Leaderboard

Here's a short tutorial on how to navigate in my Red Flag 81-2 DCS F-4 Phantom campaign. It's really not that difficult, the documentation and the visuals are extensive, if you follow the plan you'll hit your time on target to the second, I'm sure!

The legendary aircraft carrier, Shinano, is soon to arrive in DCS.

I disagree with the #6 versatile stuff. Bomcat in Afghanistan scored 90% hit rate during the first 3 months. Also, it actually lasered targets for hornets, as these did not have lantirn (EDIT : Hornet had Nighthawk pod, which had a lower resolution) ! And they can carry more payload and farther than hornet. And also for the #4 good dogfighter. Good pilots in tomcats can rip F-15s. A nice unofficial picture shows it, with an F-14 piper right on a F-15 pilot.

We continue working hard on the F1M and F-104 development, we'll make an official announcement in due course.

@ ITR1102 I bought these inserts: Inserts pour écrous d'impression . They say 4mm high but they are actually 3mm. Finally the ones I received

[18th April update: Thanks to the thread contributors and all those documents, this is such a fascinating and amazing topic. This project was massively ambitious and in a competition for my time between everything else and a 5th month old Border Collie puppy with no manners, I submit my work to date to the community 'as is' to do what you like with! Attached kmz. ] I could use some help from the armchair army to check the Google KML I am producing, before public release. Using a combination of KML's from Speedy on the army rumour service for the British and Soviet installations, a filtered SAMsite overview and my own work to collect, locate and organize the US installations I have over 1210 Google mapmarkers in the most complete rendition of 1960-1995 Germany's Cold War installations. The KML will eventually become a key reference resource for locations in the upcoming DCS map. Mission makers can check the details provided for targets and mission use. The KML will eventually be imported to DCS as a rough template of locations. I don't intend to place any objects as there won't be a 1:1 parity and there are clearly too many, but it is enough to add sites for your missions. The KML for Cold War Germany comprises of: Over 1200 placemarks categorised and colour coded (so far) The inner border reference line East and West Air defence sites (for West, the Nike Hercules is available for pre 1984 but dates are pretty tough to get) British American Soviet/E. German --Airbases and minor Helicopter airfields --Barracks and installations --Ammo Depots --Training Areas --Special Weapons Compounds --Stores --Fuel dumps/CEPS The rough time range for these is 1960-1995. What I am looking for initially is anyone interested in helping expand on this, specially if they want to zero in on, for example, enriching the US Kazernes with any reference links, tidying up the current placemarks, finding names for the unamed ammo dumps, checking the data with online references, etc. I'm definitely interested in anyone with knowledge of the Eastern European theatre, the locations and names of units and their stations, the airbase complements and time ranges. Also those with good knowledge of the FEBA and plans who can identify major themes that can be added to the KML or fill holes and gaps, such as the areas east of Luneburg and Hamburg, east of Braunschweig, east of Salzgitter and Northeim, etc. Please don't ask for the WIP copy, it will arrive here when its done. Feel free to add details of the theatre to this thread. Whilst I've seen a lot of resources online, its not the finding of the information so much as the time it takes to create a nice placemark with links, find the modern day geo coordinates from the resource that is now hidden under a Lidl or BMW factory and so on. there's issues of time and date filters which I havent even attempted. It will never be perfect but thats not the aim. Cold War Germany.kmz

As the title is self-explanatory, here's a video.

Polish forces operated Mi-24 and Mi-8 out of Ghazni using the 8 helipads. In DCS the sytem thinks the pads are too small and won't let us place the aircraft on the ramp. In this Google Earth image you can can see Mi-8s, Mi-24s, and two UH-60s parked on the pads.

Take a breath and count to 10 Perhaps read other's posts as well: I know this doesn't support what Moza told you, but since the contrary evidence is a GOOD thing, you're really trying too hard to paint Moza as some kind of "Big Bad Corpo Entity" Your kind of hyperbole really is what's wrong in today's social media

d9 panel

You must reposition the angle of the camera and the clip. This is especially true with large screens where the camera is high up. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

That was our first Event. What Made This Tournament Special? Intense Rivalries: The leaderboard never stood still—constant changes, last-minute surprises, and comebacks made every hour exciting. Record-Breaking Performances: The 2:07 barrier was broken, proving that perfection is possible with dedication and skill. A True Test of Skill & Endurance: Pilots weren’t just racing each other—they were battling fatigue, precision, and the mental game of shaving off milliseconds. Global Participation: With pilots from around the world, the tournament showcased the very best DCS has to offer. Final Thoughts This was more than just a race—it was a test of skill, patience, and raw piloting talent. From the first green light to the final checkered flag, every pilot gave their all, pushing the TF-51D and P-51D to the limit. Congratulations to Old Shatterhand for an epic victory, and respect to every single pilot who took part! Until next time—keep flying, keep racing, and never stop chasing the perfect lap!

With 64 GB of RAM, Windows gives a default 4 GB pagefile, which is enough for now.

Bankler's famous Trap Training mission moved to Kola after permission from Bankler. There we go. Approved and active in User Files Bankler's CASE 1 Recovery Trainer - Kola Peninsula version I have edited some of the surrounding parts of the mission and added a few things. - Statics and AI activity on the carrier from mission start - Human airborne jets moved to 30nm to give a good time to set up the brake - Carrier Group consistency changed to mimic CVW-8 in 2006 (https://www.seaforces.org/usnair/CVW/Carrier-Air-Wing-8.htm) - units used from other mods (FRENCHPACK, desdemicabina-simulations Álvaro de Bazán, Military Aircraft Mod, EA_6B, A-4E-C, T-45) - I opted to add the mods as dependencies as they are all stunning work and ad a bit of atmosphere and realism to the mission. - New scripting to give updated BRC course from the carriers magnetic heading. Can be called via menu on demand. - Added/altered Recovery Tanker, AWACS and Caps via moose scripting if you experience any problems with the mission be sure to tell me and not bother Bankler about it null

Just finished ( litterally) and all work flawlessy, passed at first try 100/100 score. Eager to start M02 Many thanks for your efforts!

Delta ramp, and really most of that entire side of the airbase, should fit C-130s yet we are unable to place them anywhere on Delta ramp, and are limited to only 5 spots each of Charlie (09-13), Sierra (01-04) and Tango (01-04).

Historically CH-47s were parked at the Romeo ramp however the mission editor thinks the Chinooks are too big for these spots.

Hi ,if you put Interception... The unit... in the mission editor all in I.A there is no order to give

Hi everyone, As I understand it, FlyingIron are utilising ED's ground radar API - while understandable as this is FlyingIron's first attempt in DCS, it does lead to some unfortunate drawbacks, many of which have a significant impact on gameplay. ED's ground radar API is currently the lowest fidelity model present in DCS (surpassed even by the Viggen, released nearly 8 years ago and was the first true air-to-ground radar) and radar models subsequently (and even one prior) developed by 3rd parties significantly raise the bar in terms of fidelity, offering raycasted models that more accurately depict radars. This all results in ED's radar model having inaccurate limitations, both in terms of not modelling limitations that should be present and introducing limitations that shouldn't exist. ED's radar model: Doesn't account for beam-geometry at all, meaning: They can unrealistically map from basically 0 out to the instrumented range of the radar, regardless of antenna elevation or aircraft altitude (see here and here). Antenna elevation or different beam settings (for instance, the pencil/fan beam setting in the Hornet) are functionless/broken. To compound this, if you take the picture seen at default elevation and gain, then elevate the radar to its maximum above the horizon and increase the gain, you see very little difference in what's displayed. Conversely, if you depress the radar to its maximum below the horizon, the brightness falls off to 0, despite the fact that the radar should still be illuminating a portion of the ground. In vertical/near vertical climbs the radar can see behind itself, something that's obviously impossible. Will not detect aircraft (even low-speed, low-flying ones). While obviously surface-directed radars/modes are obviously not optimised for detecting aircraft - aircraft that are caught in a lobe of the radar producing a skin return powerful enough to be detected should be displayed, espeically when the A-7E's APQ-126 is a pulse-only radar and has no motion filtering (like the F-4E). Is completely immune to jamming. While ships don't feature anything EW related (apart from radars), low-flying bombers can currently be used as semi-functional approximates (though their jammers aren't powerful enough to completely hide ships). The RDI's ground-mapping mode (Mirage 2000C), the PS-37/A (AJS 37 Viggen) are all affected by jamming and produce jamming returns. Is completely immune to sea clutter (Heatblur's F-4E even takes polarisation into account here). Doesn't model sidelobe returns.

"And if I'm flying solo At least I'm flying free"

так на восьмерке и 24 есть подобное, износ двигателей, там и вилку можно увидеть и мощность падает null null

I still think the new suspension modeling is more important than the Dynamic campaign. This is going to be the biggest release since the clouds. Still, the initial release of the DC is going to be a realisation of an important DCS development direction. So for me it's still suspension ATC graphical glitches ! damage modeling others

I won’t. Any movement on this? Can you knock the shed door and wake the ol fella up please? Tell him “it’s time” and pat him on the shoulder. “More props please, can we have our Corsair”

Well he certainly isn't shooting blanks with the missus....

@SAB0T thank you for the quality cockpit, sir! It's like I'm flying a brand new module!

Mir ist noch bekannt das es unter der Steam Version so war das ich Fehlercode 28 und Fehlercode 401 hatte, die ich auch nur durch das 8:8:8:8/8:8:4:4 beheben konnte.

Из новостей: Ну и добавили бы адекватных объектов в редактор для трасс в DCS, раз способствуете развитию гонок. Конусов разных размеров (хорошо бы их размер можно было масштабировать по вкусу), чтоб на ветру качались (как носок качается же) ну и надписи на конусах с картинками писать (как номера же можно самолётам самим вводить сейчас в редакторе). А то приспосабливают под трассу не пойми что - нефтяные вышки, подлодки.. сюр какой-то. Ладно я когда смотрю, понимаю, что это от скудного выбора объектов. Но другим то стыдно показать - засмеЮт.

Apart from a few details, it is complete and fully operational. The real fun begins and it s awesome.......... @AusMumbles thanks for sharing your initial model, and of course, to HB and ED, for basically everything. @AusMumbles

Not a word about Dick, politics and Hornet Mafia?!

What is happening in DCS vs what should happen: When the TMD separates two of the three pieces stick together and follow the submunition dispenser down. What should happen is the TMD should blow away and the force from the wind should cause it to go aft of the submunition dispenser. This does not affect anything from what I can tell inside DCS, it is more of a visual inaccuracy right now. The submunitions are then dispersed individually rather than together (FWD section followed by AFT section) on the CBU-105. This is done correctly on the CBU-97 but not correctly for the CBU-105. The way they disperse the submunitions should not change. It should still go all FWD, then all AFT. They should not dispense individually. In DCS if you use a HOF of 1500 two or more submunitions collide with the ground. If you use a HOF setting of 1200 (standard) you will lose up to 5 with the CBU-105 and up to 11 with the CBU-97. From what I can tell this is happening due to a long chute deployment interval time once the submunitions are released from the bays. What should happen with a HOF of 1200 or 1500, is all the submunitions in the FWD bay get released and they should almost instantly start deploying their chutes one after another, then all the AFT bay submunitions should do the same. There should not be any that collide with the ground. Judging by the pattern of how the submunitions disperse under certain wind conditions makes me believe that you guys are modelling the CBU-105B/B which has the P3I munition in it. Even if the CBU-105/B, which uses the Baseline munition, was being modelled it should not have submunitions crash into the ground with a HOF setting of 1200. With a setting of 1200 (which is standard) the dispensers will still open at a predetermined altitude AGL. Depending on which one you are modelling will depend which altitude is correct. Right now, the only way to avoid losing any submunitions to ground collision is to set a HOF of 1800 or more. Here is a video to show a CBU-97 in action. Timestamp 4:33. In the video you can see how the TDM separates and then the FWD submunitions disperse, followed by chute deployment almost instantly (and the video is in slow motion.) In DCS it takes a while for the submunitions to deploy the chutes. Attached are tracks with various drops with 1500, 1200, and 900 HOF used. They are all short and can be watched and slowed down to view the submunitions going into the ground. Along with some pictures. And also, for the CBU-97, visually it has a WCMD tail package when it shouldn't for obvious reasons. Should be all green not silver. That is the biggest way to tell the difference between a WCMD and non-WCMD CBUs. Which you can also see in the video as well. CAT-UXO - Cbu 97 aircraft cluster bomb Another thing I noticed, when dropping a single CBU another dispenser appears for some reason at some point. You can watch the track here to see it.f16c_cbu105_1200_test3_double.trk The only thing that separates the 105 from the 97 is the WCMD tail kit. Everything else is exactly the same as the 97. All relevant documents will be sent to @NineLine (All testing done in a no wind environment with other tests done with wind) f16c_cbu105_1200_test.trk f16c_cbu105_1500_test.trk f16c_cbu97_1200_test1.trk f16c_cbu105_900_test.trk f16c_cbu105_1200_test2.trk All CBU-105 Tracks.zip

Interesting, but that's good old VFR with a little help from Jester in the back with his INS

Damn! That worked. Thanks!

There currently is no good way in DCS to associate a livery with a unit, so livery support can only be provided for some modules. Spawners who can spawn any typeName cannot provide livery control in a meaningful way. Cloners can do it if you manage the livery in ME by assigning it to the clone template.

Bonjour à tous, une mission d'escorte d' un C130. Bien lire le briefing. Hello everyone, a C130 escort mission. Read the briefing carefully. escorte_C130; 4 raf client.miz

Выглядит так. Удобно для разрабов кампаний. Можно в каждой следующей миссии добавлять несколько процентов износа. Или сделать разветвление. в котором в одну сторону больше износа. Но летать так веселее, особенно когда забыл, что у тебя это включено.) Может и на Ми-24 такое тоже сделают...

Thanks Bremspropeller, that's a really good anser. I'll try that. So you don't use any curves at all with your setup? Danke und LG Booka42

Yes. Hahaha, YES!

The citrus' on me, cheers! [emoji1635] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Free "product" is not fair enough?

Pacific== Abandoned airfields Guam... Normandy ..

@NineLine you and the rest of the ED team (including testers and helpers) on these forums deal with a lot of crap from some posters. all of it anonymous posting so they would not have any juevos to say something to someone in public. especially in a Walmart (in the US) where they would surely get their face punched. rant over. ED, you are doing a great job! you will work out this latest setback.

Oregon National Guard 75th Anniversary

You should check out the official manual too, not just chucks guide. As for the fuze, it literally depends on what you want to do. Shorter fuzes for dive bombing, longer ones for low level bombing or extremely long fuzes for area denial. And the secret ingredient to success is not having someone on your six in the first place.

You know what? I have to take back what I said. I hadn't used MAN in a few flights. AUTO handoff is much, much better on average run-to-run than going to MAN, particularly on moving targets. You were right @Hobel The difference is subtle, but I decided to test on a grouping of 4 close APC's over 15 iterations, and the results with auto handoff were consistently superior until about 5-4nm. You're not going to notice it until you test a bunch, and use a hot start jet to eliminate an additional variable with boresighting.

F10 map mark would be quite different, since it would allow you to get the exact (or close) coordinates of the marked point. Would support such a wishlist item.