Leaderboard

Yes. As I've tried to explain in my FAQ. I do this so that you don't have to download the Complete pack with every little update. To save both on the user download and the daily Google Drive transfer limit. But to make things easier, I've just updated all the Complete packs to the latest fixpack level. So for first-time users there is no need to download anything else than the Complete pack.

Posted in the Discord

@Esac_mirmidon Thx.. @skywalker22 you probably know the basics but.. 1. Research, research..research 2. Create models and textures / Roughmets/ Normal maps and render them as dds/EDM files 3. create lua files 4. Headache...because you figure that the Airbase/Airport layout is inaccurate... 5. Thinking until you get headache again... 6. Headache..the Killer High grass is drivin you nuts... 7. A lot of trial and error.. Back to work. I'll be away for a week, but some more updates for now.. Again, UGRA has not yet created most of the critical military infrastructure like those huge "grass" bunkers...there're at least 3 of them at Gütersloh, the place is completely empty on their map.. no layout.. nothing !! Creating the ground layout above the "Killer Grass" is really annoying work to say the least...

MP hasn't done much except hype up and live off the Copyrights for old MP projects they had zilch to do with, and when that revenue pool started shrinking, they increased the prices. $15 for Falcon 4.0 now is absurd, you can buy a F4 CD brand spankin' new at dollar general for $2, and they know the only reason it is still selling is because of BMS's requirement of having it. I paid $3.99 for the entire Falcon Collection, just so I wouldn't have to retain a DVD Drive in my rig anymore. F5 or any completely new sim of the 2020+ era is likely not even in active development, they are already way behind on their other projects, outside of bar napkin notes, there is likely no F5 work being done.

-------UPDATE 250607 Reworked the FCS page with new textures and code Separated the left and right flaperons Relocated the left and right LEF indicators (which currently do not indicate movement) -EFM Corrected rudder deflection indication to read full scale Adjusted speed brake indicators to show which surfaces are used Adjusted labels for correct flight surfaces Flaperons - LF/RF Leading Edge - LL/RL Ailerons - LA/RA Horizontal Tail - LT/RT Rudders - LR/RR

Maybe, but only ED knows when that will happen. I'm null at creating liveries, so I depend on users like you sharing the liveries they create ... but I do like to edit training missions, but without the ModelViewer to inspect the arguments of the cockpit elements there is no way I can do this kind of missions for the new F-5 (which I foolishly purchased before knowing about its encryption), pity so now I'm instead making this type of mission for the T-45C User Mod.

Vietnam War Vessels 1.1.2 This hotfix Vietnam War Vessels 1.1.2 contains only the O-1 Bird Dog and MiG-21MF "Fishbed-J". It is meant to be installed over the full Vietnam War Vessels 1.1.0 release or the hotfixed 1.1.1 install. The MiG-21MF textures were updated by Odyseus and the pylon definitions were re-ordered and fixed by sinzov. The O-1 Bird Dog propeller was reverted to the state of Vietnam War Vessels 0.7.0 and works again. https://github.com/tspindler-cms/tetet-vwv/releases

The liveries are ready. Lately, I’ve been working on testing and battle outcome calculations, trying to get the difficulty level balanced properly. The campaign documentation is also nearly complete—about 150 pages including instructions for playing the dynamic campaign, along with plenty of intelligence material for mission planning. Testing and fine-tuning will still take some time. In addition to that, both the campaign start and the various end scenarios are still missing.

Can you please stop using process lasso or whatnot to activate / deactivate cores? DCS reads your CPU architecture and assigns specific tasks to specific cores. if you play around with that on your own, you work against what ED is doing for you already.

I believe that we are overlooking the elephant in the room, and to me it is a dire warning. MP are charging $15 because they can. Meaning that the audience is so starved for a good fighter sim that they are willing to shell out $15 for a nearly 30 years old game. As if we don't know. Do you know of any other game (ok, beside Star Citizen) where people routinely shell out $50 for an unfinished product that never gets finished? Look at the sorry state MSFS is in. People still buy it. I liken this market to the state of mobile phones pre-iPhone: people buy mobile phnes and use them - not because they are good, but because they aren't terminally flawed. I used a Blackberry then. When the iPhone came out, RIM/Blackberry Ltd. confidently announced their iPhone contender "PlayBook" with "Amateur hour is over". Do you own a PlayBook? When Steve Ballmer saw the iPhone he laughed. He mocked the $500 price tag. ''There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share." Look where Windows Phone is now. Those were the market leaders, and they thought they understood why their customers bought from them. The moment that a real, good and fun combat flight sim shows up, it'll be curtains for the others. I assert that the majority doesn't play DCS because it's "so realistic, so carefully crafted, so good". They play DCS because there simply isn't a better alternative, they play it in spite of the bad quality and the forever-early-access low quality nature of the planes. I've spent in excess of 1000 on ED products alone. They are good enough for me. But are they good? No. So yeah, MP saw an opportunity, and they'll milk it dry. On our side of the aisle, we are getting ready to spring much more for Fat Amy.

I’ll try to explain it in a different way. The 1.1.0-1.1.1 is only an update file if you already have 1.1.0 installed. It is a small file. If you choose to download the large file titled 1.1.1, then you do not need the other file at all. If you already have 1.1.0 installed and it was working, then you ONLY need the 1.1.0-1.1.1. You will then merge that folder with your existing version 1.1.0 to make it become 1.1.1. You will know that you did it correctly if windows pops up a warning saying: this folder already contains xxx files with the same name”. It will the ask you if you want to overwrite these files. You choose “continue” to finish the process. When finished, you should have only one Germany folder.

I live near a A-10 base (190th FS) and I see them all the time. There is still a mixture of pods, and I would say more Sniper than Litening these days.

EWR RADAR MOD V1.3.1 V1.3.1 fixes the livery naming error. Add some ambiance to Cold War Germany or your favorite map! Enjoy! null

Hi all, I wanted to have a Trophy Active Protection System used for a future mission, didn't see what I wanted anywhere so I made this. It'll go into the Splash Damage script sometime in the future also. Not sure if there's any actual demand for this, but I will share anyways. Trophy APS Script Version 1.0 Github: https://github.com/stephenpostlethwaite/DCSSplashDamageScript/tree/master/OtherScripts The script tracks weapons heading towards a TrophyAPS vehicle, triggers a small explosion by the unit to mimic the Trophy system and triggers a larger explosion at the co-ords of the incoming weapon. The script mimics there being a Trophy system on the front right and back left of the vehicle, with each launcher having 4 rounds. This was tested using the Abrams. It contains 2 methods of enabling, either the vehicle has TrophyAPS in its name or you put the unit type into the AllUnitType table. By default, only the name method is enabled, both can be enabled at the same time as below: --Unit types eligible for Trophy APS local AllUnitType = { --["M-1 Abrams"] = true, --Example unit, uncomment to enable Trophy APS for all M1A2 Abrams units as opposed to only name searching. You can add units too. } The weapons tracked are in the trophyWeapons table, small example below, weapons can be added to or removed as needed. local trophyWeapons = { --For weapon types: typeName:gsub("^weapons%.missiles%.", ""):gsub("^weapons%.nurs%.", ""), other types not supported in code currently. shells were too fast. ["AGM_114K"] = { range = 8000 }, --Hellfire missile ["AGM_114"] = { range = 8000 }, --Hellfire ["vikhr_m"] = { range = 10000 }, --Vikhr ATGM ["Vikhr_9M127_1"] = { range = 10000 }, --Vikhr ATGM ["AT_6"] = { range = 5000 }, --Shturm ATGM (see script for full list) Also you can configure things how you wish: local TrophyConfig = { enabled = true, --Enable/disable Trophy APS (true/false) selfExplosionSize = 1, --Explosion size near vehicle, mimicking trophy location (default: 1) explosionOffsetDistance = 2, --Launcher offset from vehicle center (default: 2 meters) weaponExplosionSize = 20, --Explosion size to destroy weapon (default: 20) detectRange = 200, --Detection range in meters (default: 200) when in detection range speed up the location checks of the weapon interceptRange = 30, --Interception range in meters (default: 30) you can reduce this to 20 to make it more realistic but the script may struggle hitting fast missiles frontRightRounds = 4, --Initial front-right launcher rounds (default: 4) backLeftRounds = 4, --Initial back-left launcher rounds (default: 4) failureChance = 0.00, --Failure chance for interception (0.0 to 1.0 0% to 100%, i.e 0.05 for 5%) debugmode = false, --Debug mode enabled What you see for the majority of the effect: Split second view (damn it DCS give us more fire) Any questions/comments/suggestions feel free to post here or message me. Trophy_Script_v1.lua

-------UPDATE 250608 Continued work on the FCS page I wasn't satisfied that the LEF indicators didn't do anything so I found a way to get them to indicate from -10 to 45 degrees just like the real jet. LEF's are tied to AoA and automated in the EFM. Relocated the new LEF indicators back to the top but keeping all left to the left and right to the right. Added a new FLAPS indicator above the SPD BRK that will indicate Normal = Green, Moving = Yellow, Down = Teal. Tested Flaps with gear and takeoff modes and all indicators are working as intended.

Yeh, prefer the old CFM. The new one is slow, frustrating, and frankly not ready for prime-time. Would have been better as a beta release. Any way to go back to the old one?

Смотря с каким сюжетом). Экспедиционные силы польских ВВС против... кто там у нас изгой вечный -иранских фундаменталистов например на карте залива это одно. И уже приевшиеся сценарии. Или все же кампания советских или ГДРовских ВВС на карте Германии холодной войны против НАТО - это другое. И чтоб без клюквы еще бы)

The problem is that you're comparing current sims with something out of your imagination. If everyone thought like this, there would be no Falcon 1, 2, 3... Flanker, Lock on...etc, because no one would buy them. You can't beat imagination, because it doesn't rely on real life practicalities. If some dev group could snatch the whole market at once from BMS, DCS and others, they would already have done so. DCS W have a ton of value for the majority of customers, or there would be no community growth throughout the last years. Demand rises as well as curiosity given the growth of content creators. Today this sim is much larger and with a lot more quality than when it has begun when the MiG-21 was the shinny new thing and the cutting edge of immersion and nowadays everyone is screaming for it to be updated.

@CrimzN Hey my friend, talking to Kandy about wrapping up the campaign. We have started a Hornet Campaign in Afghanistan. Started a thread on it today. I would like to finish up Silent Thunder, however we have been out of the Kiowa for some time. I am starting to draft the last mission and will work towards fitting in hopefully sooner than later. Just wanted those of you who followed this campaign to know it has not been forgotten.

Combat Flite was/is a great tool, its stalled development is a great loss to the community. With the release of the CWG map I haven't used it a lot anymore though, since at the outer regions of the map magnetic courses CF vs. DCS vary quite significantly, and the kneeboard maps are of limited use due to the differences between the real charts and the in-game terrain. My flight planning procedure for a MP flight in our squadron, which I do take quite serious, is to create a flight in the ME, then start the mission in SP, select the flight and visualize the route, then measure all magnetic headings and distances and jot them down, then calculate times-to-steerpoints, time-over-steerpoint depending on desired time-over-target, fuel required, and fill in a Mission Data Card manually. A very time-consuming effort, so I'd be willing to pay ED a ton of money if they sold me a fully-integrated mission planner that would do all that for me and give me the in-game terrain on my printable kneeboard charts with my route and doghouses on it, so basically everything that Combat Flite did, plus aircraft specific calculations like fuel flow, take-off and assumed landing data and so on.

They usually release it without warning.

Nope. cause the topic is Vietnam War Vessels. please be patient. I believe Admiral189 will update his Knox after he finishes the supply ship project.

1. things with no relative speed(closure rate = 0) relative speed between you and target is 0, this also means doppler effect is 0. Doppler radars are based on this doppler effect. 0 doppler effect returns are most likely noise and could not distinguish if it is returns from target or noise/error etc. So those 0 doppler shift signals are flittered out by Zero Doppler Filter(±100kts 0 closure speed) and this cannot be turned off at all. Simply, Zero Doppler is blind spot of PD radars. 2. things with no ground speed(or closure rate = my speed) These things make Doppler effect(unless Radar is not moving) unlike Q1. Returns at Clousure rate = my speed are usually returned signal of 'Main Lobe' that reflected from ground, which hinder normal detection for look down situation. These are called Main Lobe Clutter(MLC) (Image from FlyandWire, AWG-9 WCS Advanced – Part II) For look down situation, MLC is undesirable, MLC Filter will filter out those returns(±133kts 0 relative speed or closure speed=own ground speed) Notching is basically using this filtering. If target fly perpendicular to radar, it's closure speed of target will be same as ground clutters. From radar's view, it can not distinguish if it is returns from ground or target. Since amount of doppler shift is same as ground clutter(MLC) thus, filtered out by MLC Filter But if we are looking up sky, there will be no Ground clutter. That's why MLC filter is automatically turned off when looking up 3', or even RIO can manually turn off MLC filter. TLDR; Q1 is basically 'blind spot' of Doppler radars, no Doppler effects Q2 is filter for Quality of Life and this can be turned off by RIO, but has Doppler effects Some artcles by FlyandWire(Karon), which might help you understanding AWG-9 AWG-9 WCS Advanced – Part I – FlyAndWire AWG-9 WCS Advanced – Part II – FlyAndWire Detail Data Display (DDD) in Pulse Doppler mode – FlyAndWire and Another forum article.

Since we are posting in M3 section of the forum, discussing M3 product, I was referring to Japanese assets (namely armour, AAA and truck) that M3 themselves have been developing for Corsair since 2022 independently from ED and their work on Japanese assets. How ED divides their teams between projects is off topic in this thread, I don't know why you brought it up.

I'd love that. It would be a great way to highlight all the modules in the works.

There is, sort of, and it is lowest drawer UI quality-wise (unfortunately like so many of ED's recent features). In order to import drawings from one miz to the other, you can use the the 'band select tool' a.k.a multi-select (I warn again that this is quality-wise not a good experience): Here's how Select the drawings with the band selection tool (note that unlike any other band selection tool in other apps, you first have to activate the band selection mode) MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALSO INCLUDE AT LEAST ONE UNIT INTO THE SELECTION. Why? Because band selection is buggy. If you select only line drawings, nothing will be pasted. I assume that the silly anchor is required for pasting, and there is no anchor when you copy/paste line drawings only. Once you have selected the drawings (plus a unit), press ctrl-c to copy immediately open the target mission. Be advise that that mission has to have been saved before, so do not create a new unsaved mission. Open a saved one instead. Activate the Band-Select mode. Why? Because the kind folk at ED seem to have no idea of proper UI design. If you paste without activating band selection first, nothing is pasted. Silly? Stupid? Yes. Move the mouse to where you want to place the objects Press ctrl-v to paste the drawings and unit. Engage the MOVE mode inside the Multi-Select mode (yeah, a mode within a mode, another UX sin). Move the pasted line art to where you need them to be disengage move and multiselect modes Remove the unit(s). Note that if the unit was an aircraft with "start from ramp", you'll have to look for it at the nearest airfield close to the location where it would have appeared during paste. Yeah, I know... Indeed, this is bottom "quality", and there is little excuse to leave it in this abysmal state for half a year. Then again, this is DCS...

Meta link does not work very well at the moment. It is very unstable for me. It just keeps dropping out of DCS. I have moved back to using Virtual Desktop. The latest update is very good. Equal if not better than Meta link and more stable.

Thanks to all of you, Thx @Manschy, i allready have the "old" shelter door as texture so it's easy to change it, a good idea is to have maybe Hangar 6 and & 7 with the old doors and the rest with the new ones, so it's a bit of the base in it's transition. Regarding inaccuracy.. there's a waste water plant at the base located north west, close to the shelters.. i can understand that Ugra has not created the buildings or something.. ok, but not even creating the concrete ground tiles..?! just trees and thats it !!!!, They should really work with Satellite images, would be much much better. I tryed what i could to create this spot, still small parts of the KILLER HIGH GRASS is coming through... but, anyway you get it..

I have run the QAG once and I don't get it. It started with my last used PG map. I set my action options and clicked Generate. It then moved my starting and enemy postitions to completely different place on PG map, only then I was able to click Save and play. It lacks options and I find it harder than ME to use. Of course assuming knowing ME already.

I've been looking for Ace Combat related missions for some time now, but sadly there is not a whole lot of Ace Combat content in the form of missions. I've also taken a very long time before trying the mission editor, which is amazing and allows the creators to make cool missions easily. Recently I designed my first mission, although it is very simple, it is also fun. So, in order to have more Ace Combat content and also practise with the ME, I'm going to start this personal project of making Ace Combat 5 missions. As much of them as I can. This post will collect all of them in order for future reference. The game's missions will be adapted to the simulator to make them a little more realistic and they will have the soundrack in all the missions I can insert it. Due to the fact that I've still not have permission from the original soundtrack composer at day 2-Sept-2023, from now on I'll use the CC-BY 4.0 tracks made by Scott Buckley, an amazing composer that publish free to use tracks for this kind of purpose. You can check his art here: https://www.scottbuckley.com.au/ Edit: At june 9th, 2025. I contacted Bandai Namco asking for information and permission to use the original Ace Combat 5 art and they answered that, as long as what I'm creating falls under fair use (and is not monetized), they do not intend to strike it down. I think this is huge and should let me use the original soundtrack into my recreations. And so I've redacted a little fair use disclaimer I can use from now on: Feel free to comment the bugs you find, criticism or reviews are also welcome as I'm learning a lot by trial and error but learning from experienced people is way more efficient. The next list compiles the missions I've done and the ones I'm working on: Mission 1 - "Shorebirds" - For Belsimtek's F-5E - Completed. Mission 2 - "Open War" - For Belsimtek's F-5E - Completed. Mission 3 - "Narrow margin" - For Belsimtek's F-5E - Completed. Mission 4 - "First flight" - For Belsimtek's F-5E - Completed. Mission 5 - "Rendezvous" - For Magnitude 3 LLC's MiG-21bis & Persian Gulf - Completed. Mission 6 - "White bird part I" - For Magnitude 3 LLC's MiG-21bis & Sinai - Completed. Mission 7 - "Front Line" - For MiG-29S - Completed. Mission 8 - "Handful of Hope" - For Magnitude 3 LLC's MiG-21bis & Sinai - Completed. Mission 9 - "Lit Fuse" - For A-10A & Kola map - Completed. Mission 10 - "Blind Spot" - For F-15C & Kola map - Completed. Mission 11A - "Chain Reaction" - For J-11A & Syria map - Completed. Mission 11B - "Reprisal" - For Mirage 2000 & Syria map - Completed. Mission 12A - "Powder Keg" - For A-10A & Caucasus - Completed. Mission 12B - "Four Horsemen" - For A-10A & Caucasus - Completed. Mission 13 - "Demons of Razgriz" - For J-11A & Kola Map - Completed. Mission 14 - "Ice Cage" - For J-11A & Kola - Completed. Mission 15 - "White Noise" - For Belsimtek F-5E & Kola (extra version for Heatblur's F-4E) - Completed. Mission 16A/B - On hiatus because of the insane work it will take. I preffer to work in the rest of the missions, which are way simpler in the term of number of dialogue lines. Mission 17 - "Journey Home" - For F-15C and Sinai - Completed. Mission 18 - "Fortress" - For A-10A & Kola - Completed. Mission 18+ -"8492" - For A-10A & Kola - Completed. Mission 19 - "Final Option" - For VNAO T-45C Goshawk (extra version for FC2024 Sabre)- Completed. Mission 20 - "Ancient Walls" - For Su-33 & The Channel - Completed. Mission 21 - "Solitaire" - For Magnitude 3 LLC's MiG-21bis & Kola - Completed. Mission 22 - "Closure" - For F-18C & Kola Mission 23 - "Ghosts of Razgriz" - For ?? & Kola Mission 24 - "The White Bird Part II" - For ?? & Marianas Mission 25 - "Heartbreak One" - For ?? & ?? Mission 26 - "Sea of Chaos" - For F-18C & ?? Mission 27 - "Aces" - For F-18C & ?? Mission 28 - "The Unsung War" - For ??? & ??? Additionally, I made this compilation of missions 1 to 4 for FC2024 F-5E

Всем привет, это тема, посвященная разработке мода Ка-52 для DCS. Присоединяйтесь в Дискорд, новые скриншоты разработки каждый день. Также требуется помощь в разработке мода. Канал Дискорд: https://discord.gg/BwGZE8VEQg --------- Hello everyone, this is a topic dedicated to the development of the Ka-52 mod for DCS. Join the Discord, new screenshots of the development every day. You also need help developing a mod. Discord Channel: https://discord.gg/BwGZE8VEQg

I’ve heard that most DCS players focus on single-player. My own experience is mostly MP, where community contributions are essential — hosted servers, mission design, scripting tools like MOOSE/MIST, SRS, Overlordbot, and the list goes on... It’s made me wonder: is my reliance on community-created content typical, or am I in a niche? This poll is a way to gauge how much of the DCS experience really depends on volunteer and community input — whether it’s essential, just a bonus, or barely needed. Even in single-player, many missions and tools come from the community, so the impact may be larger than it appears. I’m curious where others stand. Feel free to share thoughts in the comments as well. Obviously if you play multiplayer, unless you're hosting your own server and creating your own missions without any third-party tools, you are relying on community contributions such as the hoster - but I don't know how much of an impact this has if the majority of players are SP as I've been told...

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.

Can we please have the old Fast Mission generator bck please? It worked well, and I'm far from the only one that wants it back. I can understand that the QAG is streamlined in a way to benefit content creators etc, understandable but is there any reason why they can't both be in the game or aren't the players seen as important to ED? It sure seems that way atm.

Using BLUFOR/REDFOR factions overrides the country-specific limitations FWIW and let you see all liveries for either "side".

@Ronin_Gaijin Has a pretty big squadron that all share a pretty deep love for the Mig29

nullCurrently working on several skin packs for 3SQN RNZAF.

Это все хорошо,сам некоторые пункты соблюдаю,но когда стоимость модуля от 6 тыс и для запуска нужно постоянно танцевать с бубном на столе,как то странно выглядит...

I’ve gotten ‘er up to 1.8 with the pylons in a dive to 25k ft. She’ll probably do 2.0, but I backed off after seeing the intake duct temp light come on.

Ой, соррян, конечно реверс внешних ))

Now available in DCS user files. Enjoy!

Hey guys! I thought I'd post the link to the video where Longshot did an interview with me.

This last message was about the Mig-29A. I am asking this basic feature for the Mig-29A. Dont understand how this can be offtopic Regards

an episode from the closed alpha test of the beta version of the mod)))

I thought this fix would be in the changelog, but it isn't indeed. And since this bug thread was locked, I couldn't announce the good news. For a short period of time, we testers were allowed to review the upcoming changelog in order to add what was missing. I'll ask the team if they can do it again because it was efficient.