Leaderboard

RAZBAM Mig-23MLA

We're getting there. As it's not completely done yet and especially ALV (line of sight mode) still has some quirks, it wasn't mentioned in the change logs. Still working on it and it has a very high priority for us.

@NineLine You are not getting the point, at all. Ignore the wing breaking. It should not be possible to produce 12 G that quickly and without nose movement. So there are two issues. 1. Its too easy to generate 12 G. 2. That G comes before the aircraft is actually demonstrating the radial acceleration required. There is something wrong in the F-5 control system and/or G calculation. G is a function of radius and speed. G force cannot exist without radius. The nose must move before the G can exist. Also, the artificial feel system in the F-5 hydraulic controls would make it very difficult to even get to 12 G, much less get there that quickly. You are asking F-5 pilots to fly an aircraft from which the artificial feel system has been removed. It exists in the aircraft to prevent exactly what I demonstrated. Without force feedback, we have no artificial feel, so it must be built in the software by slowing the rate at which the HSTAB can move at speed.

Current DLSS is the nvngx_dlss.dll version 3.5.0.0 in DCS There is a new version 3.5.10, and I just tried it; It is no revolution, but it makes for some improvements on ghosting. Or.. ghosting turns out a little different. If you like it, you keep it. If not, keep the old one. It is in the bin, and the bin-mt folder. You find it here: https://www.techpowerup.com/download/nvidia-dlss-dll/

I have to agree. I have quite a few other expensive hobbies too, especially motorbikes! But for all the money I’ve spent on dcs - hardware, software and other bits and bobs, for the amount of sheer enjoyment and time I’ve had out of dcs over the years, it a minuscule price and worth every penny and more. Can’t say the same for everything I spent on my bikes over the years!

Taking this post in the context of the entire thread, I am truly speechless.

It wasn't that great, but i was in one of my humorous moods and made up some fake 'screenshot images' from an aledged leak of the 2024 & beyond video. Basically there was one that said "Soontm framework was getting an overhaul and they would be releasing Soontm v2. More details on the new features will be released... In the future", with a challenge for anyone to read that and not hear Andre Celeste's voice (from How I Play/HIP video's) in their head. There was another one about Spok functionality being added to the Vulkan framework, ED changing their shop to mask real pricing of history purchases incase spouses are able to access the account, and similar quips.

I understand the interest in modding, but I'd appreciate if we could keep this thread about my assets.

I made the mistake once of adding up all the receipts in my profile page. Never again!

Decided to give Gazelle a go last night via free trial. Mapped axis, trim and view zoon then flew around Normandy for twenty minutes. Sold. Bought the module this morning. Seemed straight forward enough to fly (compared to Apache, Huey and Hind) and I love the forward visibility.

Difficulty levels affects to: mission timers (injured people die faster, bomb timer is shorter, things explode sooner, chain reaction is faster..etc ), the LZs are smaller, they are usually crowded, or have some obstacles on the approach, you need to be nearest to the targets/objectives to trigger them (lower to throw grenades to the ship, closer to shoot to the car... etc). Remember that you can "mix" the difficulty with the new "NO TIMER" option, so for example in the SAR missions if you choose the HARD level, you will have to land inside the tyres, and there will be more obstacles, but you will have plenty of time to approach and return to the hospital.

@NineLine Here is my last attempt at demonstrating the issue (part of it, anyway). Two Tracks- One is the Mirage and the other is the F-5. Notice when the wing fails versus how much nose movement prior to failure. One is like a real airplane, the other isn't. Forgetting that a first time catastrophic failure is unlikely since both are failing catastrophically, the problem is the G onset and failure prior to significant nose movement with the F-5. If the F-5 behaved as the Mirage does in this track I wouldn't have heartburn about it shedding its wings in an 11G pull. I would still complain about the roll asymmetry failure but one step at a time. wingbreak1mirage.trk wingbreak1tiger.trk

I noticed that when i am selecting just 2 drop tanks and nothing else, or 2 a/a missiles + 2 drop tanks, or 4 a/a missiles + 2 drop tanks or even 2 amraams+ 4 sidewinders + 2 drop tanks the jet requires CAT I stores config otherwise if CAT 3 is selected i get a stores config error. The only Α/Α loadout that allows CAT3 is 4x amraams plus 2 heaters plus 2 drop tanks or 6x amraams plus 2 drop tanks Now correct me if i am wrong (obviously i am) but according to what i know plus various sources online plus DCS F-16C manual, even a clean F-16 with just 2x 370gal. tanks should require CAT 3 STORES CONFIG Switch. Sets the FLCS mode of operation based on external wing stores. When set to CAT III the FLCS limits the angle of attack and onset rates in order to increase departure resistance. This switch has no effect when the FLCS gains are set to takeoff/landing configuration (landing gear deployed or air refueling door open). • CAT I. Used for air-to-air loadouts without external wing tanks. • CAT III. Used for air-to-ground loadouts or when equipped with external wing tanks.

Hello. I think this question has been asked several times, but I have used the search function but have not found an active thread. So I'll just ask again. Will there be a Mirage F1 version that will have an active "IFF"? With which you can recognize whether you have locked an ally or enemy in the air radar? Will it possibly be the Mirage F1 M version? o7

sorry to not have responded in a prompt manner, I am just getting back into the swing of things after the holidays... To answer your question, I have many different sources that include friends with access to airworthy aircraft, a library of photo reference books, a legit parts catalog from North American that dates back to the 1950's, some detailed blueprints for a Wirraway, some scale drawings intended for models, and some freehand guesswork when drawing it up in CAD to make it all fit together. I am including a progress pic with some drawings lined up to create an orthographic projection that I use as guidelines for the overall shape of the aircraft. I would love all the help that I can get.

Honestly, I think they're getting better from year to year. The camera work, directing, editing - one can see, how the people working on them improve their art every year. I like 2022 slightly better than 2023, though. (on a side note: in 2021 and 2022, when Nick was talking, I had to check if the replay speed is 1.0x....not .75 by accident....)

You're right fapador, but most time you only hear the people who are unsatisfied, and the satisfied are silent. Imagine you're developing a module and read only negative about it. Would you enjoy continue to work on it? I don't think. There are in fact things that need to be worked out, but there is a lot of progress. It's good to be encouraged sometimes.

Oh, trust me... I fly in real life, and also play hockey, so I'm well acquainted with expensive hobbies Looking at the total amount spent on DCS, surely it eclipses the $$ I've spent on any other software by far... with the possible exception of Adobe Creative Suite products going back about 20 years (which is also not a total amount that I want to be aware of). Really though, I don't mind. I haven't done the dollar per hour enjoyed calculation but I'm quite sure it's a favorable ratio. I'm just happy that something like DCS exists and I'm eager to support them.

From first person reports, the pitch control stick forces in the F-5 and T-38 are pretty high. Since it is an artificial feel system, it was purposely designed that way to prevent inadvertent rapid G onset. Somewhere, there is engineering data on that artificial feel system. I wish I knew where.

I'll once again argue, the lack of feedback indicating catastrophic structural failure is approaching is also a major issue.

@IronMike Now? You know you want it too!

@_YaeSakura_

To recap, I am of the opinion that the biggest part of the problem is in the controls input. Specifically, very little stick movement results in high g spikes. Please watch the attached track with the controls indicator displayed on your monitor. There are no pitch curves, fuel is 51%. It starts at 300kts with a full deflection pull to show I have full deflection authority with my stick. I then accelerate to 550kts, wings level, and pull 10 g's pretty rapidly with a stick deflection of about 1/3. Is this as intended? F-5 control stick deflection.trk

I would suggest that there may be something subtle at play here that we ca't really measure (but developers can) ... one semi-educated example could be g-onset. In the vast majority of cases, a more heavily laden aircraft should not be able to reach peak g as easily as a lighter version of itself, and it might not reach certain g loads at all. Because this requires careful examination of the available hydraulic power vs. resistance to the motion created by the airstream, it's a harder problem to analyze so I guess what I am trying to say is, maybe the problem isn't that the aircraft is breaking at those numbers, but that those numbers are reached too easily. Curves may be a potential work-around but they're not a great work-around compared to the physics simulation. There are other aircraft which have a 'lower' g-limit and they're not quite as fragile suggest this could use a more thorough investigation.

The way we did it is quite custom and I doubt a lot of people would go the same technical route soon. I can not talk too much on the details before release, but it had an initial upfront cost of several months to add this "technology". We also use it for the Jester Wheel, Grease Pencil and more. We will also add it for the Tomcat, but Viggen likely wont work.

If you find someone who takes it seriously, please send them my way. I have several cans of genuine F-35 exhaust fumes for sale. Very rare, good price.

To me, the current flight model is leaps and bounds better than the old one and the gripes are limited to a few minor issues, ie yaw trim "snaps" instantly regardless of setting. It's not enough to get me to shelve it, though I don't play it as much due to the more limited roles of the airframe. I did run someone new through it recently, someone who struggled with the AH-64, and they absolutely adore the Gazelle's handling over that module. I do believe there are issues to be addressed, but not to the level of throwing my toys out the pram and throwing a tantrum.

With the current plane set the Brits are notably lacking high speed aircraft relative to the US and Germany. Either of these aircraft would be an interesting and fitting addition to the line up due to the intricacies of the aircraft, though with no flying examples it would be tough to model. Arguably one of the most interesting parts of these aircraft are the Napier Sabre engines that are used, producing a fair amount more power then the rival engines, the merlin and the daimler engines. They were known for their low down speeds, brutal operating routines and quirks, such as being so fast they would rip their own controls off, their engines would catch fire if overprimed. The typhoon would fulfil the 1941-1943 period, and the tempest would fulfill the 1944-1945 role. In addition it would be formidable due to being able to be armed with cannons, rockets and bombs.

Flying the L tonight and the autohover position and direction modes worked perfectly.

You can turn the FCR with the acquisition source by slaving, with cued search (later), with man track or with the arrow buttons on the FCR page, but only when the FCR is not currently doing a scan. So there are a few questions. From what I gathered, because the pilot doesn't have a slave button, so the FCR always slaves when the pilot selects an acquisition source, even if it's the same one that is already selected. And it will stop slaving when the pilot presses one of the arrow buttons. Is that correct? When the pilot selects an acquisition source before selecting FCR as sight, will it slave or will it just retain it's current orientation? If the pilot presses cued search, the FCR will turn towards the RFI detected emitter to correlate. Will it stay pointed in that direction or will it go back to the acquisition source and/or the previously selected heading afterwards? Will it return the scan cone size to what it was before? With cued search, how does it interact with an already running continuous scanburst? Will it not work? Will it slave the radar while it's scanning? Will it stop the scan and do a single scan or a scanburst? What will happen? Does slaving to acquisition source also change the elevation? Does it do so in automatic elevation also? When the radar is actively scanning it can not be slewed. How does it react to the helicopter turning? Will it retain the heading or will it stay relative to the helicopter? If it was previously slaved to a point acquisition source, will it keep pointing to it, even if you fly around it? What does it do if it deems that it should be scanning behind the helicopter? Can it do that? What's the scan cone angle vertically? The radar elevation display displays the angle of the radar cone in 6.25° steps (in RMAP and GTM modes), with the big dash being 6.25° down. Is this the bottom of the scan cone, the middle of the scan cone or the top of the scan cone? Not really on topic, but what happens if one crew member has selected FCR as sight, and the other one then selects it as sight? Will they both have it as sight and if not, what does the other crew member gets selected as their sight? does it default to HMD or does it go to the last one selected (ie. possibly TADS for CPG) What happens when one crew member is currently scanning with the FCR and then the other takes it as the sight? What happens when one crew member is currently scanning with the FCR and then they select a different sight? When selecting LINK with TADS, the radar should slave to the TADS LOS. You can't select TADS as ACQ when TADS is the selected sight, so this is the only way of doing that (unless the pilot uses TADS as ACQ and FCR as sight). If you do that, does the radar elevation gets adjusted as well? If so, only in manual mode or also in auto? If the pilot has FCR as sight and the CPG wants to get the TADS onto the NTS, is there a way other than selecting FCR as ACQ and slaving? Edit Here are my observations so far It will always slave, until the manual slew buttons are pressed See 1 N/I N/I No clue. Maybe? It stays on a heading, never anything else See 6 It seems to just turn all the way around, even scanning directly behind the aircraft. The manual turn buttons seem to get buggy sometimes with that, disabling the wrong ones or none at all. Also the tail boom blanking area is not being displayed. No clue. No clue. Probably center, no evidence though. FCR in multicrew is currently buggy and not really working as is. Can't really determine. I think the correct action is to boot the other crewmember to HMD as sight, didn't check though. I think it stops the scan. Didn't test, nor would I trust the test right now. The scan gets stopped No clue. Related to 5. Actually the same as 5. You can use CAQ on the NTS to create a TG point and and slave. The PLT can also mark the target using the FCR page's TGT function.

Dead stick landings are great fun from altitude, aren’t they? Establish your best glide speed and decide where to put down.

Slightly unrelated but what is your favourite 20xx and Beyond video of years past? I think mine is "2021 and Beyond" that teased the new clouds and the Apache. Please quote me in your reply so I get a notification.

Hello flyingscotsman, you were right. I had 2 older mods from currenthill in the tech folder. They were hard to find because their names didn't start with CH. Thanks for the hint.

Where's the MFD?

thanks I have asked the team to test this in the next MP test.

The DCS F-16C Early Access Guide includes such procedures in both the Procedures chapter and Appendix A. It is as close to a realistic checklist as what can be publically researched.

@Rudel_chw Please check your PM. Thanks

The links are at the mod's Discord server: https://discord.gg/sbw8A5Mg75

Reflected, Look for “Moskito Attack!” very good one.

Thanks for the clarification BN. Believe it or not, I started it off originally with a disclaimer - this is a meme, not legit, but removed it thinking it was silly to have that for something so obvious and I'm probably being paranoid, but then after your post I thought "Dang - we're in a bad state when my paranoia reflects where we're really at". Really looking forward to the real 2024 and beyond release. Thanks for all your hard work.

Its a caster wheel so there is some natural centering if going farward. Like above, the effects of doing such things aren't as bothersome as IRL as everything is perfectly balanced out. There is a dampener modeled, but its never going to fit everyone like with the stick and things like extension/no extension, curves are going to be your biggest friend.

Hey dont worry, I left it there as it was funny, some dont have a sense of humour that is all I was saying. Hope you had a good new year and enjoy the 2024 and beyond video when it arrives.

This is your problem. Unlike Mi-8, Hind's trim will reset autopilot. In Mi-8, flight engineer is re-setting autopilot in coordination with pilot flying. In Hind, reset is instant. Picture this: you are flying nose level, not holding trim. You push nose down. Autopilot will try to bring your nose back up to its trimmed position. Your new attitude is a result of your stick input and autopilot input. When you press trim, that autopilot input is gone and only input is from your stick pushing nose down. That's your "nodding". Best way to fly the Hind is to hold down trim release until you are happy with your new attitude. You will lose stabilisation, but Hind is quite stable with any forward speed. Even in hover, you will quickly learn to anticipate inertia. Other option is to trim often. Autopilot input is directly proportional to departure from its trimmed position. More you trim, less autopilot input you will lose- less nodding. Unfortunately, there is no real good way to make springed stick work with this kind of autopilot. I don't fly Ka-50 and I'm not quite sure how its trim works, but Hind was first Soviet helicopter that got rid of flight engineer setting autopilot using analog system. My guess is what you are experiencing in Ka-50 is a result of experience from the Hind.

The latest domestic AIP can always be found here: https://www.gov.il/he/Departments/Guides/aip?chapterIndex=1 The link in question says "פמ"ת בקובץ יחיד - הורדה" ("PMT in a single file - download", according to Google Translate). That being said, the current direct link to the PDF is here: https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/guide/aip/he/aip_Full PAMAT 3-23.pdf

The issue is that other modules are not modeled this way. The Mirage F1, with nearly identical verbiage in its manual regarding structural limitations, does not crack the wings off. I actually wasted my time making 17 short tracks of how you can spike the wings off in the F-5. I see there is no need to post them. My F-5 remains parked as no one seems interested in investigating why the F-5 was singled out for this treatment 2 years ago.

I just opened up a fourth link on my site.

Hi, I have spoken to the team, this issue is already fixed in open beta, so we are just waiting for the stable version to be updated. I do not have a date for that update yet. thank you

Gentlemen, version 3.0 has been released: ■ I LOVE THIS JOB (LAST VERSION) ■ HUEY SHERIFF SKIN This new version Includes 2 new SAR missions + a "NO TIMER" option. So you can play all the missions without the timing pressure (injured people wouldn't die if you don't get them on time to the hospital, bombs will not have a timer... etc). Besides I solved the problem in the Swamp mission that doesn't allow to end it and fix all the bugs, errors and typos related with the Syria map update. I hope you like it!