Leaderboard

Polish Modernised Fulcrum v.1.0 now also on User Files https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3342823/ Also, my modding discord server: https://discord.gg/6yqcEngfE8

I've redone the pilot with new roughmets and some edits to the textures for color correction and material color. A little trickery to fake normals since it doesn't have any.

He he. You are right. Looking a bit closer into it, Canada ended up with some 50 aircraft they had no use for. These were stored in the UK (Scotland I believe) and ended up being sold to Norway and Denmark and then modified to "normal" 104G standard. Funny thing, the reason for Norway to get more F-104s was actually to replace lost F-5s, which crashed in unexpected numbers. Something was needed to fill in the gap until a new platform was planned in the early 1980s. But, at that time two more things happened. The USSR abruptly started flying more bombers and big reconnaissance aircraft (huge flying listening posts essentially) and abruptly increased their activity with the naval fleet. Those existing F-104 was used exclusively for interception (air to air), and it was found that the F-5 was (very) ill suited for naval activities (air to sea). Lack of avionics such as INS I would guess, perhaps radar? This is also a bit funny, because when the F-5 was chosen, the main competitor was the A-4, which would have been more suited for the naval job that was needed in the late 60s/early 70s I think (but I know very little about the A-4). Of course, no one knew that anyway in 1963. The F-104 was found to be perfectly suited for air to sea missions, and Canada wanted to sell lots of them. The CF-104 only stayed for 10 years, when they were replaced with the F-16. The F-16 was better in most things, especially air to ground, air to sea and as a dogfighter (much better handling of course), but not necessarily interception, where the F-104 was a tad faster. The F-16A initially had only Sidewinders and gun, no BVR capabilities. During the cold war, the job was not to blow up Soviet aircraft and ships. This would have started WWIII. The job was to be there, flash with the sabers, but keep it cold.

Это называется "чистый" DCS?

Just finished My P51 VR cockpit, Just working a few bugs out, But 99% works great.

Maybe we will get something on the Tornado as well

I'm starting to believe that ED might want to put disclaimers in their store page that "Due to piracy, we have opted for a protection that will trigger your Anti-Virus solution and disable your modules, unless ED folders are excluded!", or something along those lines. What I do not understand, is that people will post before doing a quick Google search. If you have a problem. Chances are you will not be the first. Hundreds of post on this four last year alone, should give people some clues. It's all getting a little ridiculous and tedious explaining this. Cheers! Apologies for the rant. [emoji4] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

??? I’ve been flying the Harrier since release and still enjoy flying it.

Hi, similar topic is here, however visor is only animation for the 3D model of the pilot. No any effect from pilot perspective (in VR). I dont know it was planned or not, but it seems rather logical option that it should work, as in several other modules like OH-58D or F-15E. Its a kind of problem and it was noted in March’24. Please to add working visor for 2D and VR too, animation + effect. Many thanks!

"This content is no longer available." Here is the message when trying to open the link . Buddy, please let me download the Yak-38!

^^^ This. Plus to add to the 'and beyond'... even if something is released in 2025, it's more often than not released in Early Access, so depending on what features are available 'on release', it may or not suit individual purposes, or may require significant time to be usable. (ie - Dynamic spawns not usable on dynamically created FARP's for instance)... With DCS, until it's in your hands for us to evaluate ourselves, nothing is really certain. It does however give indication of what is being worked on and the current state, which can be encouraging. Just the hype about a release of a trailer that may show something that may or may not be released in the next year certainly shows there's still plenty of passion for DCS which is a good thing. For me personally though - the thing that tops all others for me that I want to see is some soft of greater stability/reliability and support come to DCS for server admins, scripters, mission designers, and mod makers, etc. As well as that if bugs are introduced - especially things that break things that were working, they're treated as a much higher priority in getting fixed. DCS has reached a stage to me that there's nothing they can add to the game that's more important than supporting what already implemented reliably.

Thanks for looking at fixing this problem. To be honest I haven't spent much time looking in to this. I work for a 3rd party, so I only have so much time. Thanks again everyone

You might have seen them perform at different airshows in 2023 and 2024, the Voltige Victor are now proud to present their latest demo at the Château de Versailles. This video aims to be a tribute and salutes the great professionalism of the Voltige Victor, whose presence at airshows from 1990 to 2003 made the public dream. This flight, with never seen views before, will make you feel like you are riding with them through the Split Air team. Suit up and strap in tight, you will need it, and enjoy the show. https://youtu.be/ZkFKkYxqM_E

Hi @NineLine, @marktuner1960, and guys especial Desert storm conflict fans. First of all, this its not a not happy client post, i love this map, i was waiting for it meaby for 5 years and i spend a lot of time (truly a lot) rejoin this information, i hope useful for the development team and to the mission editors reading this topics (Please help me to shared this file with the development team). Alright! this PDF include information, images and locations of:: 14 Coalitions main airfields on Saudia Arabia. US Navy & US marines corps land deployment airfields, FARPS locations and CV stations on sea. 34 Iraqi and Kuwait major airfields and major FLOs targeted by coalitions during ODS. 40 Points of interest related to: Coalitions leadership and command. Iraqi leadership and command. Iraqi Nuclear, Biological, chemical and conventional weapons facilities. Iraqi communications facilities. Iraqi Oil facilities. (Included related to Kirkuk - Haifa oil pipeline; Backbone of Iraq oil industry) Iraqi Power plants. Iraqi Naval and port facilities. Iraqi Rail yards and Bridges. Area of interest. SCUD launch zones. Kuwait burning oil fields field. Ground war and aerial support operations area. Static objects related to Air defense and Scud. Suggestions and finals word. attached files: the English & Spanish version of this PDF. Google earth KMZ file (recommend used the Historical image tools) A few of POI structures doesn't exist today.) SUGGESTIONS & FINALS WORDS. Westerns Coalition airfields. The Airspace available on this map its huge, i really glad of that, but, almost the 25% of the airspace its not operational usable, because, the only Easter disposition of the coalitions airbases will force fly only north west to reach the North and South Iraq and Kuwait. To allow the use of that airspace i will suggest add westerns Airbases or airfield even if that include a map expansion ( in some alternatives to west or only a little to south. Including the bases of Riyadh AB, Al Kharj Air base, King Faisal AB in Tabuk and Al-Jouf FOB (Task force normandy deploy FOB). If that its not possible pleas considerate to add the city of Medina and its Prince Mohammad Bin Abdulaziz Airport. , model the city of Riyadh and its air base and the Al Kharj Air base and Al-Jouf FOB. Detailed modeling of POI and AOI. Performing detailed modeling of the recommended POIs, especially Nuclear, CW and BW, and increasing static objects for the simulation of SAM and SCUD Sites would give a positive and significant impact to the IRAQ map, especially since many youtubers and gamers They recreate and will recreate their missions and videos on this map based on conflicts where operations were mainly visual (CCIP Bombing, LGB Bombing with TGP, Low level Interdiction, CAS, CSAR, etc.) where the detail in the objectives to attack and also the detail of the environment such as changes and esplanades is important in some specific areas mentioned above. Increase Static Objects and fire effect. We recommend making a complementary IRAQ ASSET PACK or simply adding new static objects to set the missions that we will carry out in IRAQ MAP with greater precision and detail. The statics related to SCUD and anti-aircraft defenses (Similar to SAM site assets pack) are especially important. Also please considerate make more bigger (10.000 & 20.000 ft vertical size of the Smoke and fire effect) to recreate the huge smoke column of burning kuwait oil fields. I hope this document will be helpful to the development team in the development of the map and to my virtual pilot colleagues who develop missions on this map. I Hope everyone are having a nice holidays. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attached# 1: PDF with more than 80 images of POI & AOF. Google Earth KMZ File with POI, AOI & Airfields locations, images and aircraft deployment info. (Exportable to CF) DCS IRAQ MAP - Suggestions and points of interest (English).pdf DCS IRAQ MAP - Sugerencias y puntos de interes (Español).pdf ANEXO #1 pictures of POI V0.1.pdf Operation Desert storm v 0.1.kmz

Claiming they were getting around to it 'if only this dispute hadn't arisen" is a non-verifiable statement, who said they were going to, if the dispute did not occur? They were not fixing these issues the past 4 years it went out of EA, were they?

Happens often enough to virtually guarantee it's an anti-virus issue (McAfee, Avira, ESET being amongst the most common offenders). Uninstall/reinstall is also virtually never required with DCS. There is a repair option which will solve almost any problem that uninstall would and will be much faster than downloading the whole thing again. In this case uninstall isn't going to help you anyway because the anti-virus will simply quarantine the same file again (unless it happens to have updated to whitelist the file in the meantime). You will, however, need to do a repair to get the file back once you get your antivirus sorted.

It is definitely a weird quirk, and would be nice if it ever gets fixed. But at least we have a message history now, so I can live with the quirk for a bit longer

Yes, there is a setting in the lua that controls that. I forgot which one, but if you look at the VAP buildings, you will find some that stay level and others that tilt. I used the values from the once that stay level in Vietnam War Vessels Buildings. You can d/l a preview from https://tetet.de/dcs/mods/vwv_buildings-2024-10-31.zip if you don't want to grab the whole mod. Good luck, TeTeT

always feel comfortable posting here in the forums. there are plenty of people here that will help.

Daily MiG-29 German 9.12A

Squadron Name: 104th Aircraft Selection: F16, F18, F15 E/C, F14 Pilot Roster: TBD

Amen! The Harrier was my favourite plane for a long time. But since the F-15E and Phantom came out, I fly it less than I used to. But it's still a ton of fun. No shortage of things to do with this plane. And the cool thing is that some of my original bombs load presets that came with the Harrier are still available and didn't get erased with the updates, so I can carry 3xMK83s on each of the inner pylons. What a bomb truck! 6xMK83 & 8xMK82. Chew on that, Mr F-18.

Just one note. The visor in the F-16 is closely tied to the HMCS, meaning that if it is up, the HMCS simply does not work. Generally, there should be 3 options for the visor (just idea): 1/ clear (the indications are visible) as default, 2/ darkened (the indications are visible too) 3/ and fully up (no indications) Currently the only difference is the animation on the outside and the disappearance of the JHMCS symbols. The insert should be replaceable (so here are 3 options).

Airframes are not that much of a problem in the current age of "dataplate restorations", where most of flying examples nowadays are ground-up rebuilds from a bucket of crash relics, with only a handful of components (plus sacred dataplate) being historic and original. That's why we're seeing illogical trend of rare airworthy warbirds number increasing since the '90s rather than decreasing as one might expect. Not that I'm complaining - keep the real originals in museums while flying rebuilds as much as possible so that everyone can enjoy them. Engine overhauls are more problematic, 'cause scratch-rebuilding their parts, albeit possible nowadays, is much more difficult and costly. As for the younger generations of pilots, I don't think it's a question of older guys gatekeeping, but rather diminishing interest of younger ones, combined with awareness of how huge moneypit every involvement in warbird activity is.

hi, just recently (finally) got into the harrier that i purchased a looong time ago. not sure, if i could recommend it even in its current state, although it seems not "broken due to razbam situation" yet. generally speaking, i would place it somewhere between flaming cliffs modules and study-level. maybe 60-70% towards study-level. depending on your siming preferences, essential features are broken, such as TOT, AWLS (although apparently rarely used IRL). a lot of the avionics "logic" is bugged or just incorrect, such as missing colons on the option display unit... if flying and dropping bombs is sufficient to you, you could give it a go, but at the risk that the whole razbam situation will ruin the module totally eventually

I'll release it once it's ready. I'm still tweaking a few things.

Make it so #1. Would be fantastic to reenact the Korean War and future war scenarios.

I've just bumped the internal report.

That makes sense. I've really noticed it in Kola (or Marianas) with wooded areas with roads running through them that it's not nearly as easy to find and hit targets as on less foliage maps. Thanks for coming back with your findings!

How would ED fix this short of submitting every patch to ALL AV providers prior to releasing it? The AV's are (in part) looking for changes in certain file types to "predict" that it might be something malign, so there is really nothing that ED can do. And interestingly there are 3 or 4 AV programs that consistently cause issues so it's not even all AV's. Maybe those ones need to tweak their programs to not throw false positives.

please don't ignore all of the updates over the years and advancement we have made. While DCS is over 16 years old we have been constantly working on the core and updating code. Of course there is old code, but it doesn't stop us from advancing DCS. thank you

Update: I did some more testing and my guess right now is that it might be a LOS issue. I whipped up a new mission where I had a moving target roaming about on flat, unobstructed terrain. I then created the exact same JTAC setup with an MQ-9 loitering above and lasing the target for me. This time, the LGB hit the target right on the mark. Back to the original mission that's giving me issues, the convoy I'm targeting is moving through a small countryside road that's lined by trees on both sides. I think that the MQ-9's laser is being blocked by those trees, and consequently that is where the LGB impacts. So yeah... it's an LOS issue, but to be more specific, a JTAC skill issue. The AI JTAC simply isn't that good, so now I'm going to have to wait until the convoy reaches a clearing before I ask the MQ-9 to start lasing.

A comment from me: I would be very interested, but their website is only available in Polish. An English version would be very helpful.

It's important to remember that the "2025 and Beyond" video is always about a given year and the future. Just because we see something there doesn't mean it will appear in a given year. Here's an example summary found on Discord with the latest video "2024 and Beyond": The work is still in progress and let's hope that some of it will appear in 2025. 2024 definitely suffered under the influence of WWII, nothing appeared here so fingers crossed still!

I happen to have a mission today that requires EMCON Can't believe that after so many years, such a small feature has not been implemented

Just finished Mission 3 (Danger Close) and loved it. Great mission from start to finish. Awesome work! This campaign holds a special spot for me... I was born in Northern Ohio, and although I've lived around the country at this point, I live back in Ohio now. I'm a private pilot, and when I was completing my PPL, my "long" cross country was to Toledo Express. Seeing the Vipers on the ramp as I taxied by was really otherworldly. Every year on Memorial Day in May, the Vipers of the 180th Fighter Wing scream around Northern Ohio at treetop level, treating everyone who happens to be outside at the right time to a brief but really exciting flyby in honor of our country's fallen soldiers. I look forward to it annually. Many thanks, Reflected, for this awesome campaign featuring Ohio's own Stingers!

Thanks, I'll look! Currently I was able to read some volumes of Power Survey 1993 (Operation Desert Storm Debrif document) that shows the areas covered by airdefenses and the SAM and AAA used by IRAQ in those areas, as well as other documents on the web that illustrate the same, but in could not find satellite images or some specific coordinates. Using the historical tool of Google Earth, I was able to see very clearly some possible SAM sites, some occupied by SA-2 and others possibly by SHORAD (probably SA-9) but regarding ODS, after of 11 years and a war where they lost many large anti-aircraft systems, it is very difficult to find vestiges of SAM sites (although there are several places where it seems so) but it is very difficult to confirm it with responsibility, therefore, I only mentioned it in the document without specifying positions, anyway I think it is just as great to be able to represent the density, types and scope of area covered by SAM and the real location in which it was Perhaps it becomes secondary, that's why my recommendation is to increase the static objects that allow us to create realistic SAM sites, rather than having ED put a SAM site on the same Map. Friends, if you are interested I can upload the information I have about that in addition to a static template that I am uploading with the air defense sector 1 (Proximities of BAGHDAD). I share a little bit of what I'm working on. Greetings!!

I just had a lovely F-15E flight on Kola, TACAN-ing my way through the clouds to home plate. The drama didn't make my flight any less enjoyable. I suppose I could hate this and hate that and be upset about the other thing, but I'd rather just enjoy flying. I have Hornets and Vipers and Warthogs and Tomcats and nice maps, I'm going to have as much fun with it as I can. That's why I spent... oh my God! That much? Yep, I'm going to get every last moment and dollar's worth of flightsim goodness I can out of it.

Happiness is the art of the possible. It's a flight simulator. It's the best flight simulator. Enjoy a lovely flight for no other reason than to enjoy a lovely flight.

Whoa there - so AI is now making suggestions on forums that we should be developing using AI.... It's the beginning of skynet psyops!

Is this thread a poor joke?

And why not both? This is a wish list.. there's no wrong here

Both fixed internally. Thanks for your report.

Indeed that'd be awesome! (fast roping has been wished for many times) Especially for anti-pirate scenarios and spec ops missions. It would also give modules like the UH-1, Mi-8 and CH-47 some extra purpose/use cases.

Hi Magnetic, we have no plans to use RUST. We are currently updating code and preparing for Vulkan. thank you

There’s not a lot of ‘reality’ about it. It’s an embarrassment. I’m starting to wonder about trying IL2 again. I never went much on the graphics or flight characteristics there but I’ll be long gone by the time DCS gets any recognition of life before ‘44. I fly the Channel map or Normandy with anything with a prop welcome. Trouble is ED don’t give a monkeys about prop driven aircraft so they’re a bit lacking. Prove me wrong for gods sake. I wonder what happened to whoever developed the Channel? They did a good job of it. It performs well enough to fly in, they could expand that but we need aircraft, both axis and allied. We need modules built. Flyable, clickable and loveable. We need Bombers, Fighters and… Shipping ? - They could do with giving Admiral and people of his ilk access to the tools to help. They were on about doing some stuff for the Pacific a while back. Another map with what, two aircraft to add to it if we’re lucky? It’s a real shame. DCS flies best and looks best but it’s a shallow puddle for us vintage enthusiasts. No chance of a Hurricane, an Me110, Heinkel 111 or any of that. B-25s, flyable Fortresses and Dakotas we can only dream about. DCS just ain’t the place for the vintage stuff. Trouble is, what we do have with a prop looks, flies and works better than anything else I’ve seen. IL2 has the content without the quality. DCS has the quality without the content. What we do have doesn’t make sense properly on any of the maps so if you want to recreate realistic missions you’ll have to use your imagination a fair bit. I wish ED could do the same. We have parts of maps and parts of an Air Force. Uninhabited Airfields? Some ground crew would be a start. I wish they’d just choose a map and apply the Beaverbrook approach to aircraft manufacturing. Add a few ground assets, PEOPLE would be nice and add some life. All o that. If they had a bit of focus it’d be nice but they seem to be tearing about chasing fires to put out if they’re not building another shiny thing for sale that’ll need more to go with or against it. Who knows, maybe next update we’ll get a few carriers with decks stuffed full of Wildcats, Sea-Hurris and Sea-Spits, MkVs (why not) flying overhead towards the Rhine? Why not dream up expanded maps and go from Bomber Country in the Midlands and the North right over to Germany? Cos they’re not bothered. Jets and Helis sell and they’ve enough to chase up and update with those already. We’re bit knackered, which is why I’d rather they hadn’t drawn me in with nice looking MkIXs Mustangs and 109s. Since they’re still selling them they’re creating the problem. Whoever else fancies flying the best looking Spit or whatever here gets sucked in, invests in more props and comes to the same conclusion everyone else does. Where is everybody? Where do we go? Why can’t I fly this or that? We have to be patient. Play the long game. Invest now if you’re in your twenties and by the time you’re in your forties or fifties you’ll have forgotten all about it. We live in hope. Hope springs eternal etc. - Unfortunately, we, are mere mortals and can’t wait forever. I’d love nothing more than to have to eat my words and be humiliated when ED release their ‘bumper vintage assets pack’, full to the brim with musty useable artefacts and articles for our delectation and delight. (I’ve been reading Dickens, give me a break) . I just don’t think we’ll be getting too much for a little while. Let’s hope I’m wrong and they blow us all away with a cacophony of poppycock and prop-wash. 2025 - Vintage shall revive. Happy New Year all

So, an 'AI' make-stuff-up-from-internet-scrapings-bot says that using an 'AI' make-stuff-up-from-internet-scrapings-bot to rewrite complex software it cannot possibly have any understanding of is a good idea? What a surprise.

These are a series of simple missions which quickly get you in a position to practice various weapons. There are some ten targets in each mission which is selected randomly each time you fly a mission. You will also practice working with JTAC and the use of map grids. Missions are both day and night. There are currently 22 missions but more will be added as time goes by. 1 GBU12 laser guided bombs, Target located and lased by JTAC, Day time. 2 GBU12 laser guided bombs, Target located and lased by JTAC, Night time. 3 GBU12 laser guided bombs, Target located by JTAC using IR beam only, Pilot to locate and self lase, Night time. 4 AGM65E laser guided Air to Ground Missiles, Target located and lased by JTAC, Day time. 5 AGM65E laser guided Air to Ground Missiles, Target located and lased by JTAC, Night time. 6 AGM65F IR guided Air to Ground Missiles, Target located by JTAC using IR beam only, Pilot to locate and designate using TGP and Mav screen, Night time. 7 Cannon attack on Unarmed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Day. 8 Cannon attack on Unarmed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Night time. 9 Cannon attack on Armed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Day. 10 Cannon attack on Armed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Night time. 11 Hydra 70 Rocket attack on Unarmed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Day. 12 Hydra 70 Rocket attack on Unarmed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Night time. 13 Hydra 70 Rocket attack on Armed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Day. 14 Hydra 70 Rocket attack on Armed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Night time. 15 127 Zuni Mk24 Rocket attack on Unarmed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Day. 16 127 Zuni Mk24 Rocket attack on Unarmed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Night time. 17 127 Zuni Mk24 Rocket attack on Armed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Day. 18 127 Zuni Mk24 Rocket attack on Armed Convoy, Target located and marked by JTAC (WP), Night time. 19 Mk84 2000llb Dumb Bombs on Chemical Plant, Located by JTAC with no mark, Radar only no TGP, Rain Overcast with Fog very poor vis, Day. 20 Mk84 2000llb Dumb Bombs on Chemical Plant, Located by JTAC with no mark, Radar only no TGP, Rain Overcast with Fog very poor vis, Night. 21 GBU31 2000llb JDAMs on Chemical Plant, Located by JTAC with no mark, Radar only no TGP, Rain Overcast with Fog very poor vis, Day. 22 GBU31 2000llb JDAMs on Chemical Plant, Located by JTAC with no mark, Radar only no TGP, Rain Overcast with Fog very poor vis, Day. They are free to download here: Badger633 F/A-18C Weapons Practice, Multiple Quick Missions. 16 Dec 24.

Several people showed interest in building an ACO (Airspace Control Order) for the Afghan theatre. For those who'd like to have an idea on how to build a realistic ACO, how to find historical data (like tanker's callsigns), and in particular where to place their tanker's tracks or at what altitude, you can have a look at my personal page. I tried to study all these topics in the previous days, and you might find valuable information if you want to recreate realistic missions. Example of OEF ACO view from AFDD 3-52, Airspace Control (2011) I started with a study of the early OEF phase (2001-2002), because at that time the overall situation was obviously simpler on the theatre, due to the absence of artillery or the rarity of civilian traffic. In ended up my analysis with an ACO proposal for that period. Enjoy your reading!