Leaderboard

the upcoming version 1.2 has a proper radio and so can communicate with the carrier in the same way as the f-18. Here is a recording I did while testing v1.2:

Hello everyone, The 2.0 update for the UH-60L Black Hawk mod is now available on Patreon to all: https://www.patreon.com/posts/uh60l-mod-2-0-138859868 Please read the instructions in the post carefully! I will be updating the Discord server to include a bug tracking section for any issues encountered. Please note the ED forums are not a helpful place to report issues regarding the mod; issues tend to get lost in the noise. I hope you all enjoy the update.

Restarting this thread after some changes were made to the magic 1 functionality. Sadly nothing was changed about the missile after launch, just some changes to what happens before firing as I suspect is in line with the fact stated by @fausete that Aerges has no control on what happens to the missile after it leaves the aircraft. As it stands the missile is useless, being only capable of a hit on a non maneuvering target from dead 6 despite numerous evidence of its real life performance being very good for the time. This really hurts the module as a whole, as the magic 1 is an essential part the the planes weapons set on era constrained missions and servers. While I understand that it isn't a Aerges issue and that ED has shown evident disregard for this issue, having gone as far as removing the thread from the official DCS weapons bug forum, I am still hopeful that the developer Aerges can put some internal pressure on ED to address this, as some internal team members have the data and surely the interest to see this missile perform somewhat like it did in real life instead of being a useless paperweight, simply because ED can't be bothered to listen or care at all to change a single value in a LUA. Disgraceful. This is such a simple issue that the lack of attention ED shows towards it is quite infuriating and saddening about a product otherwise very enjoyable. Hopefully someone ends up giving a <profanity> somewhere and people end up doing their job...

+1

Not going to lie I learned originally in metric when doing flight Sims flying German and Russian planes in IL-2, and then with the MiG-21 and MiG-15 as my first planes in DCS, and I actually prefer flying metric. However for the Mi-24P I had the labels in English for the first couple of weeks to help rapidly learn her. Then when I had it down I switched back to Cyrilic. I'll probably do the same for the MiG-29. Sorry learning morse code, and nautical flags are the first 2 side quests on my SIM agenda. Cyrilic is a distant third.

Landmarks are nice. Time to start working on the airfield corrections documented through dozens of posts by the community, no?

+1

Well I am certainly happy to make an update video on the new version when it comes. I asked above regarding a timeframe for v1.2 release and heard no response so didn't see any point in putting off making a video about the current version since I don't know if we need to wait 2 weeks or 2 years.

I've seen a few conflicting statements about these, so I decided to test using one of Meta's developer tools, which provides a simulated OpenXR-compatible headset. "It's not IPD": Mostly false It's inter-camera-distance (ICD), which is roughly the same thing as IPD. While they are different measurements, changing IPD works by changing ICD. If you make your IPD 1cm larger, you're almost always making your ICD 1cm larger. Both are changing your binocular overlap/separation - that is, the difference between where things appear to be in your left eye compared to your right eye. The difference between ICD and IPD is largely irrelevant to anyone except headset manufacturers, runtime developers, or engine developers. "It's world scale": Mostly true in terms of perception Changing IPD or ICD is a form of world scale. This is also what OpenXR Toolkit's "world scale" option does: https://mbucchia.github.io/OpenXR-Toolkit/other-features.html#world-scale-override Reducing the ICD can make the world feel 'smaller', increasing the ICD can make the world seem 'larger', however, it also has an impact on depth perception. The experience also varies from person-to-person: because (spoiler alert: see below) it's not a true world scale, it makes it so your brain is seeing inconsistent data about reality which doesn't make sense. Some people will feel a depth change, some a size change, some neither, and some will just get eye strain or a headache. "It's world scale": Mostly false in terms of what the game actually does It does not change the size of anything sent to the displays. All it changes is how far apart the left eye view and right eye view are. In theory, if you look through just one eye at a time, the "force IPD distance" will have no effect on perceived size - however, if you mix this with looking through both eyes, your brain is great at filling in the blanks, and it will still feel like it changes the one-eye size even though it objectively doesn't. If an MFD is 200px by 200px with "Force IPD Distance" set to 70, it's still 200px by 200px with "Force IPD Distance" set to 80. Practical advice Your runtime/headset options should be at least as good. This is because if a runtime uses IPD as part of reprojection, using "Force IPD Distance" will hurt it. Note you often can't entirely turn off reprojection, even if there's an option for it: if DCS start rendering a frame 10ms before it will be displayed on your headset, the runtime provides a 'best guess' at where the headset will be in 10ms. Even without missed frames, 10ms later, runtimes will often reproject the image that DCS provided to account for the difference between the prediction and the reality. If you don't see a difference, maybe your headset/runtime doesn't use IPD as part of the reprojection, or maybe it's just not something you're sensitive to. In that case, use whatever's most convenient to you. Receipts I've used a simulated headset instead of a real headset so that: there is absolutely zero head movement it is pixel-perfect reproducible Fake headset is set to 60mm IPD for both screenshots. You can save them and see the pixel measurements are identical in both screenshots and have the same reference points, or, you can see that the front panels are the same width in both screenshots - but the distance between the left and right eye changes. If this were a 'true' world scale, changing it would change the pixel size of objects. The easiest reference point for overlap is the hole/rivet on the front canopy, near the centerline. image.png60 IPD headset, no override: 60 IPD headset, 80 IPD override:

Cant wait to fly her and wanna thank ED for making this beautiful airplane. Has always been my favorite Fighter since childhood when it comes to form-factor. Just look at the amount of detail that has gone in! Kudos ED absolutely amazing.

"на вкус и цвет все фламастеры разные" По моему мнению кабина МиГ-29А самая красивая из всех что есть. Как можно вообще через краску понять, металл это или пластмасса?)

But no one "stole" it from you, its developer went out of business. Its the same as if you purchase a new car and a few years after its maker folds, after a time you can't purchase some spare parts for it, and in the long term it stops to function, its a risk we take when we purchase things .. would you say that the car company "stole" it from you? ... if you truly believe that then you should call the police and report the theft.

The focus of this thread is to discuss the inaccurate tailwheel steering behavior. This problem happens in zero-wind conditions. This means the problem exists completely independently from crosswinds. Logically, it also means that crosswinds aren't contributing to the cause of the problem. Some comments on this thread regarding crosswinds are confusing the issue by seeming to suggest that crosswinds are part of problem, which is an incorrect conclusion. Crosswind issues are a symptom of the poor tailwheel steering, not the cause. I think it's fine to report that ground handling in crosswinds is more difficult (or impossible) without proper tailwheel behavior. That makes sense. But if someone suspects that crosswinds inaccurately affect ground handling...that's a separate issue and seperate bug report. And you won't really be able to verify that problem exists until after the tailwheel steering is fixed and behaving normally.

This is a Warsaw Pact aircraft. In the Warsaw Pact distances, even in aviation, were measured in km.

ED have already said they will not be doing Ukraine/Russian (not sure if they've mentioned Taiwan, but same reasoning would apply) BECAUSE there are active conflicts going on there.

I dont think that the walking pilot animation would have been good enough. Also, the pilot feature here involves other actions, like opening doors, jumping/crouching, or shooting an M4. You will notice that, in multiplayer, you cannot see the "walking ejected pilot" of other players. That is purely a client side thing. Re VR/missing pilot body being noticeable: that's because your legs are straight out in front of you, directly in the field of view. The same isnt true when walking around with your arms at your side. In any event: I'd like to implement a better walking animation and drive it through this feature, and I might even do it. But I want to be fully transparent about what the feature does today, and what you should expect on release.

+1

@MiGCap1, any landing you can walk away from, I guess.

+1

I am of the opinion that wind vaneing has absolutely nothing to do with the problem. The Corsair is not much easier to turn around without any wind at all. Just compare it to the P-47 under the same conditions. These two airplanes are fairly close to each other in weight and power and both utilize the same method of maneuvering on the ground and yet, they could not possibly be more different as they are modeled in DCS World. I wish that M3 and ED would put their heads together and figure this out. This doesn't serve either organization to have this kind of obvious problem go on unresolved.

+1

I'll fix this in the next update. There was another preset that had the same issue.

What I care most about is keeping Betty/Nadia/Rita/Natasha in Russian. The English one sounds horrible in Wags videos, like a robot

wow, i began this thread way back in 2022...and it's still broken. thats insane

i started this thread way back in 2021...and the ffb is still not fixed? That's insane

we clearly have a different meaning for the word "stolen"

Great list. I have been compiling a list like this for myself too. I will compare and add things I have found out. I run a Quest 3 at x2.0 Supersampling in VD in a 9800x3d and 5090 at buttersmooth performance. From the top of my dome, this hasn't been mentioned before: Download MSI_util_v3.exe (find on GitHub) and enable MSI mode for everything. Also set priority of graphics adapter to high. If running a USB VR headset, also set the corresponding USB controller to high. It has nothing to do with the manufacturer MSI. It means message-signalled interrupts. In easy terms, it is a superior way of managing and optimizing CPU interrupts. Most recent devices like graphics cards, soundcards, USB controllers, LAN adapters etc should be able to run MSI, but for most, it is not activated by default. MSI_util can change that. If anything goes wrong, run Windows in secure mode and disable MSI again. I had good results with it. I reduces input lag of peripherals and the odd CPU spikes. System feels snappier.

I agree. I fly MiG-21Bis and don't speak Russian. Whenever you hover mouse pointer on certain switch, you get text which translates to English. Like that I am able to use it without problem. After couple of months you get used to all switches and don't even need any language.

Keep in mind that 4th generation is the most lasting generation of aircrafts. So considering this MiG-29 variant.It is early 4th gen and it is pretty good against 4th gen fighters in it's era. 1980s. Except for F-15C, but then again MiG-29 was never meant to go against it. F-16A is your primary. Problem is you cannot keep it realistic and within time frame in PvP multiplayer. Not enough playable aircrafts. I don't think they will, and no reason actually. There are still people who own FC3 modules and it would be wrong to exclude them from multiplayer.

We could do with some Turbulents, water balloons, flour bombs and gates to fly/limbo under too . eta: The smell of fried onions. Mustn’t forget that.

I'd rather have a MiG-19S, seeing as it's probably not coming from RAZBAM. Many systems are similar between the -17 and the -19.

There is a mod for smoke VNAO_T45_smoke_ON_V1.0.1.zip

They are both implemented.

The french arrow.

Eagerly looking forward to v1.2

If you read my posts you’ll see the context - it’s pretty straightforward. Yes late war it was as you say - however in 1943 while the initial cadre of pilots were still around in numbers - 1:1 Again…as per operations/loss records/latest research.

Can't wait for the new Hercules, but in the meantime I've been having some fun in the free mod. Here's some aerobatics, a Khe Sanh landing, and a carrier landing:

+1

Light visibility is indeed very important and the abrupt lack of rendering that can happen at certain distances is problematic for a number of reasons. I absolutely support more realistic lighting.

Even ignoring the obvious other issues (starting with file size), a map that large would run into serious distortion problems with the existing 'flat Earth' modelling DCS uses. You'll have to wait until spherical mapping is implemented...

From ED Discord Development Highlights.... A6M5 Zero cockpit.

Not just incomplete, but broken. I have a small group of friends that play on my private server and VOIP hasn't worked for a number of us since its release. I honestly don't understand how a single guy (ciribob) can code, test, release and maintain a custom solution (SRS) for all these years and ED cannot (or won't). As far as I'm concerned, it's a choice. Like many "features" they release, VOIP is an MVP (minimally viable product) with emphasis on Minimal. This approach creates technical and feature debt that often never gets addressed. In the case of VOIP, at least we have a working, feature rich solution called SRS. Save yourself a headache. Install SRS from GitHub and don't look back.

+++

A short update on progress would be nice

I was listening to something the other day and learnt that on the flight Dimbleby flew and reported on, his Pilot was Gibbo. I’ll have to read Enemy Coast Ahead again for a refresher. He should never have been asked to even begin forming 617 when he was asked to. He’d done more than enough already and was pretty battered. Amazing what some of those fellas went through. Looking through the thread a bit, just reposting this one (with gunners ). Best regards team

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