Leaderboard

open beta or stable version the result would have been the same, a delay. Having one public build now is the best option, it brings the MP community together and you have more choice for servers, it is better for testing teams and development, and everyone gets new content at the same time. thank you

ED Screenshots: M1A2 SEP 1 or 2? update, with smoke launchers.

Strangle airport on the last newsletter... no Kola or Caucasus airport... EDIT: Confirmed that has Berlin Schönefeld airport.... ED "Germany" map on progress.

05 July 2024 Dear Fighter Pilots, Partners and Friends, The next DCS update, version 2.9.6, has been delayed and is currently in heavy testing and bug fixing. We sincerely apologise for any inconvenience this may have caused. It is very important for us to release updates with as few issues as possible and this extra time is genuinely required to deliver a quality product. Our initial aim was to release this massive update on 26 June 2024 and the announcement was made in our 29 March 2024 Newsletter and 19 April 2024 Newsletter. Despite the short timeframe for such a large release, we were confident we could do it based on past development experience. Indeed, we reached our internal goal and completed the roadmap that we set for ourselves and even added additional functionality to both the DCS: CH-47F and the DCS: Afghanistan map. However, some unforeseen events prevented us from meeting the schedule and we would like to share with you what caused the current delay. As you may know, we generally release one new aircraft module or map per DCS update, rarely more. In general, it takes about a month between releases to prepare for the next one. Starting in May, we released products twice a month: DCS: Kola, DCS: F-4E Phantom II, and the DCS: OH-58D Kiowa Warrior. These were planned to be topped with DCS: Afghanistan, DCS: CH-47F, and Flaming Cliffs 2024 with each product having their own specific features requiring careful integration into DCS. This is on top of the new Air Boss station for DCS: Supercarrier, many new module features and bug fixes, as well as substantial improvements to the DCS core. We overestimated our capacity to meet the challenge we had set upon ourselves but we are hopeful that you will understand our decision. Here is the event timeline for the delayed DCS 2.9.6 update: We announced the delay in the 21 June 2024 Newsletter. The decision to postpone the release was made based on 19 critical issues (stoppers) related to the DCS Core, Supercarrier, CH-47F, F-16C, F/A-18C, and F-4E. Normally, we have 5-8 stoppers a week prior to a release. By 26 June 2024 the list of stoppers had increased to 25 related to the above products, in addition to DCS: AJS-37 Viggen, DCS: F-5E Tiger II, Flaming Cliffs 2024, and the new Launcher. By Tuesday, 2 July, a tremendous job had been accomplished by the team and most of the issues were resolved. Nevertheless, the decision was made that the DCS: CH-47F should have additional time for content preparation and more detailed testing. Everything was moving smoothly when a new set of issues reared their heads. These were subsequently resolved on 3 July 2024 and we were poised to deliver the update together with the full list of fixes, improvements, and new products. However, by the morning of 4 July 2024 our QA team reported new stoppers related to AI aircraft in addition to a broken campaign and so the decision to further delay had to be made. We know that this is a very eagerly awaited update and that it will provide a lot of new and great stuff for you, including a fix to the DCS: F-15E Strike Eagle radar. However, in good conscience we simply could not let the it go out as is. A new date will soon be announced on our Discord and other social media channels once we have very high confidence in it. We would like to thank you and the Community, our third party developers and especially Heatblur for their cooperation, rapid feedback, and updates on their aircraft. The whole team at Eagle Dynamics apologise for the inconvenience and undertake to do their very best. Thank you again for your passion and support, Yours sincerely,

The problem is for every 1 chill player that can handle a bug or 2 there are a 100 who scream like banshee,s that ED is the cause of all their problems an why their wife is having an affair why their car wont start ,why they get bullied at school ,why girls think they look like a predator. its all . ED,s fault !!,. even if the base game was free they would still complain .......oh right..

Yep, it was Berlin Schönefeld Airport! https://www.mil-airfields.de/de/berlin-schoenefeld-airport.htm The picture was done from this side: Looks like version is from 1980-1990. Also notice the very distinctive taxiways and the two angled strips at the top. A little modern:

We will share the new date when we are ready, I will update the patch status forum post as usual. Please use the newsletter post now to discuss the delay https://forum.dcs.world/topic/352899-dcs-296-delay/ thank you

It does matter to us, because knowing the reason helps in finding alternative, possibly better, solutions. It is helpful for us to understand the pain point and friction rather than only getting a proposal to change something. Your request of disabling all UI is probably easier to be accomplished through a mod (edit the files in the UI/JesterDialog folder), but then you have to memorize the response options by heart if you want to use it. Which will likely run you into issues in the soon future when we greatly expand on the dialogs and mission planning features. Regarding brevity, we tried to capture the spirit of how it has been back in the '70-'80, a time where people smoked in the cockpit, ate steak and where efficient and precise communication also among the crew was something that was still currently being worked on. It is understandable if you prefer a more modern approach to crew communication and your best bet for that, as of now, will likely be user mods. Ultimately, if you do not enjoy Jester in his current EA state, it might be preferable for you to wait a few months until a lot of these early-day issues have been fixed. Until then, you can also mute Jester through the UI, or perhaps prefer flying with a human WSO.

The Low Digit MANPADS (LDM) is a simple IC compliant mod that adds in the Strela-2, Strela-2M, Shorts Blowpipe, and FIM-43C. It lacks any art assets of its own, instead using current in-game Stinger and Igla models, making the pack extremely small. Further, it uses good naming practices to ensure that it will never have any compatibility issues with other mods. This work is based on the High Digit SAM's Strela-3 implementation, and owes its creation to the work put into that mod. The mod can be downloaded here. Mod Authors: Des-mundo (original mod author, Strela-2 and Strela-2M) @Xeno426 (Blowpipe and FIM-43C) How to Install Download the latest release from the GitHub repository. Extract and copy the Mods folder into your C:\[Username]\Saved Games\DCS\ folder Featured systems Strela-2, SA-7 "Grail" The Strela-2 is an early, light IR-homing MANPADS produced in the thousands and proliferated in most major conflicts of the 70s. The mod attempts to simulate its limited capability - stemming from the uncooled IR seeker, single channel autopilot and contact fuzing. The 9M32 missile is susceptible to flares and allows for rear aspect launches. Damage output is limited due to the light, 370g explosive filling of the warhead. Strela-2M, SA-7B "Grail" The Strela-2M is a significantly improved system with capability increases across the board. It is much more likely to successfully engage fast movers. Shorts Blowpipe The Blowpipe is a mid-70's MCLOS missile from the UK, widely exported to nationa like Canada, Argentina, and even Afghanistan. It was infamous for its difficulty to use and its abyssmal hit rate during the Falklands war. Its biggest advantage is that the missile is entirely immune to countermeasures. The Blowpipe uses some of the SeaCat code to simulate the MCLOS targeting and the resulting missile trajectory. FIM-43C Redeye The Redeye was an early US-based MANPAD. The first two itterations of the weapon system (FIM-43A and B) were produced in very low numbers (only a couple hundred for the FIM-43A), and both together were less than a quarter of the FIM-43C production. It was still a mostly rear-aspect weapon, though its cooled seeker on the 43C version could potentially provide some limited front-aspect capability. In gameplay terms, these missile are dangerous to helicopters and low flying cargo aircraft. Fast jets will rarely be hit if they do at least one of the following: stay above 4500 ft use flares, especially pre-flaring (not applicable to the Blowpipe) fly fast (>300 kts, or >400 kts for Redeye) avoid flying dead straight Known Issues: the AI will attempt side-aspect launches as of now, which will almost always miss. The issue seems to be with AI behaviour, not so much as with the system's capability. the motor characteristics need tuning to better reflect the characteristics of the actual booster and 2-stage rocked motor used in the 9m32 and 9m32m The Strela-2 and Strela-2M may be overperforming, based on discussions with SMEs regarding the engagement envelope of fixed-wing aircraft, and is still being looked into. The Blowpipe may be too accurate. However, the stats are based on *extremely* limited data, and some guesswork (plus fiddling with weapon code not originally meant for MCLOS weapons) means the weapon isn't a great representation of the actual system. But it's hoped this is "good enough" for gameplay. This post was made with the permission of the original mod author, who does not have an account on the forums.

Awesome, thanks for adding this. Sometimes I prefer to think that Jester is just another guy learning the module with me, and each update is just him figuring out more tricks

Content updates require core updates, generally we would not have so many new features and product releases together, but in this case we have, as the newsletter mentioned some stoppers appeared that needed more time. When we are ready to update we will let you all know. thank you

community has an answer - Schonefeld-1985, Germania

This is incorrect. As soon as either a steady or flashing RDY is displayed on the INS page, you should be able to move your aircraft freely as it will automatically enter AUTO NAV mode, even with your INS knob set to STOR HDG or NORM. It doesn't matter if you're spooling up your engine, or you decide to taxi to the other side of the airfield, the alignment should not break. Then, once stationary again, the INS will automatically resume the alignment process without any actions from the pilot. The INS switch should only need to be set to NAV before takeoff, as AUTO NAV will only work on the ground. In fact, using these kinds of interrupted alignments should actually increase INS accuracy below 10, but this doesn't happen currently in the DCS F-16C either.

Кому лень смотреть, в треке полчаса кривого летания, с дерганьями, раскачками, борьбой с АП по направлению и прочей эпилепсией с видом от третьего лица, обычный набор управления клавиатурой

We need a high fidelity A-10A!

Once you see the patch notes and consider all that is coming with this patch, I would not call it routine.

There has been quite a few messages since my last reply, and it feels like some people in this thread think I mention all the systems I did in my post merely because I want to sit and LARP useless features, and I can tell you that this is definitely not the case. All the items I've mentioned have a direct impact on the combat effectiveness of the DCS F-16C, as well as the user experience. That is why I mentioned the things I did. As it stands currently, the DCS F-16C is unable to employ most real world tactics due to there being so many missing or inoperative systems, and its performance in combat is therefore very lackluster. It doesn't matter if you're doing BVR, WVR, SEAD, AI, or just hurling some bombs on a target. There's always several aspects of this aircraft that's missing or not working correctly, limiting your combat effectiveness in each of these roles. In my post I also put special emphasis on the SEAD role as, after all, this is the primary role of the F-16CM-50, and the DCS F-16C's performance in this role is woefully inadequate. You also have to remember that the combat environment we have in DCS is quite dated and sterile. In the 2007-era which the DCS F-16C is based on, you'd have much more capable weapon systems to face off against, which for the SEAD role would include things like both datalinked and home-on-jam SAM missiles, integrated air defense networks with intelligent and coordinated SAM operators, GPS and communications jamming, ground based radar decoys, etc. That is why I really appreciate when ED models things in depth, like the INS and its fix functions as well as GPS reception, which now enables the future addition of things like GPS jamming, which is a staple of modern warfare that even civilian aircraft and airliners have to contend with on a daily basis. And if we get GPS jamming, this also highlights one aspect of why the Digital Terrain System is important, as it, amongst many other things, increases the INS accuracy over topographically varied terrain. And all of a sudden, this has ripple effects into mission planning, where you might choose to ingress towards a target over more rugged terrain if you expect to encounter GPS jamming in order to maintain higher INS accuracy, rather than ingressing over the flat desert or ocean and having to do manual INS fixes, or it might affect which weapons you choose to employ, opting for LGB's instead of JDAMs, or it encourages you to actually make use of Offset Aimpoints or VRP/VIPs when engaging targets, et cetera. Just with the addition of a few systems, it makes the experience so much deeper, and it also gives you very good reasons to learn your aircraft more in-depth and to actually make use all the functions that have already been implemented into this product to their full potential. And for those who mainly want to hop in their jet, fly out to the range in a sterile environment, and drop some bombs on targets to blow off some steam after a hard days work, they can still do that. But it also allows people to get so much more out of the product, to get more invested into DCS as a platform, to increase customer retention, and in the end increasing future revenue for ED. These dedicated people who go in-depth are also usually the ones who creates a lot of content which benefits the entire community, stuff like tutorials, complex missions and campaigns, video content, etc., which entices new customers to join the fray and turns their toe dipping in DCS into a full submersion. And certain items I mentioned, like having a damage model, doesn't increase combat effectiveness, but it is of course an important aspect of combat. As it is right now in the DCS F-16C, the "damage model" is basically a big boolean. Either you audibly hear things hitting your aircraft, but not a single system is affected, or you die. Compared to other ED airframes, like the DCS A-10C or DCS F/A-18C, those modules actually model individual systems getting damaged, and you might actually end up utilizing emergency and backup systems to limp your jet back to base, and you might actually need to use your knowledge about how the fuel, hydraulic and electrical systems work in order to survive such an ordeal, isolate busted fuel lines, circumvent broken systems and components, etc. So when people claim the DCS F-16C has a damage model, that is simply not true because none of these things exist in what we currently have.

Hermes getting some ASW support from HMAS Melbourne And CVS-16 USS Lexington. Hopefully the S-2 will be available soon.

WIP

External cargo indicator RShift+RCtrl+P

HEY! Where did you get my pic? Nothing better than a beer in hand, and lady on your lap I say! Wait till you see my Beach bar! Now THATS what I call Service with a smile!

I will take a look at the Ford Mod soon and make sure it's working with the new SAM fixes and post a new link

@Graphics thank you for sharing with such transparency and ED team ‘s efforts to get so much great stuff done or to be delivered. People ‘s anxious, disappointment, and angry are high expectations to the great products including giant improvement in core performance! Looking forward more to come!

Jester will support that mode natively soon. Its already in the manual: https://f4.manuals.heatblur.se/jester/combat/radar.html#dogfight

seabat, I used B_47 and it worked fine for me. Cold War Assets mod\Liveries\B_47\"Example Livery Folder" I converted some of the textures from jpg to dds and increased their resolution to 8192, instead of using the blank white ones.

Coming very soon The WWII French Army And one gorgeous girl! Who gets the first date? Me first!

You must have misunderstood me here. No one is invalidating anything, we are taking the feedback very serious and are always interested in improving our product so that everyone has an enjoyable time. I am just trying to understand the underlying problem better to develop the best solution for it. For example, if you say its visually distracting and blocking parts of the main panel, an alternative approach could be to make it more transparent or move it elsewhere or make it show/hide more dynamically instead of following the suggestion of "just remove the feature entirely".

Went back and triple checked the core parking was indeed fixed. For some reason I couldnt verify that it was turned off, so I downloaded Bitsum Park Control for sharts and giggles, and well...seems like it went away. Im marking this one resolved, thanks @silverdevil.

Mig-23 ML(D)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

https://imgur.com/a/FOgHR6R https://imgur.com/a/azS6ljs Due to using the dynamic wet deck method the markings are gonna be arg based. RN early - yellow line RN late - red and white French navy US navy

You are right! Did not notice it, despite calling Berlin my home. I do wonder though: Would we expect Berlin to be in a Fulda gap map? Would be a rather big map, if it would also cover a bit of area south of the Fulda hotspots... I'm biased of course, but an 80s themed map roughly covering Berlin, Kassel (?), Frankfurt, Nürnberg would be a dream. *edit* Didn't see @Silver_Dragon's size comparison. Would still be a heavy map and probably the densest with a lot of very big cities. Nice!

There are a couple good videos about this action: and You cannot go wrong with either video, but the 2nd builds on the first.

It shouldn't matter why it is a problem. My preference would be for no visual popups from Jester because I interact with him with voice. There should be a way to mute visual popups for those who don't want them. And Jester needs to learn some comms brevity. Speaking in interminable sentences with lots of hmm and haw is extremely annoying. Example, if the clown is going to ask what the current fuel state is he should just say "Fuel State" One of the options needs to be RTB and it needs to be a Jester Command so the fussing through the wheel is unnecessary.

This is very individual. I've seen SW release delays over and over again... unless you have a very safe project it is often bound to happen. You either have to descope or delay, or often both. Alternative is to just tease without a date. Then another group will complain there is no date. I've seen interesting releases this year. Sure, there is the ongoing situation with RAZBAM, but that's PR nightmare one way or the other and will take time (good there are no dates there ;-)). If I don't read forums for a day or two I feel no anxiety about the release, there are tons of modules to play with already, why are we so focused on the ones that are not in DCS yet? Sure, we want them, sure, we're looking forward to them, but most of the bad and hard feelings about it all seem to be generated and reinforced by the vocal part of the community. I don't feel significantly worse about ED or DCS than in 2022 for instance.

Thanks for the reply, but I'm not referring to the nose high attitude. That is normal for the type. I'm a licensed rotorcraft pilot in real life, so I'm not asking about the aerodynamics. I follow Casmo and agree with his sentiments on the module and how realistic it is. What I was asking, was if there is something with the Kiowa, since I am unfamiliar with it in real life, that would cause it to be leaning the opposite direction of what it should be aerodynamically. Kinkku responded to the same bug on Discord and confirmed that they are looking into it.

As Afghanistan is mostly a coin map. We really need a more robust set of insurgent assets.

Controls: Screen Red Filter should probably be on/off/toggle rather than INC and DEC, particularly since clicking in the cockpit yields a binary switch. Differential braking doesn't seem to be a thing; maybe that's due to the nose wheels demanding their directional authority, but this seems more pronounced than on other aircraft with NWS so I thought I'd mention it. The vertical velocity meter seems like it's a little over-caffeinated. That might also be expected behavior, but it's really twitchy. Again, 'more than other aircraft', but this isn't other aircraft. I'm fine if it works correctly. There were a couple other minor things that have been bugging me lately, but I had so much fun with that zoom climb I lost track of time and She Who Must Be Obeyed wants her dinner!

Thanks! My resolution is 5120x1440. So, 1/3 of the width is 1706(see below in Special Settings). I set 'HB UI Offset' to 0 and it is now centered(see bottom pic). Also, now the Bombing Table & Manual don't open off the right edge of the screen with only 1/4" showing. And the grease pencil & VB have also moved to the center. I have 4 buttons assigned to open those windows. Yesterday, when I pressed them they acted like a toggle. They would open and close the respective window. But today, they just open the windows and I do not close them. Here is the settings you asked for. And also my MonitorSetup settings. Now it is fixed I think.

Ah, finally proof of a flat earth

Some effects are great, some not so much. But even though I will use only 3-5 effects depending on the aircraft - I will probably buy a licence.

Folks please stay on topic here, we currently have no new news about terrains to share. thank you

Так, а в связи с переносом обновления, будет продление скидки на гс2024 для владельцев гс3?

Yeah, the idea might be that one, the reality though was we all installed open beta just to see the latest content sooner while those banshees forgot it was an open beta like 1 minute after install and howled all around all the time. I don't think they are that much, not even the majority of people, probably even a just few, but howled quite aloud making a deep earworm in those who heard them. BTW, don't know when, but amazing news about that middle Europe map!! makes all the sense with the incoming MiG-29A!

Thanks we’re all aware of this workaround, the point of this thread is that it shpuld happen twice per mission in the first place.

Does it even matter at this point? Not to be rude, but the first video was released half a year too late: everyone who regularly visits the forum already knew the answers.

Daily MiG-29 Iranian 9.12B

In soviet Russia, fighter pilots are usually guided by a GCI who tells them distance and altitude to the enemy. Because of that, they built the radar in such a way so that you basically only set the range and altitude difference between you and the target. Based on the expected range and altitude difference, the radar will then looked at the expected place in the sky. Here a visualization:

WIP. The real bird is as stable as the DCS Kiowa and Shark.