Leaderboard

New Wags interview with "2024 and Beyonds" comentaries. Wags comentaries about "2024 and Beyond". Supercarrier "a ship".... First airport has not Bagdad, has Bagram on Afganistan. The CH-47F has a UsArmy mid 2000 version modeled correctly, on 2023 and beyond, show incorrect modeled ICH-47 Italian version. Working on modeling correct avionics and flight model. The M1A2 model has a SEP version "3", and expected "some day"... expand to DCS ground units, and only has a matter of time . And the problem not have the ground vehicle modeling or the damage model or the AI. The problem to make a Abrams or a T-80 tank simulator require a propper simulation of terrain with a level of detail with propper gullies or defilate positions. That is comming. No only has build a propper tank, mas making all arround to that happens.... More graphics improvements coming that year as Vulkan API with other cool graphics things as using RTX cards to take advantage on dynamic shadows, to looking more realistic. ED has working on new walking animation to the new infantry, others animations and AI. Has a grow and making better improvements, that a technology actualy working. That has required on zones as Afganistan with COIN operations where the leg infantry require a detail modeling and that has been very important. A realistic FPS has a matter of time, but has a long term target. Kola Peninsula map shot West Side Norway, making by Orbx. F-16 Fly by has Afganistan map. La7 by OctopusG. F4U Corsair by M3. F-4E Phantom II by Heatblur. F-15E over Zargos mountains on Iraq. Has a new level of geometry Has forward the Pacific operations, centred on summer 1944 with the adition of WW2 Marianas Map, with the land battles of Saipan and Tinian, wint the big naval engagements. Show a Essex carrier. Marianas map shot IJN cruisers. F6F Hellcat on 2023, Dash 3 version. Tomcats over Iraq map. Sa-6 Gainful on Kola map. F4U Corsair over Marianas WW2. B-17 and P-47 north side of Saipan. A-6E inturder by Heatblur, coming AI version first. A-7E Corsair II by FlyingIron Simulation F-16C Viper over Afganistan. F6F Hellcat has fly by Nick Grey on the Fighter Collection and has get documentation to build them. AM6 zero comming as IA, but flyable has comming later. Tomcat over Afganistan Apache on a valley has Zargos mountain on Iraq map show more about the aditional level of geometry of mountains. Mig-23MLA comming from RAZBAM. Inside of the CH-47F Chinook. C-130J has flyable now. MRAP new AI unit, probably drive on CA. Has the next steep point on DCS. Iraq map has many flat zones and mountains on the east and the north. Mig-29 has required by long time by the comunity. General questions to Wags: See like someday have a AWACS control module (E-2/E-3) with a radar control station back. New Paratroopers has coming with infantry and on a next newsletter, talking about new infantry. About more tools as realistic radios to get virtual JTAC with more tools. Probaly no right now, but we are looking at some mean to definitely improve the ground operations aspect on the game but that something we are going to the talking about at a later point, so unfortaly, there is a not a whole lot I can say now. About Rafale and Grippen, has very little public information someday release, and we can use probably not. Not enought information to that two aircrafts. About the Cobra, whiskey version, has available information. A Super Cobra has someday later but no working on that right now, but has possible someday right now. ED expected someday rebuild old maps as Caucasus, NTTR, etc to the new technology someday, but actualy has not resources available. Actualy ED has centred on Iraq, Afganistan and Marianas WW2 map develop. A P-40 Warhawk was making by a 3rd party but take diferent ways. Towed decoys as ALE50 has a rough version to F-16C Viper, but modeling them has a sensible theme. About a AH-1Z has not available info. About a Vietnam map, no yet by new implement sfere map technology first. Mig-29A FF use the same fly model of the FC-3 Mig-29A (has PFM Profesional Flight Model). DTC files has on the plans. A6M5 comming first as AI, and after to fly. Marianas maps has no plans to expand them. a DCS submarine drivable module will comming on 30 years xD. Meanwhile, the ablitily to drive the carrier, set heading, speed, lights, cooms has a feature to add to them on the future. ED has looking to improve de EW system. Meanwhile IADS has done internaly, has desing a system with expected release. Systems as on and off radars, get target cues from external radars to a tracking radar. Other point has make a scalable SAM system to make chalenges to player base. New AI units has a new MRAP, the M1 Tank as aditional naval and air units with not has announced yet. Current maps has no ability to connect together with the actual map technology, need wait to sphere map technology. Dynamic slots technology has on internal testing. About infantry damage, actualy has based on blast damage radius, no fragmentation yet. ED expected expand the blast with fragmentation damage, and actualy has working of them.

Redstar simulation showing of their MiG-17F

These are very first impressions after only a couple of hours use. Previous owner of Occulus and G2. I have not flown a long MP mission to performance-stress the Beyond yet, so I will be commenting on that scenario later. It lacks DFR, so I am interested to discover how the Beyond performs with my current PC (5800x and 3080-10MB) on the Grayflag server. The Bigscreen Beyond comes in a package the size of a shoebox and the device itself is smaller than most swim goggles. I had read this but was still astonished. Totally unfamiliar with lighthouses and knuckles controllers, so took some time futtsing with those and re-familiarizing myself with SteamVR. Still don't really know how to operate the knuckles fully, but they are irrelevant to DCS flight sim. Discovered, like many others, that my device IPD is a few mm too wide, so I have initiated a ticket to correct that issue. BsB will exchange the devices free of charge. My barber has remarked on my long eyelashes and indeed they contact the lenses. Tiny, inexpensive magnets from Amazon reportedly can fix this issue. The magnets are simply placed on the existing magnets that secure the gasket to the device. I was very impressed, despite the IPD issue, with screen brightness, vibrant colors, and clarity of the visuals. No problem whatsoever reading cockpit labels and such, and HUD symbology appeared very crisp. Perhaps because of my previous experience with G2, I did not find the sweet spot annoyingly small. As for reported glare, I did not even notice it in Hornet cockpit in daylight. Might be different in night missions. I am using the supplied strap and top strap and they seem comfortable enough. My custom manufactured face gasket seems to fit my head perfectly, but I do feel a bit of moisture where the gasket contacts my skin. Positioning the device high on my forehead provides best video clarity. I set the fan for 80% max rpm and as for fan noise . . . what fan?| We will likely not see the perfect VR headset for many years but the Beyond provides IMO one of the best visual experiences currently available. Thus far I am favorably impressed with this little headset. More later.

Please go beyond FC3 and model the Beryuza data link system. It is so wonderfully integrated with the HUD, would make an awesome feature to entice buyers, and gives it a unique and very dynamic ability to target with exterior guidance. Being able to have intercept path shown to you, radar/KOLS scan automatically and lock, and tell you when to fire. Being able to change the over 20 channels to select different targets. Being a radio link also brings the side effects of flying low and with obstructions from valleys/mountains. Opens up more team play allowing people to assign different targets to wingmen. Thank you!!

No bombs or rockets on outer stations, same as it is now with FC aircraft. Probably no S-5, only S-8 or S-24 to choose from. S-5 was being phased out by then. Probably no mixing of bombs and rockets. The pilot has choice of single release (for training), pairs, or full salvo, but not the spacing interval. For A2G, CCIP or DiveToss mode with designating target through the HUD. DiveToss release angle pre set by ground personnel. There's no bombing on INS coordinates. Probably no mixing with more than 2 missile types, as the armament panel only allows selecting "outer rails first" or "inner rails first" when firing A2A missiles. Not sure about mixing A2A and A2G on one flight. EDIT: yes, it's possible to mix A2A and A2G. One countermeasures program, set before flight.

RAZBAM Discord

Yup, the IADS guys bailed, no one knows why. I think they took one look at the spaghetti and bailed myself, or maybe not. While most of the earlier missile systems are known, plenty of the later ones are still sensitive. But ultimately its a very non trivial task. Consider the DCS SA-2, like literally the oldest, widest used SAM system in the world, totally disrespected in DCS. In DCS the model of how an SA-2 processes targets and engages them has little to do with reality. Its like a hold over from whatever 90's sam code they have. In DCS its oh look mr search radar with the 2 picks you up lat ti dah I'm flying along and there is that 2 over there, whatever. Oh and then see this it locks you when you are in max range [2]. That might be worrysome but I have time, and finally brrrring there goes the launch and here comes mr telephone pole so I have to do drop a few chaff and point at the ground. The missile will "lead" me and crash into the ground long before it hits me cuz its using prop-nav. In reality, the actual site would not be radiating at all, the fan-song is an engagement radar only, you wouldn't know it was there (unless intel told you). The EWR "search radar" would literally be miles away from the site, and it would likely be a set of EWR's some transmitting some held in reserve some moving to a new location. So, then the battery commander gets a call, hey you've got some poor hapless schmuck inbound, he will be in your engagement envelope in 5 minutes, currently heading is 345 speed 500, altitude 10k. Battery commander trains the Fan-song radar at the location where you will as reported by the EWR. When the in-range command is given, boom lights on. In "search mode" they will localize you fairly quickly, since they already know fairly well where to lock, and bang "track". Now launch, but your RWR may or may not know about it since the missile is command guided to an intercept point using one of 3 "lead modes" that I will over simplify to Prop nav, 1/2 prop nav, and the 3 point (draw a line between the radar the missile and you) mode. If the lead is actually enough the command channel for the missile is a narrow beam the RWR may not catch initially. What that SA-2 launch looks more like this, oh well, yep there are some search radars out there... La-ti-dah... Oh a 2 on the RWR uh... And few seconds later the [2], hmm thats a problem, oh look I see big smoke trails... Wait smoke trails, crap... Now the RWR goes brrring when they are more than halfway to me. Dive and chaff, crap they are headed straight for me since the SAM operator isn't a moron and has switched them to 3 point so it won't fly into the ground... BIG boom, now I'm dead. So even for a simple and extremely well known system its really badly modeled, both from the engagement sequence standpoint and especially from the missile guidance standpoint. This is also assuming a modern RWR that knows the missile, knows all the frequencies used and so forth. VN era RWR's would not always know this stuff, for example the launch detect stuff had to be added to earlier RWRs that only could detect the track radar, and of course none of them cared about the search radars. And then modeling the ECM to use against these, you have to consider ok, how good is the operator, and oh wait which version of the sa-2 do we have to consider because for example some of them had ECCM to angle jamming techniques that were commonly employed and so on and so forth. Or another common technique is actually to mess with the radio-prox fuse to get it to detonate early (also why everyone went to optical fuses) etc. So it gets stupidly complicated stupidly fast. And I think the average joe DCS player clamoring for better ECM modeling has 0 clue.

And on the previous videos we saw Ch-47 with the FLIR addon (now removed), or F-15E with Russian ELINT pod of all things. Everything is subject to change.

Is it really though? As far as I know, they went into service pretty much the same time with MiG-29, 1982 if I recall correctly, and the version we have with RDI radar went into service in 1986-87ish. Ours have a few later updates, but they aren't really big things, it works very well as the late Cold War type. FM I won't comment beyond I also think it probably is on the optimistic side, but that's just me thinking, have nothing to prove it either way. Systems wise however, it is one of the best modeled modules in DCS, and is a great representative of the most advanced fighters from 80s. And while it may be easier to win in a guns dogfight with 2000, if they both have their expected dogfighting armaments, I'd say helmet sight + R-73 still means MiG will more often be the one coming on top. I really hope when we eventually get an F-15C or A, it will also have an 80s version included. 1975-1995ish period is by far the cooles and most fitting for DCS imo, and it is becoming more and more fleshed out. Give me AH-1W of that exact vintage, Su-17M4, Jaguar, and we're more or less golden. We already have Tornado, MiG-23MLA, A-7E, A-6E either coming or planned anway. MiG-29A will fit very well into this, as does the Mirage 2000C RDI.

Octopus-G christmas tree bags... appears a "Su-17" tail and a "Po-2" tail on the bag. Future plans, sure.

Yup, shouldn't be a big deal to fix. The cockpit, like the rest, is still very much a work in progress. But thanks for pointing it out! -----

ED implement Divert and emergency landings.

Yeah I wouldn't take a promotional image for a WIP thing as gospel. I guess this would also mean "goodbye R-27R + R-27T together" memes if we indeed can take only two types of AAM?

Much appreciated and phenomenal job! Below is my Vietnam collection of books. I cannot recommend enough the Gunslingers in action and Aero scouts of Vietnam for this mod. It has a lot of info that may assist with the finer details. If you are unable to obtain either of them, I would be more than willing to scan/take some photos of anything you are looking for that might be in these books to aid in the production of this mod. Me and a few friends have been waiting for someone to pick this up for a long time now. Both books were written by a pilot who Flew the OH6, Cobra, and Huey during the war. GREAT read and tons of info and pictures. Also, the US Infantry Vietnam might be a really good one for AI assets. Let me know if interested and thanks again for bringing a much-desired Scout and Helo to DCS. You have our full attention and look forward to seeing this...............in Two weeks.

Well that goes both ways, Silver saying something to the effect of "Octopus-G didn't give a release date on 2023", is just false, as are a good bit of his often rushes to the defense of devs even when no offense is intended by anyone but at the same time, you are absolutely right too, anyone of us who has been here long enough should know release dates don't mean much of anything, can and will be missed, sometimes by multiple calendar years, and that's just fine. It takes as long as it takes, and we're better off with getting things cooked well enough after all. As for the warbirds, I absultely love the way warbirds feel in DCS, and hope there will be more devs giving us some. Though we do already have La-7, F4U-1d, and F6F, seems -3 all lined up. But I really, reaaally want Octopus-G to give us that beautiful Su-17M4 too. It is an aircraft I've been wanting for a long time, in fact could be the only one I'm quite as interested in as I am for F-4E. I know there are other potentials for Su-22/17, but I personally hope for an Octo-G one. Regardless of who makes it though, hope we can get one sooner than later, and most importantly, hope it will be made well. A good, cool, Cold War red striker is something that should be done right hopefully and I personally have the most faith in Octopus-G among the devs who hinted at making one.

Let me tell you guys something funny. I can read Cyrillic. Don't understand much of anything of course, but I can read the alphabet almost %100. How did I learn? Well how, of course with using Russian vehicles in DCS and other titles for many years! At first started understanding some letters, and eventually, very much suddenly, I was like "wait... I... can read Cyrillic now..." However, I must say, I don't really understand the necessity of having English cockpits in aircraft without complex MFD menus and such, like in Ka-50, which I still use in English. In everything else, it's pretty easy to tell what's an ADI, HSI, altimeter, speedo, VSI, G and AoA indicator etc, and for switches we already learn what's what from manuals and videos when starting, and they have English tooltips anyway. And as a bonus, you may slowly learn another alphabet as a side effect as did I Don't get me wrong, I hope people who want it will get it of course. I just personally don't get why is this that important. For flight manual however, agree %115!

DML II has arrived. Version 2.0.0 - Major Update - 20240111 Happy new year everyone! We start 2024 with a bang, just like we should. I'm proud to present to you DML II, the next iteration of what once started as my humble homebrew small library of helpful code snippets and - after I hit upon the concept of passing valuable data with trigger zones - took flight in ways I had never imagined. While a lot of modules have received some upgrade, here are the big hitters for "II": The Debugger 2.0 There are only few of us that use it, but I've massively increased what it can do, including inspect memory (Lua variables) and - yes - change them intercept DCS 'events' and tell you when they happen spawn 'generics' so you can better test your mission's reactions The "Shock Block" (Main Manual) I've extensively re-structured and re-written passages, removed anything too arcane (no more Lua discussion) - all in the hope of making it a bit more accessible to those of you who actually RTFM (my hat's off to you) And there is one change some of you may not appreciate that much: I've harmonized the file names for modules and removed the "cfx" prefix from most of them. This makes it easier to find them. Note that I only changed the file names, so those of you who import by file name may have to re-jigger their imports. So here are the changes in detail: Manual - Main - massive rewrite, better (?) introduction, more consistency - The Debugger many additions - QuickRef - many updates Demos - artillery with UI - update - being persistent - update - boom boom - update - debug events and more *new* - helo cargo - update - moving spawners II - update - moving spawners - update - once, twice, three times maybe - update - player score - update - players in the zone - update - willie nillie - update - xFlags field day - update Modules - airfield 2.0.0 color support farps supported unmanaged airfields - artillery (removed) - artilleryUI 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP, cleanup - artilleryZones 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP, cleanup - cargoReceiver 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP, cleanup - cfxMon (removed) - cfxMX 2.0.0 harmonized with cfxGroups cleanup - cloneZone 2.0.1 better handling of deffered cloning with empty! cleanup - objectDestructDetector 2.0.1 added sanity checks: location for object - objectSpawnZones 2.0.0 cleanup - persistence 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP cleanup - playerScore 3.0.1 cleanup - playerScoreUI 2.1.1 cleanup - pulseFlags 2.0.1 cleanup - smokeZones 2.0.0 cleanup - spawnZones 2.0.0 cleanup - cfxSSBSingleUse 2.0.0 libcheck at startup cleanup - cfxZones 4.1.1 cleanup getBoolFromZoneProperty() now supports "on" and "off" evalRemainder() updates - cloneZones 2.0.0 cleanup - countDown 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP, cleanup config zone upgrade output method defaults to 'inc' - dcsCommon 3.0.0 fixed stringStartsWith() point2text new intsonly option arrangeGroupDataIntoFormation hardened cleanup new pointInDirectionOfPoint() createGroundGroupWithUnits now supports liveries new getAllExistingPlayersAndUnits() - delayFlag 2.0.0 cleanup - factoryZone 3.0.0 dmlZones, OOP support for liveries - fireFX 2.0.1 fixed rndLoc - groupTracker 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP, cleanup legacy support - messenger 3.0.0 removed f? removed in? cleanup - playerZone 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP new red# new blue# new total# - radioMenu 2.2.0 cleanup - TDZ 1.0.2 manual placement option filters FARPS - The Debugger 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP, cleanup new eventmon adding events eventmon last query write analyze smoke spawn system spawn generics spawn generics config zone event? attribute bug fixes - unitPersistence dmlZones cleanup - williePete 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP, cleanup guards for multi-unit player groups new getFirstLivingPlayer - xFlags 2.0.0 dmlZones, OOP, cleanup xDirect# xCount# Enjoy, -ch

CVW-17 Flyoff ! Christmas time 2023 F-14 Bombcat!

Ich habe mich entschieden bei WinWing zu bestellen. Warum? Preis/Leistung Da ich erstmal nur vor habe die F18 zu fliegen und Space-Sims keine Rolle spielen, ist mir das Replika-Feeling etwas wert Meine anfänglichen Bedenken konnten hier im Thread beruhigt werden und WinWing scheint durchaus viel vertreten zu sein Videos und Recherchen sind positive wie negative zu finden EU-Shop von WinWing erspart mir das Gezuchtel mit dem Zoll Bestellung und Versand: Freitag kam die Meldung von WinWing, dass die Pre-Order verfügbar ist. Freitag noch bezahlt per Paypal (Alternativ giropay. Zahlung per Kreditkarte war nicht möglich). Samstag noch die Syria-Map im Sale mitgenommen. Montag kam die Shipment Notice mit Tracking Nummer (DHL Germany). Das Paket kommt aus einem Verteilzentrum in DE-Neumark (Sachsen). Das EU-Hub scheint in CZ-Prag zu sein, wenn die abgeklebten Labels stimmen. Mittwoch (gestern) war dann die Zustellung. Ich musste keine weiteren Gebühren oder Abgaben zahlen. Der Preis im EU-Shop war der Endpreis. Alles kam ordentlich verpackt und vollständig an. Erster Eindruck: Nach dem Auspacken war ich wirklich angetan von der Qualität. Ich habe zwar keinen Vergleich zu VKB oder Virpil, aber zum TM Warthog. Das Orion 2 Set hat eine sehr solide Verarbeitung und stabile Konstruktion (Metall, Schraubverbindungen, etc.). Alle Knöpfe haben ein schönes Feedback. Der Stick bzw. die Base ist wesentlich präziser und besser steuerbar. Verglichen mit dem Warthog bieten die +100 EUR für das Orion 2 HOTAS unheimlich viel Mehrwert. Die Software SimAppPro finde ich ganz ok, sie könnte etwas aufgeräumter sein und an ein paar Stellen besser erklären, aber der Großteil erklärt sich ohne Anleitung. Einziges Manko war, dass die Fingerlifts an einem Schubhebel nicht montiert werden konnten. Die Bohrung am Grip war nicht exakt passend zur Bohrung am Fingerlift. Da der Finderlift aus Kunststoff ist, habe ich dort die Bohrung einfach um einen halben mm erweitert, sodass die Schraube eingedreht werden konnte. Probeflug: Gestern Abend musste ich natürlich noch eine Runde fliegen! Also etwas Zeit genommen und alles etwas eingerichtet und losgelegt. Ich habe bewusst eine selbst erstelle Trainingsmission für das Air/Air Refueling gewählt, da das die Mission war, die ich mit dem Warthog nie hinbekommen habe und einen Vergleich haben wollte.Was soll ich sagen?! Es hat beim ersten Versuch geklappt und ich konnte die Verbindung fast bis zum Schluss halten. Für die letzten 500lbs musste ich ein zweites Mal andocken. Trotzdem war ich zufrieden und es ist wesentlich einfacher kleine präzise Eingaben zu machen, speziell nahe der Neutralstellung. Das war mir mit dem Warthog nicht möglich. Bis jetzt bin ich vollends zufrieden mit meiner Entscheidung und Danke an euch!

A reminder for all here, be nice, or do not post. Rules can be found at the top of the forum thanks

Yes they do. It's just that the RCS assigned to many aircraft is the same or similar. I really have to wonder how you missed the detection range difference between say, a bomber and a fighter which is far more blatant than a slightly different RCS between fighters. That's because 'high flying targets' are just that, targets that don't know what they're doin beyond heading in some direction to try and catch something and lob a thing at it EOS itself should be plagued with false contacts as well, in particular if any clutter at all is present in the view, including clouds - that's one of them good reasons. The other good reason is that IRL these fights are flown with actual tactics, and no one's going to fly over known enemy territory without having eyes down that (or any) valley, and by eyes I do mean radar. Flying in a valley also means saying goodbye to your comms, including datalink - unless you have some form of a satellite terminal. In general, if you're GCI dependent you need LOS to your GCI and the other guy knows where you are anyway - so you can effectively kiss valley flying 'to be sneaky' goodbye IRL. It's not that you can't do it, but it's not going to be like DCS.

@Furizit gives you the warning when you have the TGP and HTS loaded because it does not recognize them as stores in the SMS memory. Ignore the warning in that case and stay in CATIII. I also clarified that ECM by itself on the centerline is CAT I. It turns CATIII when loaded onto a wing station. @Gregkar2x tanks with 6x 9s can be CAT I. The minute you throw 120s on then it will be CATIII since the 120s we have are the C5s. Also keep in mind that if you start with an A2A loadout and end up being asymetric later in the flight (i.e. 2x msls on left wing and 3x on the right or 1x and 3x) that is a CAT III condition. @SickSidewinder9Where are you getting your info that it isn't?? Not once did anyone say that CAT deals with Gs. The CAT switch limits AoA it does not limit G. You can still hit 9Gs in CATIII if you are meeting the right conditions. The CAT limits the AoA you can pull which should make it harder to hit that 9Gs in normal conditions (meaning you are within the envelope). Especially when we get the Sniper that is CATIII all day long.

Spoiler: you dont have to use DLSS, you can turn it off

I´m absolutely seconding this. It really can be a pain in the ass to jump in the Mission quite a lot just to build a good ground structure

Hey, ich hab die Lösung gefunden (juhuuuu :-)). Also für die, die auch dem Problem gegeüberstehen: Man muß im ME das Spieler-Flugzeug anklicken und im Übersichtsfeld WEGPUNKT "Fortgeschritten" anklicken, dann auf "Hinzufügen" und im neuen Menüfeld daneben einen neuen Befehl kreieren, und zwar: TYP: Befehl ausführen AKTION: Frequenz setzen FREQUENZ: (zum Beispiel) 1 MHz MODULATION: (z. B.) AM POWER: (z. B.) 1 Watt Damit kann man alles Frequenz-Rauschen abschalten. Trotzdem aber weiterhin die Airports mit dem F5 Menü anfunken. Das gilt zumindest für die FC3 Flugzeuge auf der Syrien-Karte.

Marketing gag or not, for some players it did bump framerate enough NOT to have to buy next overpriced NV cards anytime soon and that in itself makes it worth it. But, as "there's no free lunch", some visual degradation is always a price to pay. It's all subjective - for some guys it's OK to play at 30-few fps as long as eyecandy is up. I don't understand it but hey, you do you. Just like i don't understand folks who just MUST have 120+ fps and are willing to settle for compromised visuals to get there. But it's their personal preference so - none of my business in the end. I don't use DLSS (yet), 'cause I'm still keeping my head above the 60-surface in simple missions. Will see how it goes once I start playing Reflected's campaigns. I did embrace DLAA, however, which finally killed everlasting shimmering in DCS once and for all, while not sinking my framerate like MSAA did.

Was regst du dich darüber auf wenn dich die MiG-29A nicht interessierst? Fragst du dich das selbe auch weshalb wir eine F-4 Phantom bekommen, eine MiG-21bis haben oder einen Mi-8? Die MiG-29 als voll biedienbars Flugzeug wurde von vielen gewünscht und es ist ein schönes Zeichen wenn ED auf die Wünsche eingeht. Nicht alle sind scharf auf 4. und 5. Generation Muster. Wie manche nichts mit WW2 Flugzeigen anfangen können, oder solche aus der Kalten Krieg Ära. Für jeden ist etwas dabei und wird auch in Zukunft so sein. Das ist doch das gute an DCS.

Currently, the AI priority for carrier ops is to prioritise recovering aircraft over launching aircraft. This is both incorrect (for cyclic ops), and leads to all sorts of issues on the deck. For instance, due to the deck containing many departing aircraft, an aircraft just landed may get stuck taxiing, fouling the landing area, and then everything gets frozen forever. Remaining aircraft don’t land, and nothing launches. If the priority was given to the launching aircraft, it would be both more realistic, and prevent some of these deck issues. When an AI aircraft arrives overhead for recovery, the AI ATC should check to see if there are any active aircraft on the deck about to launch. (Make the use of “request launch” command mandatory for player aircraft to help facilitate this). If there are any active aircraft on deck, the recovering aircraft waits for these aircraft to launch before being issued the “signal charlie”, and commencing recovery. This has the added advantage of clearing the deck of departing aircraft, providing more room for those about to land. Similarly, when an aircraft on the carrier becomes active for departure (or a player requests launch), it should check to see if any aircraft have already been given the “signal charlie”. If so, they wait till that aircraft has landed before moving, then they launch. If no aircraft are in the process of landing, departing aircraft have priority. Any subsequent arriving aircraft are required to wait until all departing aircraft have launched before they can commence recovery.

It's such a shame to cover the unique look of this map with such a generic textures. Would Razbam consider option to remove some of the HardSplat textures of fields, or atleast give as option to do so? Especially around cities like Ushuaia and Puntas Arenas the visuals are much worse compared to EA release of the map

I am not sure why @Wags said it was Bagram, which seems to be repeated by @Silver_Dragon but nevertheless I must say that the quality of detail on the upcoming Bagdad airport looks rather promising. Well done ED terrain team, really nice piece of work in progress. Funny that neither of the experienced airmen could tell the difference, with at least Wombat putting a correct guess -

From the last Wags interview, wow : Perhaps far, far away (2025-2026) but this is the light in the dark tunnel. Nice!

Five pages of people mostly talking missiles. Nice. - What A-G ordnance will the jet come with? Anything to expect beyond the FC3 loadout? - Will there be a fleshed out GCI meta? Would be cool to recieve steering-commands for interceps. But here's the most important question: Who else is gonna triple-Immelmann it or the first take-off?

For years now I have wanted to support the DCS community by offering any assistance I can providing any information I have obtained in over the 130 plus books I own on Military aviation and armor. For year I have been collecting books on the subject matter, several of which were published right after WW2, Korean War, and Vietnam. If there are any mod maker, Third Party Devs, or even ED needing information for modules, maps, battle plan images, bomb impact photos, liveries, markings ect....I probably have something on it. I cannot make promises I will have everything, but I can promise to assist with what I have. I do not want to see the below history sit on a bookshelf and not go back to the community and product that has come to be my favorite hobby. Pictures listed below of the books I own. I will put a few notes below the ones I think may be of assistance, especially in the WW2 department. The Gunsligners in action and Aeroscouts in Vietnam had INSANE amount of info regarding the Huey, OH-6, and Cobra. Gunslingers was written by a Vietnam pilot who flew all of them. He goes into extreme detail with call signs, formations, tactics, command structure. I cannot recommend these enough to rotor jocks wanting to create content, especially 8 ball and his new OH-6 modnull inbound. null Yes, I love the Corsair!!!! My favorite WW2 girl and grew up around 6 of them in Texas. Alot of good stuff here especially if interested in Campaigns for regarding Corsair Aces, Tactics , and info. Some really good stuff here regarding B-17's, original photos, and especially in the livery and markings department for WW2 era aircraft. The Allied fighters book gives INSANE records of the number of aircraft used at different bases and what for during the years on listed on the cover. This is a good one for campaign makers interested in authentic numbers and variants of aircraft used during the war on the Allied side. Absolute must for anyone interested in the Battle of Brittian is the top middle book. The stats are abundant and spot on with so much that happened during the war. Again, great for campaign developers looking for accurate info on this battle. This is one I pride myself on finding, the ships and aircraft of the US Fleet. This collection of books was written right after the war and gives the exact number, ship/aircraft during the war, where they were all located during different time periods ect... The was a local holy <profanity> find on a dusty shelf at an Antique store. Anyone looking to create content for the pacific, this would probably help for sure. Looking for maps and battle plans for WW2, covered! Great photos and maps in these for campaign devs. Also a ton of info about a lot of the battles fought. Now we get into the Germans. I had no idea I had collected so much on the Axis side of the house, had to break it up into 2 photos. Next round is armor. The primary book I want to point out here is the Luftwaffe Squadrons book. This is just like the Allied Fighters book listed above only for the Germans. Insane amount of info on where all variants and types of aircraft where stationed throughout the war. Outstanding book for campaign makers. The above is pretty straight forward with the exception of the armored trains. This is something I feel EVERY simulator has neglected for WW2 and hope to see ED or a third party Dev make for AI. Armored trains where a key role for the Germans during the war and again, I just happen to come across the 2 books above. Great reference material for types of German armored trains, their weapons, capabilities ect... I really hope to see these make their entrance into the DCS world. These are some modern era books I have with great info on some more current conflicts if the material is lacking for anyone. The Air War in Iraq especially was a good one. A great series showing A LOT of impact image before and after. Might make good for campaign devs and briefing/debriefings. Some good information in the ones that pertain to the modules we have and general information on the time period. Best for last. These were created earlier on after the war when censorship was an afterthought. This is nowhere near the entire collection of this series of publications. There are raw unedited photos of the war to include everything you can think of. The title of each book covers taht specific battle, commander, aircraft ect.... Any information you could possibly want on the topics in the books above are covered in there. I cannot recommend these enough to this community. I collect them as I find them. Sometimes you can get good deals on Ebay. If any campaign devs are looking for solid and accurate detailed accounts, this is a great source. All the books above have been purchased by me from an assortment of antique and book shops. I am more than willing to scan information or look something up for you if you think it can be of assistance. No of the books minus the F-16 training manual where government property so there should be no conflict in providing info you need. You can either reply to this post or send me a private IM. Hopefully some of the information above can be put to good use for our DCS content and keep this history alive in those of us who still greatly appreciate it.

I would also like to have it more of a flash/explosion and more dust/smoke combined with shockwave than a big fireball. Gun runs should also be more little flashes paired with a lot of dust/smoke. Ideally it would depend on the surface or object you hit. Hitting moist dirt of a hill on Kauskasus will have way less dust/smoke than hitting a building in the desert of Syria.

My standard profile for tossing the GBU-38 is; 1. MAX AB at 15 nm latest 2. 3g pitch up to 30 degrees at 9 nm (entry speed ~mach 1) 3. Pickle when velocity vector hits 30 degrees (approx. 7.5 miles and 3,000 ft AGL) The SA-15 will fire at you but you're so far away and fast, a 7.5 - 9 g break past the beam will kinematically defeat anything shot at you in return. Here's an example of it in the Hornet, you can probably get more out the F-15E due to its kinematic superiority.

i may need to buy a larger SSD just for all of your mods CH

Guys, the topic is the Iraq map, please stay on topic. Thanks. We are limited by available docs and government agencies with many Redfor aircraft, no one wants a Su-25 than me, but it's not possible right now. But again, this is not the right topic.

Hello all, Just finished my second weapons training mission, here: It was a much simpler mission, compared with the prior ones, that's how I managed to edit it so quickly Next up will be a Rocket employment mission, Cheers. Eduardo

For those who are new/learning, this is only possible if you bring the KG-600 jammer pod with you. The jammer pod can detect the actual physical location of radar signatures and display them fairly accurately on the HSD. If you do not bring the KG-600, the radar signatures on the HSD will display with the default threat ring schema and are not location accurate.

VR user here, DLAA alone is infinitely better than MSAA in regard to getting rid of the horrific shimmers. TAA I find even better but it has the ghosting artefacts.

Инди-игрушка ж практически. Без миллиардов нефтедолларов до совершенства игры доживут "не только лишь все", судя по всему.

That's why I think this should be fixed, people have no idea how big a thing this was. Yes, what version of SA-2 would matter then, and quite frankly, this would be a good thing. We would need models for earlier versions of the SAMs. The version of SA-2 that we have is vastly more modern than what was used in Vietnam, BTW. That said, you're wrong on account of the engagement flow. Before SA-2 could engage an EWR contact, it'd have to acquire it with its own search radar. SA-2 had the P-12 SR colocated with the battery: This is the typical hexagonal SA-2 layout, and you can see the Spoon Rest off to the side, and the Fan Song surrounded by the launchers. The thing is, the SR was generally connected with the command vans via physical cables, just like the FCR and the launchers. So, the whole thing simply couldn't be spread over a few kilometers. More than that, sites were fixed and in many cases, fairly easy to spot from air. The Fan Song would generally not be used in search mode, this is what Spoon Rest was for. After all, if the guy flying at you is a Weasel, then he's just waiting for that "2" on his RWR to launch a Shrike your way, or to dodge the missile and serve you some CBUs, since now he knows where you are. In fact, any decent Phantom driver would know that a "2" on RWR pretty much equals "take it down right now or you'll be dead". It did have some settling time, just like most missiles of the era (basically, it needed to keep you locked up a few seconds before it actually shot at you), but if you're not specifically trying to hit the site, a Fan Song turning on is a cue for you to scram. Modern SAMs can have the SR located a long distance from the battery, and the SA-10 has some nice features, including being able to datalink several battalions together. However, for early SAMs, you generally have a lot of different radars on site, and they'd be talking to the EWR by phone. A site could have low and high altitude search radars, a heightfinder (an important class of radar that we don't have in DCS), and a dedicated IFF antenna, in addition to the FCR. Taking those out would degrade the battery in different ways, and would add up to a rather complex EW picture for the EWO to decipher.

The X symbols let the crew know where they have fired a missile, so they can perform Battle Damage Assessmemt after the fact (which is why these locations are sent in a BDA report). It doen't mean targets at those locations are dead, it means that is a location at which BDA should be performed following a missile engagement. Again, these are all tools to provide the crew with information, so the crew can decide what to do because the FCR cannot determine such things. You can change the scan zone size, move the scan zone, change the priority scheme, use PFZ/NFZs, etc, if you want to isolate specific areas that you haven't engaged yet to avoid double-tapping the same area. But even so, if you see an X symbol underneath an FCR target after performing a subsequent scan, nothing is stopping you from pressing the NTS button to skip that target. The FCR is not a super-sensor. It cannot record a history of what has happened on the battlefield, it can only show the pilots what targets it has found on the most recent scan with an appropriate priority ranking. The crew must still use discretion and judgement before launching munitions.

Be able to 3D view object and terrain on editor, so you do not need to run the mission to see if you have putted correct the ground unit.This will have a lot of time in mission editing.

More about 2024 and Beyond. Iraq map (ED) Bagdad Airport. Norway Narvik zone Kola Map (Orbx) Maug island (Marianas WW2) 340 Nm north (ED) Yorktown Class / USS Enterprise / PTO Assets Pack (ED) AM6 Zero / AI) PTO Assets Pack (ED) New Dinamic Explosion Effects Afganistan map (ED) confirmed by Glowind Irak map (ED) Kola Map (Orbx) Irak map (ED) New Sa-6 AI (ED) Trees move affected by explosions Vapour effects affected by maneuvers / alierons Glowind WW2 shots video M1A2 Sep very detail model New AAA effects? New Raindrops and aircrafts affected by soundwake Kola Map

From Polychop discord:

The team are investigating internally. I dont have any news to share at the moment. thanks