Raviel29

This is great what you show, but there probably is no way to display standard data like on kneeboard in dcs? I use kneeboard mainly for airport data, frequencies, runway headings, mission data. This one is interactive, you can take notes, which is maybe great in boing 737, but in f-16 hmm. maybe during landings when I get data by radio. Not what I'm looking for but still great stuff thanks.

Hi everyone, I've been playing DCS for years, and ever since I started using the Meta Quest 3, I no longer play in 2D on a monitor. I love the immersion that VR provides, and one of the key aspects of that is using the kneeboard on my pilot's knee instead of in a floating window. However, I’ve encountered an issue when using custom cockpits for the F-16. Whenever I switch to a modified cockpit—such as the black variant or the Polish "Raven" version—the kneeboard stops working properly. This forces me to stick with the default cockpit, which is frustrating because I’d really like to personalize my cockpit without losing the kneeboard functionality. I’d prefer not to use the kneeboard in a floating window, as it breaks immersion for me. Has anyone found a solution to this issue? Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance!

don't care

Oh man, how I wish I could load up my Viper with GBU-39 SDBs! Imagine—eight precision bombs, four AIM-120C AMRAAMs, plus fuel tanks, and you’re set for any mission. Absolute perfection. And before anyone chimes in with, "BuT tHiS mOdEl NeVeR cArRiEd ThEm!" or "ThEy DiDn'T uSe ThEsE bOmBs In ThOsE yEaRs!"—I don’t care. I just want my F-16 loaded with eight precision bombs, end of story. If they’re considering adding the F-35, then why not throw in the GBU-39 SDB for the Viper? Makes perfect sense to me!

I started my flying journey with the F/A-18, but today, I can confidently say that the F-16 is the superior aircraft. One of the biggest advantages? The F-16 lets you customize its monitors exactly how you want, and they stay that way—whether you're in Air-to-Ground (AG), Air-to-Air (AA), or a dogfight. In contrast, every time you switch modes in the F/A-18, the DDI system resets, forcing you to set everything up again. In high-pressure situations where split-second reactions matter, this is beyond frustrating. And don’t even get me started on the TGP placement in the F/A-18—it’s a nightmare. The moment you load bombs, rockets, or anything else on the pylons, they block your view, forcing constant flight corrections. And no, you can’t just mount it under the fuselage—the centerline is reserved for the fuel tank, and I won’t even open that can of worms. With the F-16, visibility is a non-issue. I can orbit over a target for as long as I need without worrying about bombs obstructing my view. It’s faster, more agile, and has a more intuitive HOTAS setup, allowing for quicker, more efficient reactions to any threat. Simply put—the F-16 just feels right.

Looking at the direction in which modern military aviation is heading—considering aircraft like the F-22, F-35, or the Chinese sixth-generation fighters—it seems that the future belongs to unmanned aerial vehicles controlled from secure ground stations. The pilot is increasingly becoming a limiting factor for the aircraft’s capabilities, and the advancement of autonomous and remotely operated platforms only reinforces this trend. In this context, our skills gained from flight simulators like DCS might prove crucial. I am convinced that most of us would handle basic piloting quite well, and operating an advanced drone would be almost effortless.

Ofcourse, it was In 2009, during military exercises in the UAE, a simulated dogfight took place between the French Dassault Rafale and the American F-22 Raptor. The Rafale managed to gain a favorable position over the F-22, as captured in footage later released by the French Ministry of Defense, suggesting that the Rafale "shot down" the F-22 in the simulation.

I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but the facts speak for themselves. During those training exercises, the Rafale did indeed score multiple gun kills on the F-22. This wasn’t speculation—it was documented, and even caught on camera. Now, does that mean the Rafale is a superior aircraft overall? Not necessarily. The F-22 is a 5th generation stealth fighter designed primarily for beyond-visual-range engagements, while the Rafale is an exceptionally agile 4.5 generation multirole fighter. However, in close-range dogfights, where raw maneuverability and energy management play a crucial role, the Rafale demonstrated that it could gain the advantage—even over the Raptor. At the end of the day, no aircraft is unbeatable. Tactics, pilot skill, and the specific combat scenario all influence the outcome. The notion that the F-22 is invincible simply doesn't hold up to real-world exercises

I see that my previous post has sparked quite a bit of discussion, including some debate about the tone of the thread. One thing I’d like to emphasize is that the appearance of the Eurofighter in the trailer has elicited strong emotions—very positive ones for me personally. Coming from Europe, I view the Eurofighter and Rafale as unrivaled leaders among modern fighters. While aircraft like the American F-16, F-18, and now the F-35 have undoubtedly benefited from strong marketing, my admiration for the Eurofighter goes beyond that. After all, the Meteor missile won’t ask you how popular you are and will hug you anyway.

yes, but this applies to the F35, the production of which is scheduled to start this year, and the Eurofighter has already been in production for 5 years, so please don't mislead people

where does this text talk about 2026??

Is it normal that my HMCS does not work in this campaign?