Tank50us

I hope that one thing that is worked on is a proper nuclear explosion effect, and not just for the Mig21s nukes, but also for sufficiently large explosions such as those from the larger bombs like the Mk84 or MOAB (if we get it with the C-130), or for triggered explosions in the ME. An example of the latter would be if I set up a Tu16/H-6J to launch a cruise missile at a target area, and once the missile reaches a specific area, you get a large explosion reminiscent of a nuke going off.

What was this, the video isn't available any longer

It would be nice to have these units, especially something like Javelin since the RL weapon can lock both AFVs and Helicopters.

And you can just see the IFLOLS on the carrier when on approach, especially at night... but you have to have the right graphics settings and right sized monitor to really see it. Those with VR apparently can see it just fine, and of course in the real world they can easily see it. Of course, not everyone who has DCS is playing in VR, and most certainly not everyone is going to be running on the latest hardware. The Drogue aid I talk about, at least the throttle part of it, can appear in the same place as the existing throttle indicator that people can already call up. It would just have an extra overlay that adjusts as needed. Again, these can be optional, turned on or off as people may need. If you don't want to use them, just turn them off. If someone else feels they need them, they can turn on the aids that they need. For some, it's throttle management, for others, it's keeping the aircraft steady and in position. Some have mastered it in only a couple tries, others are still struggling. Why not give those that need further help the help they need, and allow those that don't need any help at all to just turn the feature off.

That would probably depend on the aircraft trying to refuel. A boom refueler (like an F-15) for example, would get a pop-up on screen that represents the line-up lights under the nose of the refueling plane. For drogue refulers you could have a two-part pop-up. The first is a throttle that shows where your throttle *should* be to approach the reel, and then the basket. The Second is what I'd call a "line-up diamond" that gives you a visual indication of both where your plane needs to be, and what it's actually doing. Both options could be turned on or off as needed, and eventually some people could operate without it, others may need it. I am also all for some aids that make it easier for those who are trying to refuel but dealing with real world physical issues. This would be off by default ofc, but there are people out there who would probably enjoy DCS a lot... but aren't able to because of a serious disability. One guy I know of through a DCS FB page lost both his legs in an accident for example... how's he supposed to operate without rudders and differential breaking? Well, for the aircraft that rely on the latter, there's a special option check box that allows it to be bound to whatever you bind your rudder to. Ergo, he could fly anything that requires DB, without issue. Who's to say such measures can't be taken for those who suffer other debilitating issues that prevent them from performing tasks most of us find easy. This would also be my biggest argument for more multi-seat aircraft, but that's something for another time.

You are aware that some of the aids that've been suggested, particularly the ones I've suggested, aren't anywhere out of line with the aids we already have right? Case in point, the IFLOLS that pops up during carrier landings. Nowhere in the mission settings can you turn it off, but it is in the individual settings, and if a player chooses they can turn it off. Something like that could pop up when you're trying to tank in an Boom-refueler (like an F-15) that is just a representation of the alignment lights under the forward section of the KC-135/KC-10. A gamified version could be done up for the Drogue refuelers, and again, it could be made into an option that can be turned off by the player if they don't need it or want it. Now, let me ask you this: If these aids are purely client side, and you see a player controlled aircraft approaching a tanker, will you be able to tell if the person is using the aids or no? You already can't tell if someone landing on a CVN-74 or CV-59 has the SCM or not. Heck, you can only tell they have it if they're obviously paying attention to the deck crew on the CVN-74. But landing? Nope.

you can download the mod from the mod teams discord

Honestly, one thing that DCS lacks is a good helicopter trainer. Two weeks is long enough to evaluate a plane or helo, but only if you have a firm grasp on the fundamentals. So, for my suggestion of a free helo to fill this void, I propose that they pick something from the MD500 Family. Why? Well, for starters, they're everywhere, they've been used in a multitude of conflicts, and have served in a multitude of roles. Law Enforcement: Infrastructure work: Fire Fighting: And of course, Military work:

yeah, it would be nice if there were some more soft-kill systems, both for ships, and tanks.

Ya know that the livery template is available in the User Files... right?

well, key to that is that ED must approve of anything getting put into DCS, from actual modules, to AI assets, to even static assets. And it seems that the QA portion of the implementation seems to take the longest of all the items on the docket.

So, I was thinking about it recently, and I was wondering if it would be possible to port the user files over to the Steam Workshop? The reason I'm suggesting this, is because of the following: The Steam Workshop can install things to the correct folder on it's own. Updates to any mods, liveries, or missions are automatic assuming the author updates it on the workshop Finding certain mods would be a lot easier due to Steams search functions What do you guys think? would it be possible? Should it not happen? Let's Discuss it further

Small bug report for the Phantom: When taxiing to Cat 1 on an SCM enabled CV, the right main gear seems to fall through the deck at the JBD. Might be worth looking into.

yes.... but we'd all prefer people don't get *shot* over pixels...

While it would be nice to have, the PLAAF isn't A: going to give the go-ahead, and B: if they do, they'll claim it's capable of flying at 5x the speed of sound, and capable of delivering 3x it's MTO in ordinance.

So, I'm wanting to find the liveries for the Arleigh Burke, Tico, Kirov, and so many other ships that are in DCS, but I seem to have a hard time actually locating them. Does anyone know where they can be found?

During the 145ths regular Friday mission, we ran into a bug where the #3 and #2 JBD remained in the up position. What happened that led to the bug is that one of my guys realized that there were aircraft inbound, and decided to go from Cat 3 to Cat 2. Somehow, this resulted in the Cat 3 JBD staying up (the same thing happened with 2, but a different pilot). Needless to say, it cost us our mission since we were unable to land safely, and the nearest base to land was a good 200mi away. You can see it happen here: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1720434560 Track File: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S6sRSsblhB05Wo8MdP2iDMpgk-AelpQh/view?usp=share_link (needed to upload to our Google Drive due to file-size restrictions)

does anyone even know how to *start* the F-4 up?

This has been something that's been requested a lot actually. No word on when ED will get around to it yet.

That is something that's supposed to be coming, but no ETA

For something like this, you'd need a complete rework of the DCS Ground AI Logic. Some games did this with infantry, for example if you placed infantry units in C&C3 near something they could take cover behind (like a car), they'd automatically move to that at the end of their movement. Something like that could be written into future DCS Infantry, but for vehicles, it'd be a bit harder to accomplish. All that said, it would be nice to have units behave like actual humans trying to survive an airstrike, rather than be easy marks for us in the air. Another thing that I'd like to add... is tank crews. Something seen during ODS (and there's plenty of footage of it), is crews realizing how screwed they were, and abandoning the tank and running for cover. Something like that would be kinda neat to see in DCS, where when a tank is critically damaged (starts burning), you see the crew abandon the tank and run for cover (similar to a pilot punching out of a critically damaged plane), or, if the tanks 'skill' is low enough, they may bail at the mere sight of an enemy aircraft in the area.

One thing that I'd been thinking about recently, is about aircraft and projects that are currently in development. So, what I'd like to see, if it's even possible, are aircraft and helicopters, ground vehicles, and ships that are either just prototypes, or are just (to our knowledge) still on the drawing board. If done, I see this being akin to an FC-3 style module, but with fully functional cockpits. These aircraft (pics below), would be based on what is currently in development, and using known principles of aerospace engineering, materials science, engine performance, and known trends in cockpit design. While not true representations of what might come down the pipe, such a module would be kinda fun to see in DCS, especially for those wanting to play with scenarios set no more than a couple decades in the future. As stated, this would also include the proposed tank, ship, and helo designs that are coming down the pipe. As for the "What-if" part of the statement, this would be for units that were proposed, but failed. The question would be "What if the project was continued and re-branded?" Pics: Now, before people start posting pictures of Colonial Vipers and X-Wings... keep in mind that this post isn't about those. This is about what we know, or what we can reasonably assume are coming down the pipe in terms of design. What do you guys think? Would anything like this fit in a future DCS Module?

This would be something useful, I would however add stipulations. For example, it can only be seen by members of that side (So blues can't see the status of reds, and vice versa), spectators, or game masters. All others are unable to see what's going on.

One option to make it legit right there. If they can make their own FM, DM, and sub-systems, maybe they can work with ED to make it an expansion to the existing module

So, while at work today, I was thinking about a way for Amphibious Assaults to be built into DCS. What I came up with, is mostly based on some bits I've seen in Discord Discussions, and here in the forums, with a bit of my own thoughts. So... here it goes: In the Mission Editor, an Assault Ship can be given a Waypoint Action or Delayed Action of "Deploy Amphibious Assault" Each Amphibious Assault Ship has a supply, similar to the carriers and bases, but in this they have an extra tab: "Marine Units". In this you can select how many units are available to deploy, including tanks, troops, and landing craft. Helicopters can also be used, but are still in the Aviation tab. Once you've selected this, you'll get a window where you can select what unit is deployed, and by what method the units are deployed (basically either landing craft or helicopter). Keep in mind, these units would have to be available at the time, so if the selected unit to deploy isn't available, or the method of transport isn't available, that'll be the end of it. For example, let's say you want to deploy a platoon of M1 Abrams tanks from a Tarawa. You would choose the Abrams in the "Unit" drop-down, and for the transport you'd select either the LCU or LCAC. Given that the most either unit can carry is two M1s (and even that's a stretch), you will have to adjust the number of transports until the number goes from red to white (red meaning not enough transports to deploy the group). If you were wanting to deploy a single squad of troops (USMC squad is 12 I believe), a single Huey, Seahawk, Stallion, or Chinook would suffice. More troops would require additional transports, and the total number of troops to be deployed will be divided amongst the available transports. For example if a 20-man team were to be deployed, and four Huey's were selected to deploy them, then each Huey would carry five men. When you have chosen the unit you wish to deploy, and the method by which it's deployed, a zone will appear where the landing craft or helicopter will go in order to deploy the units. This zone *must* be placed on an accessible beach or area that the unit in question can actually get to. For example, while a Huey won't care about a sheer cliff, an LCAC might have some issues. Once you've selected where the LZ is, you can then select where the units move to once they're deployed. For example, if you're deploying some troops via AI Huey's, once the Huey's drop their troops off, the troops will move from the LZ where they appeared, in the specified direction, for the specified distance from the LZ. Alternatively, once they appear, someone with CA can give them further instructions. Now, how about amphibious units like the AAV, LAV-25, or PT76? Well, if the unit you select is amphibious, "Self" would appear in the drop-down for the transport (these units can, irl, still be deployed by other transports such as LCAC). These units can also be selected as a mode of transport if the unit in question can fit inside them. In these instances when Amphibious Vehicles are deployed, when they get within a couple hundred meters of their LZ, they'll fire smoke rounds at the LZ, and also deploy into a Line-Abreast formation automatically. If they're carrying troops, they'll stop, let the troops out, and stay with them as they advance off the beach. Finally, in the waypoint action in question, once one set of troops is sent out, the next will be cycled. However, if there are no available transports (say you only brought four LCACs, and three of your eight AAG deployments require all four), the next will cycle, and the cycle will continue until the transport in question is available again (which will happen once the unit returns to the assault ship, embarks, and 'refuels'). What do you guys think? Do you think this would create a more realistic looking Amphibious Assault? Do you have ideas on how to improve this? Comment below.