Leaderboard

Back to work on the German asset pack update. Currently putting the German MAN truck based Patriot system through tests. It's based on the older Patriot setup with the AN/MPQ-53 and PAC-2 GEM missiles.

I have requested permission to do so and asked for left and right limits. If I get permission I will certainly give this a go but please be kind, I am not a you tube creator and I imagine my stuff will not be as high speed as a lot of people!

No worries about that. We just expect first hand knowledge and honesty! [emoji6] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

That and/or B-57 Canberra.

At early access launch the trim will work in a basic way, move it to desired position, press button and this becomes centre. Its a pretty standard concept for trim. Proper trim using dafcs modes will be added later during early access development. thank you

I'll save anybody a few minutes of time reading: "I talked to somebody who said it was wrong. Here is a nice little chart they drew!".

IRL you didn't need to hold the NGS button that much - just hold it when you need to turn, or give it a tap to get back on centerline. Minor corrections during taxi can be done with a bit of diff brakes, just a light tap to ease over onto the yellow line. On takeoff, first take the time to line up and roll forward with NGS off to make sure the nose gear is straight. Then, when you start takeoff, unless there is a strong crosswind you may not need any correction until the rudder works at 70 knots, or perhaps a touch of NGS, but honestly if you line up straight you will go straight long enough, if you start drifting feed in as much rudder as you need and it will work fine. On landing, rudder after touchdown, then at 100 knots start with diff brakes (you are using them anyway by then), then NGS to turn off the runway into the de-arm. Remember with a crosswind, you may have to drop the drag chute early if it starts to pull you upwind - as soon as you notice you need A LOT of rudder on rollout, jett the chute and jump on the brakes. If your finger is getting tired, you are doing it wrong! (yeah, that's what she said...) Vulture

Hello guys! New stable version of OPN was released! It includes some minor bug fixes, behavior changes, better error handling and balancing. Available here on Github as well! opn.lua

Ну к примеру, недавно участвовал в кампании. Там была типичная расстановка синие против красных, у синих было в 1.5 раза больше МФИ самолетов и флот и дальние склады и аэродромы, бомберы Б-52 которые почти с баз пускали томагавки и Авакс. А красные ничего не могли сделать имея в наличии медленные Су-25Т, Из ПКР только JF-17 (которые тоже не быстрые) на которых еще и прикрытие нужно выделять в виде МиГ-29 (МиГи-29 кстати не могли перехватить бомберов из за малого топлива и большого удаления), Скад не дотягивался, плюс он неточный. А был бы в дкс МиГ-25 в нескольких версиях, то он бы мог и отработать Х-58ми по ПВО, а так же по флоту, и разведку с бомбардировкой тылов провести, и это все не включая возможности по перехвату. По поводу быть слепцом, на нем есть ОЛС и фильтр малых высот на версиях с Сапфиром-25 (ПД/ПДС). Не думаю, что он прям такой беззащитный. Что делают на высоте F-15E? Наверное не подпускают самолеты противника, то есть дежурят в зоне. Да много чего мог бы этот модуль, если бы он был. Да и просто эстетически он очень хорош, не говоря о том, что на нем много интересных систем реализовано, как например автоматический вывод на цель по командам ОБУ, так и высотное бомбометание по ИНС. Да и сам самолет интересен своей аэродинамикой (аэродинамика МиГ-25РБ и описание многих систем в общем доступе) и управлением двигателем. Скажу больше, столько литературы в общем доступе (как в рунете так и в англоязычных источниках) нет ни по какому другому самолету. В общем я реально не понимаю, к чему придирки? В ДКСе нет красных МФИ самолетов (кроме JF-17), все в основе своей выполняют 1-2 задачи, а тут тактический разведчик- бомбардировщик , ПРР и перехватчик, а это не мало как мне кажется, плюс реально легенда (на которой будут летать даже просто для души), отвоевавшая в 8 конфликтах. Особенно хорошо впишется в карту Кольского и Афганистана.

No desperation here, just curious about your technique - which I admit I find unusual and unlikely to be accurate in the F-4. I'm more interested in your claim that the behaviour with the Yaw aug on is incorrect, when you claim to have no experience with the F-4. So what are you comparing it to? You say withYaw aug on the rudder "acts like a rubber band"? What does that mean? That the yaw stability is strong, and damping is strong? That's the point of the Yaw aug, after all - especially needed in the F-4 due to the short, low aspect ratio vertical tail and pronounced adverse yaw at higher AOA. But as far as moving the nose - the rudder seems to do that just fine for me if I need to move it, so where is the rubber band action? After all, this is a thread about how to fly the F-4 - specifically in BFM - and the behaviour of the jet in yaw is important. So if you have a good reason to think the FM is wrong, please explain why; it's early access after all and there is still plenty of tuning to be done. But if you can hit a target your way - then more power to you! Would love to see a track or video. Cheers, Vulture

Managed to the get left hand side cockpit step parts fabricated this evening, hopefully we can get the parts all edge trimmed and reassembled this week. Following which both the left and right hand side steps can be reinstalled.

You called? For anyone who might be interested, below is a PM conversation I had that alluded to some real world information sent to me by one of our many faithful forum buddies. (I've not included his name here as he sent this to me via private message) - Thought many might find his buddy's findings interesting. Enjoy: I wanted to tell you about a conversation I had at an unclassed level with a friend of mine in the fighter community. He went to the vault and looked at the lot 20 EM diagrams (402 engine) and compared them to the F-16CM block 50 F-16 with the engines we have in game -- his findings were pretty cool. He couldn't tell me numbers, to keep it at an unclassed level, but he said the difference was pylons. With pylons on the wing, the hornet will be out-rated by a clean viper. With pylons on the Viper and a clean hornet, the Hornet will out-rate the viper. Both Clean wing, and they are virtually the same with a slight advantage to the F-16. The caveat here is that the lot 20 is still G limited to 7.5Gs -- so it's engine and airframe are just generating that higher turn rate at a much slower speed -- I think around 380-ish. If the hornet gets above 400, it begins to arc, because it can't tighten down more than 7.5Gs, and the turn circle just gets really really big. This friend also told me that the hornet is playing from a very different set of rules than the F-16, and the F-16 employment manuals don't actually cover how to combat the hornet trickery. The USAF is all about aligning turn circles to kill, and you can do that pretty well against non-high-AOA fighters. But a high AOA fighter (and the navy in general) strive to have misaligned turn circles both offensive and defensively -- which allows them to change the plane of motion in ways that the opponent can't follow without overshooting. This is the classic hornet ditch -- but that ditch needs to be executed when there are misaligned turn circles, and the cue for that is seeing aspect angle out of synch with angle off nose or tail. I think this is stuff that's a bit over the nugget of most DCS players, and if they are operating from IFF manuals or the korean 3-3 viper manual -- it's just not covered in there. A lot of people's complains with flight models in BFM probably stem from this. Anyway -- bottom line is that the big engine hornet can in fact rate as well as a clean viper, but 99-100% of the time the navy is leaving 4 pylons on the hornet, where the viper maybe has 2 -- and so the advantage goes to the viper in BFM. Clean vs clean, and we just have a very small advantage in the F-16. Cheers

Хорошо быть "я уверен" на основании положения звезд на небе. ) Я вам просто скажу, что западный ЛА, при прочих равных, дает в 2-3 раза больше продаж.

Great job CH, your images look amazing. I'm looking forward to the German Assets Pack!! Thanks, CH for all that you do for the DCS Community!! We are all very lucky to have you!! I hope you're doing well, Timex 3

So, after a few hours with the Kiowa, I think I can allow myself a first judgment: You've done a really great job! It's really fun! Really great. It's great that you pay so much attention to detail. Sunglasses, to name just one. It's great that you persevered and defied all the obstacles. The result is impressive. The fact that you keep updating the Gazelle is also really remarkable. The Polychop brand now has a good reputation with me. And I'm probably not alone in that opinion. Thanks to everyone involved!

I dont want to understand how ED operates and how they make money. Thats their business. If you guys here are smarter, and want to help ED, apply to the respective position at ED. I just want to emphasize from a customer point of view, and what this thread is about: If I purchase a product even one that is labelled as "early access" and this product has certain features at the time I purchase, even if it is worked on, I expect the features to go on working. And not that it gets broken and stays broken for a year or longer.

Hi all, We are aware of the F-16 landing gear limitations and we hope to make this a bit more realistic in future updates. Thanks for your support.

Ба, я в вас не узнал коммерческого директора со всей статистикой продаж!

Plane directors need a little more time, but for the next patch airboss is planned. We hope to get a video out soon with an example of the features. thank you

wenn der Ingenieur klug war, ist das das Maximum, was der Motor verträgt ohne abzufackeln. Das geht bei den "modernen" BL (Brushless) Motoren auch einfacher als bei den Bürstenmotoren der alten FFB Sidewinder. Da ist das ein Kurzschluss und dann brennt der halt durch. Beim BL wird der Strom entsprechend geregelt und geht halt nur bis zum zulässigen Wert.

Hi, bei der echten Kiowa wird der Copiloten Cyclic aber ausgekoppelt und zentriert, wenn der Copilot mit dem MMS zugange ist. Sonst könnte der Copilot das auch kaum bedienen. Gesteuert wird das MMS über einen kleinen Force-Sense Stick oben in der Mitte vom Cyclic Griff. Da wo beim Piloten der force trim release Button ist. die verwenden das schon richtig. Linearbewegung (Pedale oder Höhenruder beim Yoke) = N = Kraft Drehbewegung (Querruder oder Stick ) = Nm = Drehmoment Das Drehmoment kann dann eben mit der Hebellänge in die Handkraft umgerechnet werden. 250N ~ 25kg für die Pedale ist auf Dauer ganz schön sportlich, gilt aber wohl auch nur bei max. Einstellung und Vollausschlag. Bei der Huey sind nach Hydraulikausfall für den Heckrotor bis zu 60 kg Fußkraft nötig, wenn nach 3 Bewegungen der Druckspeicher leer ist. Vermutlich ist aber gleichzeitig der Hauptrotor auch nicht mehr so gut bedienbar. Bei der EC-135 sind am Cyclic-Stick (ohne Hydraulik) bis zu 30 kg nötig. Mit Hydraulik, ohne Force Trim, ca. 300 gr. mit Force Trim Feder ca. 1,5 - 2 kg. (Handkraft) Die Frage nach der max. Kraft/Drehmoment eines FFB Systems ist doch: will ich Sport treiben und mit den Controls trainieren, oder möchte ich Spielspaß haben. Bei modernen Fluggeräten habe ich durch die Hydraulik eigentlich keine hohen Kräfte für Hand und Fuß nötig. Bei den älteren, ohne Hydraulik, waren die Ingenieure auch nicht dämlich und haben den Piloten aerodynamische Entlastungen in die Steuerflächen gebaut, da saßen ja auch nicht unbedingt Möllers oder Schwarzeneggers am Stick. Ja, da gibt es Rückstellkräfte, aber ich glaube nicht, das die ständig an der Grenze zum Muskelkater ausgestiegen sind.

Well I'm still waiting/hoping for my GBU-28. Beeg badaboom!

Hi, We are aware of those and will work to solve them. Some of these (for example, the threat bands that can or can't be detected or the CW coming only from a SAM launch) require work-arounds to be able to represent them in the sim but our intention is to eventually have them modelled too eventually. All this to say that we are aware of the reported issues and will solve them but they are not quick fixes that can be implemented swiftly.

All bugs in missions 10,11,12 have been fixed. Will be in the next update.

Great guide! But unfortunately it does not align with my several years of real-world experience of virtual flying with DCS naval aviators. I will outline a few of the descrepancies as I have experienced them: Case 1 Marshall Pattern Adherence Adherence to the idealized Marshall pattern geometry of 250kn and 5nm radius shall be strictly enforced. Timing, spacing, safety of flight, and deconfliction are all secondary concerns compared to achieving the idealized pattern geometry. The same with desending from the Marshall to the initial point: strict adherence to idealized geometry over rides all other flight concerns. Time in groove Despite the ambiguities of determining the exact position of 'wings level', time in grove is to be precisely quantified. Anything other than exactly 15.000 seconds in the groove will be harshly considered way too short, or way too long. Paradoxically, the strict quantification of grove timing will be waved when viewing replays or videos of carrier operations. In these situations, all groves are to be judged 'way too long'. A single frame of the video at the initial is all that is needed for this determination. Timestamps of youtube video are not considered precise enough for grove timing purposes, and for this reason a single sight picture late in the base turn is all that is needed to determine that aircraft was way too long in the grove, despite a youtube playback being close to 15-18 seconds long. Spotting the deck/dropping All succesful recoveries are to be considered as 'deck spotting' in which the aviator will be judged to have used the stick to aim for the wires, regardless of the actual flight path. Target Wire Anything other than a 3-wire landing is to be harshly critizied, even if all other landing criteria are satisfied. Comms/Zip Lip Though often briefed as mandatory, zip lip conditions can and will be overridden by any flight member at any time. Valid reasons for breaking zip-lip procedures: Lead deviates more than 0.5 feet from the given Marshall altitude block Lead deviates more than 5 feet horizontally outside of the idealized 5NM Marshall holding pattern Lead's speed deviates more than +/- 0.5 knots from the 250 knot Marshall airspeed Lead applies more than +/- 0.1g during turns to descent from the Marshall pattern Strict adherence to what is not written in CV Natops Often it is what is *not* said in CV Natops that is important, and DCS naval aviators will find many hills to die on in this regard. Topics such as whether an aircraft passes directly over the carrier deck in the Marshall pattern position 1, or flies slightly to the side to be able to spot the deck are not explicitly explained in the CV Natops manuals. However, DCS aviators will chose the one true way, and all other choices are to be considered savagely incorrect. Choose wisely. Anyway, like I said, great guide, and this just scratches the surface of the discrepancies I see in real virtual fleet aviation. Kind regards.

I have seen a few videos where a pilot has made a mistake on take off from a carrier and ended up in the drink, this one however is particularly bad. I am trying to understand what happened in this case, was it to do with incorrect trim, perhaps he increased power at the wrong moment or perhaps the catapult launch accentuated a mistake? This video shows other launches from the same day I believe. This is a great channel I have been meaning to share it previously, focus is on the lighter escort carrier ops, wealth of videos.

Dragon’s Fury: DCS F-16 Viper Campaign Tensions are rising in Asia, in July 2007 at the UN Council, the Secretary-General of the UN rejected Taiwan’s bid to join the UN under the name of Taiwan, citing the resolution 2758 that Taiwan is part of China, although it is important to note, not the People’s Republic of China. This increased the tensions between the two countries with bellicose declarations coming from the leaders of the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China, Taiwan. Military exercises from the PLA Air Force and PLA Navy have been carried out in the Taiwan Strait. The Taiwanese army (ROCA) has declared that on numerous occasions planes have violated Taiwan airspace and that PLA Navy ships have been entering Taiwan 12 miles of territorial waters. In 2007, the Chamorro Nation organized a massive protest against the U.S. military buildup in Guam. The U.S. had announced plans to transfer thousands of Marines and their families from Okinawa to Guam, along with the construction of new bases and facilities. The Chamorro Nation opposed the buildup, arguing that it would negatively impact Guam's environment, economy, social fabric, and political future. The Chamorro Nation demanded that the U.S. respect the wishes of the Chamorro people and stop the militarization of their island. The protest was held on July 21, the anniversary of the U.S. liberation of Guam from Japan in 1944. The Chamorro Nation called this day the "Day of Infamy", as it marked the beginning of the U.S. colonization of Guam. The protest was staged at the main gate of Andersen Air Force Base, one of the largest U.S. military installations in Guam. Thousands of Chamorros and their supporters gathered at the gate, holding signs, banners, and flags. They chanted slogans such as "No More Bases, No More Bombs, No More Lies", "Chamorro Rights, Not U.S. Might", and "Guam is Not Your Colony". They also sang songs and performed dances that expressed their cultural identity and pride. The protest was peaceful, but firm. The protesters blocked the entrance to the base, preventing any vehicles from entering or exiting. They also confronted the military personnel and contractors who worked at the base, demanding that they respect the Chamorro land and people. They also delivered a petition to the base commander, asking him to halt the buildup and to return the land to the Chamorro people. The 23rd Fighter Squadron was reactivated in 2007 as a reserve unit, flying the F-16 Fighting Falcon. The squadron was based at Homestead Air Reserve Base in Florida, and its mission was to provide combat-ready pilots and aircraft for various operations. The squadron members are reserve pilots some of them experienced from the conflicts in the Gulf and Afghanistan, they are carrying the long-standing tradition of the 23rd Fighter Squadron, The Fighting Hawks. To boost the US Air Force presence in Asia, The Fighting Hawks are ordered to relocate to Guam for a series of training exercises that will increase the interoperability of the Fighter Squadrons in the USAF, Marines units and the SAC units already based in Guam. The Fighting Hawks will be flying alongside the 336th Fighter Squadron “The Rocketeers” flying the F-15E, 67th Fighter Squadron “Fighting cocks” flying the F-15C, VMFA-112 “The Cowboys” flying the F/A-18C, and units from 7th Bomb Wing flying B-1B Lancer and 307th Bomb Wing flying the B-52H. The support of the training operations will be carried out with tankers and E-3s based at Andersen; other units may be assigned during this month-long exercise. However, their story is about to change. Developer Notes: In this 15 missions campaign you will fly the DCS F-16 Viper as part of the 23rd Fighter Squadron. The campaign starts after your deployment in Guam, where you are stationed at the Andersen AFB. At the start of the campaign, you will be involved in an escalating conflict between US troops and Chinese PLN and PLA forces that are attacking the Mariana Islands under the pretext of helping Chamorro Nation gaining independence. As a pilot for the 23rd Fighter Squadron, during this campaign, you will have to face various challenges that will put your F-16 piloting skills to test. During the campaign you will face J-11, J-16, Su-30 fighters, and H-6 and Tu-160 bombers. True to the F-16 capabilities, in this campaign you will fulfill the role of a multi-role fighter, being involved in a multitude of mission roles, SEAD/DEAD, CAP, CAS, precision strikes in day and night operations. The campaign is designed to operate with large strike packages, in several missions you will fly alongside F-15C, F-15E, F-18, B-52, E-3 and KC-135 while trying to repel the PLN forces. Although the missions are designed to be flown without AAR, tanker support is available throughout this campaign. The campaign is designed to replicate an integrated defense network, with SAM units, AAA, reacting to the player reactions and the reactions of the supporting aircraft, and reacting to jamming and target suppression. Ground crew interactions are also replicated in this campaign, along with over 4000 voiceover recordings, kneeboards and so on.

High time I shared this channel with you chaps. Came across it a few months back, a wealth of videos of various aircraft being launched, landing and general life on board escort carriers during WW2. https://youtube.com/@vmtb143mike?si=x9vBDd3nu8MiDK3B

Digital cockpits weren't really a thing in its time. Even the early F-16 only had that 7-segment display thing, and that was considered spiffy. Most early 4th gens looked more like Mirage 2000 or the Tomcat. Judging from the FC3 model, visibility was OK, not F-16 level, but not bad. It was a defensive interceptor and a dogfighter, roles in which it performed admirably. It wasn't a revolutionary design like the Viper, but far from crude. Sure, it was simpler than something like the Eaglejet, but one could look at it as being no more complex than it had to be. Air to ground was perfectly adequate and on par with other Soviet fighters of the time. Generally, Soviets preferred use dedicated ground attack jets as opposed to making one airframe do everything.

Got the module today and I`m very impressed with the flight model, the feel, the systems, just everything feels good! Absolute banger Polychop, thank you for this module!

Полностью согласен. Dcs это про симулятор, для серьезных, состоятельных людей, живущих авиацией. Тут приветствуется абсолютно разные самолёты. На с130 вряд ли можно на 7g виражиться, а на Чиннуке врядли можно аннигилировать наземку. Но они будут интересны своим функционалом.

I’ve asked him. He has requested permissions, he’s just waiting for an answer.

Ссылка в начале первого поста, в моде есть: Ту-4К Ту-16 Ту-95КД Ту-22Д Ту-22КД Ту-126 Ту-128М Як-28 B-47 B-58

Yes, until M3 make a 21 v2.0. Very difficult with old the old code from Lomac that the 21 code has. It needs a whole new code from scratch. (Sorry for my English, writing from a mobile)

Ive yet to do the wings or the final section of the fuselage rivets, not looking forwards to that one nullThe wing rivets are there but I'm not happy with them and I think I used the incorrect spacing for them so it will need refining

First of all, we are talking about a post I made four years ago And just to clarify: I love to have many liveries for a module. Don't get me wrong. But when I made the post 4 years ago it was the time the F-14 module came out with a HUGE amount of disk space just for liveries. I mean nearly 14 GB just for liveries of one module. I earn almost every module but I have to uninstall a few terrains to get only the module installed I'd like to have. And at this time I saw also those multiple Spanish Air Force liveries for the F/A-18 module which just were different for the immatriculation number. I love to have many liveries but for such amount an optional livery pack would have been way better. But, and I hope you all are reading this far in my post, I applause Polychop for adding 60 liveries but only using 3 GB. THAT's what I as a customer and Software Engineer myself expect from a good company. To also keep in mind those customers, that have to uninstall modules because of a HUGE amount of space in CoreMods folder, where everything is stored also for modules customers don't have.

Not sure if this is what you are looking for... 1. Target ID (Bob Up Button) or NAV UPD button for Fly Over Point - https://youtu.be/5wcTxvA4PJ8?t=446 2. Target Locate with laser for PrePt - https://youtu.be/5wcTxvA4PJ8?t=1497

There should be three separate links available. Added two alternate links.

I walked that pavement day after day, night after night. Worked on every one of those Phantoms. Your third picture, they put up the lights while I was there. This one would be lovely. I watched it burn and then I got to watch it come back and land after being rebuilt.

null nullAnd my personal favourate

I was wondering if it was just me. Seems like a "fix" would entail the radar working without me messing with my system date (and then correcting whatever havoc that might create).

The community is made up of people with a spectrum of real world flight experience or knowledge. Those that state that airplanes don’t have any feedback really don’t understand what force feedback does. And often times they think force feedback is the same thing as just rumbling effects. I think this is what makes consumer-level Moza/Winwing FFB sticks so exciting. It will allow simmers to feel the differences between airplane designs/eras. FFB is perfect for simming the aerodynamic loads on control surfaces of cable/pushrod controlled planes, the hydraulic feel of early hyd-boosted planes, and the “engineered/designed” stick-feel of later designs (assuming proper telemetry on the software side). Just because a real F18 doesn’t transmit actual aero forces to the pilot, doesn’t mean FFB is irrelevant, like some would say. It would be awesome to experience the changes in stick-feel for different regimes/configurations that are designed into any FCS/FBW airplane. This is a whole new layer of sim experience for a sim nerd like me! And don’t get me started about helicopters. Super excited about all of this. My only fear is the power of youtube reviewers that might not understand what FFB is, that can easily set back people’s understanding of what FFB does. I’d hate for FFB hardware and software development to get derailed by opinions of a big customer base that lacks an understanding of what FFB is primarily meant to simulate. On a side note…my theory is that Winwing and Moza are co-developing these. Winwing has the commercial flight simulation expertise, and Moza has the FFB tech expertise.

Screwing around with your system date is not a fix.

Hey Yall, I've been sharing this where I can, might as well throw it in here, but so far it seems the Mk49 Mod 1 missile is essentially universal, I've got it to track SA-2, 3, 6, 8, 10, and 11s fairly reliably, for killing fire cans I haven't tried yet but the Mk49/1 seems to take the cake for angriest shrike seeker head.

Here is a photo of a Royal Jet 600 CL tank, note the bolted seam along left lower side of the center of the tank. This is not present in the McDonnell tanks as far as I know.

Пора уже ЕД самим браться за советские модули (вести более активную политику в этом отношении): вернуть к жизни МиГ-21бис; доделать разбамовский МиГ-23МЛА; взяться за создание МиГ-27Д/К или Су-24; по аналогии с МиГ-29А доработать Су-25 в модификации К, а можно и "Скорпион"; проконтролировать работу над Су-17М3. Поверьте, этого хватит для 80-90% красных, как я, чтобы не вылазить из DCS и серверов типа ECW, ВF'80 и даже SDCS с DDCS. Не нужны здесь Су-30, Су-35, Су-34. Да и эти смартсамолеты удовольствия такого не доставляют (надоели уже), как будильники, НПП, АРК и прочие аналоговые радости))) Думаю пример Ми-24П наглядно показал популярность советской техники, а онлайн ECW и BF'80 востребованность аналоговой авиации среди пользователей.