Leaderboard

Hi fighters! Today we will look at optimization. The team is working on improvements to the map, but the more detail and uniqueness we add, the more effort it takes to optimize. Hard work has been done on all areas of the map: models have been optimized, textures have been reassembled, vector data rendering on clipmaps has been updated - all this has had a positive effect! We conducted tests on two systems: AMD Ryzen 7 3700x / RTX 2080Ti and i9-10850K / RTX 4080 When flying over a city, FPS increased by an incredible 20%, and while on a system with a 2080ti the average FPS was at 85, now it confidently remains around 110. When flying over a forest, FPS increased from 5% to 20% compared to the previous build. When testing the 2080ti system, the fps was always above 105. One does not simply release an update with optimization. We have added 4 airfields: Amman Civil Airport Herzliya Airport (NOTAM: RWY LENGTH 1500M) King Abdullah II Air Base Prince Hussein Air Base This will increase your flight geography and diversify your missions. Explore new airfields and get ready to take off Prince Hassan Airbase King Abdullah II Airbase

These so called modders go thru a great deal of time and effort to bring the DCS community a free asset, see they don't sit and things just magically appear, it takes research, work, coding, 3d modeling and animation even to deliver something free as a MOD, everyone that plays a mod should be grateful no matter how good or bad the mod is because at least that person or team took their time and worked on something.

Не представляю, как такое можно в лоб сравнивать.

Hi! Let's continue. The airfields are already on the map, today we will show several screenshots including Manston. As always, we look forward to your feedback, thanks to you we are making the map better. Thanks for the information on antennas, it was very helpful. They are scheduled for the next update. Current updates are uploaded The planes are waiting on the field. Fighters, prepare for takeoff! Manston Abbeville Drucat

Су-25 изначально по тупиковой концепции был сделан-лезть на пули, как старичок ИЛ-2 (отсюда и броня и тд) и до сих пор НАРы с кабрирования кидает, поэтому соглашусь, что А7 на голову выше-электроника, ВТО и работа с более комфортных дистанций считаю более правильным путём (ИМХО)

Unfortunately, reading it on the internet is not enough. I can write on my website that the Phoenix goes at M6, and someone may even believe it. However, without proper and reliable models and numbers (or the closest approximations we can get), it won't be a souce usable by the devs. An I totally agree with them on this. As a sidenote, the Phoenix is not slow or "bad". It requires the user to understand it and do some homework, though.

Let me make something clear, my projects I did not need to share with the community or forced to finish any of them, The SU-57 is the only project that I really cared about and I enjoyed working on for my own purposes but decided to share with the DCS community in which many have fun with, so I don't own anyone anything on the contrary what I did was out of my own good will. Thank you.

New screenshots 10/11/2023 (pilots body):

Ты пишешь в каком-то низком стиле, мягко говоря, приплетая Су-25. Про A-7 здесь знают не меньше тебя. По нему литература даже на русском языке существует. Просто он не так интересен. Пиши по модулю: создай тему и размещай новости разработчиков, а не вот это вот всё.

Где Вы увидели "официальное заявление ED" о чём-либо? Вас просят успокоиться и не более того. А то дискуссия явно начинает сворачивать в ту сторону, где будет ай-яй-яй. Считайте это официальным заявлением модератора.

Ух как вы на беднягу Су-25 накинулись. Нет пророка в своём отечестве?

Afaik the status is that it's still on the todo list. It has always been the intention that in the finished product you'd be able to run the tests that are part of the checklist for startup.

Thank you all for the feedback & support!

Who's this "we" you speak of? Says you. Yeah it's only the most recognizable, iconic variant in the world - SHOCKER!! Have a little faith - they deserve it.

Интересная концепция выбора модулей для покупки в ДКС... У всех штурмовиков вообще специфический вид, и А7 точно не самый "нескладный". Выглядит как штурмовик: кондовый крепкий тяжеловоз. Зато боевая нагрузка А7 впечатляет даже сегодня, а по возможностям этот самолет из 80-х превосходит су-25, состоящий на вооружении и в 2000-х.

I didn't really have the A-7 on my radar. But yesterday I saw news about the A-7 through HIP by Andrei Celeste. It already looked pretty good and I'm hooked. Now add some decent sound and a VR pilot body and I'm in. Until then, I wish you every success.

Apart from Googling, it doesn't seem so - the Encyclopedia seems to mostly have it covered, though sometimes it switches between the IEEE designation (such as for the AN/MPQ-50 PAR and AN/MPQ-64F1) and the (new) NATO designation. The screenshot in the newsletter is using the NATO system Anyway here's a list of land-based systems, though the vast majority aren't going to be all that applicable to the Shrike (which mainly targets the E, F and I bands - I'll boldface radars the Shrike is mostly intended for, though the AGM-45A/B-10 supposedly has a more broadband seeker able to target various radars): 1L13 Nebo-SV [Box Spring]: NATO A-band, IEEE: VHF-band. 2K12M3 Kub-M3 [SA-6B Gainful]: 1S91M3 [Straight Flush]: 1S11 (acquisition): NATO C-band, IEEE UHF-band 1S13 (track/fire-control): NATO: I-band, IEEE: X-band 2K22 Tunguska (2S6) [SA-19 Grison]: 1RL144 [Hot Shot]: acquisition: NATO E/F-band, IEEE: S-band. 1RL144 [Hot Shot]: track/fire-control: NATO I-band, IEEE: X-band. 55G6 Nebo [Tall Rack]: NATO A-band, IEEE VHF-band. 9K33M2 Osa-AK [SA-8B Gecko Mod 0] [Land Roll]: Acquisition: NATO H-band, IEEE C-band Track/Fire Control: NATO J-band, IEEE Ku-band. 9K37M1 Buk-M1 [SA-11 Gadfly]: 9S18M1 [Snow Drift]: NATO H/I-band, IEEE C/X-band. 9S35M1 [Fire Dome]: NATO H/I-band, IEEE C/X-band. 9K330 Tor [SA-15A Gauntlet]: [Scrum Half]: Acquisition: NATO E/F-band, IEEE S-band Track/Fire-Control: NATO G/H-band, IEEE: C/X-band. 9S80M1 Sborka (PPRU-M1 Ovod-M1) [Dog Ear]: NATO G-band, IEEE: S-band. AN/FPS-117: NATO D-band, IEEE L-band. FlaRakRad Roland 2: Domino 3D (Track/Fire-control): NATO J-band, IEEE Ku-band. MPDR-16 (Acquisition): NATO D-band, IEEE S-band. Flakpanzer Gepard: MPDR-12 (Acquisition): NATO: E-band, IEEE: S-band. Track/Fire-control: NATO: J-band, IEEE: Ku-band. HQ-7B (FM-90) [CSA-7 Sino-Crotale]: Acquisition: ??? Fire-control: NATO J-band, IEEE Ku-band. MIM-23B I-HAWK PIP Phase 1: AN/MPQ-46 HPIR: NATO H/I-band, IEEE: X-band. AN/MPQ-50 IPAR: NATO C-band, IEEE: L-band. AN/MPQ-55 ICWAR: NATO J-band, IEEE: Ku-band. MIM-104C Patriot PAC-2: AN/MPQ-53 RS: NATO G/H-band, IEEE C/X-band. NASAMS II: AN/MPQ-64F1 Sentinel: NATO H/I-band, IEEE X-band. Rapier/Rapier FSA: Dagger (acquisition): NATO J-band, IEEE Ku-band. DN 181 Blindfire FSA: NATO F-band, IEEE S-band. S-75M/V1 Volkhov [SA-2D/E Guideline/Guideline Mod 3] SNR-75M3 [Fan Song-E]: NATO G-band, IEEE C-band. RD-75 Amazonka: ??? S-125M Neva-M [SA-3B Goa]: P-19 Dunay [Flat Face-B]: NATO C-band, IEEE UHF-band. SNR-125M [Low Blow]: NATO I-band, IEEE X-band. S-200M/VE Vega [SA-5B Gammon]: 5N62V [Square Pair]: NATO H-band, IEEE C-band. S-300PS [SA-10B Grumble]: 5N59S/36D6/ST-68U [Tin Shield-B]: NATO E/F-band, IEEE S-band. 5N63S [Flap Lid-B]: NATO I/J-band, IEEE X/Ku-band. 5N64S [Big Bird-B]: NATO E/F-band, IEEE S-band. 5N66M [Clam Shell]: NATO I-band, IEEE X-band. SON-9 [Fire Can]: NATO E-band, IEEE S-band. ZSU-23-4 RPK-2 Tobol (1RL33) [Gun Dish]: NATO J-band, IEEE Ku-band. If we ever get the P-37 implemented as a functional unit (also a primary target for the Shrike), that'll be a NATO E/F-band, IEEE S-band radar. Note that in many cases (Scrum Half, Straight Flush, Land Roll, Domino 3D/MPDR-16 etc), DCS treats the 2 radars as 1 system, not sure if that'll change, but I've listed everything here for completeness. As for naval radars, I'm not sure it's worth listing them all (though I'll probably do it anyway if I get around to it); a decent amount of them are completely undefined, use the definition from a land-based radar or from another different radar. For instance: the AN/SPY-1A (Ticonderoga), AN/SPY-1D(V) (Arleigh Burke) and Mk 92 CAS (Oliver Hazard Perry), all use the definition from the AN/MPQ-53 from the Patriot; the 4R33 Baza [Pop Group] uses the defintion from the Land Roll; the 3R95 Podkat [Cross Swords] from the Scrum Half. One fire-control radar I can name that isn't reused from something else though is the Mk 95 illuminators, used for NSSMS/IBPDMS (MRS-3 and Type 909 on the Leanders and Invincible respectively also uses this definition), this is a NATO I-band, IEEE X-band radar.

This feature looks to be using the fusing window, which is configurable from the rearming/refueling window during missions. Having it be able to be set in the mission editor would still be useful though, for instance when air-starting. EDIT: BIGNEWY confirmed on hoggit that this will indeed be the case, so you'll be able to set it either in the mission editor or during a mission from the rearming and refueling menu.

Да узбагойтесь вы! Вот выйдет этот Корсар и сами всё сравните. )

Der Bundestag plant am 15. November die Beschaffung des Eurofighter ECR zu beschließen: https://defensearchives.de/news/bundestag-to-approve-funds-for-ek-eurofighter/ Dieser soll dann mit einem von Saab und Helsing gemeinsam entwickeltem integrierten System für den elektronischen Kampf sowie AGM-88G AARGM-ER Lenkflugkörpern ausgestattet werden.

Yeah, hopefully this will be extended to other weapons in the game (e.g. Sidearm comes to mind which also uses multiple seeker heads for specific threats). Kind of insensitive choice for a Mi-24P campaign to put it mildly, I'll just leave it at that.

Yes, there are several automatic bomb delivery modes, the 3 main ones are Dive Toss, Dive Laydown and Laydown. The modes are more involved than what we’re used to in 4th generation aircraft - as Smyth said the WSO needs to designate a point on the ground using the radar EDIT: actually this is mistaken (toilet2000 is correct) - the radar is used to compute slant range, but in the -34 for the F-4E, the radar is aimed with the optical sight (and all diagrams state that the target is momentarily tracked visually, the bomb button is then pressed and held and the required manoeuvre performed, the bombs then release automatically as set. However the WSO also needs to input the drag coefficient of the bomb into the WRCS and for releasing multiple weapons a release advance (and not just quantity and interval). The release advance can be used to begin releasing bombs before the calculated release point, allowing you to specify exactly where each bomb in a ripple lands. EDIT: In offset bombing using a radar identification point (RIP), that's when the WSO needs to lock a ground target.

@gabrielsmember getting links is the easiest job to do, that actually google is doing it. Assessing if the models are in line with what is needed to create a proper model for DCS is a tedious process and requires time to do it. Money are again another critical aspect in here as CH already spent a lot of money creating free mods for us. If you really want to help, consider making a donation to CH or at least make in deep analyses on the models you think might be of interest.

Don't nessesarily need ED to change the current control, leave that as it is, but.. also make an alternative command available. Could this be forwarded to the team for consideration? I have logitec mouse too which is great but ejection via handle is what im going for. Eject (3 press) "LCTRL +E" Eject (1press) "blank" Just need to see that in the controls list. Windows 10 Pro 64Bit | i7-12900k CPU |16 GB RAM/ GPU RTX 3090/ VPC Collective + Stick + Throttle | Pimax Crystal

Есть 2 разных ТЗ, под которые создавались самолёты. Под разные тактики применения, разное размещение, номенклатуру вооружения и тд. Как их можно сравнивать? Как можно делать выводы? Звучит как "Я считаю что феррари говно, потому что в неё вчетвером не сядешь. А вот G класс AMG топчик.". Вроде оба автомобиля для быстрой езды, а результат разный.

No problem I can't speak for the devs, but I guess we may see something changing when the missile API from ED is fully operational and deployed to 3rd parties. It was announced in 2019, IIRC. Last I recall, the devs were quite happy about its current status. I see your point about PvP. It is, unfortunately, the fate of the Phoenix. Players who don't know how to deal with it (spoiler alert: it's easy) are louder than the Phoenix users, and this relegates a '60s weapon to the late '90s or 2000s. I wonder why we do not have the AIM-120A, though. That being said, the Phoenix is not slow; it is actually surprisingly fast, albeit not very explosive. If you compare it against similar-era missiles, it blows everyone out of the water. The problem is that it flies upwards, and thus, the projection of its position on the ground plane makes it look as if it were a slow missile. See if this helps: https://flyandwire.com/2023/07/27/missiles-kinematics-part-ii-cold-war-era/ If you compare it with older missiles from the '60s, the difference is even more staggering: This is the kind of opposition you should go against in a realistic scenario (e.g. Iran v Iraq war, starting in 1980). Some are missing, though, such as the R-23. There are also other issues, such as the huge differences in terms of realism between different avionics, such as the Hornet and FFalcon's radar and RWR. ED is doing a great job updating those, which would help a bit (although they should not even face each other). Next, the AI is a huge problem: when you see a MiG-21 perfectly notching your Phoenix, you are indeed a bit perplexed. I hope that post-Multithreading, ED will have room performance-wise to make the AI less focused on perfect SA and last-mile ditch manoeuvres and more capable of pre-emptive defence and tactics, in concert with their level of SA and ability to recognise the threat and act accordingly. Seeing them VID, for example, would be fantastic. Anyway, sorry for the wall of text. What you can do now is avoid Ace AI (definitely unrealistic) and create or find servers or squadrons when "RP"-PvP is encouraged. This kind of PvP, where life and resources matter, is the most fun imo.

Я не вижу смысла разворачивать сравнение двух машин созданных под совершенно разные задачи и роды войск в ветке обсуждения новостей DCS.

Yes, the original F-4 'WRCS' (one of the main upgrades of the F-4D over F-4C, then inherited by F-4E) is closely related to the one in the A-4. Main difference is that WSO needs to lock the ground manually (probably something they decided humans could do more reliably than computers in the 60s). For single player flight, I'm sure Jester AI will take care of this.

Actually I'd be surprised if it's only 1/2 of servers require Open Beta (I'd guess more like 90+%). The ED pages RECOMMEND Open Beta for multi-player (did you read "Best choice for Multiplayer mode" on the download page? And SP works just fine on OB too BTW). If it's taking you 30+ min to load into a multiplayer server that's a problem of some sort on your end. It takes me longer than I'd like, but more like a couple of minutes, and I have crappy internet service that I blame it on (not sure if that's the case or not, but that's my theory). As Buzz313th said, I'd be looking into hardware on your end because that's not a normal use case.

В ВВС Ирака применялись модификации западной и советской/китайской техники поздних и ранних модификаций. Страна воевала доброе десятилетие. А Белоруссия - очередной Кавказ для любителей What if. Ну ок.

AviaStorm Tornado

A-7E Corsair II development updates https://flyingironsimulations.com/blogs/news/dcs-a-7e-development-update

Hi, When firing AMRAAMs, after the last AIM-120 missile on the aircraft is fired, the HUD symbology reverts to either Sidewinder missiles (if loaded) or simply goes back to basic air to air mode with no inflight radar guided missile telemetry displayed. The problem here is that the AIM-120 is initially data-linked to the firing aircraft for guidance to target before the missile's own radar activates and the AMRAAM becomes autonomous. Without any indication of when the AIM-120's own radar activates and the missile goes 'Pitbull', the pilot in the DCS F-16 has no reference as to when to break off tracking the target and must simply guess when the missile has either gone active or splashed the target. Again, this condition only exists after the very last AIM-120 is fired. When there are additional AMRAAM stores available on the aircraft after a AIM-120 missile is fired, the HUD provides time to missile activation and estimated time to impact. This information will however disappear after the very last missile is fired, leaving the pilot in the dark as to missile status. Is this actual F-16 logic or is the DCS F-16 perhaps a little bugged here? Thanks!

Yup, those would be the single-digit systems (using the NATO designations), and it will be easy enough to memorise the appropriate bands/seeker heads for those after using them a few times

More info about incoming campaign: Mi-24P Hind New Campaign In the DCS: Mi-24P Hind "Revenge" campaign, you will participate in similar events to the DCS: Su-25 campaign of the same name, this time as an army aviation pilot. According to intelligence reports, there is evidence of a Georgian military ground force concentration on the south-eastern side of Enguri River along KAHAT - OIREME - BASHI - RIKE. They are attempting to create a striking echelon, consisting of the 2th MIB and reinforcing units. Enemy radiocommunication and the number of radio checks has also been increased. In order to withstand the imminent threat in the region, the necessary reinforcements of friendly troops have been undertaken including; the shift of an extra pair of DCS: Mi-24P Hind attack helicopters to the advance position 2 km west of ACHIGVARA (callsign "Skala"). The “Revanche” campaign for the Hind and the brand new 3D pilot model are slated to be included in the next DCS 2.9 open beta update. Stay tuned! Recently we announced that we have been reviewing new information about the differences between Mi-24V and Mi-24P swash plate movement limits. After thorough additional checks with our SME, we've got more factual information from the real aircraft. The current implementation still stands correct as a result of that research and in the end we've concluded that currently no changes are needed.

Окей, больше не буду заниматься бесплатным трудом энтузиаста по расписывания преимуществ малоизвестного русской аудитории самолета и нового модуля в ДКС. Однако на русском языке никто здесь про эти модули не пишет. Может кому-то этим стоит заняться?

Reported, to be fixed in one of future patches:

AGM-45 Shrike Development Progress In the lead up to the highly anticipated DCS: F-4E Phantom early access by Heatblur Simulations, we have prepared a preview of the new AGM-45 Shrike anti-radiation missile currently in development. As many aviation weapons experts know, the first generation of anti-radiation missiles that appeared in the 1960s, such as the AGM-45 Shrike, had interchangeable seekers tuned to different frequency bands. At that time, it was not possible to make one broadband universal seeker, so seekers were mounted on missiles before flight in accordance with the target type it was planning to strike. The Shrike has 10 interchangeable seekers tuned to different frequency bands that overlap each other. Wider bands are suitable for attacks on a family of similar radars, whereas narrower ones are for hitting specific types of radio-emitting equipment. The AGM-45 Shrike missiles were widely used in the US Air Force by many tactical aircraft since the Vietnam War. In fact, they were the main ARM of both the multi-role F-4E Phantom aircraft and the specialized F-4G Wild Weasel. In DCS, you will be required to select the seeker from a special weapon settings panel in the Mission Editor. Bye Phant

https://www.renderhub.com/mermodels/roks-seoul-ffg-821-daegu-class-frigate https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/b1-centauro-3d-1983985 https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/3d-panther-kf51-modern-tank-rigged-pbr-model-2141957 Rigged K2 Merkava Tanks collection 3D - TurboSquid 2135164 M109A7 Howitzer and Puma IFV Collection 3D model - TurboSquid 2081606 https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/3d-tank-abrams-x-grey-2083656 Rigged K2 BlackPanther GameReady LODs 3D model - TurboSquid 1767636 https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/puma-a-ifv-desert-camo-pbr-3d-model-2059106 https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/rigged-merkava-mk4-gameready-lods-3d-model-1734135 Proud tank.

Happy to focus on experiences and stuff that eats up memory and work on that. I am also happy to report these kind of things and bring it to the right place. Can't guarantee for any fix / implementation though. Some things sound easy but are in fact not, some might be but will be killed by priorities. But I am happy to support that fight as I fully agree that it is a disadvantage for DCS itself. People want to play and not everyone has a beast of a machine at home.

Beauty picture and good idea for the repaint as well:

I have been wanting to learn this module since v2 but there has always been something either done to it or needing doing or about to be done etc etc and now I have time to do it and come along to see what's happening, as the tutorial missions were made 'n' years ago, and not to my liking in any case (I prefer to use a good manual and proper, dev produced tutorial videos such as ED/Wags do if they exist - I don't trust 3rd party fan videos and don't think I should have to, anyway) and see that after all this time there is still not even a fairly recent manual available? Very poor - I mean very poor. There is no excuse - it's an essential item in any module and I will act with my wallet. Really disgusted that this is still an issue - and adding more to the module is absolutely no excuse. ED managed it with the Hornet and leaving space to add the stuff that would come later. Also explains why my pictorial guide was so popular, which was a real surprise. I don't usually come on forums knocking developers at all - but there's a first time for everything, and this is inexcusable and has made me that angry. Said my piece. I'll check back in another few years (during which time my money will go elsewhere) - if I can still fly sims then, with my deteriorating condition. Not happy.

Мне Вьетнам даром не нужен. Но Ирак уж можно было бы нарисовать. МиГ-21бис, кстати, запустил на днях. Посмотрел на качество кокпита и выключил это. В 2014-м это, возможно, ещё было терпимо, но сейчас играть в такое желания нет, особенно в VR. Красной техники 80-х только два самолёта подходят да будущий МиГ-23МЛ.

Very interesting read and really looking forward to this when it finally gets made available.

That’s fine - just the fact that we can see a sign of life after three months of absence allows us all a collective breath of relief. If you check in regularly just to tell us that you are still alive, most of us would still see that as a positive sign. So, great to hear from you, all the best, and hope to hear again from you soon

Rocket salvo attack on this row of containers 36°43'10.6"N 115°39'15.7"W. RTB touchdown imminent a bit fast in the turn... Internal fuel only is so low. I had to refuel at Creech to be able to get back to Nellis, after flying multiple attack runs at the target range.

Actually, if you're doing this for a SimPit and wanting to pull an ejection handle. In the real world, that's a single pull... not three.

It works with 1 press in the Tomcat, and I like it that way, despite the binding called "Eject (push 3 times)"