Gierasimov
-
Posts
2722 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Gierasimov
-
-
Thank you ED for delivering on your "promises":)
-
1
-
-
On 2/23/2024 at 6:48 AM, rwbishUP said:
They won't even acknowledge posts from the people who bought their product......pitiful.
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.
-
1
-
-
On 3/31/2024 at 11:18 PM, Haz0052 said:
I have recently been wondering if I should get the Razbam AV-8b or F-15E or maybe the F16C. I have been unable to decide, so could anyone give some suggestions and explain why? I would also be interested if anyone could expand on my current understanding of real life uses of the aircraft my current understanding is:
Harrier - CAS and air interdiction.
Strike Eagle - Strike missions (like the Tornado), offensive counter air
F16C - SEAD/DEAD, perhaps air to air (but I assume F15s, f22s would perform the majority when conditions allow)
I should probably also mention that I have a t.16000m, so keybinds might also be a factor. I would probably be inclined to choose the Harrier (it can do naval ops, hover, take off from FARPS, can perform naval ops, can be used in a wide variety of air-ground roles, and is unique), but it lacks a radar, and can’t perform BVR. The f15e can actually self-escort itself, however, is quite a bit more complicated to me (main reason), and lacks link 16 which leads to bad SA (according to others) especially when the radar gets really cluttered. I also don't really like how the radar is displayed (too many green lines. It seems difficult to find targets when they are also a green icon, judging by other videos, compared to say an f16 which has a nice clear display that also isn't monochrome), but the f15e has a TFR radar, can perform BVR well etc. (I like using etc.). The f16…I don’t know. I seem to have lost quite a bit of my enthusiasm for some reason. It would still be something I would be interested in though.
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:
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:
nothing wrong with sharing third party news.
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!
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Hiob said:
Only the South Korean. The Bo-105 will be a normal full fidelity module (writing this with tears of joy btw…..)
However, if you read this again, one begins to wonder who wrote these words in such an unfortunate meaningless form:
Quotewill be available in three versions: the German Bo 105 PAH 1A1/VBH, the Swedish Hkp9A, and the South Korean Bo-105 as AI only.
Aside from the liveries, all three versions will have different internal devices and are offered as separate versions
What does it mean ?
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, MiGCap1 said:
nulll?
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.
-
1
-
-
It's coming as AI first, "as for the flyable?, we'll talk about it later" - Wags:)
-
2
-
-
On 5/26/2023 at 5:14 PM, JD Swann said:
Where did you see this. I can't seem to find it.
-
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
-
4
-
-
On 1/27/2024 at 5:39 PM, apolloace said:
Could be very useful, since the Mig29 9.12 doesn't have an advanced navigation system.
Honestly though, with DCS maps you can fly without navigation in daylight or with few waypoints at night
-
1
-
-
On 1/27/2024 at 2:05 PM, Lukas2438 said:
I think that the previous update frequency (for OpenBeta branch) will probably be significantly reduced as a result.
QuotePatches will go to a six week or so cycle, just depends on development and testing
-
1
-
-
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
-
2
-
-
52 minutes ago, pepin1234 said:
I would like know more about that in real action war. An inspection after landing is a must. Probably in real emergency situation you can skip that.
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!
-
3
-
-
On 1/10/2024 at 6:32 PM, NineLine said:
It will come, but we dont have any info right now to share. Thanks.
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.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, Viper33 said:
That GPU truck sure would be nice to have with a new model.
QuoteIt will come, but we dont have any info right now to share. Thanks.
-
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.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Furiz said:
ED is working on those psychics but no info when we might see that in game.
While it was mentioned by BN in October last year that
Quotework on refuelling physics continues, not in this patch
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?
-
3
-
-
17 hours ago, grim_reaper68 said:
Hi
Would it be possible that once the refuelling is completed, as the tanker operator tells 'transfer completed" the drogue stays "physically", instead of having it going through the aircraft. It would add some realism to the AAR operation. I don't know if it's the same for the boom AAR as the probe and drogue.
Another possible improvement, related to the first one, would be that the drogue stops going through the aircraft. I mean the only contact possible yet is between probe and drogue. It could be nice to have the drogue bouncing when you missed it, or touch it with the fuselage.
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??
-
3
-
-
So, about the dog... must have for the FF Fulcrum static object, correct?
-
9
-
-
11 minutes ago, F-2 said:
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:
DCS Update | WWII Development Progress | Mi-24P OUTPOST Campaign by Stone Sky
in Official Newsletters
Posted
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?