dwm

I found (up to now) three areas with bomb and strafing targets: Bergen Range (look at FRG 50 Helicopter base) Baumholder Range (thats the one at FRG 51) "Bombodrome" Wittstock (look at GDR 34). All have nearly the same layout, just different orientation on the map. According to Wikipedia Baumholder and Wittstock really have been used for air-to-ground.

Eher nicht, vermute ich. Die Strassen passen einigermassen, POI auch, aber der Rest der Gebäude ist halt nach grob nach Kategorie modelliert. War mal dienstlich in Tel Aviv und wollte mir in DCS das Bürohaus anschauen, da war in DCS aber ein Parkplatz. Ich finde das jetzt nicht schlimm, klar möchte man mal mit der F18 über das eigene Haus düsen aber der technische Aufwand ... die müssten ja für JEDES Gebäude ein 3d Modell machen.

Thanks guys, especially Rudel. Tried after slow repair, ,looks good, no clue what happened.

Seems that 2.9.10.3948 now finally broke it. The fix (the old fx files) now break shader compile, without the fix, the missions are broken and also won't load.

I was really looking forward to the updated German pack ... but that's for me the icing on the cake ... thanks CH!! Really appreciate all your hard work!

Thats a whole can of worms opened up ... My fear is that will not make a solution come any sooner

Somehow I'm sure we're in a time loop. How often has this been discussed now?

Well, it's a difficult situation, and we (the community) all wish it's resolved. Talking about transparency. Lot of people here say, there should be more transparency ... - Stating the situation on ED's shop - The takeover of the RB modules by ED, is it possible, will it eventually happen - refunding policies ... - ... and the state of the negotiations. You all read the statements. I agree, i personally would wish to know all of these. But i'm also thinking about the signal effects that would have ... basically it would would signal to most of the people i'm reading here simply "worst case happened, lets start the refunding race". That would not help in any way. So, as long as we hear nothing, at least we can hope for a positive outcome. And frankly, I don't necessarily want a refunding, I want working modules, that's why i obtained them About the whole "source code" thing ... well, "normally" something like that would be solved by a escrow at a trusted party, which would release the code to ED at certain conditions. Are the conditions met? Is the escrow updated at latest state, or was that neglected in the "hurry up" of a release? Would not having the code in escrow rectify stop of payment? Nobody here would expect to get informed about that details, right? So my summary - while i'm really not, repeat NOT happy with the situation, i can to some extent understand the information policy. Nevertheless to both RB and ED ... its already 2 months, and patience somehow is running out. The situation is damaging both of you, more than you even might realize - the community understood suddenly, that they give a lot of money for something virtual, which can "evaporate" on a very short notice, and thats really a basic problem. So, whatever you talk - hurry up

Cool

Also had a crash after a Bronco mission... used also NS430 there. Needs probably a little invstigation ...

The amundsen.zip file - the textures for the Amundsen Icebreaker seems to be broken in the download. These are cool ships ...

Thought about that too ... Rudel_chw, I think thats exactly the way to go. Maybe there would be the possibilty to define "routes" which are just a "series" of trigger zones, so ships could randomly spawn in one of the zones of a "route" and then follow through ... Think of a Tankers going through the street of hormuz ...

Very cool, thanks very much for that

Hat perfekt geklappt. Vielen Dank für die Organisation!! CU

Nice skins ... i wonder if we could have also the west german variant with the new template? The 24+20 ? tnx !

Bin da auch dabei.

Really cool mod, a big thanks to all the creators! This thing has potential! I struggled a little with the same issues as Fab8ball - Gear up/down mapped to a switch on the Warthog throttle need switching TWICE to work, Canopy open/close don't work, Canopy "toggle" works, but cannot be assigned to the keyboard, but only to a button? Does anyone else have the issue, that when pressing the engine crank, the throttles go to max?

I think thats the Su-35 mod. The radar is basically the Su 27. Would be cool to borrow the datalink from there? In the chinese mod, likely the J16, but not sure 100%

+1

Well, its weapons, so its ED ... thats at least what's Deka claims now for a few months Was also hoping for that fix.

I just played around, because i experienced yesterday also strange behavior. Scenario: Cold startup from Andersen AFB, TACAN 54X - TACAN takes quite some time after switching it on. Ok, just something to know. Its not "instantaneous" like in other planes, but after waiting ... around 30s i think, then it seems to show the tacan 2 miles from the parking place. Fine. - When NOT using the mouse scroll wheel, but "click and drag" on the channel button, it seems to come "loose", and is not adjusted to the displayed numbers any more. After this effect, if you scroll fully down it shows an "8" instead of "0". Also, to tune Andersen, you have to set the TACAN to 24X instead 54X. So it simply has an "offset" on the numbers displayed. Talking about the left button for the "tens". Well, its an old plane, you know. Very sophisticated simulation of buttons come loose Track is attached, together with the misson. CU Edit: I just reviewed the effect on the track - its NOT shown there. On the track you see me just adjusting the tacan to 54X, which then works. In play, different numbers are shown on the channel display. It's clearly reproducable with a "click and drag" on the channel button. dwm_f5tacan.miz dwm_f5_tacan3.trk

I think I found the problem ... It's related to the date of the mission ... you see the new islands ONLY on radar if the mission is in the month of June. Default mission date is 21st of June 2016, there everything is fine. Just switch over to November, and the new islands are gone on radar. I can reproduce that behavior on old missions and also ones created from scratch. Moved my old mission from October to June, and everything is fine. Can please someone else verify? To me, it looks like some development/debugging switch is still in there - or we found the secret of the Bermuda triangle ... äh ... Marianas ... CU

Aha ... interesting ... version is the open beta 2.7.7.15038, should be the latest. Just did some experimenting: - I used an older mission i normally use as template. Placed a F-18 airstart there ... I see the blip from Farallon de Medinilla, but not from Anatahan - I created a mission from scratch, with the same F-18, both Farallon de Medinilla and Anatahan are visible. Its in the MISSION? Thats ... interesting behavior. CU

Happens also in the F-18 ...

Hi @Flappie, just played around with it a bit... - changed pc resolution to 1980x1080, ran DCS - no success,issue still there - changed DCS resolution accordingly, switched off full screen ... no success, issue still there - changed back PC resolution to 3860x1600, ran DCS on only part of the screen ... no success, issue still there. Ok.. I thought, back to my normal settings ... - so DCS back to 3860x1600, full screen. Just for fun, changed shadows from "middle" to "Flat", switched cockpit from 1024 every image to 1024, shadow terrain objects also "flat". Tried again. ISSUE WENT AWAY!!! - changed back to settings before (Shadows middle, 1024 every image, Shadows terrain obj. "standard". ISSUE NOT REPRODUCABLE. This is how its now: The good message is, I now have a working NS430. I tried also to drag and scale it, everything seems now like it should. I really don't envy you to track down that one ... I can't find some direct relationship to one of the settings, but just fiddling around in the settings and one or two restarts seem to have fixed it? TNX Werner