Leaderboard

Dear all, with our sincere apologies for both the late update and delay: Unfortunately, and with a heavy heart, we had to decide for a delay for the DCS: F-4E Phantom II release. We prepared a detailed update for you, if you would like you can read up on it here: https://store.heatblur.com/blogs/news/of-delays-and-silence Furthermore we prepared an in depth, regular development update for you all, to bring you up to speed about the state of the module, as is, on what remains to be done, and what is already complete: https://store.heatblur.com/blogs/news/of-delays-and-progress-part-ii Finally, we would like to share the long awaited EPISODE III of our Phantom video introductions, regarding Navigation in the F-4E Phantom II this time. Thank you all for your amazing support and extermely kind patience in these past few weeks. Your Team Heatblur

In real life deutet jetzt der Einsetzer der Staffel auf den ops desk, wo ein großer Zettel befestigt ist - mit der Aufschrift “Stop whining!”

I say thanks for the detailed and honest explanation and that I am very happy to wait, although dissapointed. However, I am disgusted by the attitudes and negative comments I have come across regarding this, honestly, some people are like spoilt kids. Its simple really, if you dont like the idea of paying something before you get it, then dont, wait until release. to me, paying a pre order is a show of support for the developers, and if we did not support and encourage them, we would not have the excellent modules we all love to fly so much. So please ignore the cry babies and bitchers, and we look forwards to the module when it releases.

Soo... pretty solid proof that the DCS forums aren't a jet engine then.

So you’re dripping in cash but bitching about spending money on a pre release piece of software that has no release date set…. Good decision.

USS Lewis B. Puller FPS Lag Update. USS Lewis B. Puller lag issue number #2 has been resolved. I had to break up the collision model into five parts. I guess the game engine reads large AI mod files differently. Honestly, not sure why it happens. Below is the FPS I received in the AH-64 after I updated the ESB collision model. FPS was 117 and higher as seen in the top right corner of the screen. Goetsch, I will send you the updated collision model for testing. Please share your results with the Forum. After, you share your results. I will release ESB Collision Model update 1.0.2. Thank you. If interested, I use an app called Frameview by Nvidia to test the FPS on my PC. The link is below. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/technologies/frameview/

Die Meinung kannst du natürlich gerne haben, aber das ist schon hart an der Grenze zu übler Nachrede (bin den Text gerade am Schreiben als Hiob den gleichen Gedanken hat ). Wobei ich Heatblur nicht so einschätze, dass sie für unbedachte Äußerungen enttäuschter Kunden gleich mit dem Rechtsanwalt kommen. Die Sache ist, man kann es nie allen Recht machen. Hier im Forum haben sich Viele gewünscht, die F-4 käme schon früher raus, auch wenn sie noch nicht fertig ist und/oder Fehler enthält. Persönlich halte ich das für einen unsinnigen Move für einen Entwickler, weil dann halt ein paar Leute Glücklich sind mit dem was sie haben, während der Rest die Kommunikation gar nicht liest und sofort Videos raushaut, wie verbuggt der erste Release ist und es so aussehen lässt, als wären dem Anbieter seine Kunden komplett egal und es ginge nur darum, mit halbfertigen Produkten Geld zu scheffeln. Ich hatte auch schon Projekte, wo ich eine Woche vor dem Release Bauchschmerzen hatte, aber der Überzeugung war, das kriegen wir hin! Wird eine stressige Woche und ist noch mehr zu tun als zu diesem Zeitpunkt geplant, aber wenn jetzt nicht noch unerwartete Probleme auftauchen, können wir den geplanten Termin halten. Was passiert 5 Tage später? Klar, es tauchen unerwartete Probleme auf, und wenn man dann mal ganz realistisch in sich reinhorcht, wäre es schon echt cooler, nicht einfach den Termin um eine Woche nach hinten zu schieben, sondern vielleicht lieber 4 Wochen, und davon erstmal einen Tag Schlaf nachholen und mal was anderes machen als gestresst auf den Monitor starren und die ganze Zeit die Uhr im Nacken zu haben. Also, will uns Heatblur hier abzocken und noch schnell mit einem verschobenen Release Kohle scheffeln (was ist das überhaupt für eine Logik?!) oder lieber die erwartbaren Reaktionen hinnehmen und zusehen, dass sie mit etwas Verspätung ein sauberes Produkt abliefern? Muss wohl jeder für sich selbst entscheiden, wie man das sieht. Aus meiner Sicht hat Heatblur noch nie einen geplanten Termin gehalten und liegt mit den ersten Schätzungen gerne mal Monate daneben, wenn nicht mehr. Und am Release-Tag sind alle begeistert über die extrem hohe Qualität. 4 Wochen später sind immer noch alle total begeistert, weil man dann Zeit hatte, sich das Produkt im Detail anzuschauen und klar wird, dass die extrem hohe Qualität nicht nur an der Oberfläche besteht, sondern sich durch das gesamte Produkt durchzieht und da wirklich überwältigend gute Arbeit geleistet wurde. Ich wüsste keinen Grund, warum es bei der F-4E anders werden sollte.

Unfortunately, a business is driven by money and not by thoughts and prayers. Myriads of successful kickstarter campaigns beg to differ... In the end, the key aspect of pre-ordering is: It's voluntary. If you don't like the inherent risk - don't do it.

I enjoy using the voice chat and I hope it gets even more uptake across the community. Having used it with a few other people, including some for the first time, I have a little feedback about the GUI in Lobby, as I think it makes things a bit confusing. Lobby mode is a real strength to DCS and something that SRS doesn't really provide. The switch at the top for mic/PTT/off should follow the same colour coding as the radio mode for ready/off/transmit/receive. Push to talk should also have PTT in the label, again for parity with the radio mode. The green radio antenna icon for switching into lobby mode, should be removed completely and replaced with a sliding switch that says "Lobby" and "Radios". Everybody seems to look at this symbol as a connected/not connected indicator. Each room should be a separate box, just like the radios. Each box should have a small button that says "join" and when joined it can say "current" and the whole box can be a brighter colour. Again like the radios. This would of course be in addition to the persons name being listed in that room but some don't realise the way it works and at that point, you can't talk to them! The current system of bold titles is really easily missed if the rooms are not expanded. Rename "common" to "everyone" Just my small feedback. Anyone that agrees, please thumbs up.

Uhm…. , neither are examples. A successful example would be one that didn’t cause upset until release to the public, and as far as I know, neither has become a public available paid module. This is isn’t any slight or criticism of Grinnelli Designs, but in a way they are in the same boat as Magnitude, in that they have projects in the works. Later, say after a SEA map is being enjoyed, Grinnelli might be facing the same kinds of criticisms. From the point of view of the masses, yes, transparency always looks good. But, sometimes I’ve seen transparency go bad. Often, people will look at the transparency… and start to make assumptions. Leaps to conclusions. Misread the situation, often wildly. Then, further updates cause the assumptions people to REALLY lose their minds… then they think people are lying, that they are being gaslit. Then they get upset. Forever. And then the ETA's slip 6 months. Then a year, then 4 years. That just happened to a couple of people in my own work place. Sometimes there IS such a thing as "oversharing", to avoid misunderstandings. True. But NO ONE cares about word of mouth before a DCS release. It's literally a non-factor. The brave/rich ones buy the first batch of modules, before the first patch. They make posts and vids about the upsides to the modules, the downsides, the bugs that need fixing, the framerate performance over this map and that map. Multiplayer performance, does something feel “off” about the experience. Then the second wave buys, based on the views of the first buyers. They continue to talk about hardware and framerate performances, so that the frugal virtual aviators can make a truly informed decision with their limited funds. And none of them will care that updates were few and far between during it’s development time. They will care if it’s bug free, if framerates are pretty good on their hardware. Magnitude 3 is not the product, the Corsair module is the product people will be talking about. It’s the product that matters, and updates aren’t the product.

Hello Everyone, I hope you are doing well. My back pain is stable at the moment so I'm taking advantage of the moment to create more AI Ship mods. I will be releasing the Hamina Class Missile Boat soon. **Known issues. The RBS-15 Missile Launcher doesn't close after launching all missiles. I created the missile launcher because the 3d model didn't have one built. It's an AI vehicle script used on an AI ship so it doesn't function the same. Missile launch sounds aren't working properly. I will continue to work on the sound until it's resolved. It's a Pain in the 8$$. For some vessels they work fine for others it's trial and lots of error. The Hamina-class missile boat is a class of fast attack craft of the Finnish Navy. They are classified as "missile fast attack craft" or ohjusvene, literally "missile boat" in Finnish. The vessels were built in the late 1990s, early 2000s, and are the fourth generation of Finnish missile craft. The first vessel was ordered in December 1996 and the fourth was handed over on 19 June 2006. Since the launch of the Helsinki-class missile boats, all fast attack craft have been named after Finnish coastal cities. The class was previously known also as Rauma 2000 following its predecessor the Rauma class. Stay Tuned!!

Sry für OT, aber genau das habe ich auch gedacht. Was manche hier erwarten. Wahnsinn. Und das es Firmen gibt, die sich um Ihren Umsatz Gedanken machen... ne ne....was für eine Welt. Ich freu mich auf die F4, auch wenn es jetzt noch ein paar Tage dauert.

Oh my....the sense of entitlement by some here...

Pure Spekulation. Und nach der ausführlichen (und meines Erachtens glaubwürdigen) Erklärung, die HB abgegeben hat eher unwahrscheinlich. Das ist geht schon Richtung üble Unterstellung. Vollkommen aus dem Abseits wie ich finde. Ich muss mich schon fragen, warum manche Leute grundsätzlich böse Absichten oder Vorsatz unterstellen, obwohl Pech oder Fehleinschätzung generell viel wahrscheinlicher sind.

Ich bin nicht sicher, ob ihr beide das Statement von Cobra überhaupt gelesen habt! Aber da steht, sie dachten wie bekommen es hin und wenn du deine Vorbestellung zurückgeben willst, dann kannst du es tun - und sie machen es dir noch möglich, wenn du doch noch [innerhalb der 2 Wochen nach EA-Release] kaufen willst, bekommst du noch den Pre-Order Bonus.

This may be the fundamental misunderstanding. At this time they don’t have a product to sell, and they aren’t pretending otherwise.

Go fast and low is always fun. New video posted on Youtube! ELYTRA went for a SEAD practice mission. Also demonstrated CCIP and HARM release. I'm quite satisfied with my CCIP logic, it can guide a iron bomb to a direct hit on a truck while releasing at 4k feets above target.

To be fair, the A-10C was flying over the Caucasus for many years, I am not sure it has ever flown over there in real life, let alone during combat, right? So while we want to fill in the gaps in terrain and other aircraft we are not a cookie-cutter type of developer with our focus being on the simulation of the aircraft and its systems. Everything we do takes time I have not seen a module yet that someone could not have fun with in some manner or another. One day we will have Vietnam or Korea, or other Cold War/Combat Theaters but things do take time. The La-7 will be a blast, we have Luftwaffe aircraft to put up against it, if you put the I-16 in a good position against even the Bf 109 you can win, and finding that out is one of the cool things about DCS, no matter what the name of the terrain is you are over doing it.

Release the bloody hotfix ffs before the next patch

I'm kinda partial to the F-4D

The ALR-67 is connected to the Quad Reciever, the Quad receiver is connected to four antennas, two in each wingtip. One on the leading edge one on the trailing edge, that cover 360⁰. The Quad Reciever is basically a signal multiplexer that takes those received RF signal and sorts them to range and bearing to your plane in real-time space. The ALR-67's threat library tells you what type of threat it is and it's priority. Think of the RWR indicator as a moving map display with you in the center. It's constantly moving in relation to yor position in the battle space. AT1(AW/SW) USN ret.... 1977-1997... DECM technician W/C 64C.

Good thing about a jet engine; It eventually stops whining.

As mentioned; we're cognizant of this and these features will only be available in a manner that is secure. The intent is not to provide a general browser experience, but rather serve safe, appropriate content - strictly and safely. Most importantly, everything needed for the module itself runs locally (manual, UI, etc.) without a single byte of data leaving or entering your computer - and so we can even provide further options to further inhibit any traffic for the users who feel at risk by mistakenly hitting a hotkey.

I will need to look at the mod structure and names. ASAP

Confirmed, the lag has returned on the ESB. I will work on it today. Off to the shipyard. Thanks again for the notifying me of this issue.

Thanks Guys. I appreciate. I will create another Small Coastal Patrol Boat due to our lack thereof while also working on the Iranian Frigate. Thanks, Goetsch, I will test it now to see if I get lag while in the AH64. Did you see the lag in version 1.0.1? Version 1.0.1 should have addressed the lag. Either way. Testing now. Thanks.

A full changelog of any change is available once the Phantom is released. GitHub never forgets, full history is available.

This wins "comment of the day" for me! Perfect.

What you have said boils down to “trust me bro”. I’ll trust heatblur to know what they are doing over some random people on the forums. Unless you can come up with some evidence that shows the way they have implemented chromium is going to be a problem.

DCS World AI Ship Mod Hamina Class Missile Boat has been released. I've decided to create one more Coastal Patrol Boat so stay posted. If you have any major technical issues PLEASE PM me and I will resolve the issues as soon as I can. Thank you all for your support. Please Enjoy the mod.

I have no idea what you are talking about. As far as I know nothing bad has happened from the updates from Grinnelli Designs' on the F100 or FlyingIron Simulations' on the A7. Only thing that happened was people was appreciative for getting full and clear updates about the project.

If all developers (ED included ) just followed the example of Grinnelli Designs for the F100 or FlyingIron Simulations A7 there would almost never be a problem. Its amazing how some developers easily mange to make good useful updates every few months. While others can't manage even 5% of that transparency. And no updates don't have to include fancy graphics or video. If all you've been doing for 3 months is coding fine. Spend literally 5 minutes to write that. Instead of just saying noting for 1-3 years. I think it was airplane simulation company that released an update that was just showing graphs about the flight model or something like that and people found it interesting. It's super easy to just give short updates. No news is not good news. No, we don't need a release estimate in updates. No, we don't need fancy pictures or graphics in updates. Yes, updates can be just a graph or some numbers or literally just, sorry guys half our coders got in a bar fight with some drunk schools girls and now all their fingers are in a cast so can't code. So nothing much has happened the last 3 months. Transparency is always good. The "when we have news we will share it" policy just makes things needlessly complicated. Literally 5 minutes of typing every 3 months would make the entire ED forum far less antagonistic. And when your products often sell based on word of mouth. Not hinding from you customers is probably good. There is also a world of difference between a module that has been in development less than 2 years and one that has been in development for 8.

I am pleased that the default state, is to only use local data sources on the device, however, if you allow access to the Internet, then then it must be part of your threat model, and it requires appropriate mitigation in order to manage the risk... And appropriate security testing... And controls... Just saying "don't use a feature" is not a realistic control... As it is prone to user error, or deliberate exploitation. Especially because as I have said we largely have been recommended to turn off security features in windows (Av etc...) on the folders containing dcs, for performance reasons, something that until now made sense, because of the limited attack surface in play. Adding the browser in this way changes that. I remain concerned that a browser is being used here in this way, especially with such a small team, I am less concerned about the use of a chromium based browser , per-say, though I do care what features will be in your build of chrome. And again how you will maintain the integrity of the browser, given dcs's own patch update schedule. Also bearing in mind that any customisation will complicate your ability to patch the browser... I would strongly recommend you consider this approach of allowing browsing access to Internet resources, as it will have consequences that will be difficult for a small Dev team to manage... Ranging from sand box escapes, to custom tab vulnerabilities to Skia, to WebSQL and on...and on...

Contrary opinions... are. And Administrative Threats - are a poor substitute for argument in the arena of ideas. Some of us have been looking forward to this PTO expansion since the abandonment and demise of CFS2/1%. Waiting patiently, and being jerked around, are discernible differences to one paying attention. Bowie

I’m always amazed at how so many users can fly DCS only as a reproduction of historic events, and need a historic map and historic AI units in order to fly and enjoy a new aircraft module. On my case, I like DCS mostly to experience and learn to fly a given aircraft, I have no problem with a fictional scenario, say a La-7 flying on the Normandy map on 1944, Ijust imagine a coop program between the allies, where in exchange for some US units sent to the URSS, a squadron of La-7 gets to participate on the D-day. Limiting oneself to only historic re-enactments is … well, limiting

Thank you all, it was indeed an incredibly tough decision for us to make, specifically because we are this close to full on release ready. Thank you all again for your kind patience, passion and support!

I'd pay $50 for a WWII pack of 20 AI planes plus other stuff like tanks and boats backfilling PTO and ETO. Seems like a good 3rd party opportunity.

Thanks for clarifying @BIGNEWY. Like others, I had a yuk knee-jerk reaction to the thought of having to have some bit of Google spyware just to play DCS but on further research it seems quite innocuous really. And the free trials are a very nice and generous feature of DCS.

As I said I will wait for ED to release its PTO items to come out and see what's included, but we could be easily 5-10 years away for a fully fleshed out PTO asset pack based on how long it takes to get stuff from concept to release, even the WW2 Asset pack in its current form is very lacking for the Normandy map we have but it at least can help makeWW2 in that area work to some degree. But at least the PTO has something coming for it that will suite the 2 planes (both allied), the LA7 will have nothing for it as EF assets for a long time. For casual flying and using planes as a flying experience I use something different for that.

Respect for the detailed explanation of the delay, many companies would just write a standard apology text. Wish you the best to fix all the problems very soon.

Садомазохизм и самовыглубление. Даже без педалей\без твиста, теряешь половину возможностей и люто страдаешь.

if they don't maintain it who will... it wont magically update itself ? certificate pinning could be used to limit access to specific sites, but, then we are in a different world of what is the criteria who maintains it and buys the certs etc..., otherwise it becomes quite difficult to limit actual access for example a suborned link could be used by a motivated attacker, why would they be motivated money typically, ransom ware, vandalisim, the list goes on. in the example they specifically show it going out to an arbitrary website, yes it happens to have DCS content on it and i actually use that site myself ... but what happens when that site links to another and so on ... who is going to maintain the whitelist, most games do not include a live internet browser for a reason ... this is one of them I don't think they thought it was dangerous when in one of the first versions of IE they enabled arbitrary code execution remotely via a URL.. everyone thought it was a great idea until the bad guys started using it... even then i remember some of the more frantic calls begging to keep this functionality enabled... The problem is the implications for "good use" are easy and clear where as the implications for "abuse" are not clear and hard to understand, because of 2nd and 3rd order problems... and hard even for security professionals with 4 decades in the field to understand ... and TBH neither HB or ED are experts in the field of security.. because their exposed threat surface is small ... a browser changes that massively so, hilariously so...

Yep, this for me is a massive problem. I'm worried PTO is going to essentially be more of the same and that there will be very little in the way of fleshing it out. The 2024 and Beyond trailer having a WWII naval battlegroup entirely consisting of LSTs and APAs save for an aircraft carrier was already pretty concerning in and of itself. Yes and this isn't a good thing. It makes me reluctant to use those aircraft when there's very little else for them. I don't see how I can construe having an era barely fleshed out as anything other than a bad thing. Well, unless you don't pay attention to the variants that is, if you do then we really don't have many Vietnam aircraft at all, it's only the A-1H and F-8J that are (which so far don't have a carrier to operate from). And Vietnam is probably the most highly requested map going. People have different interests and desires than you do, and you find that "amazing"? Certainly an interesting take, but whatever. It also isn't true - having modules, assets and maps that are coherent with each other wouldn't prevent you from being able to make hypothetical or fictional scenarios, so even if I had that, I still wouldn't be playing DCS solely to reenact historical events. I absolutely can enjoy an aircraft without a coherent theatre, assets and modules, but I'll always be limited to scenarios that are mostly fictional (and even when they aren't a hefty amount of fudging has to be employed, though mileage will of course vary) and I'll always be lacking what I'm really interested in doing and they'll always be the nagging mile-wide, inch-deep sensation that can be quite offputting and dare I say it, even disheartening in some circumstances. If you find that "amazing" then so be it. And that's completely fine. I'm certainly not amazed by this, you can and should be free to make whatever scenario you like. But then, because of the lack of an eastern front theatre, that's practically the only thing you can do, which I find fairly ironic given you're about to type this: To which I say, how is being limited to purely fictional scenarios where even the aircraft's presence in the theatre at all (historical scenario or not) is itself fictional, any less limiting? Surely if anything, I'd be less limited with a coherent set up, because not only can I still create fictional or hypothetical scenarios like I can now (only I'd be able to have a coherent set up as a bonus), but historical re-enactments too.

Who, exactly, is jerking you around. They've taken no money; they've made no promises. You and others need to rethink this.

Security is of course important and we take it seriously. Note however that the UI is run and stored locally, using only files stored on your hard drive unless using the specific internet related features.

@IronMikeThanks for the status update. I am sorry about the health issues your team has faced, and hope they are all through the worst of it, and are continuing towards good health. As much as I am excited by this I am also gravelly concerned about the implications of putting a browser in game, the security implications of that are actually staggering, given that a browser is one of the most significant attack surfaces on a computer today. And keeping a browser up to date is a very difficult and time consuming task even for a full fledged Dev team that is only updating a browser, even if what you are doing is delivering an instance of Chromium based browser you are recompiling (just ask the Microsoft Edge Dev team!) this concern is even higher given that most guidance for dcs suggests excluding it from most anti-malware programs for performance reasons. Chrome and edge both recieve daily updates in some cases to mitigate threats, given that dcs itself only receives updates monthly, how are you mitigating these issues?

I already imagined that the launch would not take place in March due to the lack of videos. The important thing is to keep the community informed. I will wait patiently. Thank You!

Собрал вторую механику джойстика с обратной связью. Нагрузка на рычаге длинной в 33 см получилась около 17кг! https://gvl224.com/ffb.php