Leaderboard

Phantom:

Just finished the configuration, working on textures now...

No, you're misinterpreting it, the only release date given is still winter 23/24. (Until end of March) As my attempt at a clarfication tries to say is that what Cobra meant is that the team is busy finishing off certain features to show those features off. He's not talking about the module in it's entirety. You can't just read "this week" and skip all the rest!

It is difficult to estimate when the mod will be available. There is still a lot of work to be done but I will keep you guys updated.

Hi CurrentHill The Russian and Chinese infantry are really indispensable in view of the many material additions you're offering us, and I sincerely think it's futile to believe that ED will be delivering mods as visually advanced as those you're offering us in the near future... in short: Please get them out! Thanks!

Check Six Top End Australia:

That is correct. It's the Type 056A Corvette.

A snapshot of the Type 056A firing a YJ-83 antiship missile...

Folks please keep the feedback constructive, I have asked the team to take a look at the moon light. thank you

Do you really believe the video intended to be historically accurate? No, it's for building hype as you said. As such, they made up a fake mission, in a fake conflict to show off the SEAD capabilities of the F-4E. How is that false advertising? The F-4E is perfectly capable of the mission set as shown in the video, whether it would have been technically classified as a Wild Weasel mission 50 years ago or not. We aren't in the 60s, 70s, or 80s anymore and like it or not, Wild Weasel has become the common term the majority of people associate with the mission depicted in the video. So they used the terminology people in general are familiar with. In other words they catered to the majority of their audience who is paying them by buying their aircraft. It doesn't matter that this particular squadron never did this in real life because DCS is a game! It's not real life and neither is the mission depicted in the video. Most of DCS is historically inaccurate anyways, with made up missions and conflicts, AI units from the wrong time period that fly like UFOs and see through terrain and clouds, aircraft missing weapons because they haven't been added yet, etc. It's pretty laughable to expect a marketing video to be a perfectly historical representation of an aircraft because that's not the goal of marketing a game. Heatblur is simulating the F-4E the aircraft, not making a documentary film on its real life usage. You've made your point that you dislike the video based on the historical innaccracies. That's fine and you're entitled to your own opinion, but the video wasn't made for perfect historical accuracy, it was made to advertise the DCS: F-4E module and show it performing the SEAD role. It did what it was made to do perfectly.

That doesn't take into account that the F-4E's at Spangdahlem carried Shrikes also in the Wild Weasel role or that every other F-4E could also carry Shrikes. (This doesn't mean that every aircrew was trained in Wild Weasel missions, just that the airframes were capable.) Were you at Spangdahlem? Did you personally know anyone that was? I knew several, not just my old crew chief. Lastly, you are beginning to bore me with your tunnel vision.

Your suggestion about returning to single assets has been received. I feel like I'm repeating myself every other day, but okay, here it is: I don't allow redistribution of my assets, for example by hacking them up and re-packaging them for further distribution. I make my assets for own entertainment, and release them for others to enjoy. If you don't enjoy my assets, you don't have to use them. I release my assets in country packs, which are maintained and updated regularly. There are more frequently asked questions answered at my site: https://www.currenthill.com/faq

^ It's all true of course, but I think in this case the video was not designed to aim at "low knowledge gamers" but more at people who are just not so "high horse"-obsessed/anal about rivet counting and procedures. Throughout all the DCS in it's current franken-form, with multiple unit and gameplay limitations and simplifications, we all have to use imagination a bit and make do with what we've got. More often than not, "close enough" is good enough, both in SP and MP missions. Can't be otherwise, because the only alternative would be no missions at all. So I'm fairly sure once the module releases, lots of people will still perform simplified "faux-Wild-Weasel" sorties with -E, 'cause we will never get a -G or any other "proper" WW airplane in DCS anyway.

You should be okay, it's around 7 GB unpacked at the moment, which probably becomes around 6 GB packed.

Right... i think ive arrived at a point where i cant really think of improving anything anymore. Ive redone the matte fraying edges on all markings so that they match the frayin where stencils lifted and left a more soft mark. before that it was just a uniform inner glow. also fixed the fug16zy morane antenna which was actually made out of wood. last thing ive done was to tint the used metal parts to represent different alloy batches. ill just take care of the silvering on the metal surfaces and then do few more 7./JG26 machines.

Mal unter uns Gebetsschwestern, wie kommt man auf den Trichter, dass, wenn man nur eine Aussage tätigt, ohne eine Frage zu stellen, man eine hilfreiche Antwort bekommt? Die gemachten Angaben sind in etwa so hilfreich wie die Aussage: "Ich habe gestern getankt, nun springt der Wagen nicht mehr an.". Gut, nun wissen wir 2 Dinge: 1. es wurde getankt 2. der Wagen springt nicht mehr an Man kann sich jetzt denken, anhand von Wahrscheinlichkeiten, dass 2. ein Problem sein muss. Was man aber weiterhin nicht weiß, aufgrund von einem massiven Mangeln an Informationen, weshalb das so ist. Ist es wirklich so schwer vernünftige Fragen zu stellen und vor allen Dingen ein Minimum an Informationen mitzuliefern, anhand denen man eine Analyse des Problems starten kann? Das Grafikartenupdate war ein BIOS Update, oder war es nur ein Update des Grafikkartentreibers? Aber lassen wir das, hat eh keinen Zweck so weiterzumachen. Also muss die Antwort 42 sein.

BO-105 Development Report During the last few months, the Miltech-5 team has been hard at work on developing a completely new set of functionalities for the BO-105 helicopter. Simulating helicopters is a long and complex endeavor, and throughout our journey the team has learned valuable lessons along the way. Development cycles often require taking a step back, and realistically assessing the needs and wants of the community. Your ever-increasing standards and expectations do not fall of deaf ears, and we have taken draconian measures to meet them. In concrete terms, this means we had to go back to the proverbial drawing board, take an honest look at what the team could realistically achieve with existing tech… and we concluded that we had to change the way we do things. We needed to set a new benchmark in terms of helicopter flight dynamics fidelity and more accurately simulate various aircraft systems, devices, and components. “MEDUSA” is the name of our own internal software framework, specifically built from scratch to better simulate realistic aircraft physics, including behavior according to their mass and properties. The traditional way to simulate a specific user action (for example, moving a switch in the cockpit) is to cause a chain of actions, which then are checked for all possible situations. Here is an example on how things were typically computed prior to using MEDUSA: Is electrical power available? Is the relevant circuit breaker pressed in? Is the device useable/undamaged? If all previous conditions are met, results of all connected devices are calculated. Hardware Devices The MEDUSA software considers individual devices/components as dynamic objects, which are in turn affected by environment arguments, and react accordingly. Any external change of arguments does not require a specific software module anymore. The reaction is an automatically computed result based on the combination of all device results. Electrical, fuel, hydro-mechanical and oil lubrication systems of the simulated helicopter are as close to an integrated 1:1 representation of the real helicopter as can be. One of the most critical physics models to get right is the rotor assembly. Each rotor blade is divided into 10 sectors. Each sector computes: Sector speed Sector lift Sector drag Sector momentum Sector centripetal forces All sector forces are added, which in turn affect the entire helicopter. The three images below show calculations in different situations. The green bars show the lift development, the red bars the induced drag. The first image has the collective in downmost position. The second image shows the collective raised 7 degrees upwards. The third image shows the collective raised in the uppermost position. This approach ensures that special situations like autorotation or blade stall are dynamically computed and affect the whole flight model. Special care was also taken to accurately model rotor blade stall, which can lead you into dangerous situations. If a helicopter is in a rapid descent (vertical velocity greater than 800 ft/min) with almost no forward movement, the inner blade sectors 1, 2 and 3 have a resulting angle of attack (AoA) greater than 18 degrees. This is partly caused by blade twist (8 degrees), collective position and the direction of streaming air caused by the abrupt descent. The physical position of the inner sectors affect the lift vector, which in this case is reduced to almost nothing) and the pilot has almost no possibility to recover. Why? Well, a natural reflex to decrease the decent rate would be to raise the collective further up… but the side effect of doing so further increases the blade angle, which is already stalling. The image below represents the stream of air in a blade stall situation. The beauty behind this concept is that the stalling blade is recognized as physical result by the rotor device software. In other news, the electrical and fuel supply systems are done. The turboshaft simulation still needs a bit more tuning since the modelling of the compressor and the combustion chamber are not quite where they need to be yet. The next step will be the integration of the gearbox and the rotor systems. In parallel, another team is working on integrating the module with the DCS SDK (Software Development Kit) interface. The Miltech-5 team has already shown the advanced stages of our photorealistic replica of the BO-105’s cockpit and helicopter body, but we thought it was important to share what goes on under the hood when it comes to systems, flight model and component interactions. The BO-105 is an exciting challenge, and we are very excited to share further upcoming features as we approach the finish line. We will keep you informed continuously about the development progress.

Incorrect. We're simply saying its something as gamers that we have to deal with because we can never have every variant for historical accuracy in every possible scenario. I would also put forth that you are the only one creating the tempest in a teacup. I will again quote part of the website that shows the history of the USAF at Spangdahlem AB in Germany and highlight the important part that you might have missed. The F-4E's could, and did, carry Shrikes for killing the radar sites and that is historically accurate. That is what makes them capable of performing the Wild Weasel mission. No one is arguing that a German training squadron was doing Wild Weasel missions.

I still can't see a problem with the video... Virtually everyone who is interested in the F-4 here in DCS knew that Heatblur offers an F-4E and not an F-4G. It was a cool promotional video. No more and no less.

According to the post on Discord, it will be released this week. https://f4.manuals.heatblur.se/f4e_manual.html

wip ... Native shape of 767 wing parts. This project is delayed, so publishing will come in the end of February or March ?

Currently it uses up a bit less than 5 GB ... myself, my SSD is almost full but given the choice between having more DCS assets to use on my missions, and having to upgrade my 1 TB drive to 2 TB (around US$ 100), I prefer to upgrade my hardware. Edit: This is my current storage status: the drive I'm concerned about is the unit C ... when the Kola Map cames out I will have to choose between upgrading the drive, or uninstalling the WW2 Maps while I immerse myself at Kola

The 20th TFTS was the German Air Force training squadron for the F-4F at George AFB (37th and 35th TFW) and Holloman AFB (20th FS, 49th TFW). They used the F-4E until the mid 90's when they then switched to the F-4F for their training missions. Having the capability to shoot an ARM does not a Wild Weasel make. Project Wild Weasel was started by the USAF in the 1960's to combat the new threat of Soviet SAMs and involved the modification of existing airframes to be able to detect, locate and suppress enemy SAM sites with specialized sensors/weapons. These aircraft with the nature of the missions, and the specialized sensor fits required aircrew with specialized training to be able to hunt down and suppress enemy SAM operators. These aircraft were given designations within the Wild Weasel program: Wild Weasel I was a modified F-100F Super Sabre Wild Weasel II were modified F-4C's (Early and unsuccessful) Wild Weasel III were F-105 F/G Thunderchiefs Wild Weasel IV were better modified F-4C's and, under Wild Weasel IV B, a pair of F-4D's Wild Weasel V was the F-4G In the time period represented in the video, the USAF had the F-4G Wild Weasel V. A bog standard F-4E from a non-weasel squadron, particularly a foreign operator training squadron, would not have had the Wild Weasel call sign as neither the crews nor the aircraft were trained/optimized for the role respectively. With the retirement of the F-4G, there are no more actual Wild Weasel Aircraft in the USAF. The confusion encountered seems to come from the modern use of the Wild Weasel call sign by the USAF. The Wild Weasel callsign in today's USAF refers to specially trained crews flying modern multirole aircraft performing the same mission as the crews of old who flew actual Wild Weasel aircraft. In the case of this video, the use of the Wild Weasel moniker is but a marketing ploy. It is designed to sell a product to low knowledge gamers.

That wil be the best gifts of the chinese new year holiday! thank you, my friend !

I'm Chill, just wanted to explain my process, no offense taken man, sometimes texting can cause this, as i'm not a native english speaker, pardon me if i was misunderstood, sometimes its difficult find a better way of saying things.

Second time I watched Pacific , I think it was on par with band of brothers. But I watched BOb annually. Masters of the air is something different. And I like it

2nd porno promo video released, manual released, it can't be far away

Mine arrived yesterday. I installed the counter balance kit which is amazing. The collective moves freely and smoothly with zero resistance. After using the base with clutches for 2 years I wasn't sure how much of an impact a counter balance kit could have however it's a huge improvement over the clutches. Onto the grip itself. It's great to have the proper grip with all the correct buttons. It is very plasticy though, the switches feel cheap, the cursor joystick alao feels quite fragile and for some reason calibrates off centre tried 4 or 5 times with the same result. The jettison switch covers feel a bit strange when you lift them up and they spring straight back down so I find to press the switch under them I've got to burrow my finger under the cover. Maybe that's what the real aircraft is like though. There is a little bit of wobble with it too it moves about half an inch left and right using a chair mount and extension plate. Everything is tightened but it's still a bit wobbly. I'll probably keep the grip as it does look really cool and as I tend to fly the Apache mainly having the grip is a plus. Compared to the other Virpil products I've got I find it a bit disappointing though

I apologize the response is reversed, a mistake in transfer of info from the team. You are correct. To the OP, this is a known issue and already reported. Sorry for the confusion.

GD F-100D progress update Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk

Another asset for the China pack, it's the PLZ-07 122 mm SPG.

Updated NX611 paint

So it's been ... a while since the last Scim update. Work has continued, mostly on the research side for the last couple of months, but a little 3D work here and there. As is the way with many DCS modding projects, it all takes much longer than one expects, and learning an entirely new way to do 3D, as well as working from some pretty questionable documentation has made this much more challenging. I've also been much busier with the unavoidable "real life" (which I am now quite convinced does exist and wasn't just made up to stop me practicing case III recoveries), and a couple of other projects which I've been splitting my time with to avoid burn-out. It's about a year since I started this project, and although I have definitely not progressed at the speed I had hoped, it's been a lot of fun so far. The Scimitar isn't going anywhere, but for the time being it's going on the back burner until I can get better 3D reference, be it more detailed plans or scans of models perhaps. I will be working on the cockpit here and there, and might even finish off the current 3D model for AI use only over the next couple of months (pretty pictures will of course be provided where appropriate). In the meantime I have a couple of other DCS mod projects that will be announced in due course so stay tuned in the forums and discord.

Hello, Coult it be posible to add by default the F1-B ,F1BD and F1-BQ liveries to the choices we have in the CoreMods folder ? Where F1-CE and EE have a lot of fictional liveries choices as CR, CT and EQ from a lot of locations, BE only have spanish and virgin ones. I know I can add them by myself but I would like to share them online as F1-CE and F1-EE Thanks !

Elitism at it's finest, errr worst.

I don´t get it - is it against the law to fly SEAD/DEAD missions in an F-4E in DCS, or is it the use of the "Weasel" callsign in the video that is the great heresy? Maybe SEAD is only Wild Weasel if it´s from the Wild Weasel region of Vietnam, else it´s just sparkling SEAD...

There are 2 ways to use the term wild weasel. 1. Relating to the specific aircraft in the wild weasel program (the only truly valid use according to you) 2. Wild Weasel is a code name given by the United States Air Force (USAF) to an aircraft of any type equipped with anti-radiation missiles and tasked with the suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD): destroying the radar and surface-to-air missile (SAM) installations of enemy air defense systems.[1][2] The video showed an F-4E doing SEAD/DEAD well with the second definition of Wild Weasel. The video says F4E not F4G. So you going full nuclear with: Is rather way way way beyond anything within reason.

Thank youuu, tried it with a couple of modules, all worked! Edit: Thanks, that AI option could be useful in the future! Now that I re-read it my question was unclear in that regard. I was specifically looking for that one trigger condition for the Player. Works like a charm, problem solved . You guys dropped this:

I'm integrating them more with every release, so it'll become even harder.

Yes this is correct; pretty much a direct quote from the aircraft weapons TO. And since nobody would let themselves get as far as actually locking up a threat and THEN going MASTER ARM, the Phantom Four Second Count will be the way to go. Or, you lock up, squeeze trigger, nothing happens, and after a few seconds yell <profanity> and select ARM. Congrats, you are well past the 2 second minimum.

Ну, МиГ-21бис в нынешнем состоянии даже по скидке покупать - выбрасывать деньги на ветер.

I'm afraid of how many teras the China pack will be

+1

Followed your instructions and tested it three times. It appears to be the solution. Thanks very much for your assistance.

I sort of did it first time too. Did not like Pacific first time. I expected Band of brothers. Then after watching Band of brothers some month ago I just continued with Pacific. And this time I really liked it. I do not know why. Masters of the sky impress me with the volume of air war stuff compared to non flying scenes. I expected a lot more non flying non combat focus. Somehow they pull this off better than twelve O’clock high

судя по этому видео раздница слабо заметна. может я что то не понимаю

People really WANT to worry…. Afaik, it wasn’t said a single word about mandatory updates. So why panic in advance? The question of MT/ST is slightly different. ED already emphasized a lot of times that ST is a dead horse and will be removed eventually. This happening in time with such a major update makes kind of sense - but nobody said so either, yet.

Why does this matter? Play DCS at your own pace. Don’t worry about what other players do. FWIW I feel I get more out of DCS by focusing on a few or even one module at a time and learning it very well.

Some old refueler photos