Leaderboard

We cannot express enough gratitude to our community for your continued support and passion. It is your commitment to the art and science of flight simulation that drives us to continually improve and expand the DCS experience. First place: Rasboy. $100 ED Miles Second place: Golden JAMMER. $50 ED Miles Third place: Kino_67. $25 ED Miles Here are some of the incredible screenshots that have made this competition a tough one to judge!

In my opinion, first place is way too generic to have won. Just place two ships and a F/A-18 and win. People have set up crazy missions in the ME to get a perfect picture of a combined operation meanwhile first place looks so effortless.

I have been eagerly waiting for a full fidelity MiG-29 for many years and your announcement came in as music to my ears. Based on this I would like to clarify one of the biggest misconceptions for your planned module. Its name. In the history of the Fulcrum there has never been a fully fledged MiG-29A version. The MiG-29A that is so erroneously used by many, was a plan in the mid 70s to create a MiG-29 version with the MiG-29 body design, but with the MiG-23ML avionics and weapons (this had the identification project 9.11A). photos attached This was a proposal to close an existing gap in the Air Force quicker. It never materialised and was cancelled in 1977. So the initial version of the MiG-29 meant for the Soviet air force was called just that, MiG-29 or izdeliye 9.12. The export version of that, to Warsaw Pact countries, was called MiG-29 again, but the identifier was izdeliye 9.12A (it was a slightly downgraded version of the 9.12) The export version to non Warsaw Pact countries, was called again MiG-29, but now the identifier was izdeliye 9.12B (it was a more downgraded version of the 9.12) To sum all this information up I would like to urge you to use from now on, the correct name for the full fidelity module you have in the works which is: MiG-29 9.12A Sources A. Fomin, A. Mikheev, E. Gordon

Shoutout to this guy who came up with a very elegant screenshot by having a clever composition. You were robbed by the MFD Hornet mafia. I see you bro.

30 August 2024 Dear Fighter Pilots, Partners and Friends, We are delighted to present the 3 winners of the DCS Screenshot Competition 2024! With over 650 entries it was wonderful to see so much talent. Thank you all! The quality of the screenshots presented was exceptional and selecting the three stand out images which best represent DCS was tricky and involved a lot of back and forth. Congratulations to all the participants and applause to the victors. Check out the winning screenshots below. As recognition for the large number and quality of the entries, we decided to award the top 20 runners up with 5,000 ED Miles each! Congratulations! Thank you again for all your great images and for your time. We hope you will continue to pursue your DCS adventures and look forward to hearing from you soon! Thank you for your passion and support. Yours sincerely, Eagle Dynamics Screenshot Competition 2024 Showcasing our talented contenders These screenshots and many others stood out for their beauty, narrative, and technical excellence, making our selection process both challenging and immensely rewarding. We cannot express enough gratitude to our community for your continued support and passion. It is your commitment to the art and science of flight simulation that drives us to continually improve and expand the DCS experience. First place: Rasboy. $100 of ED Miles Second place: Golden JAMMER. $50 ED Miles Third place: Kino_67. $25 ED Miles Here are some of the incredible screenshots that have made this competition a tough one to judge! Here are the top 20 runners up. $5 ED Miles each. Thank you to all who participated, we are blown away by your talent and creativity! Please join us in congratulating the winners and all the participants of the DCS Screenshot Competition 2024 and make sure to join us in the next one! Stay tuned for more events, updates, and community features. Blue skies and safe landings to all! Thank you again for your passion and support, Yours sincerely,

Wasn't one of the requirments -No external software or post-processing enhancements-? Some obiously did, nonetheless there are some great winning pictures

all ok, I'm working on refrigeration plant IRL and now no time, plus hands in gloves. My englishe became too bad - lots of work u can see. But I will bring my hands back on mods ASAP.

Here's a small group of haters blowing up up their personal disfavour about a 3D-models presentation. Over month now there's nothing new- just the repetitive pointing on unbelievable disappointing cosmetics. Others told them they're fine with that level of aesthetics. Positions exchanged about a topic of minor importance. Polychop took notice of the displeasure, they will react according to their priorities. That's it, usually. But some guys here feel the need to cultivate an obsession. Seen them starting a comparable flame-war against EA because of the outdated and dishonourable impression of the Huey? THE iconic helo-warbird - it's graphics are imperfect, too! How they endure the worst offence against quality-standards in simulator-business ever? This thread just feeds some trolls who campaign against Polychop over many weeks now.

Congrats to the Winner! But! Just my opinion. There are so many better ones than the winning picture? There's no need to spend time on a perfect shot when it's obviously enough to see an F18 take off on an aircraft carrier as seen 1000 times before.... + and also shows poorly resolved clouds...?! Personally, I don't care who won, I'm just a bit critical of those who “really” made an effort to create a nice screenshot without post-processing. There were plenty of them in this competition! Cheers

How to reproduce: With FCR in TWS, it takes a long time and a large number of hits to create a Track Target. As per the F-16C Early Access manual says, "These targets disappear after a few sweeps if a track cannot be obtained. If a valid track is obtained, usually after being detected on two consecutive sweeps, the contact automatically becomes a Track Target.". In the example, I was using a scan of 10º, with 1 bar elevation. This is the smallest scan possible and the fastest update rate as well. Even with the target well below 20 miles, it took a large amount of hits to upgrade it to Track Target. F-16 radar.trk

Thank you so much to ED for this award!! I still can't believe it!! I understand those who didn't like my photo; I also prefer many others over mine. Even so, I dedicated time to making it the best it could be. Thank you once again, and congratulations to the other winners and to all the photos submitted in general. Best regards!

So with this in mind, the F-4E is not well simulated and lacks resources because it has a 3D model and textures that are close to the real model of the aircraft. And another thing! The programmer does not interfere in the 3D design or the texture designer. Each one has their role. Now, if Polychop is formed by only one person who did the programming, the 3D model and the textures. This would justify the current state.

Using @tmz's miz from the first post I ran back-to-back tests in 2.9.5 and 2.9.7 with the same options.lua. The results were as described before with the 2.9.5 running as expected and spending plenty of time at the set fps cap of 95. The 2.9.7 run struggled to get out of single-digit fps. I then ran the test again with RTSS overlay running in order to use presentmon to gather frame metric data. I think the CPUBusy metric points to what many have already suggested, which is that whatever new "logic" was added in 2.9.6/2.9.7 has resulted in missions that were playable becoming completely CPU-bottlenecked and unplayable. 2.9.5 2.9.7

It is finally time to get back in the game… I have been a Hornet fan forever and have owned and flown probably every F/A-18 simulator ever released including Janes, Hornet Korea, and MSFS etc… but DCS has always been the favorite. In the beginning (1999) I hated flying a desk, and I really wanted some kind of “cockpit”. We were living in a rental with limited space so I wound up building the “Akers-Barnes Cockpit Mark 1” which I found plans for on the 62nd Fighting Falcons site. Served its purpose well, but less than a year later we bought a house and now I had the best thing ever… room to build bigger! At the time, the most detailed information I could find were CAD files for a Hornet cockpit, but I can’t remember where they came from… Hornetpits.org maybe? Anyway, I finally got started on my pit in 2001 and got to a point where the cockpit shell was complete and painted, Suncom SFS Talon stick and throttle (which I still have somewhere) installed, and the old 17” CRT Monitor up front. The original plan back then was three monitors with Fresnel lenses to give a false big screen view, three Thrustmaster Cougar MFDs (with a DIY LCD retrofit), and I even bought a first surface mirror and started working on a live HUD. As far as the panels were to go, I installed Dzus rails along the length of the left and right consoled to make installing and maintaining the panels easier. At the time there were a handful of places on the internet that I could find prefab panels but the thought of wiring, programming, and the software interface seemed a little daunting so I was content with making blank aluminum panels and gluing printouts of the panels on them. Spent quite a bit of time in that rig but before I could devote time to all that work… life, work, and lack of funds took over. I started flying again a few years ago, upgraded from my Thrustmaster Cougar to the Warthog (never was a big F-16 guy) and I decided I was going to buy a 3D printer and start making pit parts. Fast forward to today and becoming aware of Open Hornet, A Hornet's Nest, the Warthog Project and many others… and the ability to source parts way easier than ever, it’s time for pit “resurrection”! The final goal is as much fidelity as I can afford, DIY 270 deg screen with a three-projector set up (nod to the WH project) and if all goes well a functioning HUD. I’ll post progress for those that care to see and welcome comments and suggestions. As time goes on, I am sure you all will be a tremendous help when I start interfacing with DCS. Actually, you already have been, and I can’t thank you enough for your dedication to the flight sim community! And here we go… Cheers! Ed

If anything, the winning photo does show that simple is best. One of the rules was indeed that photos shouldn't be post-processed, while many submissions were post-processed through photo editing software. I'll tell you what wasn't edited in anyway though - my submission: It's a fix I tell you, a fix! Congrats to the winning pics. That thread does have some great screenshots.

Hey Admiral, For starters, thanks for the OSA mods! They are awesome and were badly needed in DCS. My only concern is that the P-15 missiles seem overpowered. I think they are modelled to fly too low and too fast. Modern US ships couldn't seem to intercept them. So I went down a deep rabbit hole and reworked the OSA_Styx.lua. Any interest in me sending it to you? The flight model still isn't perfect, but I think it more closely matches their real life capabilities - very deadly against ships without defensive measures, but get mostly shot down by US warships unless you just saturate them. I thought I read somewhere that you were planning on updating the OSA mods anyway, so if it's something you are already working and you aren't interested it's not a big deal. Let me know

GPU model doesn't matter as the performance is inconsistent bellow 900ft in the same scenarios. This is why the 'optimization' word is not being thrown around. It is a bug somewhere.

I admire this entire community who are trying to find solutions. On the other hand, I am tired of having software that is less and less efficient with each update. And this despite the investment in ever more efficient equipment. DCS is the only program I have invested this much money into. Because like many people I am someone who would have wanted to be a pilot. but today I no longer enjoy flying. Without radical change, I am sadly considering stopping. What a waste

I think people would be more disappointed if the flight model was bad GFX comes second like it or not and as is the fight model is very good compared to others.

Presenting, Enemy at the Gates The Snipers https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/3b0uwkgd7zuvb48s80lhu/Enemy-at-the-Gates-The-Snipers-V2.9.2-1.zip?rlkey=30hq4lgcbvgim0xfwli54ozh2&st=0tzdd14d&dl=0 These mods would not be possible without the Admirals Sniper mod! I Thank him from the bottom of my Ammo box! Inside, you will find snipers All types On towers, and in hides Even a female Sniper in desert uniform! To best make use of them, place facing the target,although they should turn to face the target. (not tested) I included the Admirals Sniper as a tribute to his talents! Please enjoy these assets! Cheers! There are more to come! Stay frosty!

Not necessarilly. Sure I could give you the exact target coordinates, you fly to the basket, drop the bombs then back home for tea and medals, and yeah, you'd be right. But next time we don't have the exact coordinates, we have a general area we know the target is in. The enemy have a medium range SAM that is going to deny or at least restrict medium-high altitude delivery; low level SHORAD so you can't just scoot in low and visually acquire, and cloud cover to restrict the ability to search with a targeting pod at longer ranges. The challenge now is no longer weapons employment but instead in finding the targets and finding a good attack window which minimises your exposure to the threats. That sounds fun to me.

The fidelity factor was, and still is close enough for me. I just want to get to the point that the important switches are in a realistic place, The UIP and LIP are fully modeled and functioning, and I can fly without using a mouse or keyboard. This is how it all started with the rough finish of the cockpit shell. The only plans I had for a seat were for the ACES II, so that's what I built, but I altered the recline position to match the NACES as much as I could. The left and right consoles lift off the base as well as the "nose" section. I just used strategically positioned blocks on the base to keep them in the correct position. I will have to completely redo the base, because I made it out of MDF and since it would not fit in the attic it got wet in the garage when I forgot to close the door during a thunderstorm. The plan is to mount castors on the base, so I would have to remake it any way with stronger material. I'm really looking at the Winwing MIP and the PTO2 Panel to get started and build on from there. Probably just a really big single monitor or HDTV to start and see what happens. I hope to have it back in the garage in a few weeks, new paint job, and then get to the real work. If anyone is interested in a lower fidelity pit, I still have all the original CAD files for this one. Thanks for reading! Cheers!! Ed

The September development newsletter is now available: https://www.8492sqdn.net/posts/newsletter-2024-09/

I'm in your boat, but as other users have shown. The current textures can be better optimized. And DCS overall is in need of that. Cheers! Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

So still moaning about 3D model 3 months later¿ Jesus Christ. Everybody knows already. Move on.

Hello, When I use AB and switch to F2 camera, the effect of engine number 2 comes late. Thanks! I'm using MT. AB_SYNC.trk

It's a shame that no one noticed one very striking thing. This contest is biased. It primarily promotes equipment made in the USA, especially jets. I've seen many better shots in this thread that deserve at least a mention and there was no American equipment there. Congratulations to the winners.

It is already reasonably compatible. Reasonably as in "there are a few problems", but for the most part of it it runs very nicely. It's described here how to get it running. The guide is for the Steam Deck, but it'll work similarly for plain Linux, if you setup Steam etc.: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/SteamDeck/ If you want to have a look what problems people may have seen, have a look at Proton DB and the DCS issue on the proton issue tracker: https://www.protondb.com/app/223750 https://github.com/ValveSoftware/Proton/issues/1722 I'm not sure if there is a thread dedicated to DCS on Linux via Proton currently. iirc the old Linux thread was closed by a mod a couple of years ago.

Нда, в последующих 20ти скринах, больше достойных работ, чем первые три. (Особенно 3 место... аниме навеяло своими красками)))

Nice, not many Red assets though

The chevrons mean that your radar is detecting a jamming signal. In this case, the radar can't resolve a distance, so you get chevrons at the top of the screen on the detected azimuth. Sometimes you'll see the chevrons on top of a radar contact, indicating that your radar was able to burn through the jamming and resolve range to target. I hope that translates!

You got to be kidding bringing that for comparison...

It's a real bummer, indeed. All the tweaking and tuning wears you out. Stuff like "delete your FXO and Metashaders" after each update (which I think is a "wive's tale" anyway)... if it is that important, why doesn't the program do it itself during the update process? "Upload a trackfile" and "submit your dcs log"... for crying out loud, my computer is a top-end system, what the heck? The game ran almost fine until the last update. The only thing that changed was the software itself. "Turn on vsync", "Turn off vsync", "Turn down the shadows setting", "turn textures to medium", "turn terrain textures to low", "reduce your PD", "Have you looked into core parking?"... It's exhausting. It really makes you question your own sanity.

It changed. Now you do it by pressing RCtrl+RShift+2/4/6/8 and the zoom buttons on the numpad.

You don't really understand what the issue is. This has nothing to do with development priorities, this is about lack of knowledge in the craft. It's not about how much YOU like or don't like how something looks. If you would be a 3D artist and delivering something at this state to your company that works on a product that is going on sale world wide, you would be fired in the most cases. For wasting time (=money), for creating more effort (& costs) that needs to be invested by someone else to redo the same amount of work but the right way. And of course, the company's reputation you would damage if something gets delivered world wide in such a bad state. The state for textures we are currently seeing is sufficient for preview tests at best. No professional 3D artist would continue to work on final liveries and cockpit textures with such bad UV layouts. It's a natural part of the job to know how these have to look for a final product.

Wow, these guys know what they are doing. That's passion and respect for the product.

Hi BN, any word on progress on this? Very frustrating when you're enjoying a server, decide to switch to the Mirage or Gazelle for a different task, and are suddenly booted because one of the display scripts has been adjusted (VCM/RWR and Viviane respectively). Interestingly the adjustment to the AWACS script to make it more concise passes IC with no issue.

HB have spoken about implementing it, but it's up to ED to do the missile. This shouldn't be too difficult, provided specifications on the rocket motor (Aerojet Mk 78) are available. It's also the same rocket motor that the AGM-123 Skipper II has (which will be relevant to the A-6E). It's identical to the A, but with a superior rocket motor and a modified warhead. The real -1 for USAF series F-4Es (both 1979 and 1984 revised 1990) manuals list both versions in the stores limitation diagram. From ben_der: source source source

That would also be a wish from my side. I know the changelog says the city textures have been improved, but I still think the cities could look better. I have the impression that in order to see some details on the houses, you have to get extremely close - you wouldnt wanna be there, even in a helicopter. From higher altitudes, the cities remind me a bit of those early Google Earth 3D-buildings without textures. They all seem to have the same color and to be really smooth - great for performance, I guess, but a reason why I rather fly over desert than over cities on the Sinai map. That being said, I really like the update you put out

Как я понимаю, перед вылетом, в полётном задании должен определяться для экипажа сектор для патрулирования. И если есть данные, где возможно появление противника, то указываются координаты либо направление. Т.е. определённая конкретика, чего ждать и возможно где ждать. (это мои предположения) Ну и конечно, в реальности огромную роль играет общевойсковая разведка. Отправлять на задание экипаж со словами:"Ну вы там сами как нибудь..." или "Повисите там над лесочком пару часиков" врядли кто-то будет. P.s. У апача, на картах даже есть вроде инструмент для обозначения подобных участков? Полёты "в слепую"- огромный риск потери экипажа, машины и кроме того не нужно забывать , сколько в реальности стоит один вылет.

Yeah, I just tested, the F-4 AI is completely broken when it comes to ground attack. I have 4-5 pending reports about it, I've just added this one too. Let's hope they'll sort this mess out, because in the mission editor I can tell the AI what I want it to do, but I cannot change the AI core code.

Finished last night and wow!!!! It was awesome and lived up to the hype of being the best of zone 5 and speed and angels. Agree that the 2vUNK was the most fun and intense. The 4vUNK I felt like a bad ass! My skills and techniques have definitely been turned up a notch. My the final hop I even managed to get every switch of the landing checklist completed before being asked. Can see myself flying this one again and again.

We appreciate the feedback, good and bad. We want you all to keep us honest and keep pushing us to be better. We only ever ask for it to be constructive and mature, which yours has always been as far as I can remember, so no worries at all. We do hear you even if it doesn't feel like it. Thank you, we appreciate it.

Not perfect (missing downwash), but looks good all in all. (to be fair, no helicopter in DCS so far (as I'm aware of) simulates rotor downwash on rain drops. And tbh I don't even know, how that would suppose to look irl!)

Syrian screenshot dump...

It was a pretty simple statement that wasn't hard to understand, but ill clarify it for you to make it simple to understand, yes he means more then what was in the Massum92 free objects pack. The Afghan map and many others introduce new static objects when they release, these should be made available in the mission editor for mission makers to use rather than just being used by the map maker.

@Terrifier, no one is saying the flight model is perfect or without its flaws. As I already said, the devs are working on it. Further, ED has several AH-64D pilots that they have been communicating with to refine the flight model. Casmo is indeed a valuable community member and content creator, but there have been a few instances in which he has stated things about the AH-64 that are not accurate. I am not speaking ill of him because I have talked to him on numerous occassions and he is a respectable and well-meaning individual with many years of experience and hours of real-world helicopter flight time. However his experience in the AH-64 was quite limited compared to his time in the OH-58. There are a couple of AH-64D SMEs that provide feedback to ED regarding the DCS AH-64D's flight model which have over 5000 hours of combined time flying the AH-64, one of which is myself. So believe me, the flight model is being addressed, which is a monumental task. The AH-64D flight model is not abandoned; it is being worked on as we speak. If you don't or won't believe that when it has already been made very clear, then there is nothing else that can be said on the matter.

Thanks, added to the bug list. Priority - medium