irisono

For me, the only bright spot in this Newsletter is to see the dedication and professionalism with which Aerges pushes his projects forward. The F1 is awesome but the F-104 looks to be even better. ‘New fog effects’ a nice-to-have feature for 8500 man hours. Who asked for it? Many core aspects of DCS are in a bad state and are lagging far behind. To name just the most important: - notorious performance instability in MT - serious AI problems. Special FM of AI aircraft. Keyword: General Flight Model Program - basic mission editor functions are broken and are ignored by ED - some game assets are so old and outdated (e.g. 3D models of ED and FC3 planes) that they completely destroy game immersion. - dynamic campaign, GFM, ATC and Vulkan are promises that are still far from being implemented I speak for myself, but I think that you (ED) should finally address the essential issues and the aging problems in this flight simulation. Please start finishing the things you have started and make the sim more stable overall.

I can also see this PCM indication box. It was not displayed before. It seems to be a new error. Has anyone already submitted a ticket to tech support?

I think this is a very good suggestion. On the one hand, an early version of the Thyphoon fits much better into today's DCS environment with protagonists such as Su-25, Su-27, Mig-12Bis, Mig-29A, F-14B, F-16C etc. On the other hand, it would be a true European representative of the early post-Cold War era. Which, in my opinion, represents a very interesting period of military aviation.

I consider the communication policy in the case of Eurofighter to be very poor. Actually quite unusual for HB, which I have seen as exemplary in terms of interaction with its customers. More than 3 years after the Typhoon announcement, it is now really time to inform the DCS community about the status of module development.

Even after the latest update, the error occurs with the board/tail numbers of customer liveries. It's really annoying.

Very, very nice 3D models. The AI behavior of the bombers as well as that of the Tu-128 and Yak-28 is quite good. Unfortunately, cannon hits on both fighters have no effect. It often takes two Sidewinders to achieve a kill. The damage model for the bombers, apart from missing damage decals, reaches a good DCS standard. Perhaps skilled modders can correct these small things over time. All in all, it is a very successful mod and a great enrichment for the DCS Cold War simulation community. Thank you very much for this excellent contribution.

I think a J-7A would have been a better option. The J-8 was only in service with the Chinese Air Force. The J-7 has been used in numerous countries in the Middle East, Asia and Africa and has performed well with these air forces. Due to its relatively widespread use, its popularity and the possibility that it could stand in for a Mig-21F-13 in DCS, the commercial prospects for a J-7A module are much greater than for the J-8.

To come back to the original statement by Cobra847, spokesperson for HB, the question arises as to what is the status of the AI Draken and what are the prospects for a FF module. Please inform the community how things develop.

Can we have a Cannons Saber for both versions FF and FC? All corresponding mods stopped working after the last update.

Two Hawker Hunter mods have recently been introduced, the Mk6 and trainer variant TMK68. In the context of the increasingly emerging trend in DCS for Cold War Flight Simulation, this is actually a great addition. Unfortunately, some functions of this mod are disrupted by the latest DCS update FC2024. Once again the mod developers have recognized the spirit of the times. When will DCS announce the corresponding FF model? Or will DCS miss the boat again?

I’m glad that we do not have to make do with speculations that have no basis in fact. I am all the more grateful that the developer has spoken out and is seeking communication with the DCS community. Thank you for this closeness to customers. I am eagerly awaiting the announced update.

Next month will be one year since the F-104 was announced by Aerges. I think it's time to give a first update on the development progress. A small announcement like: 'Yes, one team is now working on the FM and another on the cockpit design. The progress is...' or something similar would be very welcome. There is an excellent F-104 mod that helps bridge the time until the real FF module is released. But DCS's chaotic update process keeps destroying the functionality of these mods. The hopes of F-104 fans now lie in good progress from Aerges.

I can confirm TKhaos' findings. In addition, I have observed that some instruments (e.g. the fuel gauges) are not working yet. The firepower of the four cannons is far too weak. Their effect on the target is more like that of 4x 0.5' machine guns. The four 30mm ADEN had a huge punch, comparable to twice the firepower of a Mirage 2000. This module is WIP and we still need to give the development team some time to fix these shortcomings. In any case, it is already a pleasure to fly the beautiful Hunter from VSN. I am already looking forward to the upcoming updates.

Unfortunately we can't enjoy this beautiful aircraft in flight yet. But we can enjoy these excellent skins all the more. I really like the Suez Invasion and the RN 899 Sqn Early liveries. Thank you, crazyeddie, for this great contribution to the DCS early jet fan community.

Thanks for your advice. While this workaround works for the VSN module F-104, it doesn't work for the Hunter.

Download Link: https://filedn.eu/ldmvNCjOtAfkbhMFc1BTA2f/VSN_html_Links/VSN_MODS.html I hope it works for you. I'm having problems with the installation.

I downloaded the Hunter Mk6 and installed it like all the other VSN mods I use. Although the Hunter is marked as flyable in the ME, I can't fly it. At first I suspected that it had something to do with the FC3 botched by DCS. The workaround to jump into the F-15C module first and then back to the Hunter doesn't help for me. The VSN F-104 mod, which is also based on the F-15C, works perfectly with my installation. Has anyone had similar experiences and could help me?

the same goes for me

When this poll started on July 22, I voted for the Mirage III. In the meantime, I've flown the F-104 mod from VSN. If the flight characteristics of this mod are reasonably correct, the Starfighter required precise flying but was super fast and climbed like a rocket. It's exactly the plane for my hunting style - dive down or pitch-up, shoot and pull away. I can understand the love of all pilots who have flown this plane IRL.

A very well done module. It is a great contribution to the DCS community in general and in particular a great joy for all simmers who want to seriously pursue Cold War simulation. Thank you very much for your work.

The catastrophic state of AI-FM is nothing new. It has been criticized by many users in this forum for years. The quality of the AI is fundamental for an air combat simulator because it affects many areas of the simulation - including the area BFM F4 vs Mig-21. For this reason and because ED has not taken this topic seriously for years, it has to be discussed everywhere and again and again. I see a certain disillusionment since your first post on this topic. I hope some insight has set in. I think you are on the right track.

And where do you see a learning process in BFM with such nonsensical behavior?

I am grateful to both of you for this tip.

I don't know this command either. Would you be so kind and tell us where we can find this cargo command and with which tool we can add additional cargo to an AI aircraft?

Yes, I know you can set in the Advanced Waypoint Actions menu the attributes "restrict afterburner", "restrict jettison", force "passive defense" to your Mig-21 opponent. But in my opinion that's a pathetic botch and not worthy of such a renowned air combat simulation as DCS.