Leaderboard

OH-6A version 1.4 is out We splitted the releases for individual parts (OH-6A, Liveries, VAP and Playground assets pack) NEW: OH-6A: https://github.com/tobi-be/DCS-OH-6A/releases/tag/v1.4 OH-6A Livery Pack: https://github.com/tobi-be/DCS-OH-6A/releases/tag/Liverypack_v1.3 Individual Download for the unchanged VAP and Playground assets Pack can be found here: Vietnam Assets Pack: https://github.com/tobi-be/DCS-OH-6A/releases/tag/VAPv1.0 Playground Pack: https://github.com/tobi-be/DCS-OH-6A/releases/tag/opp-v1.0 See the readme https://github.com/tobi-be/DCS-OH-6A for short descriptions of the features Changelog: Flightmodel improvements: - Improved suspension code: more energy is absorbed during landings, - Increased lateral skid friction - Further tuning of engine dynamics New Features - Optional RWR System equippable in ME/default is off - Optional Flare/Chaff Dispenser equippable in ME/default is off - Specific callsigns - New liveries Bugfixes - Increased gunner accuracy - Improved gunner script performance - Increased gun accuracy - Allow frontdoors for rockets, minigun and door gunner - SRS stopped working - Missing cameraman textures - Can't open rearm/refuel window with LAlt+' - Fixed missing image at rearm menu

the typical in-sim TU95 probably my DCS updater tool doesnt download the last version but I still see these beauty in my in-sim by the way guys as always and correctly Congratulations to the winners.

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.

As we've all gathered, the nature of the PC's 58D as it stands is very much subject to opinion. I can see both sides of the issue, especially when we come off of modules like the AH-64D and the CH-47F. For me, personally, the detail is "good enough," though for the resources utilized (as noted several pages back regarding the UV maps) it is lackluster. The small things like poorly mapped parts, lack of detail where we might expect it, some variable color palettes that don't make much sense, the lack of damage modeling, and other issues add up. I can't blame anyone for feeling underwhelmed due to these issues. Likewise, from a playability standpoint, they don't impact my experience much when the rubber meets the road. Number 1 issue: Aircrew. I feel that these are the most lackluster part of the module and could really use a second pass, at least on the faces. This is even more important for an aircraft like the OH-58D, because they're incredibly visible from a variety of angles. A comparison with the AH-64D aircrew makes them look poor, to say the least. At a minimum, the faces could definitely use a lift. Number 2 issue: Damage model. We have a generic bullet hole texture for most of the aircraft, but we're missing things like panels blown off, rotor blades fragmented, tail boom twisted away, and so on. I'm assuming this has been a priority since release as it's the most incomplete part of the module. Compared to many other helicopter modules with items like slumped pilots, twisted and destroyed rotor blades, tailbooms that pop off, etc. it is incredibly lackluster. The UH-1H has all of these and it's more than 10 years old, plus things like panels that hang on by a thread after damage, etc. After being hit by 23mm fire, I'd expect a bit more than small arms bullet holes, since my tail rotor is out, a weapon pylon has been blasted off, and the crew is dead! Number 3, all the other small details. Things like avionics wiring, panel coloring, flare launcher being a black hole, etc. add up, and while not totally immersion breaking, I do understand why those adjusted to the flare packs having actual flares that get expended in other modules to be an annoyance. Of these issues, I'd say the dash colors being too dark is probably the largest one, as all the ones I remember seeing were more of a gray color with dust and abuse. The wiring could be improved by darkening and adding various amounts of shade as well as grime (I've worked with the stuff before, it attracts grime like nobody's business). Not functional issues, more aesthetic, but they do add up. The AH-64D's colors are about right for a service aircraft. It's important to note that I don't consider these functional issues, merely as examples of understanding why some folks are disappointed with the detail level as a whole. The flare launcher, for example: I actually use the pre-CMWS aircraft quite often, as the sweet spot for my scenarios is prior to mass integration of that system. From a purely functional standpoint, I find the PC 58D pretty dang good. It offers a lot of flexibility in a small package and the handling is one of the best and easiest for new players who may want to dive into helicopters with a bit more flexibility than existing modules without getting into the complexity of the AH-64D (and associated functional issues like the FM + SAS). The only minor changes I'd like to see in that regard is introduction of the M296 gunpod and an aesthetic removal of the toilet seat intakes, but the lack of such don't detract from the module as it is. I can understand that for the price point, a few buyers might feel a bit jaded by what they received, even if others are absolutely overjoyed with what they got. You can't please everyone and since most of the real Kiowa guys are pretty satisfied, I'd say that speaks volumes. There's enough info out there for everyone to make an educated choice by now to decide if the module is worth their time and money.

their judgement? It seems yes.. But I'm not sure about their own rules

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,

Made a little obstacle course for the OH-6

Hello.. First of all thanks for your mod! I have a suggestion for future releases..Why don't you put something in your pics in the mission editor in order to distinguish your mod from vanilla? For example (and personal use) i used photoshop and placed a yellowish frame on your mod.

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

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.

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!

Thanks! Dispensing flares or chaff works now Tested the RWR with a Rapier, works too. Got hit and pilot disappeared but gunner was still there

I did not submit anything so I have no dog in this fight. But honestly it makes me wonder how the winner was decided. It is the most generic DCS screenshot imaginable. Default Hornet with an airquake loadout. I see that basically every time I fly the Hornet.

@NeedzWD40 Thanks for going into detail. The crew is actually the best example for "how going bonkers with textures". They really don't make any sense. This is the pilot's face - a 4K texture - taking up around the same amount of pixels as the whole tail section of the OH-58D. The jacket got also a ridiculous single high resolution texture with finest uv packing art: Why didn't they combine this with the protection vest? I have no idea... (again a 4K texture, check how much you can see of it in game): let's have a look at the patches (4K texture space): Alright, i think i got it. The module is a OH-58D crew simulation! It's not about the airframe! (If you don't have a 4090, it might be best to disable the crew models. May help with performance.)

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.

Been wanting to cover this for a while to clear some things up. I am 47Driver on YouTube, some of you have been watching my videos on the DCS CH-47F, (I really appreciate that), and everybody wants to know about all these weird acronyms that I mention, along with many others. First of all I want to point out something in regards to the flight model. I see a ton of complaints about how unrealistic it is, etc. Yes, the FM is very WIP and that is what it is. Tandem Rotor physics are straight up wizardry. This is far and away the most complex flight model that ED has ever tried to replicate, and I can say that confidently as an actual Pilot of this aircraft and someone who understands a fair bit about aerodynamics. Tandem rotor helicopters are very weird, and what I'm seeing in the flight model so far indicates that the devs have done their research on how these helicopters behave when none of the things that are built in to help you fly are working, which is true in the module's current state. Please keep that in mind as you fly this thing. AFCS: Automated/Advanced Flight Control System. This alone is what makes the Chinook so easy to fly. Put your feet flat on the floor, don't touch the pedals, and fly all day long. Thanks Turn Coordination. She's very smooth, steady, coordinated, and controllable when this system is on. When the AFCS in DCS is fully fleshed out, it's gonna make a huge difference. DAFCS: Digital Advanced Flight Control System. Super cool autopilot(ish) functionality. Basically allows us to capture current Inertial Altitude or Radar Altitude, maintain low speed over the ground via TRC or Translational Rate Command, or capture current position over the ground via P-Hold. P-Hold + Altitude mode = perfect hands off hovering. We also have a full 4 axis autopilot via Flight Director for cruise/instrument flight. DASH: Differential Air Speed Hold. As you increase speed, the DASH, (a long tube in the flight controls with an actuator on each end) will decrease in length. You'll notice eventually when this is modeled that as you increase speed, you'll actually start moving cyclic backwards towards center and the aircraft will keep the speed. Pretty nice and allows us to fly with a more neutral cyclic position. LCT: Longitudinal Cyclic Trim (Actuators). As speed increases, the LCTs will extend, this will increase forward tilt in both the fwd and aft heads. Allows a more level fuselage at cruise and reduces stress on rotor system. You'll be flying at 140kts and the fuselage will be completely level with the horizon. No more staring at the ground 10deg nose low anymore. When you land, the LCTs drive to the GND position, allowing easier ground taxi. When you hover, they drive to the RET position to facilitate a level hover attitude. DCP: Differential Collective Pitch. This is mostly why the Thrust Lever is called the Thrust Lever and not a collective. DCP comes from longitudinal cyclic input. Forward cyclic increases collective pitch on the aft rotor system while decreasing collective pitch on the fwd, and vice versa. So basically, the cyclic is also a collective... Hope this clears some things up and helps you folks understand why the flight model feels so weird right now. With most of these things not being implemented yet, because I'd imagine they're all very hard to simulate, the Chinook is gonna fly a little weird. I'm still having a great time with the module and I'm very excited for more systems depth to be added, so I can continue to share with you guys. Thanks! 47Driver

Actually no. I can't follow you since a couple of posts. It's getting really weird. You seem to get a bit entangled in strange thoughts.

Thank you for this mod. It brings me much joy.

@Taz1004 I've made a simple powershell scripts to automate this process. Script: https://gist.github.com/zbysiek/8df79276f659674b3926a0a757050f2f TexConv: https://github.com/microsoft/DirectXTex/releases Powershell 7.4: https://learn.microsoft.com/powershell/scripting/install/installing-powershell-on-windows?view=powershell-7.4#installing-the-msi-package Usage instructions: 0. Delete _backup and _downloads folder in your main DCS Install to avoid compressing unnecessary files 1. Open powershell as admin, type Set-ExecutionPolicy Unrestricted 2. Close the powershell window (we don't want to execute the script as admin, just in case, DO NOT EXECUTE THE SCRIPT AS ADMIN) 3. Open Powershell 7 in the same folder by right clicking > Powershell 7 > Open Here (DO NOT OPEN AS ADMIN) 4. Select your main DCS folder 5. Wait for it to finish 6. Open powershell as admin, type Set-ExecutionPolicy Restricted After it's done the files are gonna be ready in a OvGME ready format under ./Mod

That "logic" doesn't work well for DCS. We won't get any other 3rd party developer doing another Kiowa, this slot is taken. And for me the OH-58D is the right fit. That's why quality standards needs to be kept (and controlled beforehand).

This is a great idea

@jetsimace Thank you very much for your feedback. When it comes to different choppers and theaters, there is good and bad news. Let's start with the bad, but they are not that bad at all. Worlds Apart is, in a kind, like Lord of the Ring, a storyline that spreads over at least three campaigns and tells the story of the UH-1 crew. So Part three, "STEEL RAIN," will not change that. The good news is that I need a different challenge and another few so the next campaign will be a Mi-8 campaign on the Syria map. This is already in the works. I don't currently have enough understanding of the systems to fulfill my expectations in a Simulator campaign to build a campaign for the newer DCS models. Many others are building good campaigns for players who are seeking just fun and a good time. My goal is to create a situation that feels as realistic as possible, but this requires a deep understanding of the aircraft, procedures, and tasks. This takes some time.

You know what he means. F-4, F-14, F-16, Apache etc etc... the whole bunch are better in the visual department. Also your point and preference is clear. You want systems and physics and you dont care about looks, graphical beauty et cetera we get it. But whats unacceptable for me is that, like Thor said earlier the person that does the graphics, textures and those sort of things is a different person. And right now the "Base" level of aesthetics are not being reached compared to other products with the KIOWA. I for one, dont understand why poly doesnt say "okay we get the point we will hire another dude and improve" this simple reaction would bring them A more customers and B they focus on the whole range of the product (physics, systems, flightmodel, graphics etc). But the reaction showed earlier on discord by one of the team really set me off, i hope they will reconsider within the team.

WOW! Nice up-date! Ich danke Ihnen!

Да, все конкурсы в той или иной мере субъективны. В данном случае, мы сразу говорили, что определять победителя будем сами. Естественно, что художественные вкусы и пристрастия у разных людей разные, и то что понравилось одному, может не понравится другому. Такова "се ля ва" )

Su-25A goes brrrrrrr

Oh my, that is beautiful !

Can confirm, I have the same issue here. It happens every time you go to F2 view. I don't have any mods or a split throttle.

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

So I can’t post the video showing this after getting 10 warning points for just spelling three letters... - Basket contact points with airframe or drogue can displace/dammage basket, movement of basket caused by airframe depression just before contact - Basket movement caused by weather turbulence - Hose physics (Depending on how fast the pilot connects a strong contact can send a wave movement throughout the hose length. - IA control of the hose length, for instance when the pilot is flying dangerously or when refueling is complete and pilot does not disconnect. - Possibility to break the basket or damage the AAR pods if the connection is too strong. - Instances and a probability of not connecting properly to the basket, perhaps due to a too soft connection leading to a fuel leak with fuel spraying over the refueling aircraft canopy with possible consequences like fuel vapor in the cockpit if relevant bleed air system is not closed (i.g. for the F14s) and impeding view that makes formation flying on the tanker more difficult. It would be nice to have this in DCS. Thank you for your passion and support,

Where to start, there are so many items on ED’s list that were announced or hinted at literally years ago that are still in the pipeline. Don’t get me wrong I love DCS and am a massive fan boy but they’re some way behind expectations. I’m not talking modules, plenty of those in recent times and they’re generally great, I’m talking all the features such as Vulkan, Dynamic Campaign, AI GFM, etc. Around twoish years ago things seemed to move a lot quicker than they do these days. I’m not going anywhere but that is more than a little frustrating. I’m probably not in good company but I wish sometimes that they would simply switch to a subscriber model and hire more staff and get the job(s) done.

The lack of emplaced Heavy machine guns is very noticeable. If we look forward to Vientam the DHSK was the main anti aircraft weapon in the south. Even stuff like Zu23 was very rare south of the DMZ. Having read stories from Helikopter pilots in Vientam, they could fly 1 or 2 tours and only see small arms and the 12.7. Same with fast movers that mostly flew south of the DMZ, if they got a briefing about 37mm guns in the area, they knew it was serious stuff.

Looks like someone got excited about a Swedish map and programmed all the real REF codes from the SFI into the computer, as they would've appeared in the real life aircraft. For example, code 9001 for Hässlö airport is an accurate simulation of the real aircraft, but it's also quite useless in DCS because that airport is located near Västerås, over 700 km south of the Kola map's southern boundary. And it's still questionably realistic anyway because of course the real aircraft didn't have any REF codes for foreign airfields, least of all Russian ones... On a side note, there should now be some navigation landmark REF codes too that you could use instead of manually programming the lat/lon of waypoints into the computer, but I don't have a list of the Kola-relevant ones handy.

Expecting a developer to a „cater“ to a function >> form crowd is equally narrow minded as expecting them to cater to a form >> function crowd. And the notion that the visual standards set by modern DCS modules (ED and 3rd) party doesn’t matter as a reference is somewhat silly tbh. I assume that a lot of (probably most) people are interested in both. It is also valid to point out some obvious shortcomings of the module in the current state. Visual and otherwise. The fuzz some people make out of it is just completely out of proportion imho. If people would just state their feedback in a factual way and stay away from attacking the developers or assume careless or malicious intend, I‘m sure the developers would happily improve their product as suggested and as resources allow……

Thanks, guys. It all worked out. My bad. Special thanks to the creators who made it! ))))

You NEED to install it in the saved games folder. There is the description on the release page. Please read it

With the release of Afghanistan map, the Kiowa, the upcoming chinook and the previously released Apache infantry are becoming MUCH more relevant in DCS. There are countless threads on ground AI and behaviour but thats not what this is about We need more red and neutral infantry and emplacements, instead of just a stuck kneeling RPG soldier and a handful of units with AK-74s Specifically: Civilians: we need civilian assets (there are mods for vehicles but not infantry) as a common challenge in afghanistan thats relevant to these new modules is VID, and discerning enemy fighter from civilian bystander. Being able to have people on rooftops and in fields that the player cant just assume are enemy combatants would add a lot of depth to the game. I would suggest just a few models, male and female that would feel in place for a few of our maps. Enemies: a bit more variety here would be good, give us a mortar team that can pick up and move, a guy with a shovel (think planting IED), and a few variants of the generic rifleman ideally Emplacements: trenches, mounted machine guns, bunkers, etc basically statics that shoot, we need more of them, we need to be able to have a machine-gun or atgm position that is small, somewhat disguised, and able to engage targets, and most importantly isnt an infantry unit that will run in circles the moment the target returns fire Any amount of all of these will be a big help, not asking for new behaviours or AI in this, just a few more models basically.

I think being able to click the throttle to the cutoff/engine start positions instead of having to do the Rshift+home thing. Thanks!

I would really love to know even a little bit about the AI GFM - it's a little bit unfair to have previewed this and showcased it 2 years ago and then total silence. Even an update to say "guys, this was way more difficult than we thought and things aren't going well here" would be better than total silence, to keep us in the loop. I think honesty and transparency gains far more trust from consumers than constant "stand by for future updates" that never come. Same for the other promised features too... ground units AI, some kind of F-5 product that never materialised, supercarrier marshallers, ground crew AI and so on. @BIGNEWY Anything you could tell us at all, especially regarding the aircraft AI formation behaviour that's been in the works for so long?

Quoting just this part for emphasis, because it's a perfect description. Texture resolution change on other maps might produce a gradual reduction in framerates as you descend generally, but not like this. This is like a switch. I've had so many moments where I've thought I've found a cause, or I've stumbled upon a cure for this issue. I've come back to this forum to report on my findings, only to have the problem reappear. There's a randomness to it. If you load a mission and you don't experience the problem the first time you are under 900ft, you won't get it during the play of that current mission. If you reload the mission, you might or you might not suffer it. If you load into a mission and you've got the sub 900ft frame drop, you might get it during the next mission, you might not. You probably will, though. The best possible culprit I've heard to explain it is that DCS wants to rebuild some splat textures endlessly under some circumstances. That would probably explain part of the randomness and the cause for what is often a quartering of the framerate.

These are all outstanding, congrats to everyone involved. Tough duty for the judges!

Этот да, атмосфернее любого из тройки. В тройке призёров, как по мне, посредственные скрины без художественной ценности. Поэтому и никогда не участвую в подобных конкурсах, так как это всегда какая-то дичь с результатами, пир посредственности почти всегда). Особенно фотоконкурсы(реальное фото) с открытым голосованием - это жуткая блевотина.

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

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.

Hi ED... When did you release the new infantery you tease us in.... 2021 !!! ED's news in 2021 : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RD9nFvH7bbjUUqXcDs7AOG0A_lj1t6EP/view

As razo+r said, you don't really need any mods to enjoy DCS. If you want more A-10C info, you should try asking in the A-10C section of the forum https://forum.dcs.world/forum/149-dcs-a-10c-ii-tank-killer/ as this section is for the A-7E.

This is a joke... 3 updates in 3 weeks. And the last one could have been done in the penultimate patch. I'm sick of being a beta tester for free. And still no performance fixes. I'll test Falcon BMS in the meantime. (I don't like helicopters, I only fly planes) Latest update: DCS World User Crash Reporting Tool. CTD related to ghost network client animation - fixed User Crash Reporting Tool. CTD triggered by unloading aircraft cargo - fixed Multiplayer text chat window unresponsive until player spawns in aircraft cockpit - fixed Visual glitches if GUI scale is set to more than 1 - fixed Using TAB while Route tool is active disables other controls and inputs - fixed DCS: CH-47F by Eagle Dynamics User Crash Reporting Tool. CTD related to multicrew client join in CH-47F - fixed