Leaderboard

I'm with GJS. If all you are doing is madly typing in coordinates and flying following a line, then you're missing all of the fun. That's why I'm so looking forward to the Phantom, it's going to go a long way towards weaning people off of the crutches, and perhaps, changing their mindset into one of a real world pilot. You can't count on the automation or the INS or even the TACAN. The dirty little secret that you are missing, is that flying an attack or recce run at low level using time, heading and ground speed is a BLAST! I'll probably put up a little paper are TARPS in the F14 forum shortly, on where to find how to do this, and some examples and tips. Otherwise, TARPS from stored point to point in a sim will be boring. Learning to navigate isn't difficult, and it unshackles you from electronics, which results in confidence of knowing that if it all gets taken down, you can still find your way to the target and get home. My guess is that I share a lot of the same, fond memories as G.J.S, sitting around a table, telling sea stories while mission planning with my mates. More later. F4 Learning Curve The F4 is going to be easy to fly for those who know how to fly a regular old airplane. It's easier to land than the F14, it doesn't have the trim changes that the Tomcat has with wing sweep and power inputs, and it has a superior attitude reference in the AJB-7 ADI. You can do a full aerobatic sequence referencing nothing but the ADI. We had a similar instrument, the AJB-3 in the TA-4J, and on a student's first flight in the aircraft, they performed a "squirrel cage" sequence, under the bag, in the back seat. Rolls, loop, half cuban eight, Immelmann, split-S. It's magnificent. The Phantom is going to be a ton of fun. Change your mindset, embrace basic flight tasks like trimming, which become second nature in mere minutes. The F4 is a very straightforward airplane. Everyone I know who flew it loved it.

Heatblur Simulation: GIBs assemble! Enjoy a few candid shots of the WSO's cockpit. There's nothing as fun as the rear, cozy cockpit of the F-4, with basically.. no forward visibility. Thanks McDonnell. Flying with a friend in VR? Beware of the vomit comet. The rear seat of the F-4 contains all of the controls and displays associated with the mighty APQ-120 radar. The WSO is also responsible for operating the Pave Spike TGP, as well as just being a general help and useful set of eyes for the pilot. You can of course fly the F-4 from the rear seat too; and WSOs would often fly the aircraft, and even assist rolling onto e.g. a bandit during a dogfight. Multicrew synchronization in our new next generation framework has been a key design goal of the last few years, and we're working hard to ensure all systems, instruments and the radar are well synchronized between both crew members in multiplayer. Just like the pilots' cockpit, we've tried to push as much detail in sculpting and texturing as our time and budget allows, and we hope you'll enjoy experiencing the F-4 from the back.

Thank you! I don't set release dates, but I can disclose that I'm doing final work on the last asset for this update. When that's done there's a testing phase before release. So we're getting pretty close.

Back in business.

They are indeed scrambling to get the F-4E over the finish line. And they actually communicated via Discord that they currently focus more or less their entire energy on that very goal. Also, they said that interaction with the community will be a bit less during that final push. That’s absolutely honest and okay. So, I think the best we can do at this point is to wait for the usual YouTubers to start releasing their videos in the very near future and meanwhile HB will do the magic in the background. I believe the next patch might probably make us very happy. And speaking of videos…I hope that a certain YouTuber (yes, the one who screwed up the F-15E startup vid) who yesterday uploaded a downright disgusting F-4E clickbait video will not get his hands on the F-4E pre-EA…

Did you ever pledged to CH? And even so, do you think that amount is remotely close to the big picture of effort and money put in? The only one mindlessness in here seems to be you, but hey, you are not the only one .... if you are interested in "only few add-ons", just build them by yourself and stop this non-sense. Is a free mod... take it or leave it... what's so hard!

The last asset for the updated China pack.

Jester will be able to leapfrog your flightplan on his own. The details of the interaction will be explained later on the manual.

Try this approach: through all the other modules DCS was able to grow a foundation worthy of the Phantom. If we had it earlier it might not have been as phabulous as it will be in 2 weeks (TM)

After some tests, the fuel flow of a clean aircraft is spot on, but it seems that the drag caused by the stores is a tiny fraction of what it should be: In the documentation, the relationship between the DI (Drag Index) and the fuel flow appears to be of the form ax + B For example, for 50,000 lbs, 520 KTAS, and 10,000 ft, the relationship appears to be close to: 10518 + DI x 73.875 A clean F15-E has a 21,3 DI and the FF is very close to the documented one but the coefficient of the variable linking the FF and the DI appears to be close to 74 in the documentation and 13 in the measurements taken in DCS. null Although I cannot validate all of this as I don't have enough time, I am certain there is an issue somewhere because in no configuration can I achieve a fuel flow requirement exceeding 15,000 lbs/hour for 60,000 lbs, 520 KTAS, and 10,000 ft, whereas I am supposed to have this result between 60 and 80 on the DI.

Dont use his Mods then, very simple. he makes them for himself, then is kind enough to release them to us.

Thanks again to those who answered my questions earlier about this headset. They helped me make the choice on whether to get the Q3 or stick with my Q2. I now have my Q3 and have been messing with it for a couple of hours, so it is perhaps time for me to contribute as well. My Setup: CPU: Ryzen 5 5600x ~4.3GHz. GPU: MSI AMD 6900XT, left as is with no intentional overclock Ram: 32gb Trident Z ~3000mhz. Motherboard: X470 Gaming plus by MSI Cable: Syntech 16ft USB 3.0 Primary Monitor: 3480x2160 (My DCS profile swaps it to 1920x1080) Secondary Monitor: 1920x1080 (Unused for DCS but still being rendered) For what it's worth, I got the 6900XT during the great GPU shortage (particularly for the copious VRAM) and I have yet to have issues with it in VR, same for the 5600X. I will be staying with AMD for the foreseeable future. Quest 3: -90hz @ 4128x2208 (Native) -Honzvr perscription lenses -APEXINNO silicone interface cover Quest 2: -90hz @ 3712x1872 (1.0 according to Oculus) DCS Settings: Performance Results vs Quest 2: No major difference. My desired FPS is 45 FPS locked without ASW, and so far this setup delivers, both on Caucasus and Syria. Neither the Mi-24, F-16 nor Mi-8 brought it consistently below this. It typically hovered around ~55 FPS when unlocked as I flew around Syria in a Hind on a local-hosted sandbox multiplayer mission. I was CPU bound the entire time according to the in-game FPS monitoring utility. Thoughts on the Quest 3: Worth it. Visuals: I am in perhaps the best circumstances for running it at the native resolution as I got my eyes checked the same day I ordered it and the lenses. I can read the F-16 MFDs reliably (except for small text like the bullesye numbers, which is a bit of a challenge.) The switches on the sides are a bit more difficult but are usually still legible. If not, a quick lean to one side solves the issue. My regular office, the front seat of the Hind, was similarly workable. I can clearly read the little charts on the right side with relative ease and the dials are a no-brainer. The CPG's weapon dial is a bit difficult (I can decipher the '30' but not the other letters for the store, for example). Something that I really want to emphasize is the edge-to-edge clarity the Q3 offers. I can read the contents of the right F-16 MFD while the headset is directly pointed at the left one. Hell, I can read the Oil Pressure gauge while looking at the left MFD! Interestingly, the edges almost seem clearer, though maybe that's my lenses. Absolutely not happening with the Quest 2. The days of looking directly at a particular switch and zooming in on it are thankfully over. So are the days of tilting the headset vertically in an awkward and never-ending quest to get the perfect angle on the CRT-looking lenses. The Honzvr lenses were themselves a big upgrade from glasses. I have a mismatched prescription but both eyes are in the negatives above -2.5 and I have astigmatism in one eye. Fitting my glasses in the Q2 headset was a big pain and I am very happy I don't have to worry about it anymore. Shipping to me in the central US took 5 days. I also ordered the optics cover for when I am not using the headset, eliminating the problem of dust settling on them. The Quest 3's dial for precise IPD adjustment is very handy. Comfort: I don't use aftermarket straps, the vanilla straps on both were sufficient for me. The Quest 3's do feel a bit more robust. The silicone face cover is a must for me, a greasy sponge being held against my face isn't very fun. My only real complaint with the Q3 is that its sidepieces go perhaps a further quarter-inch back than the Q2's, complicating the wearing of my Hyperx Cloud III. I had to angle the pieces a bit up to fit the ear cups over my ears, and it still could be better. This wasn't an issue with the Q2. If you are like me and use a wired connection I would strongly recommend that you loop a cable management strap around the strap of the headset and route your cable through that. It reduces the vertical stress on the port substantially and also keeps the cable off the side of your face. Note on Privacy: Remember that you can used windows defender firewall to block inbound and outbound connections to basically anything, including Quest software, and still use the headset once you have it initially configured. I set my headsets up using my phone's temporary hotspot so Meta never has access to my home's Wifi, disable the firewall rules so it can run updates, and then lock everything down again once I have everything good to go. I can then use it at my leisure for months on end without worrying about the mic and cameras next to me. I would encourage anyone that strictly uses their headset for DCS to do this. Conclusion: It was worth the cost for me. No matter what comes out next, I probably won't upgrade until I rebuild my PC. Even then I may just upscale it instead of buying a new model. It's simply good enough for me, and it would take a lot to make that next step up worth it.

why is this important enough to report?

Доброго времени суток всем! Давненько я не летал на Миг-21. И вот решил вспомнить что да как. Дабы не переоценить свои силы, решил начать с простого. Поставил в виде воздушной цели Боинг 747 (из цивильного мода). Подвесил пару ракет и полетел. Вышел на высоту 8000 м. Нашёл цель, сблизился при сигнале захвата пустил ракету. Не попал. Ладно бывает. 747-ой самолёт " не большой", можно и не попасть. Решил зайти ещё разок. Развернулся и.... больше догнать 747 на форсаже не смог! Скорость 747 была 550 км/ч. Специально посмотрел по F2.В итоге быстренько спалил всё топливо на догонном курсе, на форсаже и в азарте догонялок прозевал.когда оно кончилось. Соответственно мы вместе с Мигом упали и всё. Что это было!? Это что же за зверские двигатели на 747? Или наверное техники плеснули мне палённого керосина. Подумалось ещё, хорошо , что не поставил F-14 или 18. В них вообще крутые ребята сидят. В общем отставя весь юмор в сторону, скажу -грустно это и не правильно, чтоб уж так то. Какие то модули в любимцах, ТТХ у них как у летающих тарелок, а какие то, хоть и являются легендарными но задушенные и урезанные. Моё мнение- должно быть как было, не взирая на сторону и предпочтение. Но это лишь моё мнение. Какой смысл от весов, если на одну чашу класть много и постоянно, а на вторую абы кабы и когда придётся. Поставил 21 в ангар, авось когда найдётся техник грамотный, починит и восстановит историческую справедливость. Всем добра и здоровья! Можно не отвечать, ни к чему. Сам сим- восхитительный!

Some Targeting pod footage https://alert5.com/2016/08/10/planaf-j-10ah-with-kjdc01-targeting-pod-and-ls500j-lgb/ J-10a and early b used Sura

Reproduced with paid campaign Speed and Angels on NTTR, without supercarrier module but with the static tugs and deck crew. These seem to be the cause for the hangup for whatever reason. The end of the logs is always different. Months ago it was stuck on loading deck crew "tables." In some missions it's stuck on loading F-14A properties, in this one CH-47 properties, in others I've seen UH-60 properties. The only foolproof method of fixing it is to remove all static tugs and deck crew, however this is not possible with payware campaigns. dcs.log

Bei einem Video, dessen Titel („DCS F-4E Phantom II Release Prep! | Dive Toss Dumb Bomb Delivery!“) ganz klar auf den ersten Blick suggeriert, dass gezeigt wird, wie man diese Taktik in einem Modul, auf das extrem viele Spieler sehnlichst warten angewandt wird und man nach dem Aufruf erst erkennt, dass es mit der Mirage 2000 gezeigt wird? Ja, kann man definitiv so sehen.

Which weather combos are your favourite ones? Selecting none, height 2500 m, thickness 2500 m and density 3-4 brings awesome experience. Once I managed to make 2-layer altocumulus or stratus type 3 or 4 and never before had such feeling of depth. Bandit mate, outstanding job!

Crewman is already gender neutral. Crew refers to the entire group. Crewman is one member of the crew. Lets talk about cockpit next.

The 11711 landing ship has plans to make it,I don't have a ready-made 3dmax model for the 1174 landing ship, so I haven't considered making the 1174 model

1) yes, the system can interface with dcs repair if desired 2) planned for later, especially for dynamic campaigns 3) definitely something we plan to add, but likely after initial release :)

Digital Combat Simulator Black Shark 2024.02.04 - 04.08.18.0125 - Trim1.mp4 Turret aim by mouse input, turret slewing works with headtrack and VR point of view and key input too. Animations will come after i got a few things sorted, like the boresight and maybe a ccip indicator. null

Yes, absolutely! On launch you can use the arg system for this, but later on we will offer all ethnicities- super important for us.

Heya, just trying to figure out whether this is the current expected behavior, and whether it's intended to be final. When you use the SLAM and SLAM-ER missiles on the Hornet, they do the sensible thing and point towards the target area when they're in the terminal phase. FWIW the following is with special settings as MITL Control Mode Traction, TDC Deadzone 0, DL Pod TDC Slew Rate 1, and 25 curve on my throttle's analog ministick, throttle is STECS. By contrast the CM-802AKG seems to be flying level, regardless of whether you select skim or pop-up as the terminal guidance type (probably doesn't work on purpose, being just a carryover from the anti-shipping missile days). If you're medium or high, you need to crank down the nose of the missile MASSIVELY to point at the target, and during the maneuver you basically lose all visibility. Just kinda gotta hope you can reacquire the target afterwards, and that you were pointing in the right direction overall (which thankfully is at least usually the case). Is this expected behavior? Something to be fixed? The TDC controls are also a bit weird. You need a LOT of input to create any movement (there's a huge deadzone), and then it turns very quickly, so getting it to accurately point at a target is quite challenging. In addition if you let go of the TDC input quickly (like if you were to flick the stick, for example), the input doesn't always center properly, so you can end up with the missile constantly veering to the side after inputs. So all in all you when you get control you: Can't see the target without cranking the nose down (unless you're flying very low level and are lucky), which makes you temporarily blind, and you have no guidance on how much you need to point down You have a huge deadzone to start with, so you wanna push the stick quickly to get past it If you do that, you'll very easily run over the slower section of the input range, making tiny corrections really difficult Even if your input is very gentle, the minimum amount of movement is quite a lot, so it's hard to prevent turning too much If you just let go of the TDC and let the stick snap to center on spring pressure, the TDC won't always center properly, and the missile will keep veering to the side This "minimum input is really high" problem doesn't happen with the radar, TGP or any other sensor for that matter, AND it doesn't happen when the CM-802AKG is set into "Designate" MITL Control Mode. I can move the seeker around with ease and accuracy using that mode. It's however a bit iffy when used from high altitude, since the dive down problem still exists, so you do want to be low down to use it. Again, expected behavior? Something to be fixed?

Heatblur Simulation: GIBs assemble! Enjoy a few candid shots of the WSO's cockpit. There's nothing as fun as the rear, cozy cockpit of the F-4, with basically.. no forward visibility. Thanks McDonnell. Flying with a friend in VR? Beware of the vomit comet. The rear seat of the F-4 contains all of the controls and displays associated with the mighty APQ-120 radar. The WSO is also responsible for operating the Pave Spike TGP, as well as just being a general help and useful set of eyes for the pilot. You can of course fly the F-4 from the rear seat too; and WSOs would often fly the aircraft, and even assist rolling onto e.g. a bandit during a dogfight. Multicrew synchronization in our new next generation framework has been a key design goal of the last few years, and we're working hard to ensure all systems, instruments and the radar are well synchronized between both crew members in multiplayer. Just like the pilots' cockpit, we've tried to push as much detail in sculpting and texturing as our time and budget allows, and we hope you'll enjoy experiencing the F-4 from the back.

We need the F-16A with the old cockpit and small tail. It could be sold as a different module, since it's a very different aircraft from what we have. Fox 2 only, but truly the best dogfighter of its time, and, hilariously enough, could load 6xMERs on both inboards (of course, it didn't have a whole lot of gas if it did that).

https://www.roadtovr.com/steamvr-vision-pro-controller-support-ivry/

Type 056 corvette (NATO reporting name: Jiangdao-class corvette) maybe?

You could go “old Skool” and do it the way it was actually done? Piece of paper and a pen. Or go with Heatblur’s own - scribble relevant must need things on your canopy. The tools are there - some in sim - some real world.

This seems related to the Sim PostStart bugs posted in the 2.9 crash forums as well, as myself and others have this same behavior only with supercarrier and/or related static tugs and deck personnel. These are all the same/similar issue, perhaps a merge is in order? With all the threads separate I notice different troubleshooting methodologies in each which might make it harder to find the solution. Thread 1 Thread 2 Thread 3 Thread 4 Thread 5

But do you really want to wait and be teased and Irritated by endless previews, progress updates, peoples I wants and then debates/discussions that get heated? Id rather see an end point to modules that have been in use for years which are still classed as "early access" this also reflects on what is currently happening with new modules in development. Finish up and sign off what we have in a priority order. Every new update brings new bugs to old modules [that are still classed as early access] which is a constant frustration to a lot of people, 2024 should be a year where this sim and its modules are squared away, finished, completed and maybe give us a years break or more to further enjoy the sim at a stabilized point. Nothing against development and progression here but maybe ED can do this in the background and only launch it when its fully ready and will integrate into the sim without any bounce back on or to finished modules?

Hey @BIGNEWY Yes i will do later, I'm reinstalling the server right now If the problems persist after this, I will post everything you need. not all aircrafts have a dsync. And on other servers i have dsyncs, and on others not and we play: Pretense Dynamic campaign 1.6.2 Server specs: at the moment Vserver 8vCpu ram 16 gb 400 Gb HDD (i know maybe, thats the problem) but with this specs all works fine, no problems, after days we have dsyncs. i send the logs later. thx BIGNEWY | ED

I'd buy a F-16A, 15A, 18A "downgrade" even though I have the current modules. Weapon restrictions can solve the problem even right now, more or less, but of course that is not perfect.

Ich würde Spudknocker clickbait mit diesen Video vorwerfen...

I won't lie. The Belsimtek Phantom was a heart breaker. I've waited for a decent Phantom combat simulation since Chuck Yeager's Air Combat Simulator. Knowing that it is so close now, it's a combination of enthusiasm, frustration, anxiety and hopium. I guess with this length of time waiting for something like the F-4E to happen, the naval bird really isn't that far off either. A handful of years.

Suggested from discussion in another thread: A request to change the SATNAV option to enable more options and make it more intuitive. Specifically to allow it to work independent of coalitions and for more than two coalitions for future expansion of the sim. Quick example:

Thanks for taking the time. I understand the argument, I don't say I agree (don't think anyone cares), 30 meters of precision seems a lot to me no matter how bad the GPS is. Even more so with such unverifiable aspects as GPS guided accuracy of eastern world countries. Maybe if BLUE is 5m, then make RED it 10m or 12m, I don't know, but 30m, 40m even 50m seems like much. It is worse than dumb bomb level flight release from 20.000ft. Be sure to stick this report on the refrigerator door because it will surely be a constant complaint XD. Thanks again for the time.

Really ?!?!?

That doesn't reconcile one bit with eagles practicing treetop level cruise missile intercepts, or their attack on (unfortunately friendly) helicopters or the fact that that Mi-24 (or 8, whichever) was tracked in A/A from 50nm until the moment it was bombed (they were ready to attack with an AIM-9, but switched to bombs after they slaved the pod to the radar and realized the heli was on the ground)

Mine's here.The quality issue is overblown, imo (and I'm very fussy about this). An extra 10% GF would have made it look and feel better but it's fine, it doesn't creak or flex. My main complaint is that the two-way hats are very sloppy. (other than the usual of virpil adding press to hats that are not shaped or positioned for it to work ergonomically but that's not hard to eliminate)

There's probably no need for STT, but this not sure that this is worth discussing. You're basically looking for a slow moving Vc jammer You can get this off a hit, and display the classification; I have seen radar plots (not kinds we're used to) showing the main body return and the rotor return, and you could similarly classify prop planes as well. This is all about processing. The moment you get a digital processor the likelihood that you can distinguish certain things goes up tremendously - detecting moving vehicles is just a matter of them going fast enough to be out of the notch gate.

Gib mir diese Feder und ich zeige dir wie ich sie verbiege!

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.

Updated NX611 paint