SloppyDog

This video has such a beautiful cover that at first glance I thought it was an official Boeing video.

LGB and JDAMs fall long of the target.

Yep, the point that bothers me the most is this: lack of communication to us, the customers. I don't really care who stepped on the ball, Razbam or ED. I feel very sorry for the devs who didn't get paid, that's really bad. But, in the end, I don't care if it is Razbam or ED that will continue updating our bought and paid for modules, as long as someone took it and continued the development. But no, not a communication, no definition until now. I feel like I have an abandonware product on my SSD right now. And that made me really open my eyes to the many underlying problems within ED and DCS that I wasn't willing to see before. So, I decided not to fall fro the hype anymore and I'm not buying anything in pre-order or at launch. Only if the product already has been launched, updated, developed and it is mature enough for me to commit to a buy. And, what surprised me is that lots of players here in the forums and on reddit have expressed the same thought as well.

Sorry, it is on the community tab.

Going back to the original question, we don't know the status. What I know is that three of the main devs jumped off of the ship: Capt_Smiley, who was the flight model codder, Metal2Mesh, the 3D model guy and lastly, Galinette, or Radar Chicken God, the guy who codded the radar for the Razbam products. Yesterday he post a fareweel note on his YouTube channel. https://youtube.com/@Chwibon?si=-9IZNHVbseP8fKv_ So whatever it is going on in the background, doesn't look good. For now, all we have is abandonware products that will take a long time to have development retaken by new devs or ED. Have you looked at the newsletter forum regarding the pre-purchase of the Chinook? Lots of people with the same sentiment.

I agree. Not going to buy it. In the past, like ten years ago, I would buy it in order to "support this small developer who makes this very niche product for my entertainment". But not now, I've already have lots of unfinished modules, that quite frankly, I need to learn how to fly and fight on them. And although the Razbam debacle is not directly related to this, it sure left a bad taste in the mouth. I wish for those buying much success. I believe it'll be a great module and lots of fun. As for me, I'll pass for now. I'll be on the outside observing how the release and updates go, and once I decide it is mature enough, I'll end up getting it on a sale down in the future.

Its is confusing, but from my tests, you need to set the total quantity of bombs, regardless if it is ripple multiple or ripple single.

Wow! Beautiful landing!

"Even on that video it didn't work correctly. It was set at 12 with 200ft spacing and yet they are all grouped together. 12x 200ft is 2400ft which is a lot further than that spread on the video. Excuse the poor image, you tube compression in the first 15 seconds of video." @Father Cool The grouping on the video is right, it is a total of 1200 ft, not 2400 ft. In Ripple Multiple the bombs are dropped depending the number o stations selected. If there are only two stations as shown on the video, the plane will drop 2 bombs, from the left and right CFT, at a 200 feet interval. So it will be 6 drops (of a pair of bombs) every 200 feet, so 6x200 ft = 1,200 ft total. Attached are two track files for the a mission I made to attack a runway. One is using Mk-82 AIRs, the other using Durandals. The MK-82 AIRs work fine, releasing at the right point, and within the desired interval, 6 x 200 feet in Ripple Multiple. The Durandals, on the other hand, fall way too short, but fall within the desired interval, 6x 200 feet in Ripple Multiple. The smoke markers are in place to show the 200 feet intervals, starting with the white marker and finishing at the orange marker (0 ft and 1000 feet, respectively). F-15 Durandal Ripple Multiple.trk F-15 Mk-82 AIR Ripple Multiple.trk

Thanks man! I believe I'll have to do the same.

I often use the X:SET COMMAND on my missions, to make the player interact with the AI wingmen without using the usual Radio Menu. Anyway, it is very cumbersome having to get out of the mission editor, confirm which number corresponds to which command, then getting back to the ME to finish the mission. I read in the manual that you can have this list in some files, but it seems not to work for every plane. Does anyone knows where I could find the command list within the files? Thanks in advance.

The 2.9.4.53549, April 10th, 2024, patch brought: DCS: P-47D Thunderbolt by Eagle Dynamics Fixed. P-47D-40 bugged gunsight external texture Fixed. hydraulics drives fail to extend undercarriage after repair Added. New landing gear physics I've tested it, in a hurried manner, and it seems to be working fine. No more breaky breaky bouncy bouncy behavior. Seems that it is now absorbing the impacts as it should. Before the patch anything beyond 100 mph on touchdown was sure to give you a left or right or both struts broken. Attached is a track file of the test: P-47 New Landing Gear Test.trk

I can confirm that. Durandals fall way too short of the runway in Auto Mode. Mk82 AIR and Snake-Eyes fall where you targeted them, no problem. The aiming problems seem to be happening only with Durandals.

Are you using ripple single? It seems that the function it is not working right now. Try Ripple Multiple and see if it works.

Oh, thanks. You made me see another use for this, that would be very helpful.