe Each time I try and tell my wife about "this awesome experience I just had in DCS", I just see in her eyes the attention flowing away (even though she's really doing her best to understand my excitement)

Проблема деревьев не в том что они большие а в том что они масштабированные. Мозг видит модели 20 метровых деревьев, а они на самом деле 70 метровые. Поэтому восприятие высоты идет в мусорку. Надо или масштабировать модели деревьев в их изначальный размер, и уменьшать их количество(ну и ладно), либо делать новые модели больших деревьев а не скейлы, без листьев в колесо уаза. У вас в движке таки есть долли, и на внешке и в кабине они разные. Погодя попробую доказать. Из быстрого - хорошо проверяется на кавказских радиомачтах, например возле Крымска. Из кабины и с внешки. UPD картинки. Добился одинакового углового размера с внешки и кабины, но чувство перспективы все равно разное.

ok i had installed it over 1.3 i removed it all added 1.4 then instaled it . all good now thanks

Yes, hence a much more interesting fight than mig-23. How well will the F4 radar pick up the camel, how well will the old sidewinder Bs and Ps pick up the heat from the lawnmower engine. How much damage will 2 .303s do to the F4. It will be spitfire turning vs 109 boom and zoom taken too the extreme.

There's a wrong ensign on the Russian boat. Today Russian Navy uses the blue St. Andrew's Cross on white background. On some photos the national colors can be seen on the naval ships, but those are hoisted only during shipbuilder's trials prior to commissioning.

Hi，I'm glad to see you are well ,we are all worried about your health !

Flappie is trying to help you, if he makes a report the first thing the team will ask for is evidence or a real world example. Without it he will not be able to push the issue with the team. It is the same for me, I need evidence to back up any claim I make for change in DCS. thank you

0% chance we see an La-5 anytime soon. An La-7 on the otherhand, maybe. I'm still betting on the Phantom being the next module release.

Forrestal still appears to take damage when you trap on it. It's showing up as "hit" in my debrief logs.

“Western”

Thanks for the posts - 7800X3D it looks like then. Just went on sale here in Canada too at my shop.

I didn’t correlate which callsign went with which liar. My apologies.

No problems here with releasing BETA updates on a Friday. Production releases are definitely better for earlier in the week for sure. Newy has made it clear that this is a BETA release. Sure - people are running OB as their main version, but that's on them, not ED. Vanuatu. (And before anyone thinks I'm joking, the question is what timezone is it going to be released in on the 19th. Often a release on the 19th can be the 20th for countries ahead of GMT time, such as NZ, Japan, Australia, etc).

Ahhhh Fall my favorite time of year

WIP Combat weathering.

Like how all mavs were originally used. Their camera.