Leaderboard

When we are ready to we will let you know about the next patch. Everything depends on QA checks, as soon as I am told we are good I will update the patch status post as I always do. thank you Yes I was on holiday, had a week in the historic city of York. thanks

So basically what I am getting from your post @BIGNEWY is that 4K 32 bit normal maps (and FLIR/roughmet textures) are intended to be this size and a huge drain on resources? I understand the desire for image quality but at what cost? Do ground units that I don't see from up close really need to have enormous files so that I take a nice looking screenshot of them? Since the other thread’s GPU's have gotten more VRAM sent we are again at the limits of what is possible with these unoptimised textures both at 4K screen resolutions and especially VR. I think the reason this feels frustrating to many is that using the script to reduce texture sizes proves the game is eating up enormous amounts of RAM and especially VRAM at high texture resolution. If I run the game with the default textures I run out of VRAM (all 16GB) nearly immediately. This leaves me with 3 options. 1. Use high texture resolution but run out of VRAM and encounter massive stuttering as the game constantly loads/unloads textures. 2. Use medium texture resolution, however now I cannot read my cockpit in certain modules since they are older and become blurry. 3. Manually alter my textures so I can use high but now I cannot join servers that require a pure client. I understand there is no pleasing everyone, but this optimisation which is sorely needed for the entire games texture library, would go a long way on alleviating all these RAM/VRAM issues. And just getting more RAM or a GPU with more VRAM is not a solution due to the costs involved. Brute forcing can only go so far. As has been suggested more than once. Perhaps the standard game should have these textures optimised and compressed using the optimal method for the texture’s purpose. And a separate pack be made available as DLC which allows users to go for super ultra high res textures for making a cool screenshot or video. Again the game can run and look amazing at high texture resolution IF the texture are better optimised. I understand this has been talked about many times. But I simply cannot see how this has not been addressed yet.

Hello all, I am sorry to be bringing up the same topic again as from months ago, however I feel it is still worth mentioning again and something that might help out a lot of people who are having issues since the latest few releases. As pointed out in a post in March 2023 by @Taz1004 a lot of the normal map, roughmet, and FLIR texture sizes in the game are absolutely huge. These texture files do not need to be this huge (22+MB and some reaching 64+MB) and are furthermore stored as uncompressed 32bit textures when they can easily be compressed without giving up any visual quality. The FLIR textures don't have to be 4K since all we ever see them through is our MFD's or similar sensors which do not have this resolution in the first place. The textures that are affected are mostly found in a lot of the newer modules but they are not exclusive to them. They are also not exclusive to player controlled modules or aircraft/helicopters. Ground units have the same issues. The issue also occurs with many off the addon modules not developed by ED themselves so perhaps a word from ED to the other developers to have a streamlined and standardized texture creation procedure could be considered? From what I can tell from some of the videos I have seen regarding the latest issues with stuttering many of us seem to be suffering from, it appears that DCS is trying to use as many cores as it can get to constantly load/unload textures between SSD->VRAM->RAM->page file leading to massive bottlenecks on the SSD side as the threads end up waiting on the SSD and thus each other. Perhaps one way to combat this issue would be to have the normal map, roughmet, and FLIR textures reduced in size which would, without sacrificing image quality; 1. Alleviate some of the bandwidth requirements between all these different components. 2. Reduce overall VRAM and RAM usage. 3. Reduce texture loading times. 4. Reduce the size of the sim itself (which stands at 861GB for me personally as I own nearly all modules and terrains). I totally understand the dev team is busy but if a modder can make these changes in a matter of a week or two it should be possible for the dev team to put someone on the task of hunting down these insane textures and make them a much more reasonable size. I implore you @BIGNEWY and @NineLine to please pass this message on to the responsible people and take another hard look at these texture files since this was first reported already over a year ago. As someone who has been using DCS since the days of LOMAC, please pass this on and take it seriously because I feel this could make the sim so much more enjoyable for many. Kind regards, Vincent van Veen

Hello! I see that there have been multiple pings sent to @BIGNEWY and @NineLine. Could either of you kindly please provide a response or alert the dev team? There are some VERY good points in this thread regarding VRAM usage and optimization. Also, I find it sad that the end user has to compress the textures down with a powershell script to get any reasonable performance back while simultaneously breaking integrity check. We shouldn’t have to do the developer’s job for them.

You guys are great !!! That was it. Thank you all very much.

Good morning. First of all, I apologize for my English since I use Google Translate. After the release of the Phantom, I liked the included option that allows the pilot to put on sunglasses or lower the helmet visor. Although it is not very relevant to the game itself, it is true that I miss the possibility of changing the brightness of our vision, which in reality we do by putting on sunglasses, lowering the helmet's sun visor, or simply covering ourselves with our hand and which is very well implemented in the Black Shark by raising the anti-glare glass that the helicopter has. Could you include an option to make that jump in the brightness of the image to avoid the glare that bothers so much, especially in virtual reality, imitating any of those acts? A cordial and grateful greeting for your work.

I manage to modify the Mk-77 Mod1 bomb, when coupled with the Napalm Effect mod, to show something like a napalm bomb The Napalm Effect mod: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3340469/

Hi folks, this thread is old and the work done on the previous modules and textures sizes were completed. The new AH-64D and the CH-47F will also get more optimisations in the future, and I will remind the team about it today. Im going to split this thread to cover the new request. thank you

Дело не столько в проработке, сколько в том, что реализуются не составляющие конкуренции современным синим. Иначе я не понимаю, чего вы жалуетесь, что нет наших истребителей - берите вон И-16 и летайте на нём. И истребитель и наш и проработан. И не надо рассказывать про "сервера с реализацией эпох", на 99% серверов из списка вы будете летать против Ф-16 и Ф-18 модификаций вовсе не 80-х и пытаться уйти от ракет из нулевых-десятых годов. И дело не в отсутствии документации на современное, как таковой, а в статус-кво.

I completely missed this update. I just went for a quick flight on the F1BE and I was surprised to see that the repeater screen is now projected at the correct depth when playing in VR. It looks awesome. Thank you!

Dear @WINWING team: thanks for your reply. While I am looking forward to have my individual case resolved, I am still a bit concerned that things only moved after I made this public via this forum. Nevertheless, I'll report here how it went. Kind regards Ulu

Жуткие? Тут люди реально хотели тукано и пукару, вот где жуть.

A new release has been published. Controller now broadcasts MERGED calls, and also includes MERGED WITH fill-in in PICTURE, BOGEY DOPE, DECLARE and SNAPLOCK. Fix an issue where the controller would broadcast a FADED call for every group when the mission was changed/restarted. Download available at https://github.com/dharmab/skyeye/releases/tag/v0.4.0

Bumping this, mainly for the SUU-25 pod. It appears to have been a standard load in Afghanistan, but the model and textures for ours is Windows 95 level of pixelation.

Unfortunately still happening in MULTI THREAD PREVIEW: 2.9.7.59263 & DCS Updater 2.16.2.17 on an i-9-12900, nVidia rtx3080, timezone, date & time manual, no trial modules, direct download version (not-Steam). Short & Sweet: Until recently, I was a very happy offline DCS customer and had been saving up money coz I was planning to upgrade my paid helo modules & buy some more helos, aircrafts, maps & campaigns. So needed to upgrade by game. Extremely disappointed to discover I now no longer have unlimited offline access to all my purchased helos, aircrafts & maps. TL,DR: This is a game breaking issue for me coz I'm on metered bandwidth (online usage above monthly limit costs money). And like others, my internet service is unreliable & not always available. In my case, its worse, coz when I do login online, DCS only allows me to fly for around 5 minutes before flight is abruptly ended & CTD with a 'login session has expired' message, WTF? Then when I switch off internet access, DCS shows the 3-day authentication message & takes 20 minutes to load, and when it does finally load a flight, its a slide show, double WTF? I have to end DCS in task manager and restart it to have any chance to actually enjoy a flight with my paid modules normally. 30 minutes flight time gone. I purchased DCS modules on the basis that I would have unlimited offline access, per the DCS website, which still currently states about offline mode [quote ] 'The mode is unlimited in time, thus all network services (Manager of Modules, multiplayer, news) will be inaccessible.' [ unquote ]. The 3-day access restriction to my purchased content, introduces the unknown risk (hope, wish & prayer) that a DCS authentication server is available & operational at the time I next play. But I guess there may be good news on the horizon. I now will have more (previously-DCS) simulation time available & I will save a lot of future money, as its pointless to purchase any additional DCS content, coz I'm not allowed to access my existing modules or new modules, at the time & in the manner, I want to access them, with unlimited offline access. Bottom Line: DCS has currently removed unlimited offline access for me & others to both paid & unpaid content. Furthermore, the '14-day trial before you buy' is in effect now only a 3-day trial (until your next login). And there are some wonderful paid offline campaigns, also 3-day access only (until your next login). Not ideal for your 3rd party developers, who are also potentially impacted by this issue. I cannot even imagine the uproar by the online community, in the event of random 5-minute online flight limits, 'login session has expired', coming to a server near you ... Not really dreams come true, so lets all hope these issues get fixed well before then, and our whole community (both online & offline) can enjoy DCS World 2025 & beyond. In the meantime, I guess I need to research how to download & install previous versions of DCS 2.7 or 2.8 so at least I can try to access my paid modules in unlimited offline mode again. Any advice here would be greatly appreciated.

I hate to say it sharpe another combat flight sim has no issues in spotting wether that be flat screen or VR , I've just this minute finished flying online in VR . Guns only . Something is amiss with DCS and VR . The WWII server is empty. That server was always full weekends and half midweek. Now that tells a story .

There are presently 1780 "players" and 1326 servers. 14 servers have population in double digits for a total of 250. Only 100 ish have more than 1 player, most of those at 2 or 3 but even if the average is 5, that is still 500 players so the player count is including the "admin" slot. So you have to subtract the server count from the player count to get the live human count. And I was referring to the visual range PvP servers, not the modern BVR or PvE so you can lop off the most populated servers right there. Numbers are paltry. Noticeably lower. Of course, the weather is still nice and the world is pretty scary and lots of folks are selling their computers to buy food but there has been a noticeable drop in interest in WVR PvP since ED started mucking with spotting a few updates ago.

Sir or Ma'am, As an old CH-47D/F PIC and MTP I can say I LOVE your product. Obviously it has a lot of work before the final product but I think you are well on your way to an awesome simulator. Here are some of my takeaways from my run through of the start up that you are probably already aware of but if not then I hope they help. Before I get started here, let me start with saying I have still not been given permission to reference my old CH-47F materials so I have purposely not done so. So everything I discuss here is going off nearly 10 year old memory or CH-47D manuals. So if you think you have better information on a topic I bring up all I can say is you are probably right! 1. DAFCS. I understand this is a work in progress. So take what I say here with a grain of salt and a lot of paitence. Currently what you have going seems to be a hybrid between AFCS on and AFCS off. With AFCS on the aircraft should maintain pitch, roll, and yaw attitudes and heading based off the last place you pressed the CDR. That is regardless of weather you have any type of holds or other advanced features engaged or not. Additionally, when flying in forward flight AFCS on should maintain your trim automatically. To put it simply, when I was yanking and banking I could do so with my feet off the pedals because the aircraft would keep the aircraft in trim for me. Finally, at a hover that thing is going to want to keep your exact attidue and heading again regardless of any hold features engaged. One of the checks we did for maintenance test flights was to push the aircraft out of their set postions WITHOUT pushing the CDR and ensuring the aircraft returned to the last selected attitude. Going off pure memory here. I want to say for pitch, roll, and yaw it was +-1.5 degrees. Though I may be off on that. You can reference the CH-47D MTF manual to get those exact numbers. Now, AFCS off you are going to have to work the pedals and controls to keep a good attitude and trim condition at all times. 2. CDR: The CDR doesn't appear to do anything. You all have a great system in the Huey which I would love to see mirrored in the -47! 3. Flight control sweep. Right now you have it set for max forward +6.5 and max aft -4.5. If I recall the CH-47F correctly the MINIMUM control sweep should have been +7 and -4.5. The CH-47D manuals said +7 to -4 but I seem to remember the CH-47F has a bit wider margin. 4. CGI: The CGI test button does not cause the CGI to do anything. Additionally, I did not notice movement of the CGI in flight. This guage should be a quick reference performance indicator. The heavier/faster/more agressive you fly the higher that needle raises. 5. In your start up guide there is no clear explaination on spooling up the EGIs, radios, etch. I seem to remember in the old 8.4 software of the CH-47F we had to go in manually to start all that stuff up. But I can not for the love of me remember the proper sequence. I can find that the EGIs need to be turned on in your simulator so I think there is something to my memory on that so anything you have on that added into the simulator startup guide would be appreciated (unless I completely missed it then I appologize)! Oh, I will say this too. I asked a buddy of mine who just retired a year ago to guide me through the start up of all the avionics and stuff and he said "Crap man, we were on such an later software then 8.4 when I retired. All that stuff is automatic now." So maybe that would be something to incorporate into your sim. Have all those EGIs and stuff auto spool up? Well, this is what I got for now. I hope some of it may be helpful. Either way, thank you for the consideration! And again, awesome job!

that‘s bogus. Debunked countless times. There comes a point of diminishing returns, but that would be somewhere above 90-120 fps for a flight sim. I recommend the following to see a direct comparison between different framerates www.testufo.com.

Hello, thanks for the mod first. It is great! As for incorporating the Mk.77 Mod 1 napalm bomb, used by A-4E-C, into "Splash_Damage-napalm.lua", and also Mk.82, here is the code: explTable = { ["FAB_100"] = 45, ["FAB_100M"] = 45, ["FAB_250"] = 100, ["FAB_250-M62"] = 100, ["FAB_250M54TU"]= 100, ["FAB_500"] = 213, ["FAB_1500"] = 675, ["BetAB_500"] = 98, ["BetAB_500ShP"]= 107, ["KH-66_Grom"] = 108, ["M_117"] = 201, ["Mk_81"] = 60, ["Mk_82"] = 118, ["AN_M64"] = 121, ["Mk_83"] = 274, ["Mk_84"] = 582, ["MK_82AIR"] = 118, ["MK_82SNAKEYE"]= 118, ["GBU_10"] = 582, ["GBU_12"] = 118, ["GBU_16"] = 274, ["KAB_1500Kr"] = 675, ["KAB_500Kr"] = 213, ["KAB_500"] = 213, ["GBU_31"] = 582, ["GBU_31_V_3B"] = 582, ["GBU_31_V_2B"] = 582, ["GBU_31_V_4B"] = 582, ["GBU_32_V_2B"] = 202, ["GBU_38"] = 118, ["AGM_62"] = 400, ["GBU_24"] = 582, ["X_23"] = 111, ["X_23L"] = 111, ["X_28"] = 160, ["X_25ML"] = 89, ["X_25MP"] = 89, ["X_25MR"] = 140, ["X_58"] = 140, ["X_29L"] = 320, ["X_29T"] = 320, ["X_29TE"] = 320, ["AGM_84E"] = 488, ["AGM_45"] = 45, ["AGM_45A"] = 45, ["AGM_45B"] = 45, --["AGM_88C"] = 89, --["AGM_88"] = 89, ["AGM_84S"] = 500, ["AGM_122"] = 15, ["AGM_123"] = 274, ["AGM_130"] = 582, ["AGM_119"] = 176, ["AGM_154C"] = 305, ["AGM_154"] = 305, ["AGM_154A"] = 305, ["S-24A"] = 24, ["S-24B"] = 123, ["S-25OF"] = 194, ["S-25OFM"] = 150, ["S-25O"] = 150, ["S_25L"] = 190, ["S-5M"] = 1, ["C_8"] = 4, ["C_8OFP2"] = 3, ["C_13"] = 21, ["C_24"] = 123, ["C_25"] = 151, ["HYDRA_70M15"] = 3, ["Zuni_127"] = 5, ["ARAKM70BHE"] = 4, ["BR_500"] = 118, ["Rb 05A"] = 217, ["RBK_500AO"] = 256, ["RBK_250"] = 128, ["HEBOMB"] = 40, ["HEBOMBD"] = 40, ["MK-81SE"] = 60, ["AN-M57"] = 56, ["AN-M64"] = 180, ["AN-M65"] = 295, ["AN-M66A2"] = 536, ["HYDRA_70_M151"] = 4, ["HYDRA_70_M156"] = 4, ["HYDRA_70_M257"] = 4, ["HYDRA_70_M274"] = 4, ["HYDRA_70_MK1"] = 4, ["HYDRA_70_MK61"] = 4, ["HYDRA_70_WTU1B"] = 4, ["HYDRA_70_MK5"] = 4, ["Vikhr_M"] = 11, ["British_GP_250LB_Bomb_Mk1"] = 100, --("250 lb GP Mk.I") ["British_GP_250LB_Bomb_Mk4"] = 100, --("250 lb GP Mk.IV") ["British_GP_250LB_Bomb_Mk5"] = 100, --("250 lb GP Mk.V") ["British_GP_500LB_Bomb_Mk1"] = 213, --("500 lb GP Mk.I") ["British_GP_500LB_Bomb_Mk4"] = 213, --("500 lb GP Mk.IV") ["British_GP_500LB_Bomb_Mk4_Short"] = 213, --("500 lb GP Short tail") ["British_GP_500LB_Bomb_Mk5"] = 213, --("500 lb GP Mk.V") ["British_MC_250LB_Bomb_Mk1"] = 100, --("250 lb MC Mk.I") ["British_MC_250LB_Bomb_Mk2"] = 100, --("250 lb MC Mk.II") ["British_MC_500LB_Bomb_Mk1_Short"] = 213, --("500 lb MC Short tail") ["British_MC_500LB_Bomb_Mk2"] = 213, --("500 lb MC Mk.II") ["British_SAP_250LB_Bomb_Mk5"] = 100, --("250 lb S.A.P.") ["British_SAP_500LB_Bomb_Mk5"] = 213, --("500 lb S.A.P.") ["British_AP_25LBNo1_3INCHNo1"] = 4, --("RP-3 25lb AP Mk.I") ["British_HE_60LBSAPNo2_3INCHNo1"] = 4, --("RP-3 60lb SAP No2 Mk.I") ["British_HE_60LBFNo1_3INCHNo1"] = 4, --("RP-3 60lb F No1 Mk.I") ["WGr21"] = 4, --("Werfer-Granate 21 - 21 cm UnGd air-to-air rocket") ["3xM8_ROCKETS_IN_TUBES"] = 4, --("4.5 inch M8 UnGd Rocket") ["AN_M30A1"] = 45, --("AN-M30A1 - 100lb GP Bomb LD") ["AN_M57"] = 100, --("AN-M57 - 250lb GP Bomb LD") ["AN_M65"] = 400, --("AN-M65 - 1000lb GP Bomb LD") ["AN_M66"] = 800, --("AN-M66 - 2000lb GP Bomb LD") ["SC_50"] = 20, --("SC 50 - 50kg GP Bomb LD") ["ER_4_SC50"] = 20, --("4 x SC 50 - 50kg GP Bomb LD") ["SC_250_T1_L2"] = 100, --("SC 250 Type 1 L2 - 250kg GP Bomb LD") ["SC_501_SC250"] = 100, --("SC 250 Type 3 J - 250kg GP Bomb LD") ["Schloss500XIIC1_SC_250_T3_J"] = 100, --("SC 250 Type 3 J - 250kg GP Bomb LD") ["SC_501_SC500"] = 213, --("SC 500 J - 500kg GP Bomb LD") ["SC_500_L2"] = 213, --("SC 500 L2 - 500kg GP Bomb LD") ["SD_250_Stg"] = 100, --("SD 250 Stg - 250kg GP Bomb LD") ["SD_500_A"] = 213, --("SD 500 A - 500kg GP Bomb LD") ["AB_250_2_SD_2"] = 100, --("AB 250-2 - 144 x SD-2, 250kg CBU with HE submunitions") ["AB_250_2_SD_10A"] = 100, --("AB 250-2 - 17 x SD-10A, 250kg CBU with 10kg Frag/HE submunitions") ["AB_500_1_SD_10A"] = 213, --("AB 500-1 - 34 x SD-10A, 500kg CBU with 10kg Frag/HE submunitions") ["AGM_114K"] = 12, ["AGM_114"] = 12, ["HYDRA_70_M229"] = 8, ["AGM_65D"] = 130, ["AGM_65E"] = 200, ["AGM_65F"] = 200, ["AGM_65H"] = 130, ["AGM_65G"] = 200, ["AGM_65K"] = 200, ["AGM_65L"] = 200, ["AT_6"] = 10, ["HOT3"] = 10, ["AGR_20A"] = 8, ["AGR_20_M282"] = 8, -- A10C APKWS ["MODED_AGR_20_M282"] = 8, ["GBU_54_V_1B"] = 118, ["SNEB_TYPE251_F1B"] = 8, ["SNEB_TYPE252_F1B"] = 8, ["SNEB_TYPE253_F1B"] = 8, ["SNEB_TYPE256_F1B"] = 8, ["SNEB_TYPE257_F1B"] = 8, ["SNEB_TYPE251_F4B"] = 4, ["SNEB_TYPE252_F4B"] = 4, ["SNEB_TYPE253_F4B"] = 5, ["SNEB_TYPE256_F4B"] = 6, ["SNEB_TYPE257_F4B"] = 8, ["SNEB_TYPE251_H1"] = 4, ["SNEB_TYPE252_H1"] = 4, ["SNEB_TYPE253_H1"] = 5, ["SNEB_TYPE256_H1"] = 6, ["SNEB_TYPE257_H1"] = 8, --["CBU_52B"] = 32, -- CBUs --["CBU_87"] = 32, --["CBU_97"] = 32, --["CBU_99"] = 32, --["ROCKEYE"] = 32, --["BELOUGA"] = 32, --["BLG66_BELOUGA"] = 32, --["BL_755"] = 32, ["MATRA_F4_SNEBT251"] = 8, -- Mirage F1 Section ["MATRA_F4_SNEBT253"] = 8, ["MATRA_F4_SNEBT256"] = 8, ["MATRA_F1_SNEBT253"] = 8, ["MATRA_F1_SNEBT256"] = 8, ["SAMP400LD"] = 274, ["SAMP400HD"] = 274, ["SAMP250LD"] = 118, ["SAMP250HD"] = 118, ["SAMP125LD"] = 64, ["BR_250"] = 118, ["Durandal"] = 64, ["BLU107B_DURANDAL"] = 274, ["FFAR Mk5 HEAT"] = 8, -- Rockets ["FFAR Mk1 HE"] = 8, ["HVAR"] = 8, ["C_5"] = 8, -- Mig19P Rockets ["BGM_109B"] = 400, ["BAT-120"] = 40, -- MB-339 Secion ["BAP-100"] = 40, ["ARF8M3AP"] = 8, ["ARF8M3HEI"] = 8, ["ARF8M3TPSM"] = 8, ["HB_F4E_GBU_8_HOBOS"] = 582, -- Heatblur F-4E Section ["AGM_62_I"] = 225, ["Mk_84AIR_GP"] = 582, ["AGM_65A"] = 100, ["AGM_65B"] = 100, ["AGM_12A"] = 118, ["AGM_12B"] = 118, ["AGM_12C"] = 271, ["RB75"] = 100, -- Viggen ["RB75B"] = 100, ["RB75T"] = 170, ["MK77mod1-WPN"] = 118 } napalmTable = { ["Mk_81"] = true, ["Mk_82"] = true, ["MK77mod1-WPN"] = true, ["SAMP125LD"] = true } The name of the bomb is "MK77mod1-WPN. Working on MK77 mod 0

There are some who dislike the above video, I understand and I wish to hear from those who have this opinion and have a polite and constructive talk how I can improve. And once again, all the credits of the mods go to their respective creators. Here is the mod of Mk.77 Mod1 mk77mod1 = { category = CAT_BOMBS, name = "MK77mod1-WPN", model = "A4E_Mk77mod1", user_name = _("Mk-77 mod 1"), displayName = _("Mk-77 mod 1 - 500lb Fire Bomb LD"), wsTypeOfWeapon = {wsType_Weapon, wsType_Bomb, wsType_Bomb_Fire, WSTYPE_PLACEHOLDER}, scheme = "bomb-common", class_name = "wAmmunition", type = 0, mass = 230, hMin = 10, hMax = 12000.0, Cx = 0.0030, VyHold = -100.0, Ag = -1.23, puff = { show_puff = true, }, fm = { mass = 230, caliber = 0.2730000, cx_coeff = {1.000000, 0.320000, 0.710000, 0.150000, 1.280000}, cx_factor = 3, L = 1.05, I = 33.282267, Ma = -0.1,--2.746331, Mw = 0.1,--2.146083, wind_time = 1000.000000, wind_sigma = 80.000000, }, control = { check_obj_delay = 0.0, default_delay = 0.0, default_open_height = 33, }, warhead = simple_warhead(220),-- 220 kg of fuel shape_table_data = { { file = "A4E_Mk77mod1", index = WSTYPE_PLACEHOLDER, }, }, targeting_data = { char_time = 20.32 }, } declare_weapon(mk77mod1) As for the Napalm Effect mod part, I would like to pass on to the mod's creator, but I have some ideas how to integrate it to A-4E-C: BTW, if somebody would make weapon mod for F-4E which incorporates napalm, it would be great!

Hi, I've reported this issue a couple of years ago, but unfortunately it hasn't been fixed yet. I should be only some simple lines of code. I would really appreciate if this was fixed. kind regards.

Actually our other sim products have fully custom code for systems. Only weapons are not reproduced. Our tornado has also a working TFR and Radar. Inviato dal mio SM-F731B utilizzando Tapatalk

From GAF TO 1F-4F-34-1 page 1-157 it describes that the case/cartridge on the SUU-23 is ejected from the lower left side if the pod with sufficient velocity to clear the aircraft.

Version 1.52 - 20240912 -- Maintenance Update • Fix for FARP slot accessibility edge case (single/multiplayer) • Added a single Su-25T (DCS free plane) Frogfoot to Nal, so everyone can start the mission. • Set all AAA infantry orders to “wait-guard” while all Assault set to “wait-captureAndHold” • Slightly upgraded the AI Cobra’s bite Enjoy, -ch

Thanks, but that's not for me. I don't mess with inner workings, that's what I expect the Devs to do. ..

A few modules already provide that, ex. F-15E but yeah, should be a standard feature for any aviator - either visor or sun glasses.

well every day is a school day :)...guess I'll stoat aboot wi DCS and try to get to the bottom of the pausing/stuttering I have when using MT...cheers for the info

Something else for the to-do list (albeit minor) - the AA1 panel for the AN/APX-76 interrogator currently isn't present (blanked off). Of course, without wider IFF functionality (though RAZBAM have implemented a system that does everything required for their aircraft, which Aerges' F1 also uses) I'm not expecting functionality, but the equivalent for the F-4E (which is similarly non-functional outside of LotATC) - the AN/APX-80 (which includes the AN/APX-76), exists. The panel is rather simple and is described in HB's own manual. There have been mentions of it being planned but low priority on Discord.

Do you have all pieces (and the prices) dialed in yet?

Тем не менее, возможность включения "шаблонного", вшитого в игру аэродромного заполнения (а лучше и траффика) хотелось бы иметь. Это на порядок оживило бы миссии и упростило бы работу создателям миссий, сняв часть нагрузки по созданию шаблонов. Специфичные шаблоны может каждый сам себе набить, но хотелось бы и что-то стандартное видеть, это экономит час-два, которые порой тратятся на "косметику". Ну у нас же авиасимулятор, а не симулятор последствий "перестройки" и развала 90-х, согласись))) Тем более, что в нулевых у нас уже постепенно шла модернизация на СМ. И мой пост был больше про "конкурентоспособность" МиГ-23 и прочих истребителей:) В случае использования наших один в поле не воин без полноценной реализации системы управления звеньями.

I have added this issue to our reports thank you

You're welcome!

Daily MiG-29 Russian 9.51

you need to be patient, we can not get to ever thread instantly. You also posted in the wrong section of the forum for AI, the modding section is for unofficial mods, I will move it. Many train issues have already been reported and I have bumped the internal reports thank you

Вообще ничего удивительного нет в том, что сабжи с приличными возможностями по земле в наших реалиях интереснее чем истребители, которые конкуренцию синим не составят от слова совсем, я про и 23 и 29.

With a big THANK YOU! to @Urbi for the help and liveries! They are outstanding! Stay tuned for more! And the releases!

Think I have to go with Biggs on this one. Keep using it for a while and see how it goes. I turned my textures right down to low and thought that was a fix even in vr. (Which should be way more aggressive than 'optimised') Then 20 mins of use later.....

Hello, We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience and frustration this situation has caused you. We understand your concerns regarding the defective MFD screen and the support process you encountered. Our goal is to provide prompt and effective solutions to our customers, and it appears we fell short in this instance. We appreciate your feedback and take it seriously as an opportunity to improve our service. To resolve this matter quickly, we would like to escalate your case to ensure that your warranty is honored and that you receive a replacement screen as soon as possible. Our customer support team will contact you directly to expedite this process. We value your support of WinWing and the feedback you've provided. Please rest assured that we are committed to addressing this issue promptly and to improving our after-sales support to better serve the flight sim community. Thank you for your patience and understanding. If you have any additional concerns, please don't hesitate to reach out. Best regards, WinWing Customer Support Team

Thats cool and you can just run it after an update or repair. I am not a big fan of these huge textures and huge poly models in games. To me its best to let the sim have the breathing room to get on with the actual important background detections and calculations. That is a massive amount of space you save. 4k files are big When you view a 4k pic in paintshop pro at 1920x1080 desktop and pan around you realize how big 4k is.

^ It certainly will. From dcs_updater's "point of view" a modified file is a modified file and has to be restored. With the script, however, shrinking these textures afterwards is finally not much more complicated for us than re-enabling mods in OvGME/OMM so at least that's a good thing.

Ran this script on mine and it modified over 4000 files, saving around 70 gigs of space and couldn’t tell one bit of difference in quality. Used 2-3 less gigs of VRAM flying the CH-47 in Afghanistan. From maxed out 16 to 13.3 ish.It’s a much needed optimization across the board, I believe.

Yeah, just to reiterate, spotting in VR went from perhaps too easy to non-existent in one of the recent updates. Meanwhile, it's still too powerful in 2D, which creates a huge differential between players in MP. It has to change one way or the other to make it more consistent.

Airbase has a couple of manpads and 2 SA-8's scattered all over including AAA's in 2 or 3 positions. Its suicide thats why I'm taking care of the low altitude threats for the tornados to make their run. I rather not use myself as bait after 20 minutes just trying to reach the target I'll do some more testing to find alternatives using the same mk-20 at low altitude as you suggest. Thanks!

Which is why the J makes the most sense, to me personally. The -B isn’t a sitting duck, but the J features the same technology reach as the published -E variants. An F-4B disqualifies Naval fans from using their aircraft competitively in late 70s / early 80s scenarios. A -J can be kitted out for Rolling Thunder by just equipping the early missiles, or loaded up with later all aspect Sidewinders and better Sparrows for post-Vietnam scenarios.

Whoa! Just WHOA!!! Judge for yourself! Before After For those of you that have followed this thread, especially the strange slowdowns reported the past few weeks. Well, it seems this has been solved for me now. It does have slowdowns here and there, while the 20FPS below 900' is completely gone for me. NOW! Applying this fix with an ordinary mod manager is not really the way to do it. Takes a lot of time, first backing up the original files, and then replacing them with the fixed ones. And of course there will be a lot of reads and writes, which finally kicked me in the but and have forced me to start using this mod manager. It takes, well not seconds on my slow system, but a couple of minutes or so. And basically no backup and writes. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3339453/ Couldn't find a forum thread for it, but this is a similar tool. Thanks @zbysiek EXCELLENT WORK!!!

Ну Су-17М4 поинтереснее и Миг29 будет Интереснее Су17М4 - тока Миг27К.

Hello all, Don’t mean to be annoying and bumping this thread but I never saw this one and I am honestly shocked to see this thread is so old already! The issue still persists to this day and is getting worse with every new module that is released! See: and: It would take less than an hour to run the script through a fully loaded (every module installed that is available) and it would reduce texture sizes by 60+ GB in total. This allows people to actually use high texture settings at high resolution and have all their cockpits readable since the older modules at medium settings are blurry. 4K 32bit textures are a total waste of resources if used for anything but the actual colour textures. And even then they would probably look just as good if they were compressed as DXT5 or similar saving so much memory both RAM/VRAM and disk space. Please have a look at this to try and improve and optimise the sim where it is sorely needed. @Flappie @BIGNEWY @NineLine It is not a handful of textures that are affected. There are hundreds of them that have to grown to ridiculous sizes that can be fixed in a matter of minutes using the script by @zbysiek Kind regards, Vincent van Veen

MILTECH-5 @Stachelhaut We have taken care of the ammo supplies and would like to show you the progress of our new static objects today. The picture shows a pallet of HOT missiles for the new DCS Cargo System to ensure the supply for the BO-105 with the CH-47F. We are also confident that we will be able to present you the first BO-105 flight with the new flight model in the next few weeks.

Good afternoon, @zyll That is basically what I have been looking for for ages now! An automated way to get the file sizes in check! Thank you so much for pointing me in that direction I ran the script through my DCS folder and noticed the following results with regards to my original 4 points as laid out in the first post: 1. Less hard stuttering whenever I fly the CH-47, AH-64 or the OH-58 around the new Afghanistan map due to smaller textures being loaded in/out om memory or the SSD. 2. VRAM usage going to a manageable 13-14GB instead of instantly running to the 16GB which is the max on my GPU. RAM usage down from 40GB to 30GB. 3. Game loads slightly faster, though not a huge deal. 4. Total game size on SSD reduced from 861GB to 804GB. The texture conversion took my 5800X3D less than an hour to complete. The aircraft and cockpits look nearly identical and you really have to put them side by side to see the difference but the advantages are huge IMHO. @BIGNEWY and @NineLine This is not a huge ask of the team. This way we can still fly around using high texture settings with clear readable cockpits. It would be a huge deal if someone could please have a look at an optimized texture resolution and format option especially with the newer modules having ever larger texture file sizes. Even compressing all textures from 32bit to a much more manageable DXT5 or similar would be a plus. Can you please let us know if there is anyone looking into this? It shouldn't have to take 1,5 years plus to do what the community has done with the script and freely available tools (many thanks to @Zyll for pointing it out and @zbysiek for creating the awesome script) Kind regards, Vincent van Veen And two more shots from the AH-64