Gierasimov

Come again? "In parallel with the work on the European World War II theater"(...) Talking about Channel map or something unannounced or did I miss something?

Thank you ED for delivering on your "promises":)

Yes they do, constantly. Latest example: In January they said "Hi Dear friends and pilots. We are testing a new update and solving current optimization problems. As it turned out, doing more is quite problematic. But we can handle it." We just need to do that - be patient and wait for them to handle it. No point in adding more assets to the scenery if they have problems optimizing, saying that from the perspective of 120 FPS simmer.

Hello and welcome to the forum. F-16 seems in a good shape right now and gets lots of love by the devs, it is also by ED so more guaranteed to be completed one day - in light of recent dispute between interested parties, we might need to wait long before Strike Eagle is updated or progresses. Notso posted current missing features and known bugs for F-15 (in the Razbam discord) and it is a lot. I am not sure about the state of Harrier as I never flew it in DCS and since you also have some reservations about it then it leaves Viper as a good choice. I love the Hornet - true multirole fighter in a very good development progress too, I flew already over 700 hours in it according to logbook so I might be biased :)

Hi there @Bugfish welcome to the forum. Wrong section, so please have a look at Game Crash - ED Forums (dcs.world) maybe some info for you there already Try this first:

If news at all, sir. Bo 105 information was available before the newsletter that seemed just to repeat it, SA map is not news at all as Razbam said long time ago they will do it, and promoting community multiplayer group does not belong to 'news' category although we know it is part of the newsletter since some time now. Yeah, looking forward to those other weeks out ahead, but frankly this community is always eager to get the real information, we also communicate this loud that newsletters should stand out, this one today is rather weak. Thanks for reading!

What's lacking really is few words from ED, with all the great things announced, it would be nice to actually start to read more bits and pieces. Nothing new on the ED side, like really, nothing to tell your community that makes your dreams come true? I know, when there is something to share, you will share.

However, if you read this again, one begins to wonder who wrote these words in such an unfortunate meaningless form: What does it mean ?

It gets added when you add image only. It's a forum bug I think. Happens to me as well and you see it only after posting.

It's coming as AI first, "as for the flyable?, we'll talk about it later" - Wags:)

Disabling wake turbulence in options seem to improve pass grades considerably.

It works fine in current DCS. Add static fire truck or any other static vehicle - select option link to unit and enjoy trucks on Kuznetsov.

Daily MiG-29 - Polish Air Force 'red' 114

Honestly though, with DCS maps you can fly without navigation in daylight or with few waypoints at night

Since the new pilot model is still w.i.p I wish it was considered to create a proper 3D for the patches. Currently it looks like it was a painting on the sleeve, a wrapped texture and not true 3d object. Here is the example of how it looks in real life: null

I had the privilege to know and converse with one of the Ukrainian Fulcrum Drivers. In one of chats we had, he described 'day in a life" where he would fly three sorties one after another, with re-arm / refuel and quick visual inspection / BDA check. When you imagine all the training, like road strip operations training, it is that in fact - land, grab a bite and off you go for another one!

Thanks for the info. However it does make me wonder MRAP and Abrams being worked on right now as per Wags in recent video, and yet things teased and or mentioned years ago get only "no info". I get it that resources, cost, etc, sure thing, but just the logic seems a bit off here.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/341605-aerodrome-mobile-electrical-unit-apa-5d/?do=findComment&comment=5364199

MiG-29 is looking to be the newest module, and each module brings something new to the DCS, for me, one of the must have feature is a new model and physics of the drag chute.

While it was mentioned by BN in October last year that We don't have anything else on it and obviously many people saw that YT clip called "NOR Aerial Refuelling Testing" which kind of shows how it could behave in DCS if ED wanted to improve the current state. I also remember that ALE-50 Towed Decoy was awaiting cable physics which I think could be a common tech for both, the decoy and the drogue. Maybe FF Fulcrum's drag chute work will also benefit from / contribute to this?

It does happen on all tankers and with the boom as well (noticeable with the Hog or Strike Eagle if you care to look). Seems almost like after the "transfer completed" the tanker slows down a bit. It is annoying and been raised at least once before. I mitigate it by throttling back immediately when I see the message "completed". Yes, ED or more specifically Wags hinted that the "new hose and basket" physics are being worked on, but: 1. It was never officially announced (newsletter, or module roadmap). 2. We never had any confirmation or factual status update. 3. Maybe it is being worked on by a third party for their module??

So, about the dog... must have for the FF Fulcrum static object, correct?

Who do you mean by "they"? If you want to discuss the simulation of late 90s' we should focus on Flanker / Flanker 2.0 / Flanker 2.5 as these were by Eagle Dynamics. However, by the "FC3 standard" we could assume that this public information is enough to build it: Simulator Su-35 (topwar.ru)