Joe1978

I don't know if it has been reported; the radar screen was moving inside the cockpit, and the illumination of the sight was also moving at the same time/direction. nullI'll try to upload a track tonight.

Thanks Stick,I was trying to keep the previous versions (2.5.7.01 y 2.9.1.01) because the Mirage IIIs look like more older models. What I've done is install the latest version (v2.9.16.201 +SkinPack ) and tweak the Luas a bit so they now can load AIM9 B,JULI,L

Question (stupid probably) Where should I add those files within the mod? I installed the folders—Mirage5, etc... in the liveries, but DCS only shows MirageIII files. C:\Users\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\Mods\aircraft\Mirage III\Liveries. null

I'm tempted to buy it right away, but I'm also worried about how long it'll be in EA and if the developers will can fix any problems quickly.

I'd pay for a Mig21 upgrade right now, but I can see both sides of the coin here: Having already four aircraft without developer support (RB), and with Mag being so uncommunicative (and not very proactive resolving some issues), questioning the purchase of one of its modules (including the F4U) is like a leap of faith... although that's what DCS is all about. My advice: enjoy the MiG-21 as it is. We have great maps right now. It can do almost everything it was designed to do.

Thanks. Yesterday it happened to me several times... plugging and unplugging seemed to solve the problem but after loading a new mission, it happened again.

After the latest update, I'm having quite a few issues with my AVA base. Has anyone else had problems? It seems like DCS detects it (it appears in the menu to add functions in DCS), but it doesn't receive any input. I keep plugging and unplugging the hotas until I can finally move it.

Thanks NineLine, we've been dealing with this issue for several years (and the developer has been looking the other way). If you look around here, you'll see several threads related to this issue. Tonight I'll try to record a track with the Supercarrier and Tomcat.

For me, the problem with radar in VR is that the clutter is always displayed in this way and in a static way and with this same image... if you rotate, for example, the image will remain the same.

No, in low altitude mode the search antenna is disconnected and will not display an image on the screen but the distance markers will be on (red). Second, the radar mode switch has always been backwards. It's a bug that has never been fixed (switch in position 2 is low altitude mode instead of 1).

In VR low altitude mode works

Ummm I just test it on 2D (I haven't used it for years) I have found two types of returns... The first screenshot is what I'm used to seeing in VR (circular blobs). The second is what I found in 2D (white block) For both tests, I used the dynamic ground return option. I agree with you, there's definitely something there. Unfortunately, even if RB were there, I highly doubt they'd support us. Edit: Low altitude mode doesn't seem to work in 2d... I need to do some tests agaim

For me, it makes sense that below 2500 meters the radar is blind... At least it brings a bit of "realism" to a module that RB never pampered.

This is what I was trying to explain before (I only use VR). Below 2,500 meters, you'll have that effect that "simulates" the clutter/noise The noise/return is simulated with that "static" image that you show. Above that altitude, the radar will return to normal operation. This has been around for many moons. Edit: Forget about the messy/returning like in more modern modules where the image is dynamic. The MiG-19's radar was simulated very simply.

It works that way even in low altitude mode/mode 1. Remember that the MiG-19's radar was never fully modeled by RB. Clutter can only be eliminated by flying at higher altitudes. Close to the ground, it's blind. If you fly low and place an aircraft 2 or 3 miles in front of you, you'll see how the radar detects it despite the clutter. In terms of simplicity, it works "similarly" to how a primitive radar should.

Yes. Only in this map. In my case (tomcat), it's the worst-case scenario. Overall, my experience with the 4080S is much better. But as I said, I still notice that change at 900", although subtle at times, it's still present.

I am pleased that you are able to utilize it now. With the 4080S, I can feel/observe the "step" at 900 feet. It is not as pronounced, nor does it cause a significant FPS drop, but the transition remains noticeable, despite the developer's denial. Where I do still notice a very hard jerk is when I try to approach the carrier: for a few seconds the stuttering and jerking is brutal.

Thank you YoYo. In mi case, I tested the module without mods ( I don´t have the MIG 25p mod ) and with a DSC repair. Only after an update (Sorry, I don't remember the exact date) did the problem resolve itself.

RB just need to add this to its statement... jajajaja

Hi I just fix the mission 4 Issue related to the player's Viggen starting position. You can find it: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3337375/ PD: I couldn't find a specific thread for this campaign. Sorry if I duplicated it. joe AJS37-M04.miz

I don't want to give away any spoilers, but "The Pentagon Paradox..." is about how the end of the Tomcat comes and how the Navy and the Pentagon offices and lobbies rescue the McDonnell Douglas YF17. There are many good books about the F-14 (maybe not as many as on the F4). I personally like to the history, and specifically the First Gulf War (Iran/Iraq), since all my favorite aircraft were involved (F-14, F-4, F-5, Mirage F1, Mig-25, Mig-23, etc.), so I would recommend "Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat," but there are other books like "Tomcat! The Grumman F-14 Story" or "Grumman F-14 Tomcat." This is part of my library: Tomcat Alley Brown, David F. Tomcat! The Grumman F14 story Gillcrist, Paul T. Grumman F14 TomcatHolmes, Tony Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat: No. 49 (Combat Aircraft)Tom Cooper, Farzad Bishop In the Claws of the Tomcat: Us Navy F-14 Tomcat in Combat, 1987-2000Tom Cooper F-14 Tomcat Units in Operation: Iraqi Freedom No. 52 (Combat Aircraft)Charlotte & Peter Fiell F-14 Tomcat Units of Operation Enduring Freedom: No. 70 (Combat Aircraft)Tony Holmes F-14 Tomcat: Grumman's “Top Gun” from Vietnam to the Persian Gulf: 11David F. Brown F-14 Tomcat Pilot's Flight Operating Manual Vol. 1 United States Navy F-14 Tomcat Pilot's Flight Operating Manual Vol. 2 United States Navy Grumman F-14 Tomcat James Perry Stevenson

Excuse me, just a quick note on my comments: English is not my native language. My question is rhetorical... everyone should make the decision that best suits them, of course.

Without wanting to get into an argument, anything not available in the store or installed on a PC is just smoke and mirrors to me (F4u,Bo-135, Iranian Tomcat...). In this case, I've only mentioned RB since we're talking about them: obviously, we could talk about other modules, as you rightly point out, but that's not the case here. I agree with you. I buy a product and I'm not interested in the drama (I have only participated in these threads on two or three occasions)I'm interested only in the finished product and its maintenance, things that RB doesn't usually pay attention: Suddenly there is a problem between two companies and the flight model of the M2000 breaks, the radar of the F15 stops working... you mentioned the campaigns, for example: the ones that come with RB modules have been broken for years and have been reported countless times. As previously stated, my sole concern is the completion of I already or paid for. I am not interested their good intentions or future projects. joe

I hope I don't offend anyone but in case RB were to return, as a user, I would feel more comfortable if they finished EVERYTHING they have pending (starting with their oldest modules and of course, everything related to the F15) before selling us more "smoke": Mirage 2000D, Mig23, Prowler..... are just promises. After what happened, would you buy a RB module again? They have a lot of work to do and a lot of things to prove before selling us anything IMHO. I would have felt more confident if the real developers had moved away from RB and created their own 3rd party. Joe

Well, like you said... it depends. A Hornet can't carry those Harpoons, harms, etc... very far due to its limited range. I don't want to start a sterile discussion with this. James Perry Stevenson's book gives a good perspective on things.