Leaderboard

Some of SMT liveries As well as some A/G weapons test kh29 sh med smt.mp4

Updated (more like fixed lol) normalmaps with roughmets/speculars. For those that arent into 3d stuff - normals are textures that make flat surfaces look 3d, and roughmets and speculars are those controlling how rough or shiny is the surface.

The MiG-21 v2 must be paid for. The same happened with the Ka-50 v3, A-10C v2 and F-5E v2. I will pay as long as the upgrade cost is the same as the upgraded modules. 10 to 15 dollars.

This would be easy enough to add. I was working on a pretty substantial update but I'm in the process of moving right now so it's going to be a delayed for a month or so.

It has been 2 weeks since the Mig29A went on Pre-purchase.

I think everyone who already owns Mig-21, will be willing to pay extra money for an update, including me.

Methinks Lava is using this forum as stress relief: they are here for trolling only. That Herc is hopefully going to refresh the transport/logistics angle of DCS. I can't wait to try my hand at putting together some missions that focus on that aspect. Let's hope that MSE can keep up with it, since currently the logistics API is... insufficient.

-------UPDATE 250601 Modified VVI display so that the G-Force meter is more legible and delineated. Readings are now 0 - 12G in 2G increments positive or negative. Increased yield of the air to ground tactical nukes to their 1.0kt maximum yield. They should have a blast radius of about 3nm.

Actually 2014

How much money have you given them? Nothing…. So you have nothing to moan about!

Calm down, friend! DCS modules take years to be made because the teams are small and something well done takes a long time. Not to mention that the modules remain in early access forever. So you have to get used to it, because this is not going to change. There is also the issue of many third parties giving up halfway and the module never seeing the light of day.

@BIGNEWY Since the 2.9.15 topic was locked and we're now on 2.9.16, I'll start a new one. Since Friday's update I have encountered every single one of the previously reported issues. Right now in fact, as I type this the game has locked up on loading for the sixth time in the last two hours. Saving missions, loading mission, exiting missions, exiting the game, starting the game, all of these continue to have the same performance problems. Sometimes it does work correctly or at least mostly responsive. Others, you're fighting just to get the thing to start up. It's really frustrating. Rolling back to 2.9.14, again, resolves every single issue with no other changes.

Potential new or returning customers are going to look at the DCS page to work out if there's anything interesting in enough to draw them in. Many won't want to sign up for the newsletter, seeing it as just another email coming into their already crowded inbox that they will often have little interest in. I just wondered if it might be worth adding a "Coming Soon" section to the DCS page, so that potential customers can easily find the modules likely to become available soon. You could combine this with a "Recent Releases" section, so people who haven't looked in a few months can easily find modules that might have been announced and launched since they last looked (eg: Cold War: Germany map). ED will have the analytic data, so they may have an idea of how many people this might attract. To me creating a "Recent Releases" and/or "Coming Soon" section seems like a modest investment of effort for plenty of potential benefit, but of course that's not my call.

Hi everyone, It's been discussed (though has not yet been a topic of) several other threads but I thought this could really do with its own. Currently quite a number of runways, taxiways, aprons and a fair few roads have this prominent sand-like texture surrounding them like a border. For example, here's promotional material of Spangdahlem, taken from this post. There's a number of other errors clearly visible in these images also (for instance, all of the hardened aircraft shelters are the wrong type and the open parking spots are marked as helipads when they aren't, several other structures look like they were taken from Syria and aren't that accurate either). The layout however is broadly correct. By comparison, here's a satellite photo, taken summer 2018 (the lighter area is actually from March 2017): And here are a few close-up shots: It can clearly be seen that areas of mud/dirt/sand are few and far between and in the overwhelming majority of areas, the grass goes right up to taxiways, runways, aprons etc. This is further backed up by photos taken on the airbase (these from mid May 2023, sourced from here) These from the end of May 2020: This from May 2024 It should be very clear that the sand-coloured boundary surrounding the paved surfaces is incorrect - at the very least it should be made much more sparse, as IRL, nearly every image shows more-or-less uniform grass right up to them. With these you could also make the argument that the grass texture should be darker. You could make very similar analysis at the majority of airbases, not just Spangdahlem. Yes, you sometimes see brown/dry grass, but it'll be much more uniform and not patchy (it's not like the sun only illuminates certain areas of grass). Sometimes, there is mud/dirt/sand but unless significant construction work is going it's few and far between, not all over the place as it is currently. Personally, fixing this would fairly dramatically improve the realism of these airbases.

I have been simming since Amstrad !...I have been DCS since Lock-On !....99% of my Flying has been SP...I had some Great MP experiences on IL2 and CLOD...I have tried a few DCS servers but it always seemed like "Get to the Furball "," Get as many Kills"... And Then Call Yourself an "ACE" ! No regard for your Virtual Life turns DCS into Game. No Purpose For your Mission turns DCS into a Game !...Amazing, how many pilots Post Videos of their "amazing Kills" , and dont even RTB !.. AND BRAG about it ! Trapper, I have recently joined Contention Cold war and I am having the BEST Simming , I have ever had...I have 4 hours in Huey (total flying in DCS). I have done CSAR missions and given my team 200000 Resources . I have 150 Credits to spend. I installed an EWR !... ALL with Chat turned OFF and I Fly in VR !...I am still learning Contention (And the Huey). Thank you Trapper, This is Simming in DCS ! ~S~

Any update or repair of DCS is going to remove the avionics stuff since those are modified files. That will need to be reinstalled every time a repair or update is done. See the first post for more information on this.

There are issues with the core missile code, not the mod. These are recent and apparent even with a clean unmodded install. There are a lot of bugs in DCS too. No one is forcing you to use the EFM. Good luck. The recent DCS update didn't affect the mod. Still works fine for me and many other people. The GD release of v3 and older I believe had that issue. I do not maintain or curate those versions. It was fixed in a release of the enhancement mod that's available on the first page of this thread. I've made many changes and fixes to the F22 mod over the last several years. I tried to notate changes in the readme but I can't remember every one that I did. It was brought up that it was an issue, and the current release of the enhancement mod has that normal file in the cockpit textures file. I don't think that the v2.02 EFM has it yet, but it will in the next release I think.

Why some people expect to always get things for free? I've flown the -21 for years, so I feel that by now I truly got my money's worth.

Fixed internally, Jester should be more thoughtful about identiyfing pressure loss soon

I've given up hope that Ugra will ever fix this massive error. We've told them ever since they showed the first previews that Germany does not look like this. They never acknowledged the issue even once. The topic has come up again and again, only to be met with silence. So thank you for your efforts with this new topic, appreciated!

yea, but on Airbases, its totally wrong. sure when the base should have that "many years abandoned look" then it's spot on... if this should represent a operational Airbase, then it's all wrong. So far the height of the grass is only accurate for the fields..

i fully agree, they should skip Phase II and III so far until the Airbases are fixed, lakes are missing around some bases, the Road map on bases is mostly inaccurate. Spangdahlem looks totally wrong, they even put a german village into the base almost, at a spot where the main gate is, and where storage buildings and military infrastructure should be. Also please add more parklng lots and more accurate detail according mostly to bing or google maps.. the detail we have right now is pretty inaccurate or unnecessary. I hope they give all Airbases a major overhaul. Radar Towers are missing and so much more...

I agree. Finish PTO first. However, I would like to see some early-mid WW2 at some point.

I think you've hit the nail on the head with this. The QAG won't allow you to have both helis and fixed wing in the same mission, you can't have ground units in a dogfight mission, in a SEAD mission its air defences and nothing else etc etc. I initially liked the QAG., now I absolutely hate it. It's utter garbage. Thank god it relatively easy to populate the map with the ME, but I wany the old Fast Mission functionality back. They replaced a Canon DLS with a Box Brownie.

For clarity here are the originals with further details and annotations that explain some of the shown information, including a representation of the DDD showing how the MiG-21 referenced bricks should appear:

My Father and his graphic design business partner drew these originally for the book “Modern Fighting Aircraft: F-14” published by Salamander.

@BIGNEWY, Thank you for re-examining the Hornet Pilot survival rate with the rest of the ED team!

What are the benefits of running on the latest client? I'm still way back on v 1.29 - been too concerned to break something that's not broken. Is there any significant performance improvements with the latter version? (Or significantly better motion smoothing, FFR, etc) that's worth risking updating to the latest client software? I see that the latest version is 'swimming' with Mbucchia's QVFR - although I don't use that.

Это точно. Я ПК поменял, потому что он совсем уже старенький, а так справедливо утверждение, что ДКС и мощное железо не равно хорошей производительности. Второй раз с этим сталкиваюсь. Когда появилась видеокарта 2080, купил и получил ухудшение, сейчас обновил на всё свежее и тяговитое с картой 5 тысячного поколения и тут бац - разбалансировали движки....надеюсь, что в итоге опять отладят.

The fog in DCS makes a nice visual change and is challenging to fly in a helicopter, but as long as the AI is coming in a dive through a 500 metre high bank of fog with its on-board cannon (not a guided missile), reducing the players standing on the ground to wood chips, it makes no sense. We've been waiting just as long for the AI on the ground to finally stop being able to see, drive and shoot through houses and trees.

And some other news, i'm currently working on a Streamdeck XL Profile (not finished yet) nullnull

Reference source comes from the MiG-29 manual about the R-27ER: https://www.scribd.com/document/706751750/РЛЭ-МиГ-29 Ракета также допускает длительные перерывы (до 20 - 30% оставшегося времени наведения) в подсвете РЛПК при сохранении временной диаграммы канала подсвета. The missile also allows for long breaks (up to 20-30% of the remaining guidance time) in the illumination of the radar while maintaining the timing diagram of the illumination channel. The missile can maintain synchronization for a limited time after the radar loses track of the target. As long as the radar resumes illuminating the same target within the missile's interruption time threshold, the seeker can re-lock the target.

It was called the "Create Fast Mission" generator. What's been lost with the introduction of the new QAG is this: The ability to, in approximately 60 to 90 seconds, with essentially one click (because it saved your previous settings like "Blue Air Units - MAX") create a battle field that had 200+ units that were not where I knowingly placed them... and that is key. We now no longer have an option in DCS to create a fast, high unit count mission that is RANDOM in nature. This is a huge single-player feature loss for me... I'm assuming it is missed by others, too. I also constantly used the CFM generator to create a base mission for, say, the A-10. After one or two clicks, I now had a mission of 270+ units and an a-10 group poised for CAS. Then, in the ME... I just dropped in a Hornet and made it "PLAYER." VOILÀ! I had a single player Hornet mission that was close to random in nature... and a populated world in order to enter into. This whole creation process took me less than 3 minutes. If someone at ED or in the community can suggest a simple, just-as-good-if-not-better way to continue to accomplish this without a third-party mod or bringing back the old CFM generator, then I'm all ears. If not, please bring the CFM generator back.

Indeed, the patch fixed what was a problem since 2 patches - high CPU temperatures and load. Other reported problems still exist, but that's true, it's a hotfix, not a full patch. Thanks ED!

This would be extremely unlikely to happen in any case. It's not worth the performance to check for bullet to bullet collisions.

External model will be updated soon

I'm sorry that you feel this way. As others have written, the project is very much not "dead", and is instead nearing completion. Amongst the things we've shown: an entirely new external 3d model, functional airdrop (in the 2025 and beyond video), a moab, functional AG radar, pilot models... probably other things I am forgetting. And yes, a tiny clip showing a neat physics based spring effect on the trim and flap indicators when battery power is applied. Short of a full release trailer, what else would you like to see as evidence that the project is alive?

A Hurricane would be great. Don’t think they’ll entertain us but I’d love one. Oh and a Typhoon… and a Wildcat… and a Corsair, B25, Sunderland etc. etc. Props, props, more props and a bit of Malta wouldn’t be a bad thing at all.

Anything DCS WWII these days I'm interested in...ETO, PTO, MTO ...anything. I wish they had a bigger team and plans to expand the WWII side of things at a faster than glacial pace.

I noticed that NVG registrate not only visible AB but also non visible for human hot exhaust lower then AB temperature. I think that choppers IR signature also can registerate hot exhaust too. So, why not to do this in DCS? Also should be implemented for KC-135 with same engines: And for UH-1 too

I believe that these two maps would be among the most popular maps DCS would have.

Agreed and surprised this hasn't gotten more support. In a lot of cases, the default spawn location for dynamic spawns is in some odd spot far from the runway. It'd be really nice if you could pick any available slot yourself.

Since the simulated locking method is based on defined objects, range, and lighting levels, the bore-sighting procedure is no good. You can't fix onto arbitrary shapes beyond 7km. IRL the fixing algorithm is based on shape and pixel variations, not range. Range can't be calculated until the seeker has been fixed onto a pattern. Additionally, there are a lot of objects with bugged sizes that make using them very difficult. On maps like Marianas, some of the buildings are dozens times larger than they appear, causing a lot of tracking failures for TV and IR's. Having a client option to bypass the requirement is the only reasonable take until the tracking algorithms are completely rewritten.

Never knew DCS at airshows was a thing. That is so cool! Good luck for the next one and many happy visitors.

Wouldn't be this would it?? Some other images . .