irisono

DCS is taking giant steps towards Cold War era flight simulation. I also think that the F-16C doesn't quite fit into this picture. An F-16A would be much better suited to represent Blueforce in the 1980s. The DCS community will receive the Mig-23MLA and Mig-29A, which will cover the needs of the Redforce during this period. The decision for an F-16A would actually be the logical consequence. When can we expect the F-16A?

With the upcoming modules F-104, Mig-23MLA, Mig-17F, the existing types Mig-19P, Mig-21, Tu-95, AJS37 and mods such as SU-15 Flagon (by Marco1985) and P-3C, the Draken would fit extremely well in Cold War scenarios based on the Kola Map. A Forrestal-type carrier with A-4E, F-4, C-2A, S-3B etc. would also be within the realm of possibility. All protagonists Norway, Sweden, Finland, USA and the USSR would be represented with good equipment. That would be a good prospect for all users who love historically based flight simulations.

Also for me, the F1 series from Aerges is one of the best modules in DCS. Controls, operation of the systems and especially the flight model provide the virtual pilot with a feeling of flight that is hard to beat. The Tomcat ranks in the same category. In my opinion, the fun is many times greater than with all the other FBW aircraft from DCS. The latter makes you feel like you're driving a locomotive on rails. I'm incredibly excited about the upcoming F104. For me that will be an instant order when presale is announced.

I've been a DCS user since the early days and own many of its FF-modules. But from a flying point of view, the F-104 mod gives me the most fun. Unlike the FBW-planes in this simulator, the Starfighter requires good flying skills and clever combat tactics otherwise it is difficult to be successful. VSN has created a mod that behaves as its pilots have described it in the specialist literature. It is super fast, climbs like a rocket and doesn't like to fly slowly at all. If you master these challenges, its contemporary opponents hardly stand a chance in an encounter. In my opinion a really successful module. Now to my question: In comparing flights between the G and S models, I can hardly see any differences in the flight performance, even though the S variant had the much more powerful J79-GE-19 engine (dry thrust 5385 kp instead of the 4492 kp of the G). Am I mistaken or have any of you had the same experience?

Although it is and remains a workaround for "de-UFOing", your justification sounds convincing. Sometimes it's better to have a workaround than none at all. Thank you.

Allow me to ask three questions, please. Are we talking about the same simulator here? If so, how can you claim that DCS' aircratf AI is pretty decent and challenging when our forum is full of aircraft AI complaints and ED feels forced to start a major GFM program? Or, are you working for the ED defense department? Then I would understand.

I understand some of the points made but your reasoning is very specific and beneficial for high-end mission creators. The UFO behavior of some ED modules affects the entire SP community, i.e. the majority of DCS users.

Captain sir, I have been in this sim for many years and have seen quite a few announcements like this. I hope there will be a breakthrough this time. Or will it be another one of those daring promises? In the evolving Cold War era in DCS, there will be predominantly close combat encounters. If the aircraft AI is not significantly improved, the frustration among users will increase immensely and the whole thing will just blow up in DCS's face. I would like to be wrong.

With all due respect for your suggestions to make this combat simulator more realistic, but none of this would be necessary if the aircraft AI had been properly developed. AI-FM cheating is the main cause of the whole misery and this should be corrected as soon as possible. In dogfight missions (e.g. with the Mig-21, Mig-15 or F-5) many users select AI experience level exclusively to "rocky" and set conditions such as "restrict jettison", "restrict afterburner" just to achieve a somewhat plausible simulation. It doesn't surprise me that with such absurd aircraft AI, serious DCS users are trying to find workarounds.

If you get caught in the opponent's air tow in a dogfight, the Mirage begins to shake violently and it disintegrates. The outer wing tips fly away and the aircraft begins to burn. Is that normal? This effect does not occur for me with other modules Occurrence: All maps, all opponent A/C Version: Latest Open Beta 2.9.1.48335

These are all cheap excuses. Other combat simulators, some economically priced or even older titles show the way. About F-5, watch Spudknocker's video from 12:45 to 17:45. Post Mike_Romeo a little further up.

The completely unrealistic UFO behavior of some aircraft reduces DCS to a ridiculous, arcade-like children's game. Modules like Mig-21, Mig-15, Su-25, F-86 or F-5 seem to be exempt from all physical rules. Their speed, acceleration capacity, g-force limits, climb performance and thus their maneuverability are presented far above the values of even modern high-performance fighters. It's actually a pity since DCS has an excellent reputation among combat simulators when it comes to system simulation. They provide exemplary solutions for their FF modules in radar operation, hydraulics, electrics, engine control, etc. They are also top class in terms of ME, GUI and graphics. But their aircraft AI is the worst that combat simulators offer today. Older sims or even arcade titles perform better in this respect. It's such a shame because this AI is completely killing immersion for SP players and SP represent the majority of DCS' customers. The complaints, especially from the SP community, are constantly increasing. For years, DCS has been shrugging its shoulders at this tragedy and putting us off with daring promises.

Well, we flew with’m in "Bolo" and caught seven of them. But these were real Migs flown by brave jocks and not extraterrestrial flying objects controlled by supernatural Martians.

Easy to say, but difficult to do with the performance of the Sparrow variants of the time and the UFO behavior of today's DCS Mig-21.

To be clear, I have no plans to purchase the F-4 module. At least not until the Phantom's main adversary's FM is corrected. As is well known, the FM of the Mig-21 is completely messed up. All the future phantom jockeys (and they will be numerous) are going to be furious when the Mig-21 performs its UFO feats in simulated Vietnam, Middle East or Cold War scenarios. Frustration and the great anger are inevitable.

There's no question that the FM of this module is pretty messed up. Given the good reputation of this simulation, ED should ensure that such obvious errors are corrected in a timely manner.

Flappie hits the bullseye. It is an absolute disgrace to expect DCS users to fiddle around in the registry editor to play the simulation. And no, that's not Intels or AMDs fault. A separate MT application was created to solve exactly such issues. Since the beginning of July there have been clear signs that the MT approach has massive problems with core handling. The DCS development team was unwilling to look closely to it or unable to find a solution. For me this is a clear failure. V2.9 is currently unplayable for me. Random freezes, stutters, sometimes massive lags. i9-13900K, 32GB DDR5, MSI 4090 Suprim X, ASUS Strix Z790-E, 2x 1TB SSD, Monitor 3840x2160 120Hz, Win 11. OS and DCS all on same SSD.

If the billboard reference is actually from RAZBAM and not fake, then they made the right choice. In keeping with the strong user trend, DCS is taking giant steps towards cold war simulation. The most important protagonists of this era such as early versions of the Mig-21, the Mig-23, Su-17/20, some types of the US 100 series, F-4, Hawker Hunter and especially the Mirage III/V family have to be introduced without further delays. That would be great for the DCS community but also in the economic interests of the module manufacturers.

Aerges has proven with the F1 that it can produce an FF module of the highest quality within a reasonable timeframe. Although the quality of the RAZBAM modules is very good, their time output is mediocre at best. I'm afraid we'll have to wait a very long time for the Mirage III/V. I would have liked Aerges to have been awarded the contract for this module.

I see I'm not alone in hoping that the Mirage III/V family will join DCS soon. Syria, Sinai and South Atlantic maps finally need their protagonists. It's long overdue.

This question that was asked over a year and a half ago still remains unanswered. Is there really no key bind for the VTH (HUD)-functions: A/G Gun Reticle Switch - CCLT A/G Gun Reticle Switch - PRED Could a Mirage 2000 expert or RAZBAM please comment on this?

No, because of the great importance of this aircraft in military aviation and its widespread use in global conflicts, a full fidelity module should be made. I am convinced it would be a commercial success. And by the way it is one of the most elegant and beautiful aircraft in history.

As part of the ever-increasing popularity for Cold War scenarios in DCS, this is a very popular module that many are eagerly awaiting. It is worth taking a look at the RAZBAM block: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/241384-mirage-iii/page/3/#comment-5260880

Yes, the elevator trim of the Bf 109K module is wrong. It's pointless to rehash the whole evidence discussion here. Many, and some of them competent DCS users, have tried to convince the development team of this in long and heated discussions. They just got kicked out. I find it cheeky that DCS simply ignores data from original documents, video interviews with current pilots and veterans who have flown the Bf 109.

I followed all these points and still I have the same symptoms with my MT implementation (i9-13900K, RTX 4090, 32GB DDR5 6000MHz, SSD, Win 11). It looks awful. Random freezes, stutters, sometimes massive lag. It happens in SP missions (even small ones with few A/C and ground units) but also sometimes when generating missions in the ME. The issues occur not always bot often. In ST, everything runs butter-smooth and like clockwork.