Leaderboard

Su-22M4 Mod Information and Progress - August 2025, Su-22M4 is an FC3 based, free mod of a legendary export variant of Su-17 attack aircraft, It is in FC3 fidelity with a lot of the cockpit being clickable as well as some basic system implementation. These include: - Cold Start Procedure - Generators, Pumps, APU, Gyro spool up, - In cockpit lighting - dimmable flood lights as well as warning lights with master caution reset, - RWR turn on/off with volume and brigtness controll, - Weapon control panel - ripple quantity, interval, master arm, - Basic SAU Channels (autopilot), - Wing Sweep Controll (only cosmetic for now, no effect on flight characterisitcs), CWS like in Su-30 is planned, this will allow for CRT display being usable for TV munition seeker view (Su-22 didnt have TGP). No estimates on that, first version will be released with Su-25A avionics. I choose them because it uses identical targeting system and gunsight as Su-22. It will use modified Su-27 Flight Model. Su-22M4 will require Su-25A and Su-27 modules Mod progress (august 2025) What is done: - External 3d model with animations, minor details might be changed, - Remove Before Flight Covers, - Liveries (almost 90 from a lot of Su-22 users, around 50 Polish AF), - Pylons with assigned weapons that can be carried on them, - Cockpit 3d model with basic gauges animated, - In cockpit clickables: Engine Control, System Power, Main Power Panel, Weapon Control Panel,Avionics Power, NWS, Taxi/Takeoff lights, - Wing Sweep Control - 3 Positions: 30, 45 and 63 Degrees, - External Lighting and Cockpit warning lights., - In-cockpit sound system with custom sounds - battery, pumps, gyro, apu, launch tone, - Wallpapers, Icons and stuff - Simple damage model What needs to be done before release: - As much in cockpit clickability as possible with modelling systems even with fc3 limitations - Bounding keybind presses to in-cockpit switches and buttons (so they animate properly) - KKR-1 recon pod (cosmetic only) - Wyuga ELINT pod, and maybe a way to correclty target ARM with Su-25A avionics, or at least making it look legit. - Loadouts - Multiplayer Synchronisation Estimated Release Date: Fourth Quarter of 2025

Internal and External Lighting almost done

Помимо любителей воевать, присутствуют ещё и любители просто летать и общаться с техникой. И ни один другой симулятор не сравнится в этих аспектах с DCS. Я вот обожаю процедуры, рутинные операции, выдерживание точных параметров полета, посадки в СМУ, отклик техники на мои действия и т.д. Боевая составляющая почти совсем неинтересна (хотя иногда и неплохо, что она есть). Для таких, как я, C-130 очень интересен. Особенно с учётом функции лоад-мастера. И мне бы хотелось, чтобы в DCS и дальше появлялись транспортные и другие небоевые аппараты. Спасательные или поисковые, например. Даже некоторые гражданские не помешали бы. Наоборот, даже украсили симулятор. И привлекли бы новых пользователей. Некоторые любители вертолетов пришли из гражданских симуляторов в DCS только из-за самой реалистичной физики, в не из-за возможности пострелять. Так что мнения о целесообразности модуля C-130 очень разнообразны и субъективны. Не надо категоричности.

The free Currenthill assets:

Not a problem, you can also go enjoy dynamic foveated rendering with DCS in your PSVR2 with the release of Bnuuy's PSVR2Toolkit, which can be used in conjunction with Quad-Views-Foveated in DCS! Anywhere you go, you can't get rid of me

Red Star Simulations (MiG-17F):

Hi. just to share a simple way to point Shkval at a known target in mountain areas,some of u may already known,but in case u don't 1. A known target,u need to know it's coordinates and elevation(in this case,the target(actually a friendly LAV25)is at 579m) 2.Enter it via PVI-800,as a target point,and select it via PVI-800.(note PVI800 uses Lat Long Decimal Minutes format,u can use LALT+Y to change the coordinates format displayed on the F10 map) 3.check ur local QNH,ur can check briefing in most case,but if the mission is using dynamic weather,u may want to find it urself.(ie.landing on a place which elevation is known,and set cockpit altimeter to match the ground elevation,then the altimeter pressure setting will be ur QNH) 4.use any calculator(u can find a lot via google),input target elevation and QNH(lines), convert them into target QFE (circle) (meter and mmHg is used for ka50) 5.Input the target QFE in ur cockpit altimeter 6.!!!!!!FLY ABOVE 300 METERS AGL!!!!! (VERY IMPORTENT,since when above 300m AGL the yellow Shkval LOS line drawn on the ABRIS will use cockpit altimeter as the altitude reference,when below 300m AGL,radar altimeter reading will be used,u won't want that unless the terrain is perfectly flat,in that case just starting from step7) 7.uncage Shkval,since u can't enter altitude via PVI800,it will point at mean sea level,the target is lined up only horizontally,u need to adjust on vertical direction by urself. 8.focus on the ABRIS,adjust Shkval vertically,until the end of "yellow Shkval LOS line" is merged with the "blue target box",DON'T use laser rangefinder through out the whole process. 9.Bingo.(note the more altitude difference between u and the target,the more accurate it will be,also there will be some heading error due to INS drift) also after u have found the target u can use range finder to make Shkval LOS fixed at it's position.

Fact is that development of the CH-47 is going very slow.

null

Further adjustment of wheel heights and compression: Also, added the missing part and positioned it in proper place: @YoYo I know its probably still not 100% correct, but is this good enough?

От тебя, о светило, очень много нехороших слов поступает, гораздо больше всех вместе взятых в твой адрес. Попробую дать ответ ещё раз: прочитай короткую заметку об известных проблемах с ливреями (в том числе Ми-28) на русском языке в новостном разделе сайта, списки изменений. А потом проведи повторную оценку адекватности и порядочности своего первоначального вопроса про пропавшие звезды.

Hey! Check my FAQ: Q3: Will the new core assets conflict with the Currenthill mod pack assets? A3: No. All new core assets have unique names and will therefore not conflict with the Currenthill mod pack assets.

Cargo System Update We are working on additional features for the logistics and cargo in DCS World. With the DCS: CH-47F Early Access we are making available parts of new system: - Dynamic cargo - Internal cargo loading Details about them are below. We are eager to see feedback from the community and adjust them further. Currently these features are available in CH-47F, but we are planning to add them in other DCS World transport capable modules. We are also working on dynamic FARP, “Fat Cow” and improved groups transport concepts. Setting up mission environment for dynamic cargo A warehouse serving resources as dynamic cargo is a WIP feature. In order to avoid it affecting the already established environment of the multiplayer servers we are making it adjustable and optional for each warehouse and OFF by default for now. It will allow a more graceful introduction of it in multiplayer. Before you can use dynamic cargo near warehouse you need to setup this warehouse in mission editor to allow take resources dynamically and pack them in cargos. This is simple process. In Mission Editor click on the airfield or FARP or Carrier for which you want to activate dynamic cargo resources availability and then click on “Full Info” at the right-side bar: Then you will see warehouse parameters window: After that save and play mission and warehouses where this parameter was activated will allow to spawn cargo dynamically with resources taken directly from warehouse. Let’s look at the process of spawning dynamic cargo on DCS: CH-47F example. Transporting Cargo Internally When loading or unloading cargo with the DCS: CH-47F, ensure the tail ramp has been fully deployed to include the ramp extensions. If the tail ramp is already deployed to the ground, an additional command [LShift-G] to lower the ramp will deploy the ramp extensions. · Stage 1. Ramp raised; cargo door (ramp “tongue”) deployed from tail ramp to enclose the aft cabin. · Stage 2. Ramp raised; cargo door retracted. · Stage 3. Ramp partially lowered, parallel to fuselage. · Stage 4. Ramp fully lowered to the ground. · Stage 5. Ramp fully lowered to the ground; ramp extensions deployed. Options for loading and unloading cargo are accessed via the Rearming and Refueling Window [LAlt + ‘]. The Cargo LOAD button is displayed on the left side and the Cargo UNLOAD button is displayed on the right side. Left-clicking these buttons will display the corresponding LOAD CARGO or UNLOAD CARGO panels respectively. Each panel provides an interface for interacting with the internal cargo loading capability of the CH-47F. The Cargo Resources button on the LOAD CARGO panel accesses the local warehouse functions. Spawning Dynamic Cargo If the warehouse near your aircraft has Dynamic Cargo activated, then you can pack and spawn resources from that warehouse into new cargo assets that will appear near your aircraft. Press “+” button to start filling parameters for the new cargo. A cargo resources window will open where you will be able to choose which resources you want to take from that warehouse and pack them into cargo. You can choose cargo 3D model appearance and name. By default, cargo names already include user callsign and timestamp for time of creation. Currently there are limits on qty. for each resource that can be packed into single cargo, WIP we will adjust it in future and looking forward for the feedback. Loading Cargo When the LOAD CARGO panel is displayed, all cargo within 150 feet of the helicopter will be listed, based on the cargo object’s NAME entered in the Mission Editor. Any cargo object may be loaded within the CH-47F by left-clicking on the corresponding entry in the list, and then left-clicking the LOAD button at the bottom of the panel. Cargo is loaded sequentially from the front of the cabin toward the rear of the cabin. If there is a need to unload specific cargo objects prior to others, such as delivering cargo to multiple destinations during a single flight, ensure the cargo is loaded in the reverse order from which it will need to be unloaded. In the image above, four cargo objects are named Pallet 1 through 4, with Pallet 1 representing the cargo to be delivered at the first destination, and Pallet 4 representing the cargo to be delivered at the final destination. Pallet 4 is loaded first in the front of the cabin to be offloaded as the final cargo delivery, with each Pallet loaded in reverse sequence, so that Pallet 1 is loaded near the tail ramp to be offloaded as the first cargo delivery. Unloading Cargo When the UNLOAD CARGO panel is displayed, all cargo within the helicopter will be listed, based on the cargo object’s NAME entered in the Mission Editor. All cargo will be shown in the list from front to back, with the final entry in the list highlighted, representing the first and only cargo object that can be unloaded. To unload the highlighted cargo object, left-click the UNLOAD button at the bottom of the panel. When unloaded, cargo objects will be placed on the ground approximately 70 feet directly behind the helicopter. If cargoes are unloaded near warehouse and cargoes contain any warehouse resources they will be automatically added to that warehouse.

I had a thought, by the way, that ASC deserves a lot of praise anyway. After all, the model is close to release and will appear this year. And looking at some other studios that also started work in 2021/2022, you could say that ASC is Formula 1, while others haven't even given a single screenshot or video, let alone released. They certainly deserve applause for that, even though you're still in the pre-order period.

I can understand that some mates (the majority?) like USED cockpits for aircrafts addons. I for one prefer NEW cockpits because at the beginning every aircraft comes in pristine condition from the factory. I would much appreciate that every addon comes with 2 options: USED or NEW. It is probably easier for the creator to modify the source files than community modders even if there are some talents. I would even pay a reasonable fee for a new cockpit (when not available by default) for the planes I like. For some planes (eg. A-10A or A-10C) the option is available but that is seems that is an exception. In terms of art, it looks like efforts goes mostly the liveries, and less in the cockpit whilst we spend most of the time in the cockpit. Just my 2 cents...

also. DCS is arguably much slower when being scanned by AV software. if you are comfortable, you can add exceptions of DCS folders to the AV software.

It’s in there. He’s had lightning for some time now. ” To create thunderstorms: 1.) Select NOTHING from the Clouds Preset menu 2.) Configure the base altitude as desired 3.) Adjust the thickness to something between 15000-30000ft 4.) You can choose any density setting but I added six new ones. Density 11 - 16 are tweaked for thunderstorms 5.) Choose Thunderstorm or Rain from the Precptns option 6.) I recommend adding a lot of wind and turbulence as well 7.) Experiment with settings to get the look you want and enjoy!

The EA manual is being updated and will be available when fully finshed

Disable hyper threading and try it again. ED broke hyperthreading support (again) a few updates ago.

I suspect it's something like Auto Rudder. Something that's supposed to help, but actually just gets in the way. In every module where I have "Auto" associated with rudder, I immediately disable it.

Ukrainian Mig-29 with R-27P/EP nullnullnullnull

I know many of you are probably already aware of this but just in case some other poor sod runs into this here was my solution (I spent way too much time on this) : Problem: I have a new high end machine and play in VR (see specs below). The frame rate was fantastic but the graphics were jittery and spikey. This would happen a bit in the first mission I would fly but if I did another mission it started to go crazy. Solution: Turn on Vsync in the DCS settings Machine specs: 5090, Ultra 9 285K, 64GB, 4TB NVMe SSD, Varjo Aero

I Love this Gorgeous Airplane!

Any idea if whoever designed this will work on the M model at all? The L is great, but the M is the new hotness. Perhaps even the MH-60M DAP with the LASS wings and all the new goodies on the MH versions...Or am I just too hopeful? Lol

Hope this will be fixed soon!, Really eager to use this on my missions, have already made my systems I have been playing around with this in MP (non dedicated) and seems that some field do not work yet, hope we can get these options too to make this fully integrated in the Scripting API! values extracted from warehouse file in any .miz (These seem to not work yet using coalition.addStaticObject) "unlimitedMunitions" "unlimitedAircrafts" "unlimitedFuel" The following do seem to work already for those that dont know yet : "allowHotStart" "dynamicSpawn" "dynamicCargo" So as of now you will need to manually put in all aircraft, weapons and fuel to make it so you can use the spawned helipad (As far as i know) Hope the team can do this!! @BIGNEWY

When using COM, the menu pops up shoing the name like ARC-210. It would help a lot to also show its currently tuned frequency. this makes it easier to distingushe the radio when not being familiar with the module and its radios.

Thank you! I use Paypal and Stripe, and I don't think any of them can be used in Russia.

We are trying something new with bug listing...because honestly, the Mantis Bug Tracker isn't great for us. For your viewing, we are sharing a google document with a list of bugs that we acknowledged on this forum as being looked at in some form. Our goal is to simply show in Orange highlight, that the bug and/or request has be fixed and/or implemented on our personal test build. And then highlighted green when our testers have confirmed it, to which then we will upload the fixes/requests to Eagle Dynamic's servers for further testing. This document, may evolve into a spreadsheet, but as requested by the Devs, it's in a doc for now. Some bugs may have been fixed already, but we'll be double checking. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aOrQR8opRdUnNfK9aAFfXnRZUB6IGGDSYP5xXOkk9Jw ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Мы пробуем что-то новое в области отображения ошибок... потому что, честно говоря, Mantis Error Tracker нам не очень подходит. Для вашего ознакомления мы делимся документом Google со списком ошибок, которые, как мы отметили на этом форуме, в той или иной форме рассматриваются. Наша цель — просто выделить оранжевым цветом, что ошибка и/или запрос исправлены и/или реализованы в нашей тестовой сборке. А затем, когда наши тестировщики это подтвердят, они будут подсвечены зелёным цветом. После этого мы загрузим исправления/запросы на серверы Eagle Dynamics для дальнейшего тестирования. Этот документ может превратиться в электронную таблицу, но, по просьбе разработчиков, пока он представлен в виде документа. Некоторые ошибки, возможно, уже исправлены, но мы будем их перепроверять.

I just don’t think it is good business. There are no “boundaries” to ED’s early access model. Does the pace of development so far on the Chinook incline you to believe someone works on developing the module full time, or that someone tinkers with it here and there? Add to it the fact that with every module released, ED has a growing base of modules to constantly maintain with each update… an exponential amount of work that they effectively no longer collect revenue on, but must make sure continue to function. Unsustainable business model aside, the open-ended early access with glacial progress (if any meaningful progress at all) and no ability on behalf of ED to provide guidance on some kind of timeline to when the module will have some basic features has soured me on the whole thing. I’m spending more time with other sims and hobbies. It Is simply not much fun to wallow around the sky in a half-working Chinook that has barely changed since it’s undercooked launch day a year ago.

Quite frankly, this is the wrong variant to be dogfighting F-14 Tomcats in

While I agree with you on the state of EA of ED modules, let me play a bit of devil's advocate here, since I think a part of the community has some blame here too. When the F-18 launched in EA, ED's plan (as per Wags - and I'm going off memory here so I'll be paraphrasing) for Early Access was to release a module with the basics functioning, at a point where everything that would be needed for a RL young pilot to start training on the type would be there, and then develop weapon systems and advanced avionics as time progresses - in the order it would be presented to a new RL pilot. But then came the community and they complained they couldn't blow stuff up... My personal priority for early access would be 'aviate-navigate-communicate': have a good flight model at EA launch that only needs minor adjustments, have all the navigation tools working (at least TACAN, ADF, manual waypoint/flightplan creation, etc), and have the radios in working order. I really don't care about weapon systems at that stage: I want to practice take-off and landings, fly the pattern, get used to the in-flight behaviour, do some in-flight refuelling (if available in that model), do some basic navigation and free flights. There are plenty of other modules available to please those who want to "blow stuff up" in the meantime (though that was less so when the F-18 first launched). Part of the community wants everything to work properly on day 1 so they can do their Rambo-style "you and what army?" scenarios immediately. And as a result you have the module released in a half-baked state with a lot of systems sort-of working, sometimes, on a good day unless there's a full moon and Mercury is in retrograde - and the community starts complaining again... That, and a lot of people expect every module to be as detailed and in-depth as the A-10, and for some reason only ED knows, that is not the case (not possible?). While ED claims to have a "standard" for EA and post-EA, when every module has a different "standard", clearly the word "standard" means something different for ED than it does for a lot of the community. So here we are... And the more modules there are in EA at any one time, the larger this problem becomes as it becomes a juggling exercise for ED... Do I like this? Nope, but I'm part of an old-school minority and I suppose from a business point of view you can't blame ED for trying to please a larger part of the community so they can keep their finances in order...

(Ignore the rear main wheel that all of the sudden started rotating weirdly lol, already fixed that) front land gear 22.mp4

Not sure abut that one, when all the DCS video'fluencers are basicly flying the Lightning design-mission: Take off in severe clear wether, with too little fuel to "increase performance", kill a couple of dudes in epic high-angle-off gun-engagements and then crash while trying to land ("...haven't read that page of the book yet..."). The EEL's the perfect jet for those fellas.

Dear all, we have cleaned this thread. For now, this thread will remain locked as it has become more work than it needs to be. Currently, we have generally the same 10 or so people debating different things releated or unrelated to this topic. It ends up in angry people, warnings and misunderstandings. When there is something new, it will be added to the 1st post in this thread. If it's something that needs discussion, we will consider opening this thread. Any new threads opened on this topic will be removed. If you have questions about items in the 1st post here, you can send us a DM. Thanks. The ED Team.

Glad to hear you're persevering! Are we still years away from actually getting to fly it in DCS? Is there any sort of timeline at all at the current pace of development? The Cold War Germany map is not complete without the Bo-105! Looking forward to it irrespective of how long it takes

I currently have a QPro and thinking about the Super. I have a 8kx shelved so I can use $400 of its supposed trade-in for the vaporware 12k on the Suoer. Personally from my 8kx experience I'm waiting until late fall/early '26 to pull the trigger so the first run bugs are worked on with Pimax. The only worry I have is the edge to edge clarity with the Super. I originally got the QPro for roomscale wireless VR and planned on using the 8kx for simming with the FOV. But in the end I can't go back from the QPro lense clarity. Much more natural being able to glance around without moving my head. With every VR headset before you have to look directly at what you want to view because of narrow sweetspots. I've seen mixed reviews on the Super regarding this. Some people are saying the edge clarity is pretty good while others complain it gets blurry outside the center of the lense. So far I don't know if it's a quality control issue or an actual property of the lenses. Hopefully it fleshed out as more headsets are shipped.

No, in the air it should fill up all the tanks anytime.

Dear currenthill. I want to thank you again may be it will be the fourth time when i sending me regards. But could you please do a favour, and update your mods packs especially rokets phicis for Himars, Atakms, Iskander and e.t.c. We would be thank you until we died. And also i maby be blind but is there anyway to support you with money, but i am from Russia. thanks again and sorry for my English!

I have to agree that the new pilot in the mirrors is goofy looking, and in VR at least, has angle and latency issues. Would be nice to be able to turn it off.

Look, my bad if that came off rude. That wasn't the intention. I was genuinely asking if you had read what I wrote. I also didn't realize that you wanted to know the "why and how". If you wanted to the know the why all you had to do was just ask. Things don't read well through text. This is the way I understand it after reading the GS (General Systems) for the fuel system, as well as talking to one of the crew chiefs I used to work with who is still on F-16s, and what I learned during my incentive ride. Fuel pressure from the refuel manifold is routed through the deenergized refuel/transfer override control valve to the poppet of the refuel shuttle valve in each reservoir. The fuel pressure moves the poppet to provide an open passage from the refuel shutoff valve through the refuel shuttle valve and to the line outlet whose opening is blocked or unlocked by the refuel/transfer float valve in each wing. The opening is unblocked when the wing is not full of fuel. Refuel manifold fuel pressure acting on the refuel shutoff valves and the fuel bled downstream of the valves cause the shutoff valves to open. Also, the poppet in the refuel shuttle valves is blocking the fuel passage which controls the external tank transfer shutoff valves and the valves remain closed, preventing fuel from the refuel manifold from entering the wing internal tanks. Fuel from the refuel manifold flows simultaneously into both the forward and aft reservoirs from the refuel shutoff valves. Fuel also flows simultaneously into the external fuel tanks through the fuel disconnect valves. The forward tank system and the aft tank system are refueled simultaneously. With that info, full internal fuel for our Viper is 7,163lbs. The internal wing tanks in our F-16 hold 550lbs +/- 100 each (The fuel in the wings will vary depending on the attitude during refueling. ). So that is a total of 1,100 +/- 200. So, if you subtract that from 7,163 you get 6,063 +/- 200 and the internal wing tanks should be empty. But to ensure the float valves are down in the wing, you want to be lower than that, but also if you tried to refuel at that level then the reservoirs would still be too full to allow external tank feeding. When crew chiefs do their Leak and T's, they aim to be at or under 5000lbs of fuel to ensure the reservoirs aren't full so they can fuel the external tanks (that is per the T.O.). From a pilot's standpoint they aim to be under 4000lbs for many reasons, shorter stopping distances when lighter, they ensure to use as much fuel as possible for training/combat (every leg of the flight is calculated specifically when tanker support is not available), account for attitude difference during the hot refueling process (less fuel means the nose sits higher meaning the fuel will go towards the aft and can bleed into the internal wing tanks), and the biggest reason is the arresting cables on the airfields. Too heavy and bad things will happen Also, good to note that when you see crew chiefs refueling they will shake the jet for two reasons. 1. to ensure the jet settles (hydraulics on the gear will compress/ they typically do this after refueling and they kick the nose tire and done when the jet is off. Jet will adjust during taxi when hot refueling), and 2. to ensure the wing tanks are getting fueled completely and evenly (typically done during the refuel process whether the jet is on or off). If they land with fuel above 7,000 then just the external tanks get filled via the receptacles on the tanks themselves (one reason why ED is talking about adding a fuel tank slider). Usually that will only happen if they taxiied but didnt take off and taxi back to the parking area. If they are in the air when an emergency happens, but it isnt an emergency that calls for jettison of tanks, they will typically burn circles in the sky over the airfield until low enough in fuel to land. Again, done for the arresting hook if thinking about taking it, and for shorter stopping distance. With all that being said it should be able to refuel external tanks at or under 5000lbs of fuel internal. But in DCS 4000 is what you have to be under. But you do see the lower you go the more fuel you get. Which does indicate that the fuel system in the F16 is pretty dynamic. Also, for AAR you need to make sure the AR door is opened for a minimum of 5 minutes to allow the tanks to depressurize in the air in order for them to take on fuel. That is why i suggest the minute you land to open the AR door while you taxi off. As for @Nedum, I don't know why you even try to make comments towards me when we both know you don't like me for some reason. But sure I will entertain you. Not everyone in the community cares about the how or why. That is why you see some unrealistic loadouts being used all the time on the F16 and exceeding G-limits with heavy loadouts as well. Also don't understand why you said "Army regulation" when we use Technical Orders, AFI's, and AFMAN's in the USAF. The Army has nothing to do with how we do maintenance on the F-16. And this may shock you, but a lot of times we don't get told the reasons why something is done a certain way or why we do things a certain way. Most of the time the only way you learn how something works is if you take the time to read the GS of what ever system you want to know more about. This is what makes a SME a SME. Just because someone does X amount of years in a job in the AF doesn't mean they know the ins and outs of everything. A lot of times people just get taught how to do something and leave at that. Each base also has their own set of "ISM's" when it comes to certain things, so there is that too. And that is the same no matter what branch or country you serve for, so to say that is how it is in the German Air Force is just false. Not everyone is going to know exactly why or how something works. They are just going to know how to operate it or fix it. This is why I have to ask pilots 1000 questions because a lot of times they just don't know the answers for certain things. The pilot may understand how to operate something, but you would be surprised to know how many actually know the why it works that way. But since you questioned me actually being in the USAF and working on the F-16. Here you go. Me with JTACs leaving 64B at the NTTR. Me on the Kunsan AB facebook page loading a GBU-31V3 and an CATM-9M while on a TDY https://www.facebook.com/100064547299944/posts/pfbid0TiTJo8CZuRJy4Psh53tRbrfQoBu38rynN4Yni9JSnUrYdG4Cg2QCLNh37bBwsGv6l/?app=fbl null null Me at Kunsan during an exercise responding to a mock "hung gun". https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=900765528751682&set=a.223059169855658&type=3 nullMe on another TDY out of Kunsan. Me TDY with the Rescue SQ out of Nellis. Me winning Airman of the Year at the Group level. I also one it at the Wing level as well. Our SQ, Tomahawks, won AMU of the year as you can see as well. Me right before they announced the winners for Airmen of the year at the wing level. Me with the pilot during my incentive ride.

Thats always their awful opinion. No mod support. They recruit the good content creators and say good luck to the rest.

This is one of those non-consensual topics because.... "it depends". It really comes down to personal preference, setup, and the type of sim(s) you're playing. For flight sims, if you have the space, a large 16:9 screen (42"–55") can be really awesome - either a proper monitor or a good 4K TV with gaming features. I specifically recommend 16:9 because vertical screen space is crucial in flight sims, especially during dogfights where full 3D situational awareness matters. Widescreen formats like 21:9 or 32:9 (which are great for racing sims) reduce vertical FOV and hurt immersion in flight sims. I personally really disliked using a 49" ultrawide for DCS (like looking through a slit, with image distorted at sides), never again. VR, on the other hand, offers a massive leap in immersion - you're in the cockpit. But it’s not for everyone. It can be disorienting at first, especially with nausea or the disconnect from your physical space. Takes time to adapt but, once accustomated, it's unbeatable in the immersion aspect. It's hard to go back to “pancake” (monitor) gaming in DCS after adjusting to VR. The catch? VR demands serious hardware and a willingness to tweak settings. Which means you need to be ready to take the time to read/learn stuff and set it right, and to sacrifice a good deal of eye-candy, to keep framerate as high as possible and frametimes as low as possible. You’ll often sacrifice visual quality to maintain smooth performance - especially in DCS heavy modules or multiplayer. No current hardware completely solves this. I think if you got to question, then it means you'll always be tempted to at least try VR, and see how it is. Even if happy with a big screen (as was the case for me). So..... rather "just do it" and see for yourself. Just don't go wasting a big budget on a top fancy VR headset, disregard the latest (and even more demanding) trendy models that you'll see praised now. Instead, just get a good and proven affordable one, even if it's 2nd hand (for example, the Quest 3 or the Pico 4, also the HP Reverb G2 if you still use Win10). If it doesn't work for you, then resell it later.

Came here looking for the same thing!

First of all let me say thanks to ED for making my favorite warbird. I’d like to make the case here for developing both variants of the Hellcat for DCS in a similar manner to the 3 variants of the P-47D (-30 early, -30, and -40) that we currently have. The scope of the changes between the -3 and -5 Hellcats is pretty similar to the P47, so I think including both variants would be similar development-wise. Including the -3 would give us the classic variant of the Hellcat that flew in the Marianas, Gilbert’s, Marshall’s, and Solomon Islands. The -5 entered service in late 1944 and would be the perfect counterpart to the upcoming F4U-1D and any late war maps such as Okinawa or Southern Japan. The main differences between the -3 and -5 Hellcats are: - Engine cowling - Windscreen -Instrument panel -Visibility window -Armament - Water injection The F6F-3 has a slightly different cowling, with a small bulge in the side and extra cowl flaps on the bottom The -5 removed both of these features The windscreen on the -3 had an outer frame and glass with the armored glass and its frame inside the outer windscreen. The -5 variant did away with the outer windscreen and incorporated the bulletproof glass directly into the windscreen There was also a small window located aft of the cockpit on all F6F-3s and early production F6F-5s This window was removed for later production -5s. The last of the “major” cosmetic differences is in the cockpit. The instrument panel in the -3 is very basic While the -5 added a reflector panel for better illumination during night flying and a few other minor changes noted in the manual. The last two differences are pretty simple, both the -3 and -5 had the R2800-10 engine, but the -5 came standard with water injection while most -3s did not. In the same vein the -5 was rocket capable, while the -3 was not. I’m sure there are other differences that I missed but I think these are the major ones that be relevant to DCS. If anyone knows of others please add them.

Dear all, In addition to the ECM pod functions coming to the Viper, we will also be introducing jamming effects on the FCR. When the FCR can generate azimuth, range, Vc, etc. data for a target and the target is jamming, a yellow double-chevron symbol is placed over the contact. If, however, range cannot be resolved due to jamming, a yellow, double-chevron symbols is placed along the top of the FCR page along the detected azimuth angle of jamming. The attached image shows examples of both of these conditions and a non-jamming contact. This is planned for January 2022. Kind regards, Wags