Leaderboard

Crosstail Studios

A video, with my terrible french english accent, are you crazy ? Anyway, since I am tired to rewrite the same thing once per year (this is the average frequency people ask for what you ask), I spent my afternoon to write a ... DOCUMENTATION PAGE ... yes ! at last ! https://github.com/iquercorb/OpenModMan/wiki/Create-and-manage-Network-Repository Good ready, tell me if something is not clear or if I made a horrible misspell (which I certainly did)

I dont recall what exactly he says without checking in-game right now, but what he says is taken exactly from our real-life F-4E WSOs. Super exact and precise brevity wasnt that common at that time in these situations yet. (Not that I want to get into this discussion now, perhaps a topic for a different thread if you want to challenge that claim )

I Totaly disagree. I raised problematic elements such as the lack of bridges in the Nile Delta, and they responded AND took my remarks for the next packs. They have a customer sense...

It's the radar. All the different OSINT sources made me chose 10 as the max number for the TPY-2.

@FLAKK88 and anyone interested: I know my post will sound as a generic response but, IMO, it's worth a try if nothing else is working... In my own experience, with mine and many other systems with Nvidia GPUs (older or newer), the Nvidia's driver 537.58 is still consistently the best, and by quite a margin. It can make a difference (for the better) with frametimes, increasing performance and reducing stuttering. I know it sounds strange how an older driver can be better but... that's just how it is. Regardless, and no matter what Nvidia GPU model or driver version, I strongly recommend installing only "Clean Version" drivers, instead of official Nvidia ones. These clean drivers differ in the removal all of the bloatware that you get with the official ones (which causes higher resources consuming with added unnecessary processes in background, affecting and interfering with performance). For the mentioned Nvidia 537.58 drivers, its "Clean Version" is found among other older ones in the following link: https://mega.nz/folder/dQRX3AQI#9RmtXT0cTw45RsWxTQgYiw If you insist in always using the very latest Nvidia driver version, then its newest "Clean Version" is (currently) found here: https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/rtx-560-70-exostenza-edition™.452356/ There's also the matter of Nvidia driver settings If you have the patience to try someone else's settings, I suggest trying same as mine: (click on image to enlarge it) Please pay attention to the following - my global settings may be different to yours. So, when you see "Use Global Setting" in my settings there, pay special attention to what appears inside parenthesis right after it (it's what it's set at in my Nvidia CP settings). Change accordingly. Also note, I've set Vertical Sync at "Fast" because it works best for me (but try it?). It should work good, but if it doesn't try ON or OFF instead. Once you finish with the changes, click "Apply" on the bottom. One important setting to change imediately in the NVIDIA Global Settings is the Shader Cache Size, to be set at 10GB (this is pretty much a "must do"). NOTE: If at some point you wish to revert again to default DCS profile settings, and start all over again (for whatever reason), then click "Restore". And you'll have a DCS profile clean sheet all over again. Play around with stuff.

Hi all, this is my entry, it is based off a scheme I saw on a scale model, and I liked it, but I am unsure of when or if it was ever used in real life. download for the livery is here: https://mega.nz/file/VQ10jARL#eZ7YLxZO2tyRXZAdpJbdqqiWXNzyj6HSldzJ1X7Qvb0

The cargos will be included in the next update, coming soon™ Yes, we would like to expand the VAP but we're busy with other stuff at the moment so it will probably be a couple of months before that happens

I have recently purchased the Fw-190 Dora during the sales period and I absolutely love it, DCS WWII is amazing (thank you WolfPack server). However, there seems to be some aspects that detract from the experience and I think I have some suggestions that could help enhance the modules interactions. 1. I would like to see a modifier on key bindings that require a button input, but in reality, control an axis. Example: The gyro gunsight target wingspan dial requires a button to be bound to it. As this seems to move a bit fast when pressing the button, I would like a modifier that we can change the value of between 1.0 (full speed) and 0.1 (slowest); which can be adjusted in the binding’s menu in 0.1 increments. Secondary to this, for controls that have labelled increments, such as the aforementioned example, one of the modifier options could be to have the output as increments which will rotate the applicable dial by one of the marked intervals per press of the bound button. This could be named “EZ42 Gunsight Target Wingspan Step (Left)(Right)”. OR, this could simply be the result of setting the increment to 0.1; or perhaps a 0.0 option which removes the rotational speed and sets a step function. 2. Specific to the EZ42 ballistics unit. I would like the ability to bind a button that cycles through the labelled intervals as marked in section “I” of the chart; 100, 93, 85, 76, 68, and 60. Such a button could be named “EZ42 Gunsight Altitude Step (Down)(Up)”; the up and down as referencing the chart. 3. The “landing gears retraction cover”. Although this isn’t a big problem as I have integrated this into my start up work flow, I would still like this following feature to be an option. Perhaps for things such as landing gear covers, or master arm covers (ref F5E) there could be a tune binding or menu option to have these covers open and close based upon the parent button been activated. When I press the key binding for the landing gear, the cover automatically opens to allow that button press instead of inhibiting the function because the cover wasnt first flipped. 4. Master arm switch. I would like to see the option to have a “Master Arm Switch – (Safe)(Arm)”, this way people using something like the VKB Gunfighter that have a flip trigger with a bindable button on both the up and down positions can use it. Currently I have the up position bound which toggles this action, however, because I actually fly with the master arm off until I need it in all other modules that allow it, this has gotten me into some very minimal trouble a couple of times with the Dora. Now I just leave the master arm in the armed position. The above suggestions are not critical and I have more than enough controls, but I do think these would enhance the fidelity and quality of life for the Dora module; and many other modules.

Thank you, reported for internal analysis.

I'll do some tests while waiting for alignments, etc. depending on the aircraft. They do seem rather pointless however, given failures aren't really modelled to any meaningful extent, and if you do get a failure, there is no mechanism within the game to rectify it or run to the spare jet. I'll never know why running some BITs is the 'gold standard' of realism, while every other aspect is sorely lacking. Comms (both inter-flight and ATC), weather interaction, tactics, weapons release parameters, operations tempo, arming and fuelling arrangements, etc. are all given a pass, but if you miss out a checklist item then you aren't doing it right! Digital Cockpit Simulator indeed.

I always learn the most detailed startup procedure with each new module. If its simulated, I'll include it in my cold start flow and will create a lengthy checklist featuring every step. Whatever knob I touch, I then learn all the underlying devices on the side while getting used to this startup flow. This procedure helps immensely with learning and understanding the aircraft. I see that many people are too impatient or simply not interested in learning these things and only focus on how to get into launching weapons as fast and with the least amount of switches to press as possible. Only these comrades are usually those who then don't have any clue what to do if something's not working or any damage demands system knowledge to solve an issue. When I know my detailed startup flow by heart, I usually create an abbreviated checklist. From then on I'll do the lengthy checklist with each first flight of the day on that specific module and the abbreviated checklist with any flight in thus module afterwards for the rest of the day. This assists me in keeping me proficient with the entire range of onboard systems, while cutting down the checks for all but the first flight.

Everything becomes clear when you know that the map was called Strait of Hormuz before release. We might have better luck with Iraq map for mentioned areas and GW operations.

Actually, Jester sends an appropriate instruction within milliseconds. The "delay" you feel is due to the length of the sentence itself. Like, lets say he decides to say "Move 5 feet forward". When he starts speaking this, your position is incorrect by exactly 5 feet. But by the time he finished speaking the full sentence you might have drifted elsewhere already, since the sentence takes about 3 seconds to say. There isnt too much we can do about this, you would have a similar experience with a real human. Something we are looking into is to evaluate individual parts of the sentence at runtime. Meaning that for example the number "5" here could change up until the moment he said "Move" instead of being determined before having said "Move". So that would give the number another 0.5s extra accuracy. The "problem" feels more real for people who are not used to AAR yet. If you ask one of the SMEs they tend to fly so precise (because that is what they did/do for years profesionally) that what Jester says is still super accurate by the time he finished talking.

That's a shame. They should have gotten rid of the hot start, not the cold.

I am no longer having this problem As I did some research I realized I had downloaded key mapping for my joystick from someone else That person had the zoom function on the UI layer calibrated to an axis I removed that entirely Now the escape key works is it supposed to so does everything else Probably you have the same key coordinated also

Yep, I have two different models for the Block I and II.

@GNCRamBo, as Tholozor stated, the engine starters are pneumatically powered and can indeed be powered by external air supply. ChatGPT or similar AI aggregation programs should not be considered a reliable source for anything, as they are unable to ascertain what sources and information on the internet are accurate or not, and are prone to simply repeat rumors, misinformation, misconceptions, or folklore.

Mi-24P from 262nd separate helicopter squadron in Afghansitan, Bagram 1988 (262-я отдельная вертолётная эскадрилья, Баграм 1988 год) DCS user files: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3340964/ For PSD, pls dm in forum or discord (yanevor)

https://en.shiftall.net/products/meganex8k It has some really good ideas, like the flip-up. The form factor reminds me of the bigscreen beyond.

yes not many options here really. but if you trim what you really dont use it might help until next year.. wish I had a better solution for you..

Yeah, I've noticed that with previous updates. But this time, it definitely wins the record with 200GB...

delete some planes or terrains or get a bigger SSD GB wise..

This one perhaps?

All solid points and much appreciated. Being an owner of the map since day one off the shelf, I totally forgot the OG title was "The Strait of Hormuz". Also, right after posting this, I saw what the plans were for the Iraq map on the first page of the roadmap forum for 2024 and beyond. If my instincts serve me correctly, it appears we will be getting part of the Persian Gulf in the Iraq map. Hopefully to include Kuwait and part of the Gulf to place our carriers. Appreciate the feedback gents. Consider this topic shut down for me.

Thanks for all the help guys! I managed to get 90fps again by dropping DLSS from quality to performance, before this update it was on quality for months without any problems. But there we go, it works again smoothly with a little less eye candy I guess. Thanks again! Blue skies and happy landings.

They do... they asked BN to close ONLY viable and extremely good bug report for its FM so they dont have to deal with it. We are at point where ED should just step in and give ultimatum - overhaul this clickable sub FC3 quality trash or we will remove it from shop/take over it. Its in unacceptable state and is absolutely out of quality standards of even modules years old. Mig-19 or M2000 were in terrible state too, similar quality to 21. Both were given outstanding reworks. Mirage 2000C went from one of the worst simulated fighters to BEST simulated fighter in DCS. It is NOT acceptable that ED sells this slop, let alone for the price its set at. I have no idea how they can even sell something like that. This product is so dated, it should have been removed long time ago without proper rework of FM, DM and avionics. We need whole new mig at this point. Best would be if someone went and did F-13 and MF.

It’s still been very much improved over the last 12 years. I would actually use those terms “murky and cloudy” to describe the old version. Before EDGE I think it was. Reshade can’t give you genuine HDR. That has to be in the game itself.

I would be interested to know if you see any difference with windows game bar enabled and disabled. Long shot I know but I think worth testing for some processors.

I hear that there are concepts of plans. Or have been. It's been some time...

Das Menü "Rearming and Refueling" bezieht sich immer nur auf das Flugzeug des Spielers, der das öffnet. Wie du schon richtig gesehen hast, kannst du darin zwar die Bort-Number an deinem Flugzeug ändern, aber nichts davon hat irgendeinen Einfluss auf deine Flügelmänner. Es gibt seit geraumer Zeit einen Wegpunktyp "LandingReFuAr", der naheliegenderweise "Landen, Auftanken, Aufmunitionieren" bedeutet. Ich habe mich aber noch nicht damit beschäftigt, ob und wie gut der funktioniert und ob das überhaupt klappt, wenn ein Spieler Bestandteil so einer Gruppe ist. Probier doch mal aus, dir bei Airbase B eine solche Aktion auf den Landewegpunkt zu legen, vielleicht tanken und munitionieren deine Flügelmänner dann tatsächlich auf, anstatt ihre Flugzeuge auszustellen und dich alleine weiterfliegen zu lassen. Ich vermute, die KI-Flieger laden und tanken in jedem Fall nur das nach, was sie zu Beginn der Mission geladen hatten, man wird also vermutlich keine andere oder neue Bewaffnung laden lassen können.

Hello, @Ladan Regardless of what was already mentioned here, regarding weight, speed, and/or angles, if you feel this is a bug we require a track file to analyse what you claim. I test landing in carriers frequently and only actually have mishaps when I go over the limitations or don't follow correct procedures.

So far I understand DCE as a battle in progress where each time I join, the front would have changed based on each AI group tasking and outocmes, which I, as a player can influence further by receiving part of that tasking, for example here is a supply convoy, go kill it, and if I succeed, the convoy won't replenish another group that might loose it's next encounter with opposing force as a result. Given the state of AI, and all other parts of DCS dysfunctional attitude towards helping the user I doubt DCE will revolutionize DCS as such. For sure it will bring nice things, which will enable us to enjoy constant 'something to do' in otherwise empty DCS World. I guess I will stick to my missions and narrated campaigns, unless DCE is actually a revolution in AI, communication, and cooperation between player and friendly forces... THAT is almost unimaginable amount of (re)work in DCS needed.

There’s a floating Runway line at Queshm that’s been there for quite some time that indicates otherwise.

Edited top post, file format can be PSD or DDS

Sold!

Do we even have information on what the Dynamic Campaign Engine is supposed to bring? I'm interested to know if it's going to be SP, or also multiplayer. Whether MP (if available) can be hosted with minimal maintenance, or whether it will require 'hands on' approach to keep things going. I'm also interested to know if it's going to provide 'endless campaigns', like you play one, then get to the end, then go to the briefing, and then start a new mission which progresses (a bit like the 3rd party app we have now), or whether it will provide seamless/endless gameplay without the stopping, so it's like an endless mission where things just keep progressing. (Which would be brilliant for online MP gamplay). And how much control we will have over the content and direction as well. Whether it will be something that can be highly customisable by server admins, etc to add to it - or if it's a stand alone exclusive function. Because honestly, if it's not going to be MP that's endless (without the server having to cycle to another mission), but you have to finish the mission, then cycle to the next - I can't see how ED is going to do it better than an already out there dynamic campaign mission generator that's already available. When I first heard about the DCE - I was excited, but the more time has gone on, the more I'm becoming less optimistic. I was real excited about dynamic spawns as well, but ED have managed to avoid the one thing that I was hoping for the most with them (ability to spawn FARPS dynamically and be able to spawn on those), in order to complete what I (and many others) need and have been asking for years. This, plus what happened with RJ (author of overlordBot), not to mention some others that have dropped out along the way, has given me the impression that whoever's involved with the planning is a little more disconnected from the community and our needs to what I first gave credit, so I'm not as optimistic as I used to be that the DCE will actually fit our needs or expectations. I may be wrong (and I really hope I am) - I'm just lacking the level of confidence I once did that they're going to nail this out of the box, but it'll be more 'Early Access' and along the lines of what's already been made. I'm preparing myself that it is still years away (Vulkan has to come first IIRC??) - and then it may take another 5 years after release before it matures into something solid. ... Or maybe I'm just suffering from the Monday Blues.

I'm not an official staff person, but on their Discord they're saying they have a new coder to work of the FM... it's on the final bits for an AI-only release, and they asked if we (those of us on Discord) were willing to wait a bit and get it released at the same time for player use...I don't recall seeing the results, but it seems to me it is in "The Process" of nearing completion. It is being actively worked on. There are two short videos of it in-flight on YouTube.

SharpeXB -> I am going to say this again. With my setup I was able to achieve between 70 to 90 fps in flight using the resolution stated pre 2.9. Please don't insult my intelligence. I put plenty of money into my sim. I am simply making a point that post 2.8 destroyed my performance and others shared the same experience. Cheers Kovacs -> Already rolled back drivers for nvidia to about 8 previous versions. Did not help one bit.

We’re all hud cripples aren’t we?

I forgot to put the October newsletter here: https://www.8492sqdn.net/posts/newsletter-2024-10/

Please include this skin

Fella in the back with the pot of crayons is working on that.

But they have resources for the Christen Eagle?

First of all, my advice would be to upgrade early next year. February or March, probably. The reason for this is because a lot of new hardware is coming between now and then, and they are preparing by stopping production of some parts, so right now you have less choice and you pay extra for parts that soon will be replaced by better things. If you upgrade early next year, you can probably get a 9800X3D + 5080/5090 system, and then pair it with a Pimax Crystal Light. That would be a very good setup and it should come in at the low end of, or below the $5k-$10k range.

yes, use the vertical and classic BFM. Usually we could not keep up with the F-4 against other Aircraft. In the F-4F we had AMRAAMs. So dogfighting was last resort. What we were really good at, was getting slow really fast. Forcing an overshoot and get a missile off after that, light the burners, getting low on deck and go home. No turning fight against everything with a higher number as a 4 in the name.

Personal choice, I ignore the tanker lights and let Jester’s guidance keep me on track. Works well enough to tank on, and I don’t have to mess with the seat height.

This is my take for MI24P. Even not within your declared special attention, I still think this will stand out as one of the best real design for a Mi24P. VeticalT theme was used in real life on an airshow. The attention to detail I've put on this skin was tremendous. Aligning all the shapes at the level that can be seen on screenshots below took me so much time, but the result I think will please you. My preference was to have a factory new look, however if requested I may apply to weathering to it. The skin can be found for download since some time ago in here: (there is the original VerticalT and a variant I called OrizontalR which themes for Eagle Dynamics) Mi24 Vertical-T and Orizontal-R (digitalcombatsimulator.com) Note: my .psd files are having an whapping 2GB. Please provide an alternate location for upload, or you may download them from here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mQsBsD796KX4IvUd_rZyc7MCfka-1wWp/view?usp=sharing Please let me know if anything more is required PS: Please find below the original GIMP templates i've used to create this skin, in case are needed. The above PSDs are generated from GIMP so I have no clue if they are ok: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eIisGFV553XhlrxH7Qa2S80e-36rRQKg/view?usp=drive_link nullnullnull