Leaderboard

Hi dear fellows, Take command of the legendary Mi-24P Hind in DCS World and relive the opening strikes of the Soviet-Afghan War in this 12-mission campaign. Built exclusively for the Mi-24P. NO you cannot set another chopper! Afghanistan Map. Missions are drawn from real December 1979 operations, delivering authentic Soviet assault tactics and ruthless resistance. Your AI wingman follows orders (mostly), but survival depends on your skill Russian Voices, English Subtitles Full documentation on kneeboard + pdf The invasion begins. Will you dominate the skies—or become another casualty of the mountains? Download here : https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3345622/ Cheers! DGGOOFY

I unpacked and connected the Super last night. It took a while to get it working with DCS (I forgot to disable Openxr Toolkit). First impressions are very good, the FOV is significantly larger than on the G2, I don't really need the necksafer software anymore to look behind me. The resolution is brutally good, both in air combat but especially when detecting ground targets, it's worlds apart from the G2. When I fly over a city, I can see every vehicle and person without having to search for long. I couldn't detect any effects such as mura or other problems at all. Performance is surprisingly good. With ‘only’ a 4090, I was worried that I would reach the limits here. Currently running at 72 FPS, which is mostly maintained, only dropping when starting a mission with many aircraft. But I haven't adjusted or optimised anything yet, I'll do that in the next few days (also with the goal of reaching 90 FPS). Anyone who, like me, was very concerned about what to expect and, especially as a new Pimax customer, might be disappointed, I can reassure you that the Super works flawlessly and offers really high quality right out of the box, which can certainly be further improved with settings. The only thing I'm struggling with is room tracking, but that's because of my Simpit with a large cockpit on a motion platform, which the Super has to ignore and orient itself exclusively to the room, as the cockpit is moving. This is a special configuration that probably doesn't apply to 99.9% of users. I'm trying to solve this with better room lighting...

Something´s jammed in there Bob...

I like how much quicker the QAG loads now. It's not perfect, but its better. One of the things I'd like to see changed is how missions end. Please let us end it ourselves instead of 3 seconds after the last target dies. I sometimes want to fly home and land. Please make that an option. Thanks.

Hey ED, why is X / Y / Z not working / buggy / not implemented / etc.... LOL, I get your excitement, I've been waiting years since "Simon spilled the beans" and need to wait a bit more.

Thanks for pointing to that Video. Yep, I see 1/1 as well and it looks a bit stupid...but if it is 1/1... I guess it is 1/1. Spool-times feel quick, but the throttle hand is a bit behind the Pilot. But you are right, even if there is some spooling-lag it is less then we have now. Both things will be corrected in the next Version

This, among other things, is why I don't use the QAG. I like to complete my mission on the ground, not on a timer.

I think it should be quite possible to calculate RCS dynamically on configuration change. Algorithms are out there, and they don't have to be real time, nobody cares if the RCS updates a few miliseconds after the plane drops its payload.

There is a VSD (Vertical Situation Display) page in the F-35 which will actually show your ownship RCS in real time in relation to threats, as knowing your ownship RCS characteristics is pretty pretty important for stealth based tactics and remaining undetected. With the current RCS implementation in DCS where it's basically just a flat value, the F-35 in particular will either be given a very low RCS value and be undetectable at a lot of distances and aspects where it shouldn't be, or it'll be given a higher RCS value and be detectable at distances and aspects it shouldn't be. This is why DCS needs a polar RCS model, where aircraft will actually have different RCS depending on aspect, both for stealth and non-stealth aircraft, and you can find tonnes of studies online on RCS and aspect, with both experimental and simulated tests on many different airframes, which can be used as a starting point. For example, in a combat scenario where the enemy has multiple aircraft coming at an F-35 from many different directions, where they might have multiple ground based air search radars in different locations, especially when information is shared between these assets via datalink, it might actually make it quite difficult or even impossible for an F-35 to operate undetected and greatly decrease its advantage against inferior aircraft, leveling the playing field. A DCS F-35 pilot would actually have to use planning, tactics and pick his battles in order to retain all the advantages that stealth provides. Without proper RCS modelling in DCS, the F-35 will probably just steamroll everything in every single scenario regardless of the skill and tactics of its pilot. You can see the VSD in action in Military History Visualized's video where he flies an F-35 simulator at some airshow: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88vCjQ8fCb0 Normal configuration: During missile launch with weapon bay doors open:

I hope we can share a more definite date with you all soon, and then we will try our best to get it on steam store also. thank you

If i said this is my favourite DCS project ever i would not lie....

Thanks to everybody... I'm back at it.. yea i first thought it was a storage shelter but figured it was/is an QRA Shelter... @Manschy Started working on this area.. guess its a repair workhshop or some.. i don't know.. other important building which is of course not modeled....

I have reported the issue to the team

first non-Spanish aircraft

I have tested the "CD Rel" force trim and it works great, I want to thank all members who helped me in this thread! Cheers and a huge tumbs up!

The museum I linked in my OP was very nice. Definitely worth visiting if you're in the neighborhood. Many different Mirage versions (even a Mirage IV), Jaguars, MiG-21 and 23, A-4, and lots more. The even have an airworthy Bronco! (which they were so kind to let me sit in). A full fidelity versiob of this thing would be awesome for DCS (I know about the unofficial mod). (Boys with toys )

just gotta say, as most do i guess, just jumped in on a runway start, didnt need instruction, its so easy to take off and land, apart from the sort of constant trim needed, bombing, hit stuff, mavericks which are usually a pain for me, 4 out of 6, really nice module, very pleased with purchase :). only thing i will ask but early stage yet, is i never see my radar with much clutter, ground etc, seems to stay pretty clear. thanks heatblur sorry did just look as i done this on my phone, thread was meant for the phantom

Works just fine in Brave browser - ignore the colours: I have my monitor in HDR mode and the windows screenshots tool doesn't support HDR. Also, this should have been posted here instead: https://forum.dcs.world/forum/61-forum-and-site-issues/

Not only infinite looping They fly at 360 knots with dead engines

Oh no, we seem to have started down the game / simulation rabbit hole. DCS is a simulation game, a sandbox, for entertainment purposes.

@currenthill：to tell you the truth ,after you return to creat these assets ,I am alive again .

Destroying bridges does not stop vehicles. Trains sail across and vehicles climb down the embankment and run across the water. Pretty sure no trains are ever effected. Some vehicles "might" get stopped...however in temp7 I manually drove the vehicle and it got stuck half way and died..but the AI managed ok. temp6.trk temp7.trk

Hi there. Great that you like it :-) Regarding the small engine-gauge I have tried to look it up in the manual, but did not find anything whether it shows 1/10 or 1/1 %. Just looking at the moving speed of it and comparing it e.g. to the Mirage F-1 I would rather think 0.1 is right so 1/10 to 10/10 of 1% (one complete 360° turn meaning 1%), but I can't say it has to ber one or the other. Regarding spool-speeds: We have been conducting spol tests with a wider audiance, one of them being a former CF-104 Pilot. The Spool-Speeds that were final were the ones the majority said to represent an early J79 engine best. I will, however, ping our CF-104 Pilot again to recheck it and if I "detuned" it further by accident or wrong info will get it to more consistent spool-times for the next update. Yep, you are right. It should achieve 720°/s but should be limited in that speed to two full roles due to inertial-coupling. The other F-104 Pilot I pinged said, that the "out of plane" rolling was not pleasent in the second roll and got a lot worse if you tried a third. Of course, roll-rate worsened by the nose going "out of plane". I found that the manual said to keep it to one full quick aileron roll, pause, and do it again to prevent the nose going out of the plane. I will test and get it to that rolling-speeds and will check the "special roll ability" as well for the next update. A shaker sound is alread implemented, but will set in earlier in the next version. Stick-Kicker is not really doable. Of course I could make the plane give a big "nose-down-punch" when getting to close to the AoA-Limit, but that will feel quite weird, since the stick will be held back, while the plane pitches forward. Sadly I have no better idea to implement it a.t.m....may be I will have an idea and can make it "feel" right...but I think that would need force-feedback-sticks, which are not that common nowadays. Ah, and I forgot: Yes, lift is to high and drag is to low right now. Have been tweaking and tuning it a lot lately and getting better results. Everything in the next Version ;-) Yep. It had a lot too much lift in the slow-speed-regime. Will be corrected in the next version. That will lead to a more natural AoA on approach...it will be a bit more challenging to fly a good overhead-break as well, though ;-) Ah, and you'll need to use "PTT Radio 1" to talk to anything in the air ;-)

Hello, I finally finished the ACM. I used TS90MD servos to avoid screens as much as possible. ACM.mp4

Currently, the Corsair's guns can be set to harmonize in a range between 300 - 500 meters. The US wouldn't have used meters for measuring range when boresighting, and these ranges also don't fall under what the ranges used by the Americans, being much longer. The US typically used convergence ranges between 500ft and 1000ft (Wikipedia cites works by Colgan, Bergerud, and Nijboer giving ranges of 500ft, 750ft, 900ft, and 1000ft, though I don't have the referenced books to confirm the data). According to Hammell (also cited in Wiki. I have that book, Aces Against Japan, but I don't know where my copy is off-hand) at least one Marine squadron centered the guns of their Corsairs as short as 300ft. I've seen charts for the P-47 with ranges as far as 1200ft. Well short of 500m. I have found one harmonization chart specifically for the F4U, though I can't read any of the ranges given: Regardless, the ranging ought to be given in yards or feet, and the range of convergence points for each gun should be brought in much closer.

Hey YoYo, just wanted to give you a huge thank you. There's not too many people in this world who would so selflessly give their time to give something back to a hobbyist community such as this. I'm just super impressed by you.

Looking at your signature, I’d never guess!

I presume a Wags video showcasing some of the systems in the Mig29A would pacify the crowd a bit. With the module on pre-purchase for almost 2 months now, with no updates everybody is getting impatient.

I’ve been looking for a trim box. Can you share what you have? … and to the OP, yeah, constant trimming is required in warbirds. Set your throttle and RPM and try to leave it there and fly the same airspeed when cruising around. Of course, maneuvering, evading, etc, will required you to do drastic things and then you’ll have to pay attention to sideslip. Any change to airspeed, RPM, manifold, or aircraft weight (yes you are constantly burning fuel), will require new trim settings.

Cheers Scoobs, just reposting that to save you having to chop it out to add more

I agree with this too. A checkbox to 'tie' the sea state to the wind exactly as we have it now in the sim. With the box not checked, the mission creator would be able to adjust sea state values and direction as someone posted a mockup here in the thread. I'd just add the checkbox and with it being defaulted to ON/Checked to not break any mission or campaign somewhere. (if that's how it works, I have no idea) The weather system in DCS is not realistic at the current moment, so it wouldn't hurt to implement these if it is simple enough to add flavor and most importantly to avoid glassy sea on low wind speeds on servers if the server intent were to avoid high wind but still have something for pilots to see the water surface.

threads merged

We need to get past this copy paste response Bignewy - I wouldn't post a message if i had Mod's running or if i'd not already done a repair to test first. Not everything needs a log or track file. The issue is not my PC, or mods, or anything else apart from game resolution (i normally fly in VR so dont have monitor setup at 1440 as pointless). If the weapons table is too long to display in 1080, then you cannot select the weapons on the bottom of the weapons table (aks GBU10, 24,MK84 Air etc) You can test this yourself on the F4 module with station 2 and 8. The issue is very much an ED issue, not Heatblur, as Heatblur themselves have indicated in the above response. DCS needs to have a scrollbar in the weaspons table, as pure and simple as that. Please submit to the dev team.

Remember that both the F-35 and other fighters (this mechanic should be applied across the board) can also have external stores. Flight control position won't really matter, but external stores would, both pylons, racks and actual weapons all have their own RCS.

This person isn't just asking about the R-77. He also wants the Mig-29A to be able to use this missile for game balance reasons. And he claims, without providing any evidence to back this up, that export variants of the Mig-29A can use the R-77. He also claims that the FF Mig-29A has no ability to BVR at the same level as any BLUE plane. This statement isn't true. Sure, for example, against an FA-18C/F-16C with Aim-120 it looks bad. Or against an F-14 with Aim-54. That makes it (very) difficult. But what about against an M2k, for example, or an FA-18/F-14/F-4 with Aim-7s? With the KA-50, there was an outcry that you could suddenly carry Iglas, and also regarding its MWR. Or with the F-35, there were/are voices complaining about the correct implementation, as the relevant sources are apparently under lock and key. And here with the Mig-29A, some kind of fantasy weaponry is supposed to be allowed due to game balance? That just doesn't add up. Or am I missing something here? Especially since ED claims to be a realistic simulation.

Harrier is unique , we really need to start encouraging Heatblur to build us a replacement for when the Razbam module becomes un usable , preferably a Gr3/Frs1 vairiant..

That depends on the module's radar implementation. Afaik F-15E and M-2000C have aspect-based RCS implemented. Idk about stores' RCS or roll angle dependance.

I did a bit of testing when the F-4 came out and came to the conclusion that the biggest issue isn't really Jester's ability, so much that using him effectively requires brainpower from the front seater that in many cases is better spent elsewhere. Jester can be effective IF you understand the Radar well enough to put the airplane in an optimum position (situation permitting), have developed your own little tactics to make use of these advantages, and understand/have practiced enough with the Jester commands to know when and how to ask him to do what you want. This mainly revolves around positioning for lookup & using the right radar elevation command to put the bandit in the search cone (this requires AWACS telling you bandit altitude, Mental math/guesstimation , and a somewhat cooperative bandit who doesn't change altitude regularly.... With contrails something like STAB OUT would be easier). Once you ask him to lock its also important to fly straight and level while he moves the cursor around and establishes the lock. If you don't do this he is much more likely to lock ground clutter (which would happen to a human too). I usually put him in Narrow Scan mode too for a faster update rate. On the subject of Aspect: I can't help but feel that anything other than a head to head intercept is all that common in DCS. The AI is all knowing and will fly right at you no matter how sneaky you are, and in MP players have either magic RWR's or the All knowing EWR report function common on Cold War servers. The most likely scenario is that you will be flying head on with the MiGs. Against a MiG-21 the detection range is about 15 NM head on, which at 1200 Vc means about 45-60s between first detection and the merge. Here's where the problems lie IMO: 1. Interacting with Jester is slower than doing things yourself in a single seat airplane. This is ofc because jester is rightfully simulated as a human being and not a Robot. This isn't really an "issue" on its own, but just a reality of the Phantom. When combined with #2 however it becomes a limiting factor in achieving forward quarter shots before the merge. A Human WSO with decent situational awareness is probably faster in these situations too. 2. Last time I flew (which was admittedly a few updates ago) Jester wasn't really capable of diagnosing and correcting a false/bad lock on his own. This means that you have to spend even more brainpower looking at the screen to validate the lock, and then alot of time asking him to unlock, and re-lock. This process generally takes long enough that you are still trying to lock a 2nd time as you blow past each other in the merge. Jester also likes to set the Gain really high and takes a bit longer to tune it down and filter out contacts than a good human would. This can also make filtering clutter and achieving a lock take longer. All of this time you are spending sucked into the radar screen and mashing buttons on the jester wheel (or trying to pronounce things properly for Voice attack) instead of looking out the window. The result is usually hitting the merge with 0 situational awareness, which is a recipe for disaster. In my experience you are better off either ignoring sparrows altogether, or taking whatever lock you get, shooting and hope for the best, but continue to the merge with the attitude that it was a miss. Even with a perfect lock the Sparrows fuzing etc isn't so reliable that they are 100% reliable anyway. The best compromise I came up with was to try for a BVR/Forward quarter shot initially, but at the latest once you hit 5NM ignore jester and the radar screen and look out the window instead. This gives you a chance of spotting missile trails, additional bandits, or to maneuver the airplane at the last minute so you can hit the merge with an advantage for the ensuing dogfight. Given Sparrows are 500lbs each its probably even worth shooting them without a lock just as a bluff to make the bandit evade etc. Being 500-1000lbs lighter will definitely help you in the WVR arena. Alternatively you can try CAA mode or Boresight. CAA's 5 NM limit means you are generally very short on time to lock, wait 4s and shoot, and it also likes to lock ground clutter quite a bit. Boresight works decently well if you can see the target at longer ranges (although that's technically not BVR anymore). At low altitudes or in look down situations (have you ever seen anyone in a cold war MP server fly higher than 500 ft?) BVR locks aren't Alot of this is mostly just the limits of the Phantom, not really caused by Jester. A really good Human WSO is probably better/faster, and would require less handholding, but the basic problems will remain the same. Maybe when HB releases the F-4J with the fancy PD modes

If possible BAP100 and BAT-120 would be cool: {30_6_M2_12xBAT120} or {30_6_M2_12xBAP100} definitions are already in aicraftweaponspack, should be super easy add them in the support list for F1, for internal pylons and centerline

My favourite aviation historian of late is Thomas McKelvey Cleaver, he has an a like 6 or 7 book series on the Pacific war. From Pearl Harbour to the end. With books covering the beginning, middle and end. He has his own book for the South Pacific from Guadalcanal to the pacification of Rabaul. The last book in the series cover the home islands and the last campaign on Japan proper. And does cover and give credit to the FAA and Royal navy. He uses sources from all combatants, his books on Korea kills a few scared cows, he's not one to let his nationality dictate. And he used American, North Korean, Chinese and soviet sources. And his Korea book dealing with the Navy again gives due credit to the royal navy and FAA.

you could ask for the list of mods they have installed

Most of such reports are actually more down to people understanding the radar. What it is, how to use it effectively, what its limitations are. As in, if you would fly with a human WSO, you would likely run into the same issues. Especially when it is about getting contacts on the screen, there is little that the WSO can contribute to that. This is mostly a pilots job of placing the aircraft correctly. A few things to consider: Establish a look-up attitude, not look-down, ideally also not co-alt. Approach targets from the side, not front, to increase the RCS. Dont place targets around clutter, know the terrain. Dont place targets at a distance equal to your altitude. Dont expect unrealistic spotting distances - for a fighter you can expect to get them on screen between 10 and 20nm if you did it well. For large targets 25-40nm. This isnt really "BVR". If all stars align you get the chance to shoot maybe one Sparrow before you are already in Sidewinder/Guns range (in particular since the Sparrow needs a few seconds before it can be launched). Practice practice practice. If you cant get them on screen before you see them visually, switch to a visual mode instead. For example (regular) Boresight or (CAGE) Boresight, put the target on the nose and hit the Jester Context key so he can lock the target that way. This will be your main tool to lock targets that are in visual distance (~10nm or closer).

Hi, no news about it unfortunately.

BAP-100 and BAT-120 added, will be available to the public in one of the next updates.

Nope, this is the former QRA area where always 2 ready-to-fly Lightnings were waiting armed for some enemy visit in the 60s... Already been built from Ghostrida... So "storage shelter" is also not quite correct ..... Not until the Harriers arrived in 1977, this building was used indeed as a kind of maintenance and support building from the mid 80s on. Made this also for P3D in the 80s era...Just as a detail how it did look those days...

I guess it would be a fine addition, might even go well in the Afghanistan map