Leaderboard

We are still working on some stoppers and they will need testing, at the moment I do not have a new date to share sorry. Splitting into parts would just make this patch more complicated and more time consuming. This is an unusual patch as it is a very busy one so we just have to make sure we get it right. thank you

Silence, we are creating... null

It shows the process and the tasks are complex, and if we need to take time to fix an issue we will do. Beta was being used as a release version by the public, of course everyone wants the new content quicker, regardless of it being stable or open beta the result would have been the same in this case, a delay. As soon as we have a new date for the patch we will let everyone know. thank you

The post was a well-thought-out and descriptive explanation one what this person thought was missing or not working, so I want to take our time and give the best answers on everything I can.

Dont worry at all, and thank you for giving feedback, we appreciate it. I hope we do get Nam one day We usually pick from community members who are helpful here on the forum or discord, or have particular skill sets in DCS, I started as a volunteer in 2013 just by helping people on the forum.

Actually, the idea of Open Beta as I understand it - is to give users an Open Beta version for testing - not to have access to features earlier if you're happy with the bugs. Yes - some may use it for game play, but that wasn't the intended purpose. I too would love to see Open Beta and a Release version, as I would love to be able to test out the new features with my current missions and scripts, and have time to work on (or give feedback of bugs) prior to it actually going to the live main missions and servers - you know, use open beta for actual beta testing like I used to... But ... ED tried that, and it failed. More people used Open Beta, not for testing but actual game play. Then more server owners switch to Open Beta for their main servers because more people wanted features sooner. Then more players went to Open Beta servers because that's where most of the players are. Then ED had to recommend a 'beta' version for new players to use for multiplayer because there were too fewer serves on Stable release in comparison. Then players got upset that there were bugs in the Open Beta version because it was their 'main' install for playing even though it was labelled Beta. There are plenty of complaints on this forum about people upset with the bugs in Open Beta because it was effectively the main version. Then for the few of us remaining on stable for primary gaming and using open beta for testing (as designed)... well, the actual release cycles got further delayed out sometimes to 3 or 4 months to a point where we were either left way behind, or compelled to switch to Open beta. It was a deadly spiral that was only getting worse with each passing month. So, while I would love to see Open Beta returned as Open Beta and see it treated as a true "Beta" test version, I know it's not practical because it won't be treated as a "Beta" test version. Even the replies here seem to indicate that people want it because they want the features sooner, not because they're willing to do actual beta testing, or provide proper bug reports. (With tracks, etc). So, I think ED have made the best choice under the current circumstances, where beta users are vetted to those who actually will use it for "Beta" testing purposes - so we don't run into the same issues we had again previously. Yes - this sucks for me as well, because I too, am outside of that closed beta circle - and though I would really love to do some scripting on the new features soon to be released both to have scripts ready on release day, and beta test missions to know that they're going to work with the new changes on the day of release (the real reason for a beta version), if it's between having what we had a year ago , vs what we have now - I'll take what we have now.

I wish some of y'all could see/understand the software industry a bit better. I have been in it for 20+ years, and delays are part of the norm. Do you want a busted game? Do you think that ED is intentionally holding the release back just to exert some form of control over their users? Do you think that they are delaying the fix to that backlog bug because SoAndSo wants it real bad? I call BS. There is never a guarantee in development. Numerous factors, some out of your control, always play into every release. ♫ One bug down, pass it around, 27 more bugs found in the code. ♫ Calm down. This is not heart surgery; no one is (hopefully) going to die because you couldn't fly your new airframe in whatever week of the month that you thought you would be able. Just stop with the overly dramatic drama. Don't uninstall; don't come here just to tell the devs off; stop flailing your arms. This happens every single time a release is delayed. Accept the things that you cannot change... </2¢> Take care, and be excellent to each other.

I don't have the document available right now but will try to post it later. There is a very nice overview of the US Navy Maritime Strategy in the 80s (internal briefing for officials). The Navy wanted at least (the more the better) 3-4 carriers into the Norwegian Sea, 2-3 carriers into the Med, 0-1 to deal with the Soviet Indian Ocean Squadron and the rest of the available Pacific Fleet carriers (I think 6-7) in the Pacific. None were initially foreseen for Germany.

Would have been funnier if there was, but sadly no, just toilet roll blowing in the wind and cubicles knocked over.

Broken some of the issues into individual bug reports and locked them for now as I investigate. Tankers is not specific to the F-16 Manual is WIP and I am sure it will improve but its resource intensive as we only have so many working on documentation Jealousy I haven't digested yet, but documentation for one module doesn't mean its available for another, some things can transfer over but its not always as clear cut. This will take me some time to dig through, so I ask for patience as I mix this with other tasks, thanks.

I see how Afghanistan is split up. (I pre-ordered that!) I'm thinking "if" that works out well, a Vietnam Map should maybe be split up similarly. Helo's and CAS work are mainly central and south, while the "lead sleds" are mainly up north, coming from Thailand and Yankee Station.

In 1994 there wouldn't have been parts of the (then former) inner border left, as they were shown in one of the ED trailers. Either the "Partnership for peace" sign, or the inner border must be an anachronism, if they are on the same map. Maybe the sign is just an oversight? Even if the theme is the German reunification (or a fictional failed reunification) it would still make sense to date the map around 1989. 1994 doesn't make sense at all.

I appreciate the transparency, as well as that things are laid out here on the forum. Bug fixes and updates I’m happy to wait for. I’d rather whatever’s released works as it should, if there are bugs that turn up to be squished by all means squish em. So long as the communication’s here and clear I’m all good. It’d be nice to be crashing me Hook today but I’d rather wait and crash it myself than have it now and let it crash itself, along with a CTD or something. For now I can busy myself chasing tankers or trimming trees with props. Busy, busy

Very good video, thanks for sharing! I can also recommend this book, which describes great insights and personal experiences from a Chinook pilot. Absolutely amazing. Sweating the Metal by Alex Duncan | Hachette UK

Threads merged. As soon as we have a new date for the patch we will let you all know. It depends on the fixes and the testing of those fixes now. thank you

We have recently added grass and trees being affected by thrust from various engines / downwash. As much as I would like to see a row of portaloo's blown over in the downwash and thrust from engines ( seen it happen in real life with a Chinook ) I think it would be low priority feature request.

Good Morning Everyone. I created a spur-of-the-moment 3d model of the Ticonderoga Class Cruiser. I will share it with you all in the next couple of days. Also, I will release the Italian mods soon as well. I will not wait for an ED's update. It's like Murphy's Law. What can go wrong, will go wrong. Stay Tuned.

Here: https://irp.fas.org/doddir/navy/strategy1980s.pdf I belief you will find this a most interesting lecture. The Navy was very much prepared to fight what they called a Global Conventional War.

Don't help having long range bombers to places that don't existed anymore or have modern skyscrapers. Vietnam today doesn't look like Vietnam in 1970. Tokyo today. Don't look like Tokyo in 1944 etc. So no spherical earth is of no help for historic maps. And Wags himself has said the historic maps(named Vietnam and Korea specifically) will need their own map. Separate from spherical each that will be modern.

Some new articles and videos which, albeit seen from the F-4E's perspective, can be applied to almost any other fighter: https://flyandwire.com/f-4e-phantom-ii-articles/ Plus, given the little spare time these days, I tried something new, breaking down a 30-minute video I am working on into shorter, more digestible bites. Contrary to older articles, I put much more emphasis on the visualisation of the topic, rather than the maths. Upcoming videos may be even much shorter and cover Aspect (TA/AA), ATA, Cut/HCA(DTG) and so on. Once this bit is done, I will move to something quite cool and applicable to any aircraft, albeit again seen from the Phantom II's perspective.

i am sure there are people who are looking to use the sale in conjunction with this update ( fc 2024). Are you going to extend the sale?

Silencio, estamos creando... Esto va a traer "Kola"...

Cheers for the update here, I don’t do discord so well done. I’ll have to check on another device as I can only see the wing damage pic on what I’m using now. Pretty sure it’s a forum thing that’s messing with pics, not much any of us can do unless we start linking to image hosts or whatnot. Looks as though you’ve been busy too. Good stuff . I thought of this the other night watching a great little thing on the telly with Guy Martin joining a team recovering a Lanc. Amazing what can be done and the fact that it is done at all is a credit to everyone involved. I’m sure most here wouldn’t have missed it Had to spank my hand on Sunday at the end of an airshow weekend. Just stopped myself shelling out for more Lancaster bits . I told Mrs Slippa I could do with another cap for trackIR, I want a summer one with perforations to breathe air on the bonce and the one with the Lancaster on was giving me the eye and showing a bit of cleavage. I just managed to keep walking by and resisted (for now anyway). Just as well I did. Further along I turned my back for a minute and ‘someone’ had just spent £15 on a tub of hand made Turkish delights! - I think she’d been hypnotised or something and I got us out of there sharpish. Keep up the good work team. Video updates with flashing lights, landing challenges et al always welcome. No pressure, no pressure .

I'm easy ... like Sunday morning.

I used Open Beta exclusively. But, I KNEW it was a Beta. I knew it would have bugs. I reported a couple frustrating ones in the past. But I flew public missions with the understanding that things would (often) be FUBAR. Occasionally, things would get hilarious like aircraft bouncing hundreds of meters in the air, sometimes to disappear completely. Sonic booms would bring chuckles when someone rubber-banded. As frustrating as "wait" is, I value a good, solid release more. Get it right, ED; I'll wait. There's nothing out there like the miracles that you have given us.

Hi, I've been keeping away from forums, social media for the same reason chump here described. The drama, hate at times is not worth it. Chump puts it quite nicely here. However, I don't think most of the anxiety comes from "I want to fly my chopper now or I am done with DCS". It is sharing of information instead. My total disappointment as I believe others too comes from this lack of update, information. I'm in a similar industry, engineering industry with SW, HW development. I can't see a scenario where we would be able to keep almost total ban on updates from customers who put a down payment (pre order) on our products. Our customer calls, or wants a visit to see progress. Under what circumstances I would be refusing to reply or provide an update of our progress? That's what frustrates 60% of users here. Release couple of images, a short video, people keep quiet for another week. This, almost secretive, selective approach breaks trust. The same goes with updates around Razbam fiasco. Withholding progress updates, explanation of delays, etc.. is the only thing hurting DCS. It is not the actual reason for the delay. Every sensible professional understands the reasons. Finding updates from 3rd party or 3 days too late, not knowing where my preorder money went to is what is frustrating. Big release like this....a few screenies, Wag's video and we smile for two weeks while you fix bugs. My 2 cents anyway T

Your RWR can detect anything between .5 -16Ghz or 18Ghz for new systems. If it does not know what it is, it will classify it as UNK and display it that way, and will help your Deception repeater to to use Sine Wave Modulation techniques for systems it can't positively identify The AN/ALR-45Fs Threat Library memory chip, was a programmable PROM, we would get new Threat Data from the Pentagon or wherever.. we could take it (floppy) and load it into a chip programmer, and with those PROMS update the threat library. They had plug ins for the DIP style PROMS, we removed the plug in and hard soldered them in to the card. You don't use plug in chips on a carrier aircraft.. LOL. The AN/ALR-67 was build by default to update the Library PROM easily. We didn't even need to remove the chip, it's a EEPROM. and use ultraviolet light to erase it. We did the same with the FCES RPYC CMT card when I worked for Boeing's ARF at NAS Lemoore.

Not really. They missed two dates and sections of the community started throwing tantrums. It makes sense that they hold off on announcing a new date until they're sure they can actually hit it.

Sinai update wont be in the next patch, even with the delay ( we dont want to add more stuff that may create additional problems ) it will most likely be the next one after testing is completed. thank you

Hi, thanks for your report. So far we have been mainly adding armament for which we had evidence that was used IRL. In any case, it is logic that the bombs you mention would be possible to be carried, so we have added them. They will be available in a next update (not in next one yet).

## __**Updates between 1st May - 6th July 2024**__ Hello everyone, here are the updates so far since we've last spoken to you! - Changed to programmatic sideslip drag, removing reliance on OpenVSP beta angle parameters. - Wing divided into 4 sections, flaps given new aerodynamics. - Roll Stabilised. - Oxygen system now working. - Refactoring of dihedral effect in aerodynamics. - Elevator and center of pressure implemented. - Fixed issue with autopilot initiation and bombs not dropping. - Differential braking and brake gauges added. Braking pneumatic logic rewritten - Keybindings overhauled. - Stall behaviour and speeds improved, tailplane is also now computed from airfoil. - Fixed some broken bombs. - Reduced elevator authority and replaced briefing image. - Exhaust and engine textures added. - Autostart fixed. - Tail wheel and ground handling improved. - Minor fixes to collision model. - Oxygen system hitboxes added. - Vera livery and external model update. - flight model refactored, prop strikes now kill engines. - Radiator flap animations and pneumatics. - ID lights, Nav lights, Landing lights, model fixes done. - Landing lights now work. - Rudders converted to airfoil based aerodynamics. - Climb performance calibrated for new aerodynamics. - Landing light effect and nav light illumination added. - Wing UV adjustments and visual damage textures on right wing added. Thank you! Small dev update from discord for those without.

The switch on the throttle is a 3-way switch where the afft position (out, extend) is springloaded to return back to center (stop). The bind mimics that behavior.

The ´89 cold war warsaw pact vs. NATO scenario would be the best fiiting era and place for a most admired DCS scenario. . . historical data of all military installations and bases are given in masses, once a day a shot of each square meter was taken from outer space to document a minor change or movement of assets. Gemany, especially the eastern part was very well observed and known by agents and spy planes and later satellites. All historically data were given and no more confidential, even all reports from CIA. So, can´t wait. This will be the Crown of DCS, our most beloved simulation. Cold war scenario means high end and state of the art, best place for all simulated assets. Minor changes must be made (A-10, Su-25 etc. . . but at least, we need definitley the MiG-23 ML(D), MiG-25PD and RB(T) and Su-17M3 / M4 and the mighty MiG-27D and K, I would also like to see the Yak-28 and the Su-7.

Precioso modelo, sera un placer emplearlo en mis misiones

It can definitely be done, no problem. I will not promise any date, though because the way the code is written will make it necessary to go through a lot of functions to check, an make sure nothing else gets broken. But I will look into it

Of course you never know what would have happened under specific circumstances, but doctrinally the carriers had little to no role in central Europe. Naval aviation is really expensive (carriers, aircraft, training), so it doesn't make much sense to use it in places where you can also use cheaper land based aircraft. Unless of course there would be nothing better do to for the naval aviation, i.e. in limited post-Cold War conflicts. But during WWIII there would have been no shortage of tasks for the navy. The USN was expected to engage the Soviets and its allies on accross the globe and generally did not have the number of carriers it thought it needed to cover all commitments (Norwegian Sea, Mediterranian Sea, Pacific, Indian Ocean). So I don't see it supporting the initial defense of Germany. I could imagine that naval aviation would have been used to support a proposed amphibious landing of a Marine division on Jutland a little time into the war for the defense of Denmark. Or if things went really bad, to support a landing during a counter-offensive on occupied western Europe a couple weeks/months later.

Funny but... no, not at that detail level. What's wrong with that? It's just an option.

Apache flies great All axes curves are linear by default.

M for management is the same, but C & R should be “Crew Resource”. Unless Jester has ideas for his next career.

Yes, this topic is still active. What exactly do you need help with? Have you read the guide at all? All of the information is there to help you with this problem in step 3. Give it a go, and if you still need help, pop back and provide further details. Good luck.

I'm not sure we have enough insight to make that statement, but yes, it looks like the software would need a clean-up effort, with no feature additions during that time. As to Open Beta, I'm one of those who used Open Beta only, with the Stable version only in backup. But I agree, it cannot work for the reasons mentioned above. For a beta test version you need a population of disciplined users who follow the defined process for reporting issues/bugs, examine issues thoroughly and document them clearly.

Some countries drive on the left, some drive on the right. They both get where they’re going. Neither is wrong, Back seat Brian can calculate as a cross check. The audible indexer is mainly used for ease - it will always give tone at the correct angle for weight. Fly the tone on finals to land (amongst other things that tone can be used for). If mental arithmetic is your thang’ then by all means, calculate your “on speed” and perform a greaser.

O they see... the question is will they do something with it?

Sounds peculiar. In real life when most antiship missiles enters the final phase turns on its seeker and lock the target, then performs its final maneuver. A lot of missiles have pop-ups or a final speed boost. It all happens very quickly. In normal cases there shouldn't be possible for it to miss the target and then go around for another go. Especially since a lot of them have a downward trajectory, and it would be impossible to recover from either hitting the target or the water.

Wait, what?? I can't hold a hover close enough to pick up a bad case of...whatever that is Laobi always goes on about, but after how many years I've never even heard of this? Now I have to check it out when I get home. I avoid that octagon on the AH-64 because I already know I've already hovered myself into a neighboring map. You misspelled 'Cyrillic' . Just wait until you have to hear the difference between shcha and shcha. Those are two different letters, and SWMBO just laughs at me. Then I make her pronounce TH properly...

Thanks, Silver Dragon. I was just discussing the Harpoon Missiles and or RGM-84s. We normally use EDs Harpoon (RGM-84) missiles but they need more attention as they are not very accurate. The Surface to Air missiles we create are pretty accurate and they pick the harpoons off like Flies. As mentioned I mainly use Wikipedia and Seaforces as my reference material. https://www.seaforces.org/. For missile speed in milliseconds, I use https://www.metric-conversions.org/speed/mach-to-meters-per-second.htm I forgot one Mod. A birdy brought up the Canadian Frigate mod. So it will done this week as well. It will be a remake of the HMCS Montreal. This will be HMCS Charlottetown FFH-339. The Italian Frigate Andrea Doria and French Frigate Forbin are up next but they will take time. At least a couple of weeks to complete. \

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

nulla first proof of concept for wing damage visuals, just figured out how to do this

Pilot error So back on topic. A really tuned curve set is important with the game. I remember when I first demoed the module with a turtle beach velocity one controller I hated it. Then once I got the rest of my gear, I still hated it lol. I felt like I was constantly fighting the controls. Once I tuned the axis curves, a totally different experience. I think my curves are at about 20 for the Cyclic axis and 15 for the rudder controls. But I guess YMMV depending on your gear. Now if only my wingman would stay alive.