Leaderboard

Official skins set for DCS F-4E: (+ more, notice also - some are WiP).

Also it would be great to add a HD model for the existing Russian Tu-142 ASW aircraft model (now they are being modernized up to Tu-142M3M/Tu-142MRM versions) or a new IL-38 model (now being modernized up to Il-38N version) to populate new Kola map airfields like Severomorsk-1 (would be good for Caucasus and Syria too).

RAZBAM discord, early stub of a working L118 Gun. Camo nets Atlantic Conveyor

Nice couple of videos for your pleasure while we wait for release

people looking for drama will always find it. Folks please get back on topic, the back and forth here isnt needed. When Mag3 are ready to share news they will. thank you

Now that we've gotten the INS update for our DCS F-16CM-50 (great update by the way), I think it's high time that we discuss the Digital Terrain System. This is an old system which was implemented back in the M1 tape for the F-16CM-50, and therefore is something which should definitely make an apperance in the DCS F-16CM-50 which models a M4.2+ tape circa 2007. For some reason this system has never been mentioned in the DCS F-16C roadmap, and seeing as it is a system that adds A TONNE of capability to the F-16CM-50, many of which increase survivability and combat effectiveness greatly, I find it quite surprising that it hasn't been mentioned there yet. The DTS was introduced specifically to reduce the number of CFITs (controlled flight into terrain) as this was the single biggest source of loss of life in the F-16 fleet, and in doing this it also had the side effect of enabling multiple other features to be added to the aircraft. These systems are explained in great detail in various publicly available manuals and studies, so it should not be an problem gathering information. A quick explanation of what the DTS is, it consists of a Data Cartridge which can be used to load approximately 480 square nautical miles of terrain and obstacle data into your aircraft. Whenever you're flying "on map" (within the roughly 480 square nautical mile patch of terrain you've loaded into your aircraft), this is then used by the aircraft in multiple different ways, namely: - Terrain Referenced Navigation (TRN) Allows the F-16CM-50 to cross-reference it's radar altitude against the digital terrain database to greatly reduce INS drift (especially when GPS is not available). The usefulness of this system will depend on how featured the terrain you're flying over actually is (not very effective over the ocean or flat terrain like the desert). - DTS Predictive Ground Collision Avoidance System (PGCAS) The PGCAS is an advisory system which will give the pilot pull up warnings when they are about to fly into terrain. Without PGCAS, you can fly into a steep mountain side without any pull up warning, because your radar altimeter simply cannot detect the mountain face before it is too late. With the Digital Terrain System, the aircraft can calculate your flight path in complex terrain or in situations where your radar altimeter is not pointing downward (like when turning in a dogfight, or diving steeply towards the ground while dodging a SAM) and give you a pull up advisory with enough time to spare for the pilot to be able to avoid flying into the terrain. I'll also mention just to be clear that PGCAS is not GCAS, and the aircraft will not automatically avoid the terrain, it will just provide warning cues for the pilot to take action. - Obstacle Warning and Cueing (OW/C) The OW/C allows obstacle data to be loaded into the aircraft. Each obstacle will have a specified location and height, and whenever your flight path nears an obstacle, the pilot will get an advisory on his HUD, informing him that an obstacle is either straight ahead, or left/right of his flight path, in order to assist the pilot not to fly into this obstacle. - Database Terrain Cueing (DBTC) The DBTC aims to fill the role that the old LANTIRN navigation pods did in low altitude flying. DBTC will allow the pilot to select a desired height above the ground that he wants to fly, and the aircraft will provide cues to the pilot to follow to fly at that height based on the terrain data. This will function much like the LANTIRN did, except that it doesn't automatically fly the aircraft, but instead provides cues for the pilot to follow in order to maintain said altitude above the ground. When calculating the desired flight path, the DBTC will take terrain data ahead of the aircraft into account to give the pilot a smooth flight path that won't send him slamming into a hill or a mountain face. This will allow much safer low altitude flying in the DCS F-16C. - Passive Ranging In addition to all the points mentioned above, the Digital Terrain System also improves targeting accuracy. If you use the JHMCS to designate a markpoint for example, the direction you're head is pointing can be cross referenced against the Digital Terrain Database in order to give you a much more accurate designation that takes terrain elevation into account. Really all kinds of SPI designations where the FCR or laser might be unavailable, will be much more accurate.

Да этот ответ я видел Мы не напрягаемся, в целом все хорошо, патчей нет, разработка не ведется, все отлично

Полная тишина. Ни те ни другие не считают необходимым сообщить свое решение. Комментарии в стиле "мы надеемся", "мы ждем" и вы тоже ждите. Чего? Чтоб время прошло? Оно то пройдёт со 100% вероятностью. Пора бы набраться смелости и сказать как есть. Варианта по сути два: 1. Спор не разрешим, ушли в суды, обновлений больше не будет, снимаем с продажи - можете вернуть средства. 2. Нашли взаимопонимание - ожидаем новый патч от разработчиков тогда-то.

Looks like the recent solar storm stirred up the Corsair drama again!

Having done many updates for the aircraft carrier flight decks I thought I'd share my take off luas. These are all still a work in progress but there should be no planes taxing through anything. Landing needs more work than take off. It some cases it might be the same as the original mod. I will update these when I can. I decided to start with the NATO STOVL carriers simply because there are really only 2 planes to worry about, the AV-8B and the VSN-F-35 mod. This is only a lua file that updates the spawn points. You will need the original mod. To install back up your mod and then either replace the "RunwayAndRoutes" lua with the new one or replace the runway data in the ship file. (some mods are setup this way) Ships include: L-61 by desdemicabina-simulation (4 runway 8 ramp) Príncipe de Asturias by Eric et Patrick (4 runway 8 ramp) HermesR12 by Joey45 (4 runway 20 ramp) HMS QE Class by Joey45 (4 runway 20 ramp) HMS Invincible by RAZBAM (4 runway 8 ramp) Note: may break IC USS Forrestal by HeartBlur (20 ramp) Note: may break IC More ships to follow soon. NATO Carrier Update V2.zip

Сейчас в ГС3 используется старая модель корабля, но у ЕД уже давно есть модель 2017 года, нет ли планов обновить Кузнецова в ГС3?

Our beloved aircraft was called one of three things- “Tomcat”, “Turkey”, or “F14”. I also never heard anyone call it “The Tom” until long after it was retired. “The Cat” meant catapult in the Navy. An aviator didn’t fly the Cat, he or she got launched by one. It sounds a bit confusing for a Cat on the Cat for a Cat Shot. The Airboss would confuse the hell out of the deck crew if he had to say, “Suspend CAT 2, the Cat has a malfunction!”. The crew wouldn’t know where the problem was, in the aircraft, or in the launching system. “Cat” also was used in other aviation terms. Cat I, II and III ILS approaches. Cat A,B,C,D instrument classification for approach miniums (has to do with approach speeds vs weather minimums), and Category of RAG student, based on whether a new guy from training command, or a transition from another fleet aircraft, or refresher for someone who had been qualified in the same aircraft on a previous tour. Other differences abound. Such as “Bag” meant flight suit in the Navy, it didn’t refer to external fuel tanks. I've got a briefing in a half hour, I gotta go put on my bag and grab a cup of Joe. Fuel tanks were called “drops” or wait for it, “tanks”. A flight in the USAF is a "ride", in the Navy, it's a "hop", even if it lasts 14 hours, includes six inflight refueling and crosses an ocean. “The Jet” nomenclature came from the USAF, usually used to ascribe drama to a mundane maneuver or situation. They were always talking about “I put nine G’s on THE JET”, or ”the jet SWAPPED ENDS and the left engine FLAMED OUT”. The Navy called an aircraft…believe it or not, “an aircraft”. In recent years, “the jet” seems to have been universally adopted, and even new airline pilots who arrived after transitioning from flying bug smashers now sneer about the proper way to fly “the jet”. For some reason, the term that grinds my gears is “fighter jet”. It’s a dorky sounding term coined by hairsprayed newsreaders on crummy cable television broadcasts. Media uses has made "fighter jet" main stream. So if fighter jet makes sense, then why do we not call a P51 a “fighter prop”? But wait, “cargo jet” sounds perfectly fine, but someone calling a C-130 a “cargo prop” would sound odd. Media also uses the term “Tarmac” incorrectly. “The passengers were stuck on the tarmac for twenty minutes while the crew removed the anaconda from the copilots rudder pedals…” There are three official places “The Jet” can be located on an airport- “a runway, a taxiway, or a ramp”. Some of those surfaces are constructed of “tarmac”, most are concrete. Why aren’t passengers suffering on “The Concrete” during routine cockpit reptile removal? My favorite on this grave, linguistic quandary is a passage by astronaut Michael Collins- a broadly educated, thoughtful man, describing how NASA changed the word “nominal” from meaning “a trifling, or small amount”, into a new usage describing an event as being “normal”. I think of him every time some kid from SpaceX utters it during a Falcon launch to dramatically convey that the payload fairing jettisoned without hitting anything important. Courtesy of NASA, the new meaning of “nominal” made it into the dictionary. I can’t bear to look to see if “fighter jet” has polluted Webster’s hallowed pages yet. Depressingly, it probably has. During the height of the space program, NASA terms also found their way into military aviation, where pilots began to call something that wasn't working as it should, “an anomaly". I heard an A4 pilot say that she couldn't get the canopy to open because there was an "anomaly in the handle linkage". Scrub the launch, get Gene Krantz on the horn, break out the emergency procedures manual and run the "anomaly in the handle" procedure! If a celebrity uses a term incorrectly, it will be instantly adopted. I met John Travolta long ago in the middle of nowhere in an airport FBO. He was on a break while he training for his multi-engine rating with one of my old instructors. Years later, he was on a PBS show talking about how he had a total electrical failure due to a “Transducer Rectifier” failure in his Gulfstream II. No Mr Barbarino, it’s called a “Transformer Rectifier”, and it converts AC power into DC power. That single interview resulted in years of newbie jet pilots going on about Transducers that weren’t installed in their “Jets”. If you’ve read Shakespeare, you know that language naturally evolves, so this is all in fun, but there is no doubt that in an effort to sound cool, participants in aviation, like most endeavors, often end up appearing silly. It’s part of what makes aviation so much fun.

I'm too impatient to wait for all the missing airports (with their associated navaids) to be added to the Norwegian part of the map, so I have started adding a few TACANS and DVOR/DMEs to help with navigation when flying along the coast. I have also fixed (or at least improved) the crooked LOC07 at Bodø, and added the missing LOC16 approach to Banak/Lakselv. Nothing is ready for release yet, but if anyone is interested, I can see if I can get something done during the weekend.

I just ran a test mission with the MIM-140 Patriot and the NASAMS 3 from my US pack. They worked great, no issues.

Erstens, sollte man es jedem selber überlassen, ob man sich von jemandem auf DCS ausbilden lassen möchte, oder nicht! Ja, das sind keine echten Fluglehrer, aber in so manchen Gruppen/Flugschulen sind auch echte Piloten dabei, die Ihr ganz eigenes Wissen zu dem der DCS Spieler hinzu bringen. Zum anderen haben die meisten dieser Personen aller höchsten Respekt verdient, da enorm viel Arbeit und Mühe in die Ausbildung anderer gesteckt wird. Zweitens, ist solch ein strukturierter Rahmen manchmal besser, als all diese ganzen YouTube Videos oder Trainings in den Staffeln. Ich bin selber Mitglied in einer Staffel, in der ich enorm viel lerne. Und auch dort wird enorm viel Freizeit investiert, um anderen Mitgliedern etwas beizubringen. Aber mir fehlt da ab und zu die Struktur und vor allem die Details. Ich habe erst im Dezember 2023 überhaupt mit Flugsimulation angefangen, und mir fehlen ab und an diese kleinen Details, die nachher viel ausmachen und manch andere erst über Jahre selbst erlernt haben. Und genau das ist der Grund, warum ich jetzt bereits seit fast über sechs Monaten auf eine Ausbildung in der OFS warte. Start-up, Start, Landung, Overhead Break, das sind alles Dinge, die ich mittlerweile (mal gut, mal weniger gut) hinbekomme, aber dennoch bin ich mir sicher, dass ich noch viel dazulernen kann. Und genau darum geht es mir! Und ich bin der festen Überzeugung, dass es auch der OFS genau darum geht! Ganz dem Motto: "Fliegen lernen leicht gemacht!" Es ist einfach nur Respektlos, all diese Menschen so abfällig abzuwatschen, die soviel für andere tun, ohne etwas dafür zu verlangen!

There are many more and a bunch of those are old/have been updated since that was shot.

Скорее - снимаем с продажи, всем спасибо, все свободны)

Please keep on topic here. Last warning. Thank you

Spulenfiepen hatte ich noch nie - aber immer Angst davor, weil mir solche Geräusche auch gewaltig auf den Zachel gehen. Ähnliche Nervkategorie wie Pixelfehler oder Mura bei VR-Headsets. Keine Probleme mit KFA2-Karten - hatte zuletzt noch eine 3080 Ti in meinem Zockrechner, habe die aber schon seit geraumer Zeit zum Dienst in meinem Arbeitsrechner degradiert. War beim Zocken tadellos, ist beim Malochen tadellos, macht auch nur dann Krach, wenn sie Krach machen soll, keine Kühlungs- oder gar BIOS-Probleme. Wie es bei anderen Modellen aussieht, kann ich natürlich nicht sagen. Noch zwei wirklich gute Tipps: 1) ÄUSSERSTE VORSICHT bei eBay-Kleinanzeigen, ÄUSSERSTE VORSICHT! In letzter Zeit ist das ein Tummelplatz für Betrüger geworden. Ich hatte vor ein paar Monaten mal nach Grafikkarten und VR-Headsets bei Kleinanzeigen geschaut, etliche Leute angeschrieben - aber immer ein komisches Gefühl gehabt. Am nächsten Tag kamen Warn-eMails von Kleinanzeigen. ALLE waren Betrüger, ALLE, 100 %! Selbst die, die "nur Abholung" schrieben - das soll nur in Sicherheit wiegen. 2) ÄUSSERSTE VORSICHT, wenn jemand am liebsten per "PayPal an Freunde" bezahlt werden, die reguläre PayPal-Zahlung mit dummen Ausreden verhindern will. Ihr habt nur dann Käuferschutz, wenn ihr regulär mit PayPal bezahlt, NICHT wenn ihr "an Freunde" zahlt. Bei Zahlung an Freunde kann euch der Typ einen Ziegelstein schicken oder gar nix - und das wars dann für euch, die Kohle ist futsch. Bei regulärer Zahlung habt ihr Käuferschutz. Und wenn der Verkäufer nicht will, dass ihr den Käuferschutz bekommt, wird er schon seinen Grund dafür haben, nicht wahr? Dann kommen solche Dummausreden wie "Dann bleibe ich auf dem Aufpreis für die reguläre Zahlung sitzen." So eine gequirlte Diarrhoe! Der Verkäufer hat bei regulärer Zahlung nicht das mindeste Risiko, wenn ihr den kleinen Aufpreis beim Kauf übernehmt. Das sollte einem die Sicherheit immer wert sein. Auch hier im Forum gibts so einen Vogel, dem die normale PayPal-Zahlung nicht schmeckt - und Wutanfälle kriegt, wenn man ihn per PN fragt, wo denn für ihn das Risiko läge, wenn man regulär bezahlte. Senkt mein Kaufinteresse sofort 10 Meter unter die Grasnarbe.

Hi ! As I have the supercarrier module, I don't know if the characters like the carrier Airboss or carrier LSO or carrier Technicians in the statics object "personnals" are available for people who not have the supercarrier module. But if these items are available for everyone or not, I would like to use them as infantry and not just as statics. As we can see them walking on the decks because of the Supercarrier module, you already have the walking model, so it's not a big work for you, ED, to make them available to use in the ME with walking from point A to point B.

А доделывать его собираются, чтобы привести к одному уровню с другими авианосцами из модуля SuperCarrier

So for this campaign I don't use stock wingmen, and tSo for this campaign I don't use stock wingmen, and the AI wingmen have quite a lot safeguards built in and their behaviour was tested many times in each mission. Barring any new DCS bugs (that usually are fixed in reasonable time) I have to say I am super happy with how the wingmen behave. Had no issues with them in the final stages of testing and hopefully you won't as well. To the contrary, they add a lot to the immersion. Also, Stormbirds.blog has published two interesting (I hope) articles - preview of the campaign first missions and interview with yours truly, which I hope you will like.

Some of the reworked mfd page. Now it's in code clearing stage.

There already is a 003 mod out by cao

No, the lineage of the model is described in the README on https://github.com/tspindler-cms/DCS-Essex , in short: karla created the Bon Homme Richard for IL-2 1946, NightIntruder and I modified it for Arma 3 usage, Odyseus improved the Arma 3 model. We use Blender to modify the carrier further, it can be downloaded from blender.org but you need version 3.6.x for using Tobsen's EDM exporter. I do not share the model freely, but if you're interested to contribute, feel free to learn 3d modeling and rigging and join the team, by all means! I will recommend to start with something much smaller in scope and size, though. I've written up my experience with getting the P4 Torpedo Boat into the game here: https://forums.mudspike.com/t/how-to-get-a-boat-into-dcs/15854 Cheers, TeTeT

Баг записан

jesus this kid really hurts my head sometimes. its like fighting with a 12 yr old girl know-it-all.

Hey Andyo, no RN Amphib for the moment. The Bay Class will come eventually along with the Canberra and the TCG Anadolu. Testing has started on the USS America. It will take time to bring her back up to speed. I'm testing her weapons which will be revamped along with weapon sounds. I will leave the Aircraft testing to Beldin. Snapshots are below. Today is Mother's Day here in the US Although every day is Mother's and Father's Day. So no modeling today.

To @IronMike and all the rest of you at Heatblur thank you for bringing us the F-4E Phantom II. I worked on this aircraft as an "Aircraft Armament Systems Specialist", fancy name for an aircraft weapons mechanic. I loaded munitions and maintained the weapon system on this aircraft (and the F-15A/B). I was ecstatic when I heard you guys were going to bring us the F-4E and I set aside my pre order money then. And now? I had a very cool job but I always envied the aircrews getting to fly and engage in mock dogfights and occasionally beating up our enemies for real. Now I get to fly this famous Cold War warrior in a virtual setting and I can't wait to beat MiG's like the unwanted redheaded step children of cyberspace. THANK YOU Heatblur!!

New phantom video:

The same SA-3 that scored against F-117A and F-16CG was targeted with no less than 23 confirmed HARMs during war in 1999 (you can check total number fired - it's astonishing). None if this did hit the SAM directly and only in one case fin of the missile and the cable leading to the launcher was damaged. During the downing of F-16CG (lead of 4 ship DEAD enter the KZ with ALE-50) the SEAD group launched 2 HARMS which missed the target entirely. By the time missiles arrived the crew turned to the equivalent mode. SAM crew competency plays a large role than the generation of the SAM being used. Also: if you know precise location you do not use the HARM, but rather a cruise missile instead.

Daily MiG-29 Polish Air Force MiG-29 (9.12A)

To anyone monitoring/trying to reproduce this bug. Given how random, and seldom it is, one can likely expect it on a longer flying session. With that said, I saw ED mention on the RU-side that they have tools now to work on large tracks. What's important, is to deliver a track (doesn't matter if multiple hour long), and record the time at which it happened. They will be able to extract all the information out of it. If you have, even a recent track, note the time at which it happened, and upload.

I have 2 suggestions for the next release: 1) Add a hotkey for chaff/flares; 2) Add FAB-1500 UMPK.

Te vuelvo a repetir por tercera vez, ¿y qué tiene que ver eso con querer tener el módulo del Corsair tal cual? No hace falta que me describas todo lo que hace o deja de hacer ED, ¿qué hay de malo en tener un módulo sin añadidos?. Cuando salió el Mustang se compró por su calidad que es el fuerte de ED; pues lo mismo con el Corsair; luego vendrá el resto…; o no…; pero crucificar a la gente por expresar esa idea es de una vileza superlativa. O puede que es que todavía no sepas de qué están tratando esta conversación….. y me voy a dormir que en Canarias es una hora menos pero en la Península ya es martes ——— I'll tell you again for the third time, and what does that have to do with wanting to have the Corsair module as it is? You don't need to describe everything that ED does or doesn't do, what's wrong with having a module without additions? When the Mustang came out it was bought for its quality that is the strong of ED; well the same with the Corsair; then the rest will come...; or not...; but to crucify people for expressing that idea is of a superlative vileness. And I'm going to sleep because in the Canary Islands it's an hour less but in the Peninsula it's already Tuesday

¿Que es más falso que un duro de madera?, ¿qué haya gente que prefiera el módulo a los complementos?. ED siempre ha dado prioridad a la creación de módulos el reste va detrás y eso es un hecho por mucha rasgadura de vestidura y adalid de causas EDicticas… Lo vuelvo a repetir; otra cosa sería vender un mapa con dos atolones y miles de millas marinas de la Segunda Guerra mundial donde no tengas ni una unidad naval japonesa….; ahí o desarrollas complementos (transportes, destructores, submarinos, hidroaviones, acorazados, portaviones, portaviones ligeros, etc) Y si sacas esos complementos los debes sacar adecuadamente. Puedes escudarte en comparaciones, requisitos, etc…; pero la realidad es la que es y ante los hechos…; las palabras (escritas en este caso) no son sino un canto al sofismo Dicho esto; dejad tranquilos a los que ya están convencidos de que la calidad está en el módulo y no en los complementos y mucho menos escudarse en esos giros para realizar velados ataques a sus ideas ====== En la lengua de la pérfida… What is more false than a hardwood? Are there people who prefer the module to accessories? ED has always given priority to the creation of modules the rest goes behind and that is a fact for a lot of tearing of clothing and adalid of EDictic causes... I repeat it again; another thing would be to sell a map with two atolls and thousands of nautical miles of the Second World War where you do not have a single Japanese naval unit....; there or you develop accessories (transports, destroyers, submarines, seaplanes, battleships, aircraft carriers, light aircraft carriers, etc.) And if you take out those accessories, you must take them out properly. You can hide in comparisons, requirements, etc...; but reality is what it is and before the facts; the words (written in this case) are but a song to sophicism That said; leave alone those who are already convinced that the quality is in the module and not in the accessories and much less hide in those turns to make veiled attacks on their ideas

Доделывать нужно до конца. Это должно быть нормой жизни. Я пилот в реальной жизни. И вот я получил зарплату за месяц вперед, посадил пассажиров в самолет и ушел домой. И все это со словами – почему я вас должен довезти до пункта назначения?! Если продукт продан с обещаниями итогового результата, то покупателя не должны волновать проблемы договоренностей пилота с диспетчерами и аэропортами… Я не к тому, что у разработчиков не должно быть зарплаты, но Разбам продает сырой продукт. Потребитель ему верит, потому что это площадка надежного поставщика услуг. В другом месте бы и не купили. Вот тот же HB не продает такого уровня продукты. Поэтому сравнивать можно с Aerges. У них тоже очень сырой продукт. Но не убежали еще. Работают над продуктом. Слабо, но что-то делают. Договариваться надо «на берегу».

Вообще-то это не Белое и Чёрное, а Bowers and Wilkins, фирма достаточно известная в "узком кругу ограниченных людей". Например, весьма известная оригинальная акустика Наутилус - их работа. PS Знакомому скажите, что их акустику зовут "бивнями"

Ideas: China's latest aircraft carrier, the Type 003 Fujisan.

Есть какие-то подвижки между Разбам и ЕД?

oh, still arguing... Just a small reminder

Yes, this will be present on a skin after release. It will be visual only though until we figured out some technical details with ED for this matter :)