Leaderboard

Sadly, I had no F4 time. Between the Reserves and Fleet, there were maybe six Navy Phantom squadrons left when I got to Oceana. VF74 and 103 finally transitioned to the F14 during my first deployment. Throughout my career, there were lots of former F4 drivers around, almost all of the Fleet CO/XOs had flown them in combat in SEA. Lot's of wisdom, lots of sea stories that had you on the edge of your seat. My primary instructor in Advanced Strike in the TA4J had flown F4's in combat as well, and was also a former test pilot. Very serious and demanding, but fair. He helped my career a lot, probably got me into fighters, but I don't know for sure. The A4 and F4 had similar instruments, which you will find very user friendly compared to the VDI in the Tomcat. My reserve squadron had transitioned from F4's to F14's six months or so before I showed up. Also, VFMA-112 was sitting across the ramp which gave us plenty of engagements and cooperative flying as well using the F4S. The biggest issue we had with the F4 guys initially was getting them to recalibrate the speeds for maneuvers. The Phantom needed about a hundred to a hundred and fifty knots more for similar maneuvers. First time we went to the ship for a mini workout, our CO was "holding" waiting for our Charlie Time overhead the ship at around 350 knots, lapping all of the Tomcat guys sauntering at the normal ~230KIAS Max Conserve. After having to dodge him a couple of times, somebody finally came up on squadron tac and said, "Hey Skipper, slow down, this isn’t an ACM engagement!" The most memorable F4 pilot I had the pleasure of meeting was CDR Ralph Gaither, who spent seven and a half years in Hoa Lo Prison in Hanoi after being shot down as a 23 year old Ensign in VF84. In 1965, he was flying Phantoms off of USS Independence, shot down, and wasn’t released until 1973, right before turning age 31. When I met CDR Gaither he was CO of DWEST Survival School in Pensacola. At the time, was a 23 year old Ensign as well, who suddenly realized that all of my problems seemed awfully small. When he walked into a room, everyone snapped to, and you could hear a pin drop. He also was the humblest, happiest guy I ever met in the USN. I don't think that he ever had a bad day. Right before I got to VF84, the squadron had sent him a plaque, because he had never received the traditional farewell swag after he was shot down. He passed away in 2019. http://veterantributes.org/TributeDetail.php?recordID=71 Hopefully this provides a little motivation and perspective. You're going to love the Phantom when it drops.

No money has exchanged hands so they owe nothing. For all I care, they could be developing it in secret and only announce when it’s ready for sale.

Everyone at ED and HB is doing everything they can to make sure it's ready for all of you, which can take more time than planned. When we have a more solid idea of when it will come we will share for sure. I do not think it will be long now, although I know the wait is painful. We appreciate everyone's patience no matter how thin it's stretched right now. Thanks.

I know its hard, but I think as with all of HB's offerings, it will be worth the wait.

It's been a long time since there have been any posts about the La-7. Just curious if it's already been submitted to ED for evaluation...

The main problem people have with fps right now (I'm strictly talking 2D here - VR is a different topic), is expectations. DCS only has a general fps problem when you try to run top tier gfx setting with less than top tier gpus. In that case you're right - vulkan won't change that much. And it doesn't need to, because you can set up DCS right now on almost any (reasonable) hardware to run 60+ fps. But right now this experience isn't consistent through all scanarios maps and aircrafts. There are more or less frequent bottlenecks, where the otherwise good frame rate tanks due to asset-streaming/AI-computing/weather-computing/whatever. And this is where vulkan (and MT for that matter) will alleviate the strain and produce a more fluid experience. At least this is my understanding. Vulkan will not magically produce 90 fps where now is 60, but will help to loosen those clocked bottlenecks. And comming full circle to VR. VR is a build in bottleneck for the same reasons and will therefore (hopefully) benefit in the same way.

Yes, yes and yes. It takes a while since I'm a one-man-band, but I still think I'm getting stuff out pretty quickly. I've added 17 new assets this year alone, and I have a total of 173 assets released and maintained.

I think I would be right in saying that there isn't ever module launches during a sale... so...

New engine pylon and flap track fairings' 3d models are added.

ah this again @BIGNEWY... I can't remember if it was yourself( @Reflected) or BD who put out the poll about why people don't buy or engage in campaigns as much anymore ... but this is likely a reason ... not angry ... just frustrated ...

Take it for whatever you want. If it makes you happy to be pissy, to be happy with a garbage attitude, go be happy. You can go be happy somewhere else.

Trust me, while the fix Fury provided made the Ford almost acceptable looks wise no one more than me would like a better looking ship . I can't make any promises but there are efforts being made to get a better model for the Ford. But it could be six months or six years at this point. When I was asked to help out with the FORD mod I was under the incorrect impression that the textures could be improved rather easily. This misunderstanding was mostly do to my complete ignorance of 3d modeling. But for me this model/texture combo was only for development purposes. But all the feedback about how the ship actually WORKS is invaluable. The somewhat dedicated mod team of me, myself and I can only test and think up so many scenarios . So if the code ever really gets solid I MAY, repeat MAY, be able to get someone that can help on the model end. Because If I have to learn the modeling stuff myself (which I am slowing working on) we are looking at the 6 year part of the time frame I mentioned earlier. And thanks again to all those that have helped out or showed any interest Also I have deleted the download link. I will post a new version with some code updates shortly

SkyEye is a Ground Controlled Intercept (GCI) bot. It is an advanced replacement for the in-game E-2, E-3 and A-50 AI aircraft SkyEye is a substantial improvement over the DCS AWACS: SkyEye offers modern voice recognition using a current-generation AI model. Keyboard input is also supported. SkyEye has natural sounding voices, using a neural network to synthesize speech instead of robotically clipping together samples. SkyEye adheres more closely to real-world brevity and procedures instead of the incorrect brevity used by the in-game AWACS. SkyEye supports a larger number of commands, including PICTURE, BOGEY DOPE, DECLARE, SNAPLOCK, SPIKED , and ALPHA CHECK. SkyEye intelligently monitors the battlespace, providing automatic THREAT, MERGED and FADED callouts to improve situational awareness. SkyEye uses Speech-To-Text and Text-To-Speech technology which can run locally on the same computer as SkyEye. No cloud APIs are required, although cloud APIs are optionally supported. It works with any DCS mission, singleplayer or multiplayer. No special scripting or mission editor setup is required. You can run it for less than a nickel per hour on a cloud server, or run it on a computer in your home running Windows, Linux or macOS. SkyEye is production ready software. It is used by a few public servers and many private squadrons. Based on download statistics, I estimate over 100 communities are using SkyEye, such as: - Flashpoint Levant - Victor Romeo Sierra - DCS ANZUS SkyEye is free software. It is free as in beer; you can download and run it for free. It is also free as in freedom; the source code is available for you to study and modify to fit your needs. DCS ANZUS has made a nice demo video showing the bot in action: Learn more: Check out the README and FAQ for an introduction Read the Player Guide to learn more about what the bot can do Read the Admin Guide to learn how to deploy it alongside your DCS server. The admin guide also includes quick-start guides to run it on a Windows server using OpenAI Platform, on an Apple Silicon mac, or on a Linux cloud server.

Good to see you guys keeping our morale up...indeed, this is greatly appreciated. Thank you.

JFC... yet another of those threads...

CHANGELOG: v1.4 - Applied ED's new textures (03/2024).

No, Amman has recently been added! To my utmost surprise I may add. Al Azraq AB was requested by several people, including me, but I never expected Ugra to also add this massive city. There have been some complaints in the past in regard to lack of bug solving and response (ahum... kneeboard.. ), but imo Ugra redeemed themselves. This last update was truly impressive if you ask me.

Can you send me a link in DM to any Jira report or Internal Tester report you might have made on this and we can make sure it gets some attention? Thanks.

Exactly, and believe me it's just as frustrating for us too. We work months, sometimes years to give people a great experience, only to learn that no matter how hard we work on setting these missions up, to make sure they work, well, they just may not work at all due to the way the MT engine is set up. If I sell something I need to be able to guarantee that it works. Period. And I understand that this is not an easy one to fix, but it has been in public release for the past 15 months. 15.

We don't know, but given the Phantom is coming and fuze customization is already in, we'll probably get it someday.

This has been fixed, and the fix will be included in the upcoming USA asset pack update.

Nope, I was patient in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and two and a half months in 2024. I'll wait for the Hellcat... It is better on carriers and perhaps more iconic. I won't reward developers who show this kind of contempt for the community. This F4U-1 is the very last plane I would ever buy.

No night gloves on Soviet / Rusian FC-3 aircrafts. No plans by ED about a P-38 or il-2 module

Давайте без лишних фантазий. В реальности на самолетах ГС ночных очков не было. Ни на одном.

Last update before release. Hopefully I can get this thing out of my life by Monday. I think I've hunted down every damn rivet head I can think of. It was miserable. I just have to finish up the pilot textures, and then find one more part on the tail, and after that, I'm calling it good. I'll probably create a quick olive drab one too, just for fun. Enjoy! null

This is a matchbox A-7D from the seventies.

I'll perhaps give it a look and retroengineer it for the mavik. We'll see.

Yes there are a number of things you can do, dropping shadows, lowering of the view distance and others will all help but you shouldn't need to. If you can fly between the buildings of Dubai, Cairo, London or Paris on other maps and hold 60fps, then you should be able to fly over a small farm and trees on otherwise empty terrain on South Atlantic too. On the same note if I can have a silky smooth ride low over the buildings of Rio Grande and Rio Gallegos, I cant see why I have a stuttering mess flying up a random valley near Ushuaia where there is nothing but trees? Puzzling

"When some wild-eyed, eight-foot-tall maniac grabs your neck, taps the back of your favorite head up against the barroom wall, and he looks you crooked in the eye and he asks you if ya paid your dues, you just stare that big sucker right back in the eye, and you remember what ol' Jack Burton always says at a time like that: "Have ya paid your dues, Jack?" "Yessir, the check is in the mail."

I think BIGNEWY already answered that. In fact you can still use the updater commands to switch between stable and openbeta, not that there is any point in doing so.

No, only some of the subforums have the option "mark as solution". http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-detail-engine.htm

Thanks @BIGNEWY I know they will work hard to find what I am sure is a difficult to track down problem. As I am sure you are aware these quite sophisticated campaigns rely on this to deliver their immersive storytelling, and this sort of bug significantly undermines the value that they have

I will bring it up with the team again but it is a difficult issue that can not be reproduced on demand.

I think the OP is asking for a few emergency service units to be added to the core game (a wish I wholeheartedly support btw). You are probably talking about an unofficial user made mod. (there's some true mod gems out there, for sure. But many of us stopped using mods all together, as they can cause trouble/errors after official DCS updates and require troubleshooting to fix afterwards)

Sorry, I apologise. That was a mistake on my part. It was an article I read a long time ago and I got it mixed up with the AIM-9L and PL-5E comparison. So I went back and found that article and read it again. It only stated that: "The A variant is an improved variant with greater range and more powerful warhead. The improved seeker head requires the guidance of the fire-control radar of the aircraft only during the final stage of the flight. The B variant is also known as PL-11-ARM. This is an active radar-homing derivative of the A variant, with an AMR-1 active radar-homing seeker developed by the 607 institute."

Just wanted to drop here to give a note of thanks! Refelcted, your campaigns are masterpieces with the perfect balance of action, skill, leisure time just flying and "preparing" for what's ahead. Of course, if the pilot spends 15 minutes crossing the Channel, and, when faced with the enemy, dives from 18.000 feet to 2.000 feet expecting compression not to kick in and die a miserable death, it's not the designers fault! Honestly, I have flown a lot of your missions, but today I tried mission 7 or 8 from BNBOF for the first time in VR! It was a blast. I enjoyed it immensely, and I scored 120 points of enemy planes downed, which is a first for me, so I'm extra happy. Not so much with my subpar landing, but a 100 score to finish it is a true gift to inaugurate the new VR headset. Again, just wanted to drop a line of thanks! Looking forward to the new campaigns in the upcoming map. Best regards, Rafa.

Off to the last big issue, the controller. I bet that will take a little longer. Not necessarily the wiring but rather the adjustment / synchronization of the axis and stuff.

Hi all, Do you know if ED plans to release MK 82 bombs with an extended fuse? Thank you M.

i hope one of them would be F-35 family

Ja das kann ich nachvollziehen vorallem in der A8. Hab kürzlich erst die Horrido Kampagne durch und die Anton ist einfach was sie ist - wohl realsitisch simuliert. Ne Spit hab ich nur 1x im flyby erwischt, Mustangs wenn sie dumm, abgelenkt und beschäftigt waren. Ansonsten biss sich auch mal die ganze Staffel (ich und 4 A8 KIs) an 1 Mustang die Zähne aus, da diese einfach stieg und keiner mehr hinterher kam. Ne P47 ist aber ihre Kragenweite und die Bomber Nein, hab ich so schon lange nicht mehr erlebt. Da hat sich einiges getan. Ist aber auch ne Glückssache was man trifft und es scheint mir wirklich sehr gut simuliert. Bei der oben genannten Spit z.B. brauchte es nur den einen flyby. Ich hatte die verschiedensten Schadensbilder wärend der Kampagne. So kam es vor, dass ich durchlöchert über den Kanal zurückkehrte, dabei dem Öldruck beim absacken zusah um kurz vor den Flugplatz erfolgreich einen auf Segelflieger zu machen. Oder ein andermal nach England flog um mir dort bei Ankunft gleich paar gefährliche Schüsse durchs Cockpit einzufangen um sofort in Schnappatmung überzugehen um schließlich übern Jordan, anstatt dem Ärmelkanal heimzukehren. Das fühlte sich alles sehr stimmig und realistisch an.

Perhaps not in 2D, but for VR it will be a game changer simply because the game engine will no longer be required to render every frame from scratch twice: it will be able to skip a few steps for the 2nd “eye”, if that makes sense. Say if it can skip 50% of the render steps taken, instead of 100% for 1 eye + 100% for the other it would be 100% + 50%. That’s already a very substantial boost right there. Also, MT should work quite a bit better with Vulkan than it does with DX11, especially when it comes to scaling on large core count CPUs.

yes, it will be based on black shark 3. the number of people is small) there is a link to discord at the beginning of the topic. the video presentation will be coming soon)

Hello all, Just wanted to bring attention to the latest version of this Mod, v1.2, released just a few days ago, you can get it here: https://github.com/BAAS-Dynamic/DCS-SK60-Mod/releases it looks really nice, wish there were a way to have it spawn with the ladder and chocks already in place. Eduardo

Я заменил крутилку под большой палец - у неё малый диаметр, ребра режут, неудобно. Моделька лежит в ветке по 3Д печати, может кому пригодится. Эту вертеть удобно - диаметр колеса увеличен и палец легко крутит за выступ. Как видите по названию, 5-й вариант (экспериментировал с разными формами образующей, рёбрами - пока не понял, что надо просто добавить выступ для пальца).

No period.. Turbulences in DCS are just like a very small area and altitude like 600m that's about it.. in RL when you fly through mountains.. valleys etc you really feel them even to a much high altitude until you are high enough for smoother.. Many pilots are avoiding areas of fear or uncomfortable .. DCS alas feel dull. has nothing todo with aircraft performances but the weather atmospheric that is almost inexistent .. alas .. if they work on it it would be the great ! but not now. But it is true that in DCS those external reactions are disconnected on VR.. felp more visually on 2D and it need to be addressed more emergently than a missiles reaction at 500 miles away.

FlyingIron Simulations

Yes, the project may take years to develop for all the reasons some have mentioned... posting some updated information takes about a minute. This topic is nine years old and 48 pages long. When was the last time the developers posted any information? The contempt is the non-communication.

So it's now been 10 months since this response about this bug, you've missed a few updates which is fine all things considered but this is a pretty big bug to have unaddressed for 10 months. Pretty concerning behavior especially given how aggressive your Roadmap timing is. Simply put, we need communication. When can we expect a single line of text on the changelog?

The issue you mention regarding inputting the opposing teams IFF codes is a non-issue, as it is fully realistic. No pilot should be flying with Mode 1, 2, 3/C or any other unencrypted transponder mode when entering combat. That's why Mode 4 and similar systems were developed who give encrypted responses and only respond if provided with the correct key, to avoid responding to hostile interrogations. Simply give both teams different encryption keys and the problem is solved. However, Mode 1, 2 and 3/C is still used by the military and it is impossible to fly according to real world procedures and tactics without these modes, hence why they should really be implemented into DCS Core, and not just for certain third-party aircraft.

The devs have the ability to replay multiplayer tracks from clients. This is how many of the datalink issues that were found in development were ironed out in multiplayer testing before such features were released. It is of course preferable to have short tracks since the time of the devs are a valuable resource that would otherwise be spent on the module itself versus running through a set of extremely long tracks trying to figure out what specific variable is causing the issue and when it occurred in the mission. @Floyd1212, on several occasions we have spent several hours in multiplayer testing amongst ourselves trying to reproduce this erroneous NAK behavior without success; this is why we are asking for tracks in the hope that we can find some yet-to-be-discovered variable that may have been inserted into the simulation that is causing this issue for the original poster of the thread. We understand that a persistent bug can be frustrating when players want to play the game and enjoy themselves. However, the implication that ED does not perform our own testing to seek reproduction and resolution of issues, or that we ignore bug reports altogether, is also personally frustrating given the amount of investment in testing that does in fact occur.