Leaderboard

Well, I'm not really working in cooperation with ED. Whenever they release an update, I go through it part by part and see what's new and what's been updated/changed. Some changes will add features that I can add to my assets, but more often the changes break some of my assets (mostly guided weapons) and I will have to find some sort of workaround. I have no information about the changes before the updates are released. Everything is trial and error. Edit: And to avoid discussions in this thread, if you have questions about integration of my assets into DCS, send me a message for details. But the short answer is no.

Folks please stay on topic here - OH-6A If you are having issues with your system or crashes use the bugs forum area. thank you

Today we announce our Data Cartridge System (DTC) The DTC in the Talon loads navigational databases, training zones, targets, jet configuration etc. What will this look like for you guys: For the pilot, this will allow you to preprogram the jet to your taste, examples include: 1. HUD mode (F-16 or MIL-STD) 2. DDS behaviour (more on this later) 3. ADI symbology (CDM or Waterline) 4. Altitude warning modes (and their values) These are persistent, and will save you time configuring the jet, as you will likely fly with the same settings each flight. For the MILSIM training squadrons: 1. Instructor pilots will be able to have a generic file for their entire fighter wing training school 2. Custom training zones 3. No fly zones 4. Low level routes 5. Targets etc. Editing your DTC * The DTC file is clearly laid out, well documented, and easy to modify manually * If an error is made during editing, the jet will revert to default settings, and post an error message for you We are looking into a separate application based solution for editing the DTC file, but this will likely come after initial release Thanks for your continued support Hayds_93 and the Caffeine Simulations Team

Obviously these things aren't 'a big deal' if you don't own these modules but to those that do own them they are as important as everything else my friend, trust me! The Mosquito cost the same as your F16 or F18 and, as such, it's owners are entitled to just as much care and attention as anyone else. Their money is exactly the same.

The glorious fact that Eagle Dynamics Allows any Mods is one of the reasons I love this platform! When mods stop working I trouble shoot and see if there is a conflict with another mod or I wait to see if there is a workaround or an update to the mod. Regarding "Mission Editor Requires all mods used, to be present"... The mission MIZ files can be edited to remove the requirements. There is a very handy utility from Loophole in the DCS User Files Downloads that I have been using for 2 years. It is a Drag and Drop Solution and still works because I just used it tonight! https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3322208/ I am blown away the more I fly the OH-6A Mod and use the asset packs provided because the quality is so professional. This is an A+ Job and @tobi and @Eight Ball have really outdone themselves!

With all due respect, using bond rating in terms of DCS mod quality, A+ is too low, AA+ is closer to reality. Keep up the good work people!

You are wasting your time answering this person .. I have him on ignore since a long time ago ... unfortunately I still have to see his drivel when people quotes him

I have to tell ya Dimitri, there’s nothing wrong with this mod. Lots of us are using it and have no trouble with it. I also have to tell ya that I haven’t read a post from you on this forum that hasn’t come across as rude, arrogant, immature and objectionable and all I’ve seen in reply is people show you patience and try to help you. You should have a look at yourself and learn some manners.

I share the update I made for the mod, it is more simple to share the full mod updated, OvGME ready without unzip, thanks to Barthek for original mod, hope it's not a problem to give link for all users. FULL MOD updated https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-Dq7iWCivLRDyleSL7gZOk_0EL2PKdyF/view?usp=sharing

I would even say ... wider FoV than what's natural... That in combination with the "improved" Spotting Dots, turns this sim which strives to be as realistic as possible in to a simple game... in PVE this can be a nice option like lables but in a PVP it is a disaster. Why use your most possible realistic Radar with all its carefully modelld flaws If you can just zoom all the way out and see those dots from over 20km all around you. The dots dont change in size when you zoom out. The result is while you are looking straight out your cockpit you can't read any number on your instruments but you spot traffic on your 3 o'clock at 20 000' 20 km away For that reason I prefer to disable the improved spotting dots, it totally breaks the immersion. Of course hughe disadvantage in PVP but I just try to stay away from any of those servers for now....

The best freeware helicopter for DCS ever to come out from a freeware developer! Keep up the good work!

A Q&A might be interesting, but in the end I think it would achieve very little than a PR stunt. Instead, I’d prefer to see more ongoing community connection that would bear good fruit. Especially with significant community contributors. After what happened with RJ (OverlordBot creator) I’d love to see a shift in direction when it came to connecting with the community better, and providing support and direction for the community needs. ED have had an incredible free resource with a number of contributors in the community (and still have some). I don’t think that was/is fully realised or appreciated by ED. I’d love to see some real changes in that area and better support and connection for API, and community module developers.

So right now any ground unit can be placed on a whip via directly editing the miz file and getting the coordinates right, or through spawning with a lua script, this is a painful process though if you just want to add a few manpads to a seemingly civilian ship etc. However once you get them placed they work fine, they stay on/with the ship and engage targets according to ROEs etc. So a pretty simple request, I would suggest that placement on ships be permitted for all ground units through the editor, don't bother trying to enforce size or weight limits just leave it up to the mission maker to decide what is reasonable to put on which ships.

Don't forget I am not the creator of the mod, all work was done by Barthek

I think the more simple will be to repack full mod, like this no error for those who are not user friendly with mods

As of the latest large update S-3 tanker skins no longer work. The option appears in the drop down menu but if you select it, it is just the default skin. The normal S-3 skins work fine however. I assume something is not pointing to the correct place in the description file but with all the files being encrypted I don’t know how to find the changes necessary to fix it. Our group would love to have our S-3 tankers back.

Thanks for reporting, we will check and fix to the next update. Inviato dal mio SM-F731B utilizzando Tapatalk

Spot on and Well Said = Thank You ...

Guys, this is a bug introduced during Syria map update. We asked the map producers to fix this but just in case also found a workaround which - if fix is not provided by them - we will include in the campaign patch cycle, that should be less than 2 weeks away. Apologies for this, but it is completely out of my hands and forces me to spend time fixing issues caused by other people instead of focusing on new content. Rest assured this will be fixed though.

LOL I'm with you now

I'll do the same now thx

Getting after it with the OV-10 on our Vietnam mission. Had our Cayuse boys down below earlier, but due to the extreme fun flying, the record key was hit late. Flying the OV-10 would not be near as much fun without the coop of our scouts down below.

I really hope you guys find a way to keep the mod alive. Video I shot today over our Dynamic Vietnam mission with the OV-10. She is much more appreciated than you know and a lot of people would hate to see her disappear, especially they guys on my server. Thanks for the hard work earlier on into this mod. Please do not abandoned it if possible, it is an iconic aircraft with a longer and larger history than most people know!

This module is 60% done. Its not about just flying it. Its about flying as it actually supposed to function...unless you dont consider it a "Study" module... No JTIDS, no JHMCS, missing options, desync multicrew. Sorry... it needs to be completed.

Submission to DCS Mi-24P skin contest November 2024. This is a Livery depicting a German Democratic Republic (GDR) Mi-24P, No. 361, C/N: 340-332 of Kampfhubschraubergeschwader 5 (KHG-5) circa 1989. In December 1989, 12 Mi‑24P were delivered. This made the GDR the last member state of the Warsaw Pact to receive Mi‑24s with modern 9M114 anti-tank guided missiles. The GDR was the only operator of Mi‑24Ps outside the Soviet Union in the Warsaw Pact. C/N: 340-332 was delivered 30Dec1989 to Basepohl helicopter base 140 kilometer north of Berlin. Post unification it was re-marked as Luftwaffe 96+42 and served Oct 1990 thru Sep 1994. Then transfereed to the Hungarian Air Force, storage at Szentkirályszabadja May 1995 then Szolnok. Dec2017-Jan2019. Overhauled by 419th Aircraft Repair Plant (419 ARZ), a subsidiary of Rostec`s Russian Helicopters holding and changed Reg No. to 331 at 86th "Szolnok" Helicopter Base, Hungary. Details of note: 1) The GDR Mi-24P's had bare stainless ring seal plates around the exhaust stacks which had a high temp flexible seal contacting the exhaust stacks. I assume that they were supposed to keep dust, soot and FOD from entering the engine compartment through the gap between the stack and the fuselage skin. Please comment if you know more about them. I couldn't depict the flex seal without the ability to mod the 3d model. 2) Photos show that the APU cover was bare metal (stainless?). 3) Photos also show the lower portions of the pylons were bare metal. 4) I don't think that they used the IR suppressors but I can't stand the plain brown default ones so I painted to match the camo and made connecting parts bare metal. 5) It looks like the GDR flight crew had orange helmets and gray uniforms and this is depicted. The pilot also got an 80s style moustache. 6) I made an additional version of this skin with selectable Bort numbers. Look for "GDR Mi-24P No. 3xx Bort". Submitted to User Files. Links: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3341792/ and https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3341793/ I will do another livery depicting this same airframe post unification as Luftwaffe 96+42. As the photo shows, it was by that point quite weathered and apparently not well maintained.

As soon as they released this new feature I added it to one of my ships. Unfortunately I discovered too many bugs regarding its current implementation that it wouldn't be a positive addition for now. Check the bug section in the forum for more information. If ED implements this feature well I will surely implement it too.

Made a little video with the new OH-6 patch. Love the strut compression and skid friction physics! Well done guys! I know it's been mentioned before a few times but a virtual pilot body would really complete this mod/ module. Otherwise I'm running out of any constructive criticisms. Chopper feels bloody brilliant Oh, there is a little bug - when landing on the school bus, if you land a little too far forward on the pad, or a little too far backward, the skids fall/go through the pad at the edge. Just a minor thing (not seen in the video).

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/stable/2.9.9.2406/ DCS 2.9.9.2406 DCS - Core Game Fixed: Crash instigated by invalid zip file used in mods FIxed: Syria map crash instigated with problem of ground AI navigating through some of the road junctions Campaigns DCS: Mi-24P Outpost Campaign by Stone Sky Mission 2. A bug caused by a change in the height of the helipad has been fixed

Airplane Simulation Compacy Wip media

Can we get mouse center keybind in UI or Common? It is really important for VR as we constantly trying to find this lost cursor to click in cockpit. Also as mouse cursor is following the view, with this function we can simply bind it to one of the joy to recenter pointer on view port, than simply look at given button and use right/left mouse binding to click on cockpit stuff without need to touch a mouse! Extended version would be "save mouse cursor position" and "restore mouse cursor position" in order to place it in position convinient for your VR headset instead of center default. Ideal would be to also add two axis commands (or direction keybinds as well) to move the mouse cursor with HOTAS mini joystick.

Well, since the thread is about spotting dots I would assume I can not see the dots. Do you think I was talking about the pizza shop down the street? How much science do you want in not being able to see anything(the dots)?? I pretty much said it was perfect(the dots) before this last update. I really don't understand what more you need than that to figure out the dots are now too small or too transparent or whatever they changed was too much for high-resolution VR.

Dear AERGES team, first of all, a big thank you for the wonderful last patch. I can only say it again and again, the F1 is one of the best modules in DCS. But let's talk briefly about the SPAD system. For those who don't know, SPAD is the anti-skid system. It works rather suboptimally in DCS. Let's take the F-4 for a quick comparison...if I turn off the anti-skid, then I get roughly the same braking behavior as the F1 - but with SPAD active! That is absolutely not okay and fundamentally unsafe...sorry, but an anti-skid system usually feels different. My question now is, is SPAD so extremely bad in the F1 and therefore correctly simulated, or is there something else coming? As a patch, I mean? I think since all the other systems are so extremely well simulated, this question is absolutely justified. In any case, thank you in advance, AERGES.

DCS has dropped support for OpenVR (those params won’t do anything) so you will need to use OpenXR. What are the problems you are having which are wanting you to use the previous OpenVR implementation?

Yes that would work.

Currently, AI planes perform dive only by "pushing the stick forward", directly getting the nose down. In most situations this is fine and I don't care how AI performs diving. Except situations when I fly as a wingman with AI. In reality when performing dive attack, you initiate the dive in some specific way and most of the time this is not the way the AI does. Another scenario is aerobatics. One more is just flying according to the flight path, sometimes it's appropriate to execute dive by creating some roll (for example, low altitude training) I believe, that the dive is a very special maneuver and it should be configurable for AI. As I said, it's specifically critical thing when you fly as a wingman with AI. We have several places where this can be made configurable: Aerobatics task Combat tasks: bombing, strafing, all kinds of attack tasks Separate option in "Set option" menu Possible configuration parameters: "Initiate with" -- maneuver that is used to enter a dive Roll-in (roll angle between ~30 and 180, not including 180) g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load Half of a split-S g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load Half of a split-S + half of a barrel roll g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load "Recover" -- how AI should recover from dive Climb angle g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load Forced turn Attitude: level, climb, dive g-load should be configurable for Aerobatics task. For attack, AI should estimate required g-load sector angle Having that, flying as a wingman with AI will be definitely more enjoyable.

Might be a good idea for a feature. Some form of "generate flightplan from map markers". Kinda requires being able to filter map markers for owner/author though, which is something we have to figure out for another feature first (showing only own Map Markers instead of all).

I agree with you, but that's how ED treats ww2. We not only paid for the aircraft and maps. But also spent money on a paid asset pack. Yet we are treated as second class citizens. ED doesn't make moeny on WW2, so ww2 is the lowest of lowest priority. I have everything ww2, but honestly don't play much any more as I'm tired of the only thing ww2 gets is bugs. Nothing of major importance has come to ww2 dcs since the Mossie and the Mossie itself is mostly left for dead. Jets got BVR AI updates and BFM AI updates. But ww2 AI is the same it has been for 10 years.

Thank you for your reports. The bugs in Barax lights animation, as well as the problem with IFF lights, are now fixed internally.

He means mess as in Seargents Mess. A place of drinking for certain ranks.

You can see how and why it was changed here:

Did you try uninstalling all other mods except just the OH-6A? That way you can isolate the problem to only being from this mod itself and not from other mods..?

Well in DCS years that’s like yesterday

Well what do we think, will we see the Corsair before the Corsair II?

You have to create a copy of the livery you want to use, and then add at the end of its description.lua the arguments you want to set for the aircraft, like this: Then on the mission editor you use this livery for the static aircraft that you want to place ... I dont know if using this type of livery makes sense on a player controlled aircraft, I have only used it on background aircraft: Once the mission starts, it looks like this:

I would say its more a thin air missile. If bandit is high and most importantly you are high (40k feet launch alt) then 54 is indeed very dangerous missile to even fighters at 70nm out. Thing is that AI cheats with its RWR and always detect missile at 10nm no matter what and no matter how <profanity>ty RWR it has

You guys got to be kidding me! When I made my wish to get a MH/AH6 some day, I did not think it would be anywhere near. And meantime you have been already working on that. You are making my DCS world even more awesome place. Thank you! Thank you!....

Considering that 7800X3D already beats 14900k in gaming overall and 9800X3D at a minimum is 4-8% faster stock for stock (before any OC headroom), then logic would dictate that 9800X3D will also handily beat out 14900k in gaming. Throw it into a half decent b650E or X670E board and you're off to the races. Interesting part will be how vcache being under the CCD effects signaling/latency and vdroop, which will bleed over into overclocking. Direct die cooling could make things more spicy.

It is the track history maintaining the return for x number of scan cycles. By default the jet has it set to 4. This means you'll see the most recent brick returned plus the bricks returned during the last 4(3?) scan cycles. As they become older they fade out. You can adjust the track history in the CTRL page in the FCR. Options are 1,2,3, or 4. I set it to 1 typically in order to declutter as much as possible. Currently, setting it low has the benefit of getting false contact bricks to go away quicker as well, which is nice. No clue if this is how it is supposed to work, but it is how it works in the current state of our jet.

Lets hope this does not fall on Deaf Ears

Thank you so much for all the info, the date range is particularly useful ... the livery I liked the most is this one: Once I have the first mission in a working state, I will link it here so you can try it if you want, as I'd love to get warnings if I've got anything wrong Cheers, Eduardo