Leaderboard

First off, there is nothing new to report as of the date of this post, this new thread is simply a clean-up and ease of access for all current official information on the current issues between Eagle Dynamics & RAZBAM. Hopefully, this will make it easier to see the current known information and weed it out from the theories, guesses and suggestions in the other thread. If you want to see that one, the link will be available at the bottom of the post. The first public knowledge of the disagreement happened with an announcement on the RAZBAM Discord here: https://discord.com/channels/536389125276827660/544501300134543380/1225494495458627634 razbam_prowler — 04/04/2024 10:17 AM Dear Customers and Community, You may have noticed that the that the latest RAZBAM announcements does not include a changelog or any updates for our products. We would like to inform you that, until further notice, all support for RAZBAM-developed aircraft modules is on hold. This suspension encompasses, but is not limited to, bug fixes and updates. We want to reaffirm our unwavering commitment to this exceptional community, our current customers, and prospective clients. Unfortunately, due to circumstances completely beyond our control, we are temporarily unable to continue our work at this time. Our team, a group of highly skilled and professional developers, is first and foremost made up of dedicated individuals. They invest not only their expertise but also their personal dedication and sacrifice into crafting our products. For many, this work provides essential supplementary income or even constitutes their primary livelihood. We are hopeful for a swift resolution so that we can resume our normal operations. However, until these issues are resolved, we will not be issuing any updates about our products. We ask for your understanding during this challenging period, a situation that RAZBAM Simulations did not seek and which has previously seriously affected other parties, for example Heatblur Simulations. We have been patient, perhaps too patient, waiting for a resolution from the responsible parties. Now, we find it necessary to take a stand and await a practical solution to this deadlock. I also want to extend my heartfelt thanks to my fellow third-party developers. Their support, once aware of the relevant facts, has been overwhelming. Thank you for elevating DCS to new heights; it truly wouldn't be the remarkable experience it is without your contributions. The suspension will remain in effect until the significant issues between Eagle Dynamics and RAZBAM Simulations LLC are resolved to our mutual satisfaction. Once these issues have been addressed, we will resume our standard practices of bug fixing, updates, and upgrades, just as we have since our inception as developers for DCS. We hope this resolution results in a more stable and optimistic future for DCS and all 3rd Party Developers. Best regards Ron Zambrano CEO RAZBAM Simulations, LLC Eagle Dynamics was compelled to respond shortly after on their Discord found here: https://discord.com/channels/542985647502393346/543013214485610520/1225540029493936219 04/04/2024 1:18 PM Following the message published by Ron Zambrano of Razbam Simulations, we believe that it is necessary to rectify some of the unfounded allegations and to reassure the Community that everything is being done to resolve the current situation promptly and for the benefit of all concerned. Without entering into the details of matters that are confidential to the parties, we firmly reject the allegations that the current disagreement between Eagle Dynamics and Razbam Simulations would be as stated by Razbam “due to circumstances completely beyond our control" and that it is "a situation that Razbam Simulations did not seek". On the contrary, the current disagreement is the result of improper actions that have been taken by Razbam Simulations, in breach of its contractual obligations towards our company and of our legally protected IP rights, and for which we are seeking a reasonable and forward-looking commercial outcome rather than entertaining legal claims. We very much regret that Ron Zambrano has decided, without even pre-advising us, to make these disparaging public statements and, more importantly, to take the customers of the Razbam developed aircraft as leverage in the discussions with us. Please rest assured, we are addressing the situation with the utmost attention and constructiveness. Many thanks and kind regards, Nick Grey RAZBAM followed with this reply: https://discord.com/channels/536389125276827660/544501300134543380/1226492074233434182 razbam_prowler — 04/07/2024 4:21 AM @here Dear customers and community RAZBAM Simulations is actively working with EAGLE DYNAMICS to reach an agreement to resolve our internal dispute and we don't want the discussion that our public declaration has generated to escalate any further. We want to assure you that it has never been nor will it be our intention to abandon our products. We look forward to a prompt and satisfactory resolution, turn the page, and move forward. Best regards Ron Zambrano CEO RAZBAM Simulations, LLC This was the last of the official announcements from both management parties. While both teams have officially been very quiet due to the delicate nature of issues at hand there has been some events that have come up and caused concerns. Some Anti-Virus programs were picking up a false positive on some DCS DLLs. Sadly it seemed to be worse on some of the RAZBAM modules fueling fears of issues with the modules. This can be solved by adding the DCS install folder to the exceptions for your anti-virus software, this happens from time to time so this was nothing new. The M2000 had some issues, including CTDs. This was an accidental merge of some changes one of the developers was working on. Once it was identified the changes were reverted and the issues were solved (although nothing was noted in the changelog at the time). This was not anything related to compatibility with the core game. June 12th at Midnight the F-15E radar stopped working. While we have internally identified the issue no fix has been presented as of yet. once we have solid news on that we will share that ASAP. Again this had nothing to do with core compatibility but rather something in the coding of the F-15E. UPDATE: When version 2.9.6 drops it will contain a fix for the F-15E radar. This fix was created by our team and not given to us by any other party. Refunds While at first, we were maintaining our normal refund rules, we decided to bend a little for those who were frustrated with the issues and how they affected an Early Access Product. We have been giving a store credit for the value of the F-15E when you purchased it. You may open a ticket here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/ for a refund, but we ask for patience as it may take up to 7-10 business days to process your refund. Other modules will not be refunded at this time, all of these are out of Early Access and remain working. It is our commitment that no matter what happens we will do our best to make sure these continue to work into the future. We understand those of you who remember losing the Hawk, this is not something we intend to do again. Steam refunds are based on the play time of the core game, not the individual module. It is their policy and they handle the refunds. As we understand it, no refunds have been accepted by Valve. All modules continue to work, aside from the current radar issues with the F-15E which we hope will be addressed sooner than later. South Atlantic continues to be updated and as I stated above, the other older modules we plan to make sure they continue to work into the foreseeable future. Is ED broke? No, Eagle Dynamics is very healthy aside from this dispute currently, all other 3rd Parties and the ED development team continue to work and push new and exciting content out to you. Is ED pushing things out because they are out of money? No, most of these recent products have been scheduled for quite some time now, into early last year. The 3rd Party products are based on when they are ready from their own team, although some delays here and there squished some release dates together, nothing has been out of the ordinary except more goodies in a short amount of time. How can you keep selling the F-15E or other modules? UPDATE 2025-04-07 Right now we are working within the framework of the legal advice moving forward and not wanting to cause any more riffs or issues. It's a complex process at this point and most likely why it seems to be moving so slowly for everyone. Nothing more can be said about that right now. Sorry. After receiving an official request by RAZBAM to remove products from sale we have done so. All products will be fully supported by DCS and will continue to operate. We cannot comment on any more conspiracy theories than this. This was an unfortunate disagreement that had been going on for some time and finally went public. I can only speak for Eagle Dynamics but I believe both teams want to resolve this as fast as possible and get back to making virtual airplanes. The discussion below was the old thread. This new thread may be moderated a little harder, so please be nice to each other, know that all the other customers in here discussing this with you are in the same boat and probably want the same thing. So let's be open to their opinions and concerns and understand they are allowed to have them as much as you are. Anything from any user here without an official tag won't be making any official comments, me and @BIGNEWY will only comment on publically available info as this is a legal matter at the end of the day. ------------------------------- Update 25th July 2025 In response to recent comments and questions made by Razbam Simulations, its proxies and/or external developers, Eagle Dynamics confirms that it signed a settlement agreement with Razbam at the end of 2024 to put an end to the existing disputes and that such agreement also provides for a strict confidentiality requirement that prevents Eagle Dynamics from disclosing further information. Eagle Dynamics can, however, confirm that Razbam instructed Eagle Dynamics to cease selling the modules developed by Razbam and its independent developers. All modules continue to function ‘as is’ and despite not receiving any access to source codes or cooperation from Razbam and its external developers, Eagle Dynamics will do its best to ensure that these modules continue to function in 2.9.X. We are still hoping to be able to implement the settlement agreement and to find a satisfactory outcome to the current situation, in the best interests of our valued community. Thank you for your passion and support. Yours sincerely, Eagle Dynamics I cannot say enough, on behalf of all of us at Eagle Dynamics, how sorry we are that you are being made, in part by us, to go through this. We are committed to getting this sorted as soon as we can. Thanks The ED Team

First post updated, 3 aircrafts added and some issues fixed

Heatblur discord:

Update Roadmap with last newsleter info about FC-2024 / Supercarrier / DCS Launcher. From ORBX Discord: null

It’s all done, waiting for ED to release it.

As usual, a lot of histrionics from over entitled drama queens who haven't committed any actual investment (save some over-wrought emotions). I keep hoping they'll finally generate the self-awareness to realise the effect that that their impatient petulant whinging actually has on bringing the F4U closer to release. Here's a little clue: NONE

Где вы их находите, вирусы эти? По порносайтам ходите, левые бинарники из сомнительных источников ставите?

Ganz sachte, trink vielleicht erstmal 'nen Tee. Jetzt halten wir uns alle fest, denn es geht eine Runde im Kreis. Musst du auch nicht verstehen, ist schon gut, du hast das Modul doch ohnehin nicht. Es gibt Leute, die sich um die Übersetzungen kümmern und die in aller Regel die Funktion der zu übersetzenden Begriffe kennen und dabei Zugriff auf die englischsprachigen Originalbegriffe haben. Nein, das musst du nicht wissen und es nicht notwendig, dass du dich hier einbringst. Wenn du anbieten wolltest, deine Expertise einzubringen, dann... Danke, hätte ich nicht besser sagen können. Sollen wir das mal zusammen probieren? Siehst du, war doch gar nicht so schwer. Eine höfliche Frage, ein nettes Angebot. Schon klingt es nicht mehr so, als würdest du Leute auffordern, notwendige Vorarbeit für dich zu erbringen, damit du anschließend die fertige Übersetzung abliefern kannst. Gut, dann können wir ja endlich zum Thema kommen: Jetzt müsstest du noch darlegen, warum "Luftbremse - vorne/einfahren" korrekter war als "Luftbremsschalter - vorne/einfahren", nachdem du ja diese Variante bereits als hochgradig missverständlich kritisiert hattest. "Mein" Beispiel bezieht sich auf die Bezeichnung in der englischsprachigen Fassung von DCS und auf die davon abgeleitete Übersetzung (schau gerne nochmal nach, ich hab das extra für dich zitiert). Wie schon weiter oben erwähnt, die Inkonsistenzen in der DCS-Übersetzung empfinde ich als störend. Und auch die englischsprachige Fassung ist nicht frei davon. Wenn du jetzt implizieren möchtest, dass die Funktion beispielsweise dieses Schalters für Spieler der deutschsprachigen DCS-Lokalisierung unmöglich zu verstehen wäre, weil "ich" das falsch ausgedrückt hätte, steht dir diese Behauptung sicherlich zu. Ich würde dies aber doch als in doppelter Hinsicht gewagte These ansehen. Also, kann man das besser übersetzen? Sicher. Muss man? Nö. Und damit würde ich gerne wieder aufgreifen, welcher Workflow dir vorschwebt. Die Idee, dass wir dir die Funktionsweise einzelner Schalter erklären, damit du dann eine korrekte Übersetzung präsentierst, die dann möglicherweise über die Übersetzer ihren Weg ins Spiel findet, scheint mir nicht sonderlich durchdacht. Das kostet nicht unerhebliche zeitliche Ressourcen und erfordert eine Menge hin und her. Da schiene es mir sinnvoller, du würdest dir das fragliche Modul installieren, dich selbst mit der Funktionsweise vertraut machen, und dann eigenständig deine Vorschläge einbringen. Nicht zuletzt auch aus dem Grund, dass es sicherlich ein paar Zeilen mehr als nur die aus den obigen Beispielen gibt, die durch eine Überarbeitung verbessert werden könnten. Falls du den kollaborativen Prozess hier im Forum bevorzugst, will ich dem nicht im Weg stehen, würde aber, soweit ich betroffen bin oder zitiert werde, schon einfordern, das klar und unmissverständlich als Angebot zu formulieren statt als Aufforderung. Und wie bereits erwähnt und ganz unabhängig davon wie ich zu der Sache stehe: die ED-Übersetzer können bestimmt immer Verstärkung gebrauchen; das würde vermutlich auch die Hürde entfernen, dass du das fragliche Modul gar nicht gekauft hast. Wir können uns aber hier gerne noch ein paar Runden im Kreis drehen, das macht auch mal Spaß. Hui...

I hope that after the release of another aircraft, will begin improving the already finished ones. Thanks for your feedback! B-57 and Mirage IV - possibly YES!

Oh I forgot to put Beldin‘s decoys into update. So with next Tu-128 I will do

See first post The Amphibious Vehicles Two versions of the Volkswagen Schwimmwagen A Bonus Volkswagen Beetle,Type 1 circa 1942 all un armed Sitting targets! One Ford GPA Jeep Armed

I don’t think it needs much more than a paint job? Textures, I s’pose? The audio’s being taken care of and I’m happy as Larry with everything else. Flown it every day since it was released I think? I’m sure someone with more technical knowledge could find faults but to my eyes it’s pretty good.

Good point. I made it faster.

If additional FC3 aircraft were to be introduced, I wonder if first generation F16 and F18 would be viable, such that they could be limited to Cold War (mostly) dumb weapons? For that matter, some other Cold War jets might be interesting, eg: - Hawker hunter - BAC Lightning - Mirage 3 - Bucaneer - F100

Sheetmetal work is underway to replace both missing and damaged inspection panels.

The MFCU does a lot of things, but there are also quite a few buttons that aren't really utilized. The hat on the top left will change which MFD is SOI. The China Hat in the middle is your slew cursor. The Castle Switch on the right will cycle through available Maps, ie., VFR sectional, IFR Low, JOG, TLM. The single button below the China Hat.... can't really remember what it does. Don't use it very often lol something to do with changing modes on the MFD that is currently selected as SOI. On the bottom, there is a trigger which is used to "Hook" a NAVAID, FIX, Friendly/Enemy icon, Overlay, etc. This will open a drop-down with a bunch of different options like Data, Direct-To, Reroute, etc. Below the Trigger towards the bottom of the grip there is a roller, kinda like a mousewheel, that sucks and nobody uses. Will scroll through menu options, but it's not tuned very well and scrolls way too fast. (The China Hat can be pushed up or down to scroll through options as well). There's also a single button on the bottom that will uncage the slew cursor so you have full slew control on the moving map, instead of the map being centered on your aircraft. Then there's a boat switch that does absolutely nothing as far as I'm aware.

ED have stated in the forums that there is much less difference in development time for FC and FF aircraft than most people think.

Updated to version 9. - New cirrus cloud textures added

Sure... let's do that. We haven't done that before. I think the answer to that is very clear to those who are willing to hear it.

в ГС4 пора и вертолёты добавить...

New version available. This one is a full replacement (of the scripts, at least). Changes: -fixes a bug with MGRS coordinates present in the Apache. - added support for the Kiowa Warrior. - support for the F-15E discontinued (the script will continue to work until it doesn't). From the readme: - OH-58D Kiowa Warrior IMPORTANT: Aircraft needs to be set to work with MGRS coordinates. NOTE: In MP, the script should use the MFD corresponding to the seat of the crew member loading the waypoints. This is untested at the moment. Waypoint Sequence Start: has no effect in this module Waypoint Designation (WDes). This is used to indicate the type of the point. Examples: @|#| ... will add the next Waypoint in the aircraft sequence @|W| ... will add the next Waypoint in the aircraft sequence @|C| ... will add the next Control point in the aircraft sequence @|T| ... will add the next Target point in the aircraft sequence @|3| ... will add or edit Waypoint 3 @|3W| ... will add or edit Waypoint 3 @|3C| ... will add or edit Control point 3 @|3T| ... will add or edit Target point 3 dcs-scratchpad (Draken35)-0.7.0.240617a.zip

Dear friends and pilots. Thank you for your patience and support !!! Phase 3 is going through all stages of testing and we hope that it will be released soon and available for updating. Phase 3 will include: Fixing bugs from users and beta testers (more than 100) Airfields: 15 pcs and unique scenes for there: Quwaysina Birma/Tanta Air Base Al Rahmaniyah Borg-el-Arab/Intl Jiyanklis New Gebel el Basur Al Khatatbah Kom Awshim Beni Suef Wadi Abu Rish El Minya Hurghada Wadi Abu Shihat Ramon International airport Sharm El Sheikh Unique objects and architectural monuments, industrial facilities - more than 100 pieces (link below) Added more typical scene objects like yacht, ndb tower etc.. Vector data - zones of new airfields, places under unique objects. City textures and assets - improvement, garbage cleaning 2 types of acacia bushes for the south of Israel New more realistic seabed texture Parking for f35 and hangar for Israel airfields Improved scenes for helipads Night illumination of unique objects Upgrading the Pyramids of Giza and the tombs around the pyramids Trees on mountains in Israel Added of military installations of Egypt (northern and southern camp) and military bases on Israel Improving ground textures (adding more color variety) Added Oil Platforms We continue to work on the 4th final phase of the Sinai project (release), which will include: Airfields for Jordan and UAE, 1 for each country Working with rocks for unique places, Ramon, Petra, etc.. (Development of a utility in TDK is required) Bugs and improvements that constantly come from users

I made these 2022

Phenomenal work on the B-58! You're adding tons of value to DCS; thank you so much. I took a few minutes to relocated the position of the wingtip vortices. nullFeel free to use the code if you so wish: wing_tip_pos = {-7.80, -0.0, 8.50},

I hope B-52D will have this bomb

This screen was before I checked as to which shops were batch 3's Batch 1.. only if I can find a decent model, then yeah, there's not much difference weapons wise (sans Phoenix CIWS) @Northstar98 yeah radars are noted, It's what was on the model.

Thanks for the reply! I think it's good for everyone to write down their thoughts on a topic. This is not a buff or a nerf, no one talked about it, it's just the need for the correct implementation! I'm not an average Flanker fan, but a dedicated one, so it affects me differently, it's as simple as that! I may say things, but I say them out of frustration because I want the best for myself and others! DCS World is not a game, so I think the tendency towards professionalism is respectable!

It's integrated, like the current flaming cliffs. It has nothing to do with MAC.

Aren't we a little bit dramatic here ? I mean, it's not like you have any other choice than waiting, right ? As a hypothetical customer of a not yet released module, you do know that "protesting", or asking for faster release, will have very little effect, don't you ? So yes, you will have to wait, and maybe to no result, because it is also a "risk" that you have to consider. If you have any reliable informations about M3 team and their dedicated F4U devs, feel free to share.

servers just starting to come back online thanks

F-4E Icons.zipThese may or may not help. Most are just screen grabs from the cockpit in on/off positions. I use some of the lighter versions for the On/activated positions so i can easily check they're turned on at a glance. Eg. The Master Arm with the red outline.

You can repeat this until the cows come home, but it always just gets ignored.

I've seen it get about 70nm range, for a target that large.

Sorry to necro this a bit @NineLine but, at least as far as I can see one unit is totally seeing through buildings. This guy here is just a ECS, not even sure why he has a radar, maybe because he is attached to a Radome. I am in the Kiowa, sitting behind the building Using s simple detection script, I got this information from him: Line of Sight, as calculated by land.isVisible, confirms that I am indeed not visible. However he things I am, and one radar at that. I did more testing on this topic after my first post about radars not working correctly. Seen here After that specific type of Radar issue was resolved another user posted an issue he found. Seems it was the same issue, I thought that was odd and decided to further test again to see why or what units it was effecting. Seen here I think I may just make a new post with all my findings over the past week so that they are in one topic. Seems things get lost, specially when marked "Fixed" or "Resolved" Even if they are NOT(after further testing)

Except that isn't really true. Avionics are not the most time consuming aspect of module development, and much of this work can be done in parallel with others. Stuff that happens in the clickable cockpit is simply not worth getting rid of.

LH today hot.

non sono un frequentatore assiduo di ECW perché tra SRS e sopratutto le ore che ho libere non combaciano col riposo della feroceMammifera e microMammifera. entro giusto quando ho un pomeriggio di fine settimana libero per prendere rapidissimamente una missilata nel sedere. ma tutta l'iniziativa l'ho sempre trovata la miglior cosa mai successa a DCS e la prova sul campo di ciò che sostengo da sempre, ovvero quel che conta è manetta-leva-timone e non quanti bottoni premi per lanciare un agm84 o jdam o centrare il singolo carretto visto da un tgp a 40nm, ragion per cui le missioni che mi scrivo con moose le ambiento massimo 1991. capisco chi ne subisce il fascino ma non avremo mai mezzi redfor ben riprodotti, specie ora con l'aria che tira. detto ciò, ne approfitto per fare autopromozione dell'ultima missione che ho generato per godermi phantom e mirage: era iniziata come progetto piccolino poi ho espanso ed alla fine condiviso tutto su gitlab, fatene quello che volete più avanti mi metterò a lavorare su qualcosa più focalizzato su risorse strategiche da distruggere in mappa, trovo sempre più interessanti bombardare porti, centrali elettriche, stazioni ferroviarie o ponti che sfasciare carretti buttati in mezzo al prato o sabbia ma più in là, io so benissimo cosa vuol dire ciò che si sente nel video "ci vuole molto più tempo a creare contenuto che a consumarlo"...lo so veramente benissimo. ECW server è in ottime mani credo.

Without exaggeration. In terms of 3D shape, the model is of a very good standard, and the pilot models are also very good (also in VR). If this is not criticism for criticism's sake, but you want this post to be considered constructive criticism, please post the bugs you notice in the bugs section (corner). Otherwise, unfortunately it is just criticism for criticism's sake. I see that the 3D model has been refined very well and it's actually hard to fault it. Here is an example of a bug that I actually noticed, but I won't go gray because of it and I will wait patiently for the solution.

Correct. The US asset pack was updated the 15th. And as mentioned above, besides the announcement I make here in the thread, always check my website. You have the release log on the landing page as well as a detailed changelog per country (if you click on a country at the top).

This is a quick fix for the sun glare issue on the T-45 Cockpit. Go to C:\Users\UserName\Saved Games\DCS\Mods\aircraft\VNAO_T45\Liveries\Cockpit_VNAO_T45C\default Replace the description.lua file with the attached one Enjoy description.lua

Multithreading was required for some of the supercarrier work. You may have seen an older quote from me confusing the vulkan with multithreading. Airboss will be in the next update. Plane directors will be in a future update.

Polychop Discord

In General: The Phantom uses the AN/ALE- 40 Countermeasures dispenser; 1. Make sure that countermeasures are loaded on the aircraft and the that you know the amount of each (Chaff and Flares) 2. Make sure the countermeasures button you have bound also activates (moves) the button press on the corresponding throttle (as the pilot) 3. The flaps and speed brake must both be fully retracted for the dispenser to work, regardless of any other settings. As the Pilot: 1. Find the programmer, it is located on the left hand side of the cockpit near the controls for fuel. 2. The Flares toggle switch you will see has the option of Flares or Normal; If set to Flares it will ignore any programming you have done and with each press of the Countermeasures dispense button it will release one flare. At the most very basic if you switch this to Flares and have flares loaded you will be able to release 1 Flare per press. In the Flares position, it will allow the Pilot to dispense flares at will, it will not prevent the WSO from releasing countermeasures nor will it alter the WSO's CCU settings. If set to Normal; each press of the dispense countermeasures button will follow what you have selected on the CCU (In WSO cockpit) or the Programmer (in the pilots cockpit) If you just want to be able to dispense flares, throw it on the Flares option and you are set. The AN-ALE-40 Power Indicator on the panel will; Display an amber light for the Flares option if it is selected Display a green light when the switch is set to Normal, AND any of the Chaff or Flare mode knobs are in an active position (if they are all off it won't light up - or work) No light if the panel is not active 3. If the toggle switch is in Normal mode you will need to utilise the programmer to set how you want to dispense the countermeasures. Chaff and Flare options are available here and you will notice two knobs for each option. Intervals are always measure in seconds; Chaff Burst; The count knob gives you the option of 1,2,3,4,6 or 8 per button press the interval gives the option of 0.1 - 0.4 seconds between each release chaff Chaff Salvo; the count knob gives you the option of 1, 2, 4, 8 or C (continuous) for the number of salvos you want per button press the interval is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 or R (random) seconds per salvo Flare Burst; the count knob gives you the option of 1, 2, 4, 8 or C (continuous) amount of flares release per button press the interval is 3, 4, 6, 8 or 10 seconds between salvos. Relevant Manual Page link: https://f4.manuals.heatblur.se/systems/defensive_systems/countermeasures.html?highlight=counter#chaff-and-flare-counters

Thank you for ED and Razbam collaborating and destroying this plane.

Thank you for the feedback. The names are chosen mostly in reference to how they are called officially in the real plane. To also make it easier for anyone using the real manuals. We can improve the name by adding (Chaff/Flare) to it. To make it easier to discover via the search function [emoji106] That said, I recommend using the categories. Selecting the Countermeasures category will reveal it immediately. Similiar for other binds.

I think you are far too committed to DCS for your own good, you maybe take this game too serious. Perhaps taking (another) break from DCS may help you. ED do their stuff not to spite you or me. They do what they do to make money, and their reasoning so far has proven to be successful enough to justify their actions. Perhaps. In the end, it's ED's decision, it's their money that they invest in their company, and they will be accountable to their investors. Risking your health over this isn't worth it. I recommend that you let it go and enjoy life a bit more.

It would lesson the work, but there's still a lot of work. A lot. So much so that it calls into question profitability. This is what we are told from the actual developers, from ED to HB. That's just how it is. Also, community surveys aren't terribly reliable and don't provide a good snapshot of that.

So it's not "two weeks" anymore. Now it's "two months".

What does SA-2 on its own refer to in the table? The Shrike's Mk 25 being the only one that works against SA-2 (TR) (i.e. the Fan Song E) makes sense, but the Mk 22-Mk 24 doesn't because the Fan Song we have in DCS is the Fan Song E, which operates in the G band. Fan Songs that operate in the E/F band are the Fan Song A, B and F. Speaking of which, it might be useful to have a threat guide in the manual for the radars in DCS, including their frequency and band where known. A list of what frequencies that correspond to what bands can be found here (you're after the new nomenclature). Though, I guess it also depends on how well DCS models it. The other thing is that some radar systems in DCS are actually a combination of radars which may operate on different bands (Straight Flush, Land Roll, Scrum Half and Hot Shot being primary examples). Also, some radar systems comprise of multiple radars, such as the 1S91 [Straight Flush], whose 1S11 acquisition radar operates in the C band, but its 1S31 tracking/illumination radar operates in the I band. Meaning that the Mk 49 and Mk 49 Mod 1 would only work against the Straight Flush in its track/illuminate mode. The Mk 37 might work (purely looking at the band) In any case, I'll list Eastern Bloc radars below and I'll bold what guidance section is appropriate, based on the frequency, which I'll write in bold. At the moment, for the table in the fusing GUI. 1S91 [Straight Flush] is the acquisition, target tracking and illumination radar for the 2K12 Kub [SA-6 Gainful] 1S11 acquisition radar operates in the C band. Mk 37 EDIT: This one actually has contradictory information, while this says C band, this says G band. If it's the former, the Mk 37 is accurate, if it's the latter the Mk 22, Mk 25, Mk 50 is accurate. Neither cite anything though and there's a non-zero chance the former could be mixing nomenclature (the C band in old nomenclature is G band in the new one). 1S31 track/fire-control radar operates in the I band. Mk 36, Mk 49 As above, while this says I band, this says H band if the latter is correct, it means the Mk 49 (either mod) or the Mk 50 is accurate. SON-9 [Fire Can] is a fire-control radar for AZP S-60 and KS-19 AAA batteries. It operates between 2.7 and 2.86 GHz (E band) Mk 23, Mk 24 SNR-75 [Fan Song] is the fire-control radar for the SA-2. In DCS we have the Fan Song E, which operates in the G band, at around 5 GHz. Mk 22, Mk 25, Mk 50 (Edit 3 - this appears to be the case in DCS). SNR-125 [Low Blow] is the fire-control radar for the SA-3. This operates at around 9 GHz, in the I band. Mk 36, Mk 49 The P-15 Danube [Flat Face A] is an acquisition radar mostly associated with the SA-3 (though is also used as a general purpose search radar, particularly for the Army), in DCS we have the updated P-19 [Flat Face B], which operates in the C band, at 0.83 - 0.88 GHz. Mk 37 The P-35 [Bar Lock] is primarily an EWR/GCI radar, which operates in the E/F band. Unfortunately, it doesn't exist in DCS (though given how prolific and how well it fits in with our maps and aircraft and the fact we have an appropriate model for it, it really should). Mk 23, Mk 24, Mk 50 As for other Eastern Bloc SAMs and radars: 2K22 Tunguska (2S6) [SA-19 Grison]: 1RL144 [Hot Shot]: Acquisition radar operates in the E/F band. Mk 23, Mk 24, Mk 50 Track/Fire-control radar operates in the I/J band. Mk 36, Mk 49 - Note, wiki (citing C:MO) describes this as a J band system, which would put it beyond any of the shrike guidance sections. 9K33 Osa [SA-8 Gecko] - Land Roll (unknown native deignation) Acquisition radar operates at about 7.5 GHz, which is in the H band. Mk 36, Mk 49, Mk 50 Track/Fire-control radar operates at 15 GHz, which is in the J band. None of the Shrike guidance sections can target this. 9K35M3 Strela-10M3 [SA-13 Gopher] This one is quite difficult as some sources refer to its radar as Hat Box or 9S86 [Snap Shot]. The latter allegedly operates in the mmW range which is in the K to O bands (30 - 300 GHz), which is beyond what any of the guidance sections can target. 9K37M1 Buk-M1 [SA-11 Gadfly] 9S18M1 [Snow Drift] SR operates in the F band. Mk 23, Mk 24, Mk 50 9S35 [Fire Dome] tracking/illumination radar operates in the I/J band. Mk 36, Mk 49 9K330 Tor [SA-15 Gauntlet] - Scrum Half (unknown native designation): Acquisition radar operates in the E/F band. Mk 23, Mk 24 Engagement radar operates in the G band. Mk 22, Mk 25, Mk 50 S-200V Vega [SA-5B Gammon] 5N62V [Square Pair] FCR operates at 6.6 GHz, in the H band. Mk 49, Mk 50 At the moment the P-19 and 5N59S are used in DCS (though neither are accurate). The actual acquisition radar used for the S-200 is the 5N84A (P-14F) Oborona-14 [Tall King C], which operates in the A band, below the range of the Shrike. S-300PS [SA-10B Grumble]: 5N59S [Tin Shield B] SR operates in the E/F band (2.85 - 3.2 GHz). Mk 23, Mk 24, Mk 50 5N63S [Flap Lid B] FCR operates in the I/J band. Mk 36, Mk 49 5N64S [Big Bird B] SR operates in the E band. Mk 23, Mk 24, Mk 50 5N66M [Clam Shell] SR - this one has contradictory information, this says it operates in the I band but this says it operates in the E/F band. Mk 36, Mk 49 for the I band, Mk 23, Mk 24, Mk 50 for the E/F band. EDIT: Forgot the ZSU-23-4, its RPK-2 (1RL33) [Gun Dish] operates at around 15 GHz, in the J band. This is above all of the Shrike's guidance sections - none of them should be able to target it. I also forgot the 1L13 and 55G6, but both operate well below any of the Shrike's guidance sections can target (A/B band). EDIT 2: I also forgot the 9S80M1 (PPRU-M1) [Dog Ear] - sorry everyone. That radar is commonly associated with shorter-ranged army systems like the SA-8, -9, -13, -15 and -19 and operates in the H/I band. Mk 36, Mk 49, Mk 50 I haven't extensively tested this however and I am just going by radar band. For later systems (e.g SA-1x, I would assume the later seekers would be better equipped for them, but I'm not sure when which was introduced). EDIT 3: You can check the exact frequency that our radars are defined with, by checking the .lua definition for the unit, which can be found here - if you Ctrl+F for "Frequencies" it should take you to the appropriate line, note that the values appear to be in Hz. As an example, here's the .lua for the SNR-75V of the S-75V, on line 81 you can see the frequencies defined range from 4.91×109 - 5.09×109 Hz (i.e. 4910 - 5090 MHz or 4.91 - 5.09 GHz), which is indeed in the G band as it should be and matches this). See this table for a list of what frequencies correspond to what bands (you're looking for new nomenclature). Note that some units appear to have this undefined, the 9K35M3 Strela-10M3 [SA-13 Gopher] is one such example, some ships also don't have this defined (though some do).