Leaderboard

Hi, Present the 3d printing stick and throttle fore the Mirage F1 or Mirage 3. The stick models and assembly instruction can be pוrchase from here: https://www.cgtrader.com/3d-print-models/hobby-diy/other/mirage-3-or-f1-stick-for-pc-simulation-or-memorabilia The throttle models and assembly instruction can be pוrchase from here: https://www.cgtrader.com/3d-print-models/hobby-diy/other/mirage-f1-throttle-assembly-for-simulation Or to purchase together at a bundle price from here: https://www.cgtrader.com/3d-print-models/hobby-diy/other/mirage-f1-or-3-stick-and-throttle-bundle MirageF1Sticl.mp4 WhatsApp Video 2023-05-06 at 11.22.29.mp4

ED aren't youtubers that put out some shoddy content every day. Production quality of those ED videos is much higher, and I wager that just finalizing the video takes more than two weeks. An educated guess: a video production project like this runs 3 months plus: from the definition of the message, over storyboarding, production of "b" footage, main footage, music composition/selection/licensing, audio recording (ED Nick has a cool voice, yes, but there little chance that he can do that in a single, 1h session), audio mixing, to post/mastering. 3 Months seems tight to me, so yeah, let's hope that they hit the 16th. This video is going to be viewed by millions and impacts their reputation directly. Worse, the footage will be dissected frame-by-frame and analyzed by certified nutcases like me that hang around here, just waiting for a single mis-rendered blend that "obviously" confirms half-life 3. And yeah, I'm looking forward to that video, too.

A little late but Happy New Year Admiral. Wishing you all the best from vCVW-7.

I think ED reluctance to increase the view distance is the huge impact on performance and the number of complaints they will have to deal with by users who expect miracles even from the latest hardware. This is defiantly NOT for those who fly in VR! That said the view distance is defiantly very out dated and we need at least one extra option in the drop down menu at the very least. The best eye candy verses performance balance for me is at 2.5, which is almost double the the default Extreme view distance. What makes the most impact for me is the increased distance you can see the trees and makes me wish the trees had their own separate slider or drop down menu.I would love to be able to push the trees alone up to 5.0 as it would have less impact on performance than increasing the total view distance and still improve the look and realism of the terrain immensely. Increasing the distance that we can see grass and ground cutter is anther on the top of my wish list. This would be particularity helpful on the satellite imagery maps where the texture detail is particularly poor down low. View distance of 1.5 (Default Extreme), 2.5 and 5.0 shown on the Normandy map below. You can see how the trees fill in the gap nicely and complete the picture.

Haha! The crew, you mean me, myself and I. I just posted screenshots of some of the new assets coming in the China asset pack update. The complete list isn't finished yet, but here are a couple of the new helicopter assets: Z-8G Transport helicopter Z-10 Attack helicopter Z-19 Attack helicopter Z-21 Attack helicopter Z-20 Transport helicopter Weapons include unguided rockets, machine gun pods, guided rockets, IR AAMs and AGMs. As well as door gunners for the transport helicopters.

Past, absolutely. I'd even go as far as saying I'd have preferred it if the most modern stuff in DCS (both maps and modules) was mid-'90s. So we could have a decently capable F-16, F-18 and Strike Eagle but no GPS, no data-link, no helmet mounted queueing systems, ... Oh and RedFor wouldn't be hilariously outdated by comparison. Present-day maps (while I understand they are far easier to make than past versions) don't make any sense to me whatsoever, for all of the reasons already mentioned.

Hello @silverdevil @sleighzy @Flappie, I can confirm that my ISP have blocked api.digilatcombatsimulator.com or its public IP. The WireShark was very useful to get the address that is blocked, I ping the address or the IP (api.digilatcombatsimulator.com) from my PC and my MacBook and no packages were received, but of course, when I get connected to the VPN works, I recall that I used this software but in a very old version. Thanks you very much guys. Now I have to start a CAS against my ISP... lol. I will give you the updates

I couldn't deal with a modern representation to be honest. Because of the German division only a historic map would make sense. We've already seen images of the inner German border, so i think we'll get a proper historic map anyway. I personally wouldn't care if it mixes elements from a few decades, but it should be pre 89, without any recognizable elements from later years.

True enough: it’s just what they themselves said. I'm not trying to make excuses for them. Several of those bugs and non-working features quite annoy me, and keep me from flying that module

shazam! Building sitting level on a slope. Don't know what exactly it was in the script files, but I just completed adapted this file structure/format and it worked. So let's not overthink it. thanks again @TeTeT for sharing.

Until then, keep practicing.

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

Maybe people just need to quit bitching about anything and everything lol.

He literally asked for more suitable assets, no "planesets" were mentioned. You really need a better translator and a better attitude. No need to be so negative. Cheers! That's why people ask for more assets all the time! Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Thanks for making dreams come true @currenthill

A vietnam map without a decent selection of US and VC/NVA infantry models would be a huge waste. Ideally they could add US and Vietnamese infantry AND add animated troops to the back of the Huey. Imagine doing a large air assault with 20 Hueys. And seeing vietnam era US infantry jump out of you Huey and run for the tree line. How Imagine you do the same. But now you have some generic infantry models with modern rifles. Magically appear as you tuch down in your empty Huey.(this is what we have now)

It is not a simple issue to fix or else it would have been already, its reported and we are hoping a solution can be found with all the changes ongoing with the core. Thanks.

What's the point of having a map without the assets? DCS is not a landscape simulator. Fulda Gap was not a proxy war (cold war) scenario like other maps and scenarios we have in DCS, it was a full scale WW3 scenario. AH-1 is one big important thing missing since DCS focuses on air assets, but I'm sure it will come at some point. But we're also talking about massive tank and troop battles as well as nukes/ADM (zebra package). I recently was at an military exhibition in the Fulda gap region, which showed all the maps, assets, scenarios and the scale of it. DCS doesn't have the ability for such large scale scenarios. And I don't see the point of doing something on this map that I could do on any other map. Same applies to Korea or Vietnam. ED has shown napalm coming with Vietnam, cause it's obviously important.

The Dash-1 charts always show 46.000 lb as the maximum desirable landing weight, which is pretty much our F-4E without any external loads right after take-off, so you can basically land a clean (i.e. no stores, but with pylons) but fully fueled F-4. Speeds will be rather high then though, around 170-180KIAS, and my experience with the HB F-4E is that it's better to fly a little faster and not "on-speed" to have some margin to work with above the runway. The manual says a stable approach is flown at 700fpm descent rate and will result in a 500fpm touchdown, but then Jester will call you names for your landing skills, so having a few extra knots to work with and flaring nicely at touchdown will give you his appreciation.

I do wish there was more single-player content for each of them, like the Kursant campaign. That was excellent. As someone who primarily plays campaigns in DCS, I tend to spend most time in the Hornet it seems not because that's the plane I like the most, but because it's the one with the most single-player content. I do often crave something that requires more stick and rudder skills.

The game definitely needs to increase its scalability at the extreme right of arc, DCS doesn't need super fast framerates as the immersion of a flight sim to me trumps all else but many people have 64+gb RAM, 4k G-Sync monitors, 4090s and X3D AMD CPUs so the game needs to take those components (and future iterations) into consideration.

Of the planes that are notoriously omitted in DCS are bombers (the exception is the fighter-bomber Mosquito), it would be nice to finally see something from heavy bombers for WWII or the Cold War. Since so much has been happening recently from the Cold War, maybe someone (ED/3rd Party) would finally be tempted to make the IL-28, it is one of the most beautiful machines used by the entire Eastern Bloc, from Egypt to Vietnam.

How do all these other games do it? lol....

I think the palm tree could be WW2 Mariana's which is probably coming very soon. It's possible we might see a bundle of ww2 assets, Corsair, hellcat to run on this map. Vietnam seems unlikely at this stage, as we have two big maps in very early EA plus the fulder gap that has been significantly teased.

If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.... The Dynamic Campaign, more than anything else, firmly falls in to the "Beyond" time line. Beyond our lifetime.

Many games with a huge budgets still use the same engine they did 20 years ago. Sometimes it doesn't matter sometimes it does.

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!

Voice attack ... Press a button, or verbally pretend you are asking your navigator.

When we have more news to share, we will. Thank you for your passion and support (and dollars/euros/roebls)...

I have been doing a little research as well for preparation for some "Hogs in the Sand" missions. I seem to have found the correct kill box layout in the theater of operations, which makes it a lot more less difficult to decipher the descriptions of missions in various books written by pilots where they refer to kill boxes fx. I also found the approximate placement of some of the tanker tracks, and i know that in Buck Wyndhams book there are several references to the names of these tanker tracks as well. So far i have made the kill boxes as trigger zones, as i plan to use them as zones anyway and see no idea in doing them two times, but it might be easier to share them as "draw" graphic then as a strip of lua code you would have to insert into the mission file..

@Panzuur If you click the "paste as plain text" text below the text box when pasting pictures, you will not get the ridiculous "null" text. [emoji6] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

I only trialed those modules, and it was quite sometime ago. I understand the appeal and place of Jet Trainers, and I'd bet that they are grossly overlooked by most users (but shouldn't). The thing is, after trialing them, I really think it's one of those "each to its own", a bit of a personal/subjective preference, or taste that some will enjoy and others not really. I tend to prefer simpler and older aircraft systems (as in, less modern computorized) and don't enjoy FBW stuff as much, but the problem I got with those Jet Trainers when trialing them was that, although they feel great (IMO), once you try to do something more "serious" (combat wise), or reach for more "ooomph", they (obviously) fall short. So, I just tend to go to Cold War jets (50s, 60s and 70s), perhaps because I also enjoy their own quirks too. Something about a MiG-21Bis or an F-5E, even an F-86F and MiG-15Bis, that just feels more interesting and makes you want to come back to them. That said, I totally get why such Jet Trainers were picked in the first place and am glad that they exhist as modules for DCS. Actually, I often wonder why weren't a couple of those modules made as the "free" aircrafts included in DCS World already, instead of the Su-25T or TF-51D.....

Most definitely past conflicts even if fictional, but realistic.

Yes please ! Given that DCS tries to be a super accurate flight simulator i don't think "fairness" should be a question. If you have the data to model the Su-27 more accurately, i think it is valid to use it.

This mod is great, especially the static version with folded rotorblades/tail. Too bad it causes CTDs and freezes in the current DCS version. I know there are other Seahawk mods out there but they are flyable mods and thus not really suitable to populate carrier decks. This mod is also the only one which has the rotor blade supports modelled. I hope the author can get back to it someday to fix the CTD issues so we can use it again.

This is a golden post. Easily one of the best in the last few days. I learned at least two new (to me) ideas from it: Betteridge's Law (genius!), "Yes-Bot" (couldn't put my feelings better in words). Thank you! So it seems. Either intentional or unintentional.

I added this this morning, apart from a crash at map load to to incorrectly entering a line of code, once corrected this worked a treat. Its frustrating that DCS isn't really rewarding those of us with top end hardware.

“The ADI is weird and not roll stabilized, but moves as you roll the aircraft. Along with the unconventional HUD, the roll of the silhouette compared to the earth of horizon was double the actual roll! I had to look at it imagining that I was flying behind the plane and radio controlling it” - paraphrase of First US pilot to fly the MiG-29 with Valery Menitsky

300 knots? Just a reminder the gear and flaps should be lowered at 250 or below.

You don't see 'opinion stated as fact' more strongly than that very often - even here...

Hence: "And Beyond"

If that includes working wiper blades for the Huey, I'll be in heaven.

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

Eurofighter and Dynamic Campaign are confirmed!! As well as a release date.

This is one of those non-consensual topics because.... "it depends". It really comes down to personal preference, setup, and the type of sim(s) you're playing. For flight sims, if you have the space, a large 16:9 screen (42"–55") can be really awesome - either a proper monitor or a good 4K TV with gaming features. I specifically recommend 16:9 because vertical screen space is crucial in flight sims, especially during dogfights where full 3D situational awareness matters. Widescreen formats like 21:9 or 32:9 (which are great for racing sims) reduce vertical FOV and hurt immersion in flight sims. I personally really disliked using a 49" ultrawide for DCS (like looking through a slit, with image distorted at sides), never again. VR, on the other hand, offers a massive leap in immersion - you're in the cockpit. But it’s not for everyone. It can be disorienting at first, especially with nausea or the disconnect from your physical space. Takes time to adapt but, once accustomated, it's unbeatable in the immersion aspect. It's hard to go back to “pancake” (monitor) gaming in DCS after adjusting to VR. The catch? VR demands serious hardware and a willingness to tweak settings. Which means you need to be ready to take the time to read/learn stuff and set it right, and to sacrifice a good deal of eye-candy, to keep framerate as high as possible and frametimes as low as possible. You’ll often sacrifice visual quality to maintain smooth performance - especially in DCS heavy modules or multiplayer. No current hardware completely solves this. I think if you got to question, then it means you'll always be tempted to at least try VR, and see how it is. Even if happy with a big screen (as was the case for me). So..... rather "just do it" and see for yourself. Just don't go wasting a big budget on a top fancy VR headset, disregard the latest (and even more demanding) trendy models that you'll see praised now. Instead, just get a good and proven affordable one, even if it's 2nd hand (for example, the Quest 3 or the Pico 4, also the HP Reverb G2 if you still use Win10). If it doesn't work for you, then resell it later.

Daily MiG-29 Polish 9.12A

No what many of us did was complain about an inability to see the oppfor…

Russians can barely make anything called multirole now. Let a lone 70s and 80s soviet stuff. Ability to do air to air and drop bomb does not a multirole aircraft make. If that's the case then the Sopwith Camel is a multirole fighter.