Mad_Shell

In the TSD video, Wags says that the SA page, which uses a secondary datalink to show blue force units (and red force units that were spotted and referenced) is not planned due to sensitivity issues and lack of references. Now, to me it seems like a big deal. It looks like a very useful tool on the battlefield (it's literally the "situation awareness" page...). If possible, it would be a way better and more realistic solution to do something "close enough", even if icons and options are not like the real deal. Automatically showing blue forces and red forces spotted by them on the SA page would give relatively similar capabilities.

I agree, it would be great if they fixed the tanks reverse speeds that are all wrong (not fun to reverse when you play a tank in DCS, and your reverse speed is 9 kmph, when IRL it's 35 kmph...), tanks not able to hit anything while moving when irl they have >95% hit rate even on the move, or the way too large artillery dispersion (irl it's in tens of meters, not hundreds...)...

Announcement on Polychop Discord server: https://discord.com/channels/303482672834019330/632737610678140948/918461363146338334 (posted on reddit too for those who don't have discord: https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/rcfwex/announcement_on_polychop_discord_server/)

Tunguska was unable to get a single missile hit on straight flying planes. Missile seems to have a very erratic behaviour with exagerated oscillations. engagement_range_Tunguska.trk

While the option "interception range" works for some SAMs (Patriot for example), it doesn't have any effect for the Tunguska, NASAMS and several others. They continue to engage at max range, no matter what the specified percentage is. engagement_range_NASAMS.trk engagement_range_Tunguska.trk

Up! Because it seems quite important to have a somewhat realistic G fatigue implemented for a combat flight sim... Seeing real life pilots turning G effect off when playing DCS because it's so unrealistic tells you something is wrong...

Ah, must be accurate then, haven't seen that documentary in a long time

You're in for a disappointement if you expect an 8mi range... Hellfire range is about 8km ;)

Preview of the dynamic weather posted by Glowing Amraam on Discord 3EmDr5H.mp4

I haven't tested that bug, but more generally speaking, missiles and rockets are too silent in DCS. Basically any missile fired should be heard several kilometers away, those things are really loud irl, while in DCS you barely hear some quiet 'pssshhhhh'

I don't know if you guys are aware but the Kuznetsov 2017 is now part of the free assets (latest open beta, but no idea since when it's available in the free assets)...

Still not fixed in the latest open-beta

oh yeah, for a long time Ka-50 AI would use Vikhrs against enemy helos only at very short range, but it's been fixed a few patches ago

It's with today patch (2.7.8). BTW pretty sure this bug is very recent. Tested it several times in the last few months and had no problem.

The AH-64D AI will use its Hellfires against ennemy helos only if the gun is empty... AH-64D_no_use_missile.trk AH-64D_use_missile.trk

I tested both with the Ka-50 and the AH-64D, vs 4 tanks in the open: - the Ka-50 managed to destroy... 1 tank. - the AH-64D was effective when there was no obstacle between it and the targets, but when you add a hill... it destroyed 2 tanks, then began to launch Hellfires randomly in the air. The way they attack is very, very ineffective and unrealistic: they just climb really high and continue to advance toward the targets, while they should remain as low as possible and stay at a distance. Ka50_bad_attack.trk AH-64D_bad_attack.trk

The different announcements like whole-world map, large number of units, better AI, etc... have my hopes up that we may have something at least approaching what VBS4 is achieving (except for air combat, DCS is miles ahead for that). DCS + VBS4 would be the literal dream... These video show that the technology for a whole-world map detailed up to small scales is already there:

Please ED, why is this not a thing yet (along with part 2) ? You already have the tools, just have to make them public. Barely any development effort, and such improvements for mission makers...

"Oh look at this poor T-72... it would be a shame if anything happened to it" "Wait, what is the smoke on the right?" "OH SHIT THAT'S A TUNGUSKA!"

Pretty sure the options were not visible because Wags opened the "special" tab, while those options are probably in the "VR" tab

There are methods allowing to track a target even in the notch if the signal to noise ratio is high enough and if the target is not too close to clutter sources (ground). For example: https://patents.justia.com/patent/4450446 @BIGNEWY I also want to point out that perhaps a part of the problem is that in DCS, since the RCS of a plane is a single number which is the frontal RCS, a jet notching a missile has a way smaller RCS than it should. For example: in DCS, a Su 27 notching a radar has an RCS of 5 m^2. IRL, many papers show that at this angle the RCS should be 10 to 100 times higher than the frontal RCS, allowing a way better signal to noise ratio detection.

The robbie tank appears in the fuel page in a screenshot: In some others screenshots we see the Apache carries 1200 30mm rounds (no robbie tank): So my conclusion is that we will have the option to add or remove the robbie tank.

It doesn't tell much, flying any helicopter is quite easy, you could hand the commands to a non pilot and (s)he could continue to fly it. The real part is taking off, hovering, landing, doing hard manoeuvers...

From Nineline on Discord: Mosquito is a testbed for new damage visual technology allowing bullet holes to appear dynamically where rounds hit:

Last time I tried it, AI detection range was very reduced at night. I could fly less than 2 km away from a ZSU 23-2 and it wouldn't see me at all.