Leaderboard

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/release/2.9.12.5336/ DCS Core Aircraft AI. B-52. Incorrect connection during refueling - fixed Aircraft AI. Helicopters cannot retrieve cargo from moving ship - fixed Aircraft AI. Ka-50. Rotor tip lights do not match blade tips - fixed Aircraft AI. AI BF-109 still benefiting from MW50 even if the MW50 tank is set to empty- fixed Aircraft AI. AI aircraft do not consider obstacles after landing and ram other planes on taxiways - fixed Aircraft AI. S-3B refueling lights adjustment Aircraft AI. WW2 Vic formation No.4 can't keep up - fixed Aircraft AI. KC-135MPRS Losing altitude when called up as tanker - fixed Ship AI. Fixed 054A CIWS Ship AI. Fixed 071 livery Ship AI. LS Ropucha damaged LOD missing - fixed Countries. Mi-8MTV2 added to Iraq Dedicated Server. Server completely breaks down when the mission stops in Web GUI - fixed Dedicated Server. Missions list shuffle function do not work - fixed Graphics. Fix artifacts on clouds Graphics. Fix for artifacts at intersection with fog when camera is placed directly on top layer of the fog Ground AI. JTAC is capable off to continue use lase and use IR pointer after his destruction - fixed Ground AI. JTAC. IR pointer is not shifted to other target - fixed Ground AI. KS-19 sounder fixed Ground AI. New sounds for Flak 38 Ground AI. New sounds for Flak M42 37mm and Twin Bofors 40mm, autocannon settings sound update Ground AI. New sounds for Oerlikon 20mm Gun Ground AI. New sounds for S-60 57mm gun + minor fixes Ground AI. New sounds for twin and quad 20mm Flak gun Ground AI. S75 ZIL truck model issue with windshield fixed Ground AI. Added desert camo and updated other liveries for T-72B3 Ground AI. Sound Update for cannons Ground AI. Added civilian Ural trucks models and updated liveries GUI. Radio messages clipped by F10 map bar - fixed GUI. Message history window won't close after exiting track - fixed GUI. Most logbook A-10 patches are not usable - fixed Scripting API. onPlayerTryChangeSlot() not called for dynamic spawns - fixed MP. Events of user draw visibility control doesn't applied to client connected after trigger was fired - fixed MP. FARP warehouses not synchronized on player join - fixed Weapons. Active Maverick camera starts to shake at certain camera angles - fixed Weapons. AGM-114L. In the case where not the entire target is visible in the AH-64 sighting system, the missile will hit the designated target, and not the neighboring ones. Weapons. BLG-66 animation corrected Weapons. Buk SA-11. 9M38 missile guidance method changed to proportional navigation Weapons. FFAR Mk 5 engine fire is detached far from exhaust nozzle - fixed Weapons. IR missiles began to ignore flares more often - fixed. Flare efficiency has been returned to previous values. Weapons. Kh-29T. Eliminate erratic maneuvers to the loft trajectory transition Weapons. SA-2, V-755 missile. Liquid engine smoke of second stage tuned. Added inversion contrail at low temperature. Weapons. Оnce LS-6-500 bomb it is released from the pylon, it transforms into an LS-6-250 bomb - fixed Weapons. Rail launcher disappear after helicopter fires last missile against air targets - fixed NS430 memory leak - fixed DCS: F-16C Viper by Eagle Dynamics Fixed Crash when click OVRD on MFD. Fixed: Radar elevation control freeze after fail to track in VSR. Fixed: RWS DTT attempting to drop single track drops both and resets radar back to search. Fixed: While in STT the radar footprint freezes in HSD in the last azimuth setting and does not follow the target. Fixed: HMCS Boresight locking - No rad but locking anyway. Fixed: A-A radar false targets appear with radar not emitting. Fixed: AGM-154A fired off angle but in-zone has a chance of not guiding. Fixed: FCR TWS Can reset/drop track even if radar maintains trackfile/trackfile is not dropped. DCS: F/A-18C by Eagle Dynamics Fixed: EXP radar scanning speed and aperture seems tied to aircraft's speed. Fixed: If Auto CPL is used with TOT it does not account for the waypoints in the sequence. Fixed: DL13 display no longer shows the video feed from the AGM-62 Walleye before launch. DCS: AH-64D by Eagle Dynamics Added default value of the VRS audio notification in the Special Options to disabled/un-checked. Fixed crash when George AI try detect targets. Fixed crash when trying to display all targets (left long) in the George target list. (Crash in DLC Mission). Fixed: George AI detects unactivated units and fires at them. Fixed: George AI does not see the targets when fog is in Auto mod. Fixed: When the aircraft is at a sufficient bank angle (estimating >20 degrees perhaps) and slew inputs are applied to the TADS with LMC enabled, the LMC slew behavior becomes bizarre. Fixed: FCR RF Handover does not work with the front seater. Fixed: TSD Cursor show option should be independent between phases. Fixed: Closing AI Interface while player is in CPG seat is disabling C-Scope in CPG crewstation. Fixed: Wheel сhocks miss texture. DCS: Supercarrier by Eagle Dynamics Fixed: Starting cold & dark the crew will not direct planes (multiplayer). Forced option 'disable deck crew' don't work. Fixed: Switching to Airboss view shows incomplete player aircraft. Fixed: Wheel chocks are placed permanently in some cases. Fixed: Stuck at Awaiting requested crew member. Fixed: MT IFLOS lights are difficult to see. DCS: F-5E by Eagle Dynamics Fixed errors in liveries: Added tie-down hooks (under the fuselage and under the wings) to the Aggressors. Changed the side numbers. Removed the extra antenna on the Swiss and Austrian aircraft, under the fuselage in the nose. Made a version of the antenna set for the 70s on the MiG-28, as well as on the Vietnamese and Iranian liveries. Removed the RWR antennas and installed a Skyspot antenna. Partially painted over the steel plates on the engine nacelles. Returned the formation lights to some liveries. Added protective brushes to the gaps under the flap rod on the fuselage. Removed and corrected several minor errors and inaccuracies in the liveries. Added template. Added livery: Aggressor VFC-13 11 Aggressor VFC-13 21 Sundowners VFC-111 01 USAF "Southeast Asia" IRIAF F-5E Standard IRIAF - 43rd TFS IRIAF - 41rd TFS Fixed: Some activities take up to 5 times longer. Fixed: Attitude Indicator rotation is backwards. Fixed: Flight Manual - Errors and typos in Hydraulic Systems diagram. Fixed: The antenna crashes into the hatch. Fixed: Fix the profile shape of the front of the suspension tank. Fixed: The texture of the cross under the screwdriver has shifted from the screw cap and dirt. Fixed: The RWR antenna is missing, on the rear, on the right. DCS: Mi-24P Hind by Eagle Dynamics Fixed: “Launcher arm” usage leads to rockets being fired in some cases DCS: Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight by Eagle Dynamics Fixed: Helicopter weight is different from the one that was set in ME in certain cases DCS: Flaming Cliffs 2024 by Eagle Dynamics А-10A. Added new IA missions for Marianas and Caucasus Su-25. Added new IA missions for Caucasus MiG-29. Added new IA missions for Afghanistan F-15C. Added new IA combat missions for Marianas DCS Mirage F1 by Aerges Input and clickability: Clickability of F1BE rear canopy left handle (“Canopy open/close”) is now operative. F1BE ejection handles clickspots tooltips were updated (the word “Alternative” was removed). Fixed some 'Wrong connector name' messages in dcs.log. Removed 'Fuel transfer sequence selector switch' from F1BE input as being not applicable to that version. Both TRAP 136 (“Green”) and TRAP 137B (“Red”) radio panels frequency, channel and function selectors can now be controlled by both left/right mouse buttons and by mouse wheel. IFF Mode 1 and Mode 3A code selectors now work with both left/right mouse buttons, as well as with mouse wheel. F1EE IDN "Additional vector bearing/distance adjustment switch" values of acceleration with time were reviewed to make fine adjustments possible. Systems and general: Pylon loadout configuration standardized with modern DCS standards: Now the default setup is empty pylons but pylons can be removed to have a 'clean' aircraft. Fixed engine fire lights that stayed lit after all electrics were turned off. The F1BE rear seat safety pin doesn't block the front seat ejection anymore. F1BE rear seat VOR/ILS control panel is now properly initialized to 'ON' state at hot start. Fixed pre-programmed radio frequencies of F1BE and F1EE Iraq quickstart missions. F1BE rear seat cockpit lighting is off, and rear seat safety pin is installed now when the 'Solo Flight' option is enabled. DCS: C-101 Aviojet by AvioDev CLB-200, BIN-200, BR-250 and BR-500 models improved. Jettisoned canopy is restored now at aircraft repair. Batteries’ temperature and capacity are now restored to initial values at aircraft repair. Rear seat cockpit lighting is off, and rear seat safety pin is installed now when 'Solo Flight' option is enabled. DCS: MB-339A/PAN by IndiaFoxtEcho Visual Simulations Fixed: ADI does not move when mission starts in cold & dark DCS: MiG-21bis by Magnitude 3 Increased radar return signature brightness Added missing pointers for VR controls DCS: Christen Eagle II by Magnitude 3 Fixed floating radio and fuel gauge displays Fixed propeller blur effect Campaigns DCS: P-47D Wolfpack Campaign by Reflected Simulations Formation updates P-51D: The Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney Campaign by Reflected Simulations Fixed some spawn error bugs DCS: F-14B Operation Sandworm Campaign by Sandman Simulations All missions – More adjustments to get the taxi director work as it should Mission 1 – Taxi director forced off to enable player to taxi right back to catapult after recovery Mission 4 – trigger zones adjusted Mission 4 – tanker holding area adjusted Mission 4 – fixes to prevent landing aircraft to stuck on the deck Mission 4 – Fixed missing kneeboard in briefing images Mission 5 – Fixed Enfield 2 returning after launch Mission 8 – Fixed CAS flight not following orders and enemy helo missing DCS: F/A-18C Inherent Resolve Campaign by Looking Glass Mission 6 - VBIEDS. Adjusted mission fail triggers as reported in ED Forums. Spaced out events to allow better gameplay and SA. Added immortal mode. Made first wave of VBIEDS easier to destroy. Adjusted weather to hot and dusty settings for desert scenario. Mission 7 - Oil Business Part 1. Wingman would not taxi due to changes on Syria map, causing mission to be unplayable - fixed. Added IMMORTAL MODE for training purposes. Moved SAMS. Moved tankers closer and fixed error. Improved mission ending and flypast. Mission 9 - The Oil Business - Part 3. Adjusted bomb fusing for CBU-99. P-51D: The Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney Campaign by Reflected Simulations Mission 11 spawn issue fixed Kill markings added to skins Spitfire IX The Big Show Campaign by Reflected Simulations Mission 6 - heading typo corrected on briefing map DCS: P-47D Wolfpack Campaign by Reflected Simulations Performance optimization Mission 11 48 ship formation fix Correct markings for the actual squadron COs Updated the order of battle slides with names Clear prop callouts from other pilots Crew chief image added Optional radio news broadcasts added to most missions Pilots notes included for the correct version of P-47D New UI Background and loading screen Kill markings and further skin fixes Campaign end cutscene added DCS: F-14A Fear the Bones Campaign by Reflected Simulations Mission 7 missile defense improved Mission 13 - Mayday parade smokes rearranged for better visibility DCS: F-16C Arctic Thunder Campaign by Reflected Simulations Typo fixes M3 Comms tower added for consistency with the Hornet campaign DCS; F/A-18C Serpent’s Head 2 by Badger633 Missions 1,4 to 6, 8 to10: Super Carrier variants: Carrier taxi and parking order fixed DCS: F/A-18C Rise of the Persian Lion 1by Badger633 Missions 2,3,6 to 9, 12 to 15 all variants: Carrier taxi and parking order fixed DCS: F/A-18C Rise of the Persian Lion 2 by Badger633 Missions 9 Part B all variants: Mig attack adjusted. Missions 3 to 8 and 10 to 13 all variants: Carrier taxi and parking order fixed DCS: F/A-18C Operation Green Line by Badger633 Missions 3: Radio call corrected, Carrier taxi and parking order fixed. Missions 1,4,6,9,10 to 12: Carrier taxi and parking order fixed. Mission 2: Red’s formations eased to stop crashes due to AI changes. Mission 5: Matrix not following Ford fixed, Typo in brief corrected, Carrier taxi and parking order fixed.Brief Mission 5: Typo corrected. DCS: F/A-18C Arctic Thunder Campaign by Baltic Dragon Horizontal: added document with scoring to campaign docs M01: added safeguard to encounter with Backfire; added clearer instructions for the player during intercept phase; M02: fixed a bug with mission stalling when Rovaniemi air defences take out enemy missiles; fixed several floating statics at Vuojarvi airstrip; fixed missing tower call. M03: updated placement of some statics at Vuojarvi; fixed Bullseye waypoint number on the kneeboard. M04: fixed placement of some statics at Vuojarvi; removed debug message; updated placement of objects at the hill (last part of mission) DCS: UH-1H Peacekeeper Lebanon Campaign by Flying Cyking Mission 1: Adjusted ADF Almirante Lynch Frequency to 380Khz to Avoid overlap with Gecitkale overlap. Adjusted Kneeboard with new frequency. Adjusted Voice Overs with ADF Frequency. Rework of approaching ship VO, taken out the black smoke advice. Smoke is white now. Subtitle correction. Mission 5: Further Hover Trigger adjustment. Switched off Nav Radio by Default in Hot Start Version to avoid annoying beep beep tone. Mission 6: Checked Camp Marjayoun rearm function and resaved Mission due to some players seem to have problems with rearming at the camp. Cannot reproduce. Mission 10: Adjustments of Briefing text.

As there has been an interest for a Type 21 frigate, I actually bought one from artstation a couple of years ago... I may as wll fix it up to be released then... I'm sure my coding genious who helped me with the Type 42 @Beldinwill be able to bring her to the Seas soon.. (not 2 weeks soon!!!) There's textures for every RN Type 21 as well

The Type 21 (UK Exocet fit) had 4 launchers , all facing forwards, and a SeaCat launcher behind the funnel. Lovely little boats, much loved by their crews but ever so vulnetrable, as was found out in 1982. Most warships are lumbering great heaps of metal, but these were the greyhounds of the Oceans. Never served in one, sadly, but watched 2 of them sunk, Ardent and Antelope. I can still see Antelope exploding as the bomb went off, we were less than 100 yds away, RIP the guys who lost their lives on them both. Smartest little ships the RN ever had, shame about the thin upperworks and hulls.

If it's an F-35A Module from Eagle Dynamics, it will be the best there is on the Civilian Sim Market. I'm looking forward to it. In the meantime, I should start building my 4 F-35s in 1:32 Scale.

Memo based on what ? I still don't think I've seen a single screenshot in 7 months linked to the update of quality of the map... Statements like that can be made and received every week... But for the moment they're just empty words, as it was the case at the time of the release, when we were told we'd have an update every 3 months.... I'm personally convinced that improvements are being made, but at what rate? At the end, it's totally incomprehensible to me that two ED maps are released within a few months of each other, and that one of them has to be almost completely reworked to "meets the expected quality standards". Is ED really hoping that customers will buy the complete maps when availability schedules are likely to be completely different from what has been announced? Yes, we're passionate gamers who spend several hours a week on our favourite simulator, but patience has its limits and ED has to stop treating customers as just wallets that will open blindly to replenish ED's money coffers.

Thanks for your passion and support Sorry, couldnt resist

Yeah, the Cold War Royal Navy is really shaping up

How can it be that the Mi-24 still doesn't have a proper manual after around 4 years? And no, the excellent Chuck's Guide doesn't count. I find that rather unsatisfactory.

ED has effectively terminated community skin creation for all of the new 3D model assets through encryption of shape and texture folder assets. Modelviewer 2 cannot open these EDCE files. Therefore, there is no way to derive the default Description.lua of a 3D shape file which is essential to creating skins. Additionally, without Modelviewer 2, you cannot easily view and test work in progress liveries without running DCS proper to view the unit being skinned. That is a completely untenable workflow process. The justification for this encryption action as posted on these forums is questionable. Is monetization of DLC livery "skinpacks" coming next?

I don't think it's fair to refer to those who disagree with the development of this module as "complainers." It's more akin to shareholders of a company who may disagree with the direction the company board or CEO are taking the company. Many of us have spent significant amounts (thousands) over the years on ED modules - I have almost every single module and map. That's a significant investment in the DCS World ecosystem. If I feel the direction the company is going could jeopardize my enjoyment of the product that I have invested significant funds into, I have the right to speak up. That's not complaining, that's voicing my concerns to protect my investment. Calling those of us complainers who disagree with what we believe to be a shift in the company's focus, what we see as a reduction in the standard of documentation required to make an accurate module, is unfairly belittling. You don't have to agree with us, but you should respect our right to disagree (respectfully) with the decision.

With the actual situation around DCS evolving, resources, updates, manpower hours, etc, i really hope ED takes extra care for those little things that on the overall image are really secondary but in the end makes an important part of us to get angry or ar least pissed off. Like, hey guys stop for a moment, just take a look about dozens of little issues we have pilled up on the to do list that are easy to fix. Call for help to your open external beta testers and just focus on fix at least part of that, for example this topic. Just take a moment ED and complete the manuals, let others outside ED, read them. Take a moment to check if ALL THE FIXES on every update are really included and working before listing them. Check if all third parties updates are included on the final version released. Try to sum those little things like lights errors on modules, lack of mipmaps on several skins, lack of manuals for years, fix former missions not up to date, campaings, etc. I think a patch with all those tiny bits of homework to make DCS cleaner and consistent will be very welcomed.

Studying the manuals is all part of the fun, especially when it is your favourite aircraft. If the F-35A isn't something you will enjoy you can skip it completely. thank you

My first thought on hearing this was "Oh dear" ED has been saying for years that they could not create modules for newer aircraft as they system information was still classified. This apparently, is now not an issue. What I suspect we will end up with is an approximation of an F35 based on limited public domain information and anecdotal evidence, it will be no more than a community mod. The reason I play DCS is for realism in the knowledge that that aircraft have been modeled in a highly accurate way, once you start fudging modules together based on projected increased sales, you are on a rocky road to something akin to War Thunder, which don't get me wrong, has it's place and is probably fun to play, but not a flight simulator modeled to the level we have become accustomed to in DCS.

There's no aircraft more reliant on accurate radar cross section modelling, radar detection modeling, and multi-sensor integration, than the F-35. And yet historically these are some of ED's weakest areas, as many who have argued for improvements/features over multiple years can attest. If ED can't/won't implement accurate representations in these core areas for the F/A-18, when they have access to all the data and expertise they need, what makes anyone think they'll do a better job just making it up for the F-35?

Well Pops, thanks for sharing. However, since I don’t belong to the first category, I think you are implying I belong to the second? But maybe you should consider that there is a third category? Professionals who actually know a thing or two? I’m an aeronautical engineer by profession with a master’s in aerodynamics and structural engineering. I worked for more than 10 years at Ericsson and SAAB with the JAS 39 Gripen, mostly in EW, but close to the guys who did the display systems. So maybe you should consider that there are people here who actually know a thing or two before categorizing them into gamers and Karen’s?

Why do I bother? Well forum posting helps me procrastinate and stay away from doing the honest work that needs to be done, that’s why. But more seriously: I agree with the take that the DCS F-35 module will probably sell like hotcakes. But that does not mean it’s the right approach: There is a famous company doing commercial aircraft that was once run by engineers, but when the accountants took over, quality took a dive and they are now struggling to regain their good name. And just because you can make money on something in the short term, doesn’t mean it will benefit you in the long term. I’ve always respected DCS in the past when they have said that they could not do something because they did not have enough data. That speaks to the engineer in me.

A version of model viewer runs in DCS in the ME. The solution as I see it, for MV, is that we just need whatever version is running in the ME to be made into the stand alone. That way the 3D assets remain encrypted. But we can view our work. And create the Lua files etc as we've been doing for like a decade. The other thing we need access to are the default texture files. Without them you can't edit the Roughmets for example to create the quality skins. You want a change the flight suite or helmet? You need the default files. We can't be recreating every texture from scratch? You need to edit the RM for glossy paint vs matte camo or bare metal... for example. I don't think it's unreasonable to allow access to those. Ateast to paying customers. Who own the modules.

For me it's not a question of whether it's wanted or not, it's a question of whether this is worthy of spending ED's limited resources for development when you have so many "carrots" hanging out there for us. I find myself rolling my eyes at your reveals lately because it just adds more roadblocks to the items we've been waiting on for so long. The 20XX and Beyond showcases tend to be mostly "Beyond". Take the F-35 crew and have them fix the clickable MPDs in the already released and paid for Apache for example. This may seem silly but it's just an example of the multitude of unfinished and unrefined modules that linger for months on end.

Там этот FAQ по F-35 - в лучших традициях "следите за ручками". Сначала там был Блок 2B и куча оружия, включая JASSM. Потом упоминание о блоке пропало. Потом пропало упоминание об оружии за пределами того, что уже есть. К моменту релиза там уже может все 100500 раз поменятся - и блоки, и вооружение и все что угодно. Этот анонс - прежде всего маркетинг, то бишь реклама. К реальности имеющая столько же отношения, сколько реклама в телевизоре. Привет GenX и Mk-77 для Хорнета

It absolutely does. For DPCA and thus STAP to work. It requires many different receiver channels (commonly done at every single antenna element) and digital beam forming to process and filter the main lobe clutter by weighting normalized dopper and look angle. Thus requiring a phased array antenna. The difference is the SU-27's IRST is not a fully integrated sensor into a unified trackfile processing architecture. It can't use it in the same way the F-35 can.

Yes, other fixes are included in this update. For some unknown reason this one didn't make it through, though it should have been the case. As Javier said, we apolozige. It should be included in next third parties update.

Well what I mean is that while I agree that they will probably make money short term, is that in the long terms their status as a producer of high fidelity flight simulations products could be tarnished by releasing modules that inevitably (since the systems are still classified) must contain loads of guesswork. I think there is still a lot of money to be made on producing high quality 3rd and 4th gen aircraft (which they already do and are quite successful at), so I don't see them risk loosing any money as long as they retain a good name as flight simulation producers. So more of the same would be better I say.

Not fixed. ADI does not power up after Cold and dark start. Despite the changelog saying it was fixed. Guess the Fix didn't make the compile. Really need a Hot fix for this rather than waiting another month for a fix.

Hey @Hagen, If you mean the 3d models for all the parts then yeah they will. @Ltdan853 has been my testing offsider to make sure they work on other people's setups. The amount of work on the pits this year has been incredible. Everyone's pit is look amazing.

I have a Type 21... I bought the model a couple of years ago from artstation... I will start a new thread so as not to clutter up the admirals releases

A new year, another patch, and still nothing (absolutely nothing) for Afghanistan. 7 months since release into EA: not only have none of the 3 monthly releases of other areas of the map happened, not only has there not even been bug fixing happening, the most egregious thing is that E.D. have made no meaningful effort to keep purchasers aware of what their plans are. Are you rebuilding the terrain, are you re-doing the textures, are you spending all this time adding access to the sea so 0.5% of purchasers can spend an entire day flying one mission? Is Afghanistan E.D.'s Yak-52 of maps? (i.e. we thought it would be a good idea, but not enough people bought it to make continuing with development a revenue positive activity & now Iraq's out working on something more popular makes sense) or are you all just waiting to blow our minds with a fantastic mega-upload that exceeds our expectations ? ??????????????????????????????????????????????

I dont know how its flight model will work, but visuals look great. I want to buy it...

The ALR-45 equipped early -A is in active finalization progress based on our RWR work in the F-4E, and I hope it will drop in Q1.

I'd be willing to pay 10 Dollars for a later downgrade. [emoji6] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

In fact, that was not the issue. It was a problem with one specific file that for some reason didn't commit.

I agree with you. Imagine if, back then, other innovative projects pioneering flight sim in military jets like F-15 and F-16 were afraid to face this challenge. I imagine the '90s and early 2000s were a lot more secretive regarding 4th gen, yet, look where we are standing now. ED's F-35 will be the first true sim of this kind, and I'm sure time will make things even better in the coming years.

Yes, this is a known bug for all mods that use FC3/FC4. You can use the method above or follow this guide: As I stated, the team needs to work on an update, once the patch is out this will make the mod whole again. Regards, Whisky

I would suggest waiting for the release which is a way off yet and trying it before passing judgement. We understand what people want in DCS and I think you will be happy with the result. If it is still not something for you that is not a problem, you can continue to enjoy DCS and all of the other great modules. thank you

3000lb is heavy for both the F-104G and its direct competitors. The normal load for a single-seat supersonic fighter-bomber in the mid 60s was 2000lb or sometimes less. Not only the F104: MiG-21 2x500kg (people should call it a fighter bomber because that was one of its important missions) Su-7B also 2x500kg originally, option for slightly more later Mirage IIIE just 2x 400kg RNLAF NF-5A 4x 500lb F100D could and did take 4x750lb often, but 2x1000lb was also common. As for the massive F-105D, it had an exceptional payload but that still meant just 6x750lb normally in SEA. Mirage F1 and AJ37 are obviously more advanced airframes. They ought to be, after over a decade of rapid technological progress. F104G speed and avionics stayed impressively relevant though, and if DCS missions are only built around 1970s-80s capability, that is the mission makers' problem. The key is that 1 ton of bombs was just fine for some very important missions. The F104 was expected to handle the kind of target that is given to stealthy cruise missiles today (with 1000lb warheads). That means easy to damage but extremely heavily defended. If it was good at that mission (and it was very very good), the F104G cannot be called 'bad' at air-to-ground in general. Only unsuitable for some specific roles. To answer your other specific questions: A-4F will do 556kt at sea level with single centerline bomb per its SAC. Flight manual charts show the F104G with 3x bombs does around M0.92 = 587kt TAS at 10000ft. A6A with only a centerline Mk28 can do 545kts per SAC. A4F is doing about 560kts (there is no exact chart). F104 with this loading stays very fast up to 20000ft, until above its optimal cruising altitude of 24000ft performance really starts to fall off. However at 25000ft the F104G is still slightly faster (525kts vs 512kts) versus the lightly loaded A6. Conclusion: an F104 without afterburner is always faster than subsonic attackers within its own flight envelope, however it is stuck cruising at FL240 while the slower airframes can cruise much higher for efficiency.

Since January 18, 2024, the status is "the English translation was finished and is currently being proof read." But there is a recurring theme: still waiting for an English manual for the JF-17 (yes, that's not ED's job, but you can trigger the third-party providers to at least provide an English-language manual), the ARC-210 is still not mentioned in the A-10C manual.

Well, Karen actually means pure. So there's that.

@Oban Sweet, nice to see some of the older UK boats making there way into the sim.

This! My fear is that all future modules will be like this, without access to the edm file in order to load the module into the Model Viewer. This would make QUALITY user user skins a thing of the past. @BIGNEWY @NineLine, is this the way of the future?

This literal grey beard who got the Original Flanker back in the 1990s, is stoked about the F-35. I don't know how long it will take to get the F-35 but I do think it will add to DCS. This is why I hope to see more mods and official modern assets- then again I just want more assets in general. I'm feeling like a kid What determines what we get are a mixture of what ED thinks will sell, what they think they can get enough open source data to do it legally. I expect the DCS F-35 to be the most realistic F-35 the public can get their hands on. The real question is when will early orders get started. Dittos I hope the F-35 gets some more DCS pilots.

As someone who has produced many skins in DCS, including five for the legacy F-5E, I would like to chime in and let ED know that without the ModelViewer support of this encrypted module, I will NOT be redoing/porting my skins for the Remastered F-5E. It is simply impractical that for every step in the production of a skin, we have to launch DCS, start a mission / the Mission Editor, pan around and zoom in for literraly hundreds and hundreds of times to finally achieve the end result we expect. Even with the ModelViewer available, producing certain skins can be timeconsuming, challenging and tedious (Chinook is a good recent example for me with all those many rivets that took forever to find - and some still remain unknown!) You remove the ModelViewer support, then the work becomes that much harder. In short, no ModelViewer support, no livery production for me!

Both should be possible, as I have models for the Harpoon's and also for the Phalanx, I will look into my goodie box and see what I have

@Wags Perhaps you can include an update on this in your next Q&A? In the last Q&A you talked about more transparency going forward - see post above, the Afghanistan map feels like a good place to start.

Agree also. The CH-47D would have been the preferred model were it up to me. I’m firmly set in the steam gauge era, I have enough troubles with my laptop to prove it! My PC fares only slightly better, my son is my “tech guy” and can vouch for that. And don’t get me started on his bloody Tesla! I remember when cars were cars, not laptops with wheels.

I'm in .

TL;DR There are literally dozens of posts now in this forum that go something like this: “Yes, well we understand that some are skeptical about DCS ability to model the F-35, but nothing has been released yet so there is no merit to your objections, because you can’t be critical of something you haven’t even seen”. Well I beg to differ: I think we can be critical of the decision to model the F-35 already now, and here is a concrete example of why: On the F-35, there is just one big humongous screen that can hold a myriad of different windows and tables etc. And, yes, we can see what they show us at demos and airshow and that can give us some idea about how the display may look like IRL. However, the only thing we can be absolutely sure of is that this will not be what the pilot will see in an operational aircraft. This is just common sense. You don’t show classified presentation modes for operational aircraft publicly. So already here we are lost. But wait, it gets worse: Because instead of a couple of MFD’s with knowns sub-menus and display properties, supplemented by the ubiquitous round RWR we see in most 3rd and 4th generation fighters (you know, the type of displays & systems DCS modeled up till now), you will in the F-35 have just one big screen where you have absolutely no idea how the disposition of different display windows will be. Why? Well because the big thing with 5th generation aircraft is the sensor fusion and how this will be displayed is top secret. For example, when you’re dozing off in nav mode, and you suddenly get lit up by a SAM or fighter radar, how will that enormous display react? Will it be overlaid something already there or will a threat window pop up which takes up 10, 20, 30 or 50% of the big screen? Where will it be located? How will threat zones be displayed? If, dynamic, how will this be displayed? Missile position and if you are inside or outside projected range? Birds eye view, or obliquely? What other windows will be active? Stores, radar, IRST etc? And if so where? Bottom right? Top left? etc etc. And this is where the 6th gen secret lies: How do you fuse not only your own, but your wingman’s, ship and AWAC data? And how do you in the best way filter and present all this data? And the only thing we can be sure of here is that what we see in manufacturers booths at airshow will be fluffy concept modes, and exactly NOT how it will be displayed IRL. Because this is what separates the wheat from the chaff. And not only for reasons of security, but also not to divulge trade secrets to your competitors, will you be showing how you have solved all this. The winner will present not all data, but the right data at the right time in the right way (SAAB is good at this!). But there is no way SAAB or Lockheed Martin are going to share this with us either in air show booths or in open documentation. So whatever DCS comes up with will be guesswork. And yes, some may scoff at the figure of 85% guesswork that was thrown around here earlier on, but how are you even going to get THAT close when you are working with one huge display that could be used in a myriad of ways, all of which are classified? However, if the aircraft you are modeling has two MFD’s, a round little RWR, and a bunch of manuals which tells you exactly how those MFD’s function and look in all sub modes (3rd and 4th generation fighters), well then 85% ACCURACY and not GUESSWORK seems within reach. And this is why it's currently possible to do high fidelity 3rd or 4th gen sim aircraft, but only 6th gen game aircraft, and while IMHO DCS should stick to the two former.

...we are already further west than Bremen, as I saw Mendig EDRE in the video 2025 and beyond. So at least Ramstein would be relatively safe. Let´s hope the best.

Agree! Excellent suggestion and would make the world come much more alive. Nice reminder.