Dragon1-1

That's exactly why I'm asking. Frame-gen is a cheap way to inflate FPS numbers, but in VR, it'd just add too much latency, and even in 2D it doesn't always work well. Rasterization performance is where it's at. Honestly, given the size of that cooler, the sheer amount of copper and aluminum in there probably accounts for a chunk of that price. My 3090 already comes with a stand, and it doesn't look like weight and bulk had gotten any better. Speaking of which, had anyone actually tried running two 3090s using NVLink? It's be an absolutely massive power hog and good luck finding a case for it, but given that 3090s are relatively easy to get by at this point, and they do retain the connector, could that be the way to upgrade from an existing 3090-based rig without spending a ton? Then again, I do recall that tech being problematic in practice, not sure if DCS would benefit.

Are both of those numbers with or without framegen? Because if half of that 70% is fake frames, it'd look a lot less impressive. For what it's worth, DCS doesn't even support frame generation.

How exactly will that help, when the reason for not updating is that ST version has been removed? It'd just waste space on a nonfunctional install. Reading the OP before responding tends to be a good idea.

Let's just wait for the Chinese to make an AI that'll run on a potato laptop card, or on an AMD GPU. Hopefully that'll alleviate some demand. Honestly, I'm sticking to my 3090 for the foreseeable future. Might update the 5800X3D one day, but since sockets seem to change every two generations, I'm currently waiting for the next new one.

The "second one" was just the first Ka-50 ported to DCS World, in case you don't remember (or weren't around that long), the original Black Shark module could not fly alongside the A-10C in MP, which was the first module built on what would become DCS World. The "third" Ka-50 is just ED deciding to give a new coat of paint to their old product, with a bunch of even more speculative features, and a realistic INS. The latter part, I suspect, they left off initially because they thought people won't want to wait for alignment, early DCS was still not fully committed to being the hardcore sim we know it as now (see existence of "game" avionics and FM, for instance). And yeah, the movie was quite well known, so I'd say Kamov's marketing strategy was a success, and I'd love to see Sukhoi to consider that maybe, they could earn themselves some publicity that way, too. Still, if we were looking for a helo that was actually used for something, we'd want a Ka-52. We only got the Ka-50 because of Kamov's marketing ploy. Or maybe, you assume too much. TBH, you can call it secrecy, you can call it something else, the excuse the bureaucratic drone gives you for the reason he refuses to put a stamp on the paper (or fifteen) you need stamped to claim your module is legal to make, it doesn't really matter. What matters is, no paper, no module, and if you try anyway, you'll get in some sort of trouble, all because some other piece of paper says that you need a paper. For all we know, the real reason could be the drone in question being too lazy to swing the stamp. And if you haven't ever run into a bureaucratic wall, particularly in Russia, you're either extremely lucky or extremely unimportant. No, I'm not fond of ossified bureaucracies staffed by old codgers. You also need a "paper" (usually digital these days, at least) to make a Western aircraft, BTW. Only, US companies seem to be somewhat less set against free advertising. Dassault being a notable exception, infamously using IP laws to come down on a Rafale mod for another sim. Well, it'll soon be ran by China, which, while pretty ruthless, is at least sane-ish... You also have Europe, which is a pretty nice gig, as long as you avoid that loony bin island just off the coast (remember to visit as a tourist before they sink it into the Atlantic).

This was a special case, ED worked closely with Kamov on that one, and in fact, I think it was the Kamov people who came to them with the proposal, not the other way around. Consider that they made the Ka-50, of all things, a largely experimental, little used helo (less than 20 airframes produced). It's far from typical ED fare, do you think they'd have considered working on this one otherwise? It wouldn't even be the first time Kamov did something like this, BTW. The name "Black Shark", actually comes from a movie title in which the Ka-50 starred practically as its own character. I think someone at the company was trying to come up with novel ideas to sell helicopters. Unfortunately, it's now clear that you never set foot in a post-Soviet country, nor talked to anyone who'd been living there. If you consider my knowledge (and my family's life experience) "questionable beliefs", I have no choice but to consider you an ignoramus.

High value, not high price. Meaning, the F-15C and Su-27 are what sells the FC3 pack, those are the aircraft people buy the whole thing for. Basically, FC3 can be said to be "buy F-15C and Su-27 in a bundle, get MiG-29, Su-25 and A-10A free" kind of deal.

Yeah, but for them to care that much, you have to tick them off in a very public way (like exposing their corruption or opposing the government politically), so that Putin himself takes notice. And besides, the West is now wise to Russia's tricks, so they're increasingly less likely to be successful in that. Yeah, because Russia is known to be so much more lenient with its security-related laws than the US is. After all, one is a nest of rampant poverty and violence ran by a corrupt strongman with his oligarch cronies, and the other is, well, Russia. Also, the only reason he was released was that they knew he wasn't trying to get anything considered seriously sensitive, like F-22 or F-35 docs, or classified parts of the documentation. For what it's worth, he was interested in collecting physical manuals, which is why scanning wasn't an option (everything he tried to get is on the internet already). The reason nobody was arrested for that specific thing in Russia is that it's well known that unlike the US, they're not particularly interested in giving people a fair trial, and hence it's better to err on the side of caution when it comes to anything they might possibly consider sensitive information.

I did, way back when this forum was better organized and didn't yet succumb to the Invision disease. Sadly, the FC3 has been out of active dev for even longer, so my request went unheeded. We need air to ground in the Eaglejet because in the real thing, it's there and it works.

The difference is, of course, that the French don't really need to buy any more Rafales. Both of those fighters are way too expensive to buy very many of. The point is to make use of existing arsenal, that is, 4th and 4th+ gen fighters, and enhance their capabilities by throwing a few 5th gens into the mix. The Rafale might not be quite as capable as the F-35, but it can hold its own, especially with sensor capabilities of the F-35 being able to be shared with other fighters via datalink. It can carry the same or better missiles (Meteor) and shoot them at datalinked contacts. Carriers could probably use an all F-35 wing because they're quite limited in number of aircraft that can be up at a time, but for land bases, mixing in stealth with older fighters is going to remain an economical solution for quite a while.

RAZBAM has cited "so-called secrecy" for the reason why they made the AV-8B and not the British version, too. A lot of old UK stuff is, in fact, still classified. As for the French equipment, it's not secrecy as such, as Dassault being particularly aggressive protecting its IP. Look up the drama around the Rafale mod for a civilian sim (this was a while ago) if you don't believe me. Mind you, that was a small time mod without anything combat-related. While Dassault can't get anyone thrown in jail, it can serve them a C&D and prevent them from selling your product in both US and EU. ED in general focuses mostly on modern aircraft. This would mean that besides another Mirage, the Rafale would probably be the best, but Dassault would be a problem with that. I suspect the fact they speak Russian and English, not French, contributes. The only British thing ED would be remotely interested in would be the Harrier, and that's already here. No, but there was plenty of people arrested for "espionage", for equally flimsy reasons. Being connected to what is essentially a Western company doesn't help. How about you come to Russia to test that "stereotypical beliefs" for yourself? Or at least do some research on who got thrown into jail in Russia lately. You do not want to step over the line with those people. In fact, in case your memory is that short, an ED dev was arrested on exactly this charge by the US. In fact, abducted from Georgia for that. Long story short, should that happen in Russia, getting cleared of the charges would not have been as easy (read: the only hope would be to try to outlive Putin and count on the successor subscribing to "an enemy of the last regime is my friend" line of thinking). Highly unlikely. The F-35 was probably the most requested aircraft to add to DCS. Chances of a similar exception for something less popular are slim.

More that they're too obscure for ED to take a stab at them. That said, Dassault is said to be notoriously difficult to work with (though RAZBAM apparently figured things out with them), and as for the Brits, they keep a lot of things classified, even stuff like the old Harrier radar. The only dev working on their stuff was... RAZBAM again. But hey, the Eurofighter is coming. Yeah, and Russian authorities don't need to prove that you actually used any sensitive docs if they think you did. Besides, the F-35 is likely to be a one time exception. My point exactly. Su-30SM was not a thing before 2011, and the Su-30MKI, nice as it was, was sold to India. Russia's export customers got better gear than their own air force during mid-2000s, and the country was in a lamentable state. Lest we forget, they elected Putin for a reason, that reason being named Boris "buy me a drink" Yeltsin. It took them over a decade to shake off that hangover.

LGBs would actually be fine, I suspect, but you'd have to drop on a JTAC's laser or have a buddy in another jet, like in the F-5. LGBs are just like dumb bombs, only with guidance. We definitely need air to ground loadouts for our F-15C. Even if USAF didn't use them, they had the wiring and all the switches, so a properly simulated USAF F-15C would actually have them.

Anyone who doesn't live in Russia is free to make a Russian jet without much fuss, as long as they have the docs to do it. Unfortunately, plenty of ED employees do, in fact, live in Russia. Russian laws only matter if they can get their hands on you. That said, docs for mid-2000s Russian jets are lacking, and either way, the only worthwhile jet they operated in that time period was Su-27SM2. All the good stuff went for export, mid-2000s were not a good time for Russia, and they were, for most part, stuck with Soviet era hardware. They began to get new tech in 2010s, but docs for that are fairly well guarded. In military operations during mid-2000s involving Russia, you'd most likely see 80s era hardware with minor updates, and maybe a small handful of newer stuff. In Georgia, for example, it was mostly Soviet gear against Soviet gear (causing quite a few friendly fire incidents on the Russian side).

I wouldn't be surprised if that very notion was how the Raptor jock got himself in the Rafale's gunsight. "Oh, my aircraft is so much better, I don't need to make any effort at all to beat it." Easy trap to fall into, especially considering Raptor's reputation, and that most aggressors on the US side aircraft somewhat less nimble than the Rafale. TVC is not magic, and if the Rafale's pilot was much better, it's not hard to believe he won in a dogfight. The 5th gen superiority shows primarily in the BVR area, where stealth increases your ability to launch at the enemy without being detected. This is determined by the qualities of the aircraft themselves far more than a WVR fight, which is a game of skill, especially guns only fights, where you can't even rely on superior missiles.

Given the economics, though, I'd rather expect a scenario where a pair of 5th gens will support a larger formation of older jets. The problem with stealth, sensors and all is that they're expensive. So, you'll probably get best bang for buck by using the two F-35s to find and lock the enemy, and then 12 Rafales to shoot missiles at him. Could also work with Loyal Wingman drones, but a manned fighter has the advantage of being able to fight individually.

Just finished the campaign, and man, what a ride. I have a suggestion for the M15: could we get a tanker at the end? The reason is, there's a dogfight involved. DCS AI, as we all know, can be unpredictable, and as such, you may end up spending quite some time in burner while chasing them. That's OK, but afterwards, you have to get back to the boat somehow. For me, that involved going to best conserve instead of keeping formation with Paco. Would that be a big issue to add an option to maybe hit the tanker before rejoining with him? IRL, I guess there would've been a recovery tanker over the boat itself, but that doesn't quite work in DCS, so we just need to bring enough gas back to come back safely.

Please add this. The magic turnaround is useless in SP and immersion breaking. At the very least, mission creators need to be able to toggle it on and off. Right now, the only way to avoid it is to stop short of the intended parking position.

They definitely need a running animation, right now they casually stroll around no matter what's happening. No urgency to be seen.

Note that there's already a free Su-25T, for those who want to enjoy a combat server. That said, while better armed, the T is too heavy and sluggish to be really fun to fly.

Which one will come first will depend on licensing shenanigans with Sukhoi and the Russian government. Su-33 is a navalized Su-27, with pretty much the same systems, but you never know, because some government drone might "think" along the lines of "Su-27 is OK, but not Su-33, because it's got a higher number".

Well, they're remaking the Su-25 and offering that (still FC3) as a free aircraft. Maybe something more will come out of it, and in any case, it's a better starter than Su-25T, which is a pig and not all that fun to fly because of that. You can throw the Su-25 around a little, and even shoot down other aircraft if they make a mistake of getting into a turning fight with you.

Also worth noting that in Vietnam, Mavs were nowhere near as good at attacking SAM radars as the Shrike. The A model had no zoom, and the B wasn't much better, so while the kinematic range might have been longer, the effective range was really short. There was basically no way to lock an A model Mav on a SAM site without entering its WEZ. Plus, there was no guarantee the Mav won't veer off at the last moment and hit a "tactical bush", this is not modeled in DCS, but was a serious problem with early contrast seekers. In modern-ish scenarios, Shrikes are effectively obsolete, but in its heyday, Mavericks were unusable for tangling with anything with more range than a ZPU. IRL, if you had modern Mavs, there'd be little to no reason to take Shrikes. You can see the site if it's in Shrike range, and if the radar is in a million pieces, it certainly counts as effectively suppressed. Shrikes are lighter (being basically a retuned Sparrow), but this only comes into play if you're planning on dogfighting with them.

Yeah, I know about it, but it's not quite DCS-level graphics, Diaspora was made a while ago. Plus, while there is a VR build of the engine they use, it's still somewhat experimental, and it's not nearly as immersive as Squadrons is (2D menus only, the engine its built upon sucks in that regard, not that DCS is any better here). It's a good entry for a freeware game, though.

It's very specific XML with a fixed syntax, and there's not enough material to train a dedicated AI for it. It's exactly what AI tends to be very bad at. I'd be careful with that story, too. It's too short to make a call on the actual story (other than the writing is excessively verbose), but I'm pretty sure you'd want a callsign that makes sense.