Silver_Dragon
-
Posts
12191 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
106
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Silver_Dragon
-
-
Welcome to a new series dedicated to some aspect not implemented yet on called DCS World The Missing Link.
On that episode we have centered on the “old” planned but actually on hold, Naval & Land Mines:
The first announcement about mines, coming with the F/A-18C module, with one of your first plans adding some naval mines to the Hornet, that was the Mk-36 Destructor mines and the MK65 Quickstrike but actually, has been delayed, meanwhile ED require implement first new functionality to working properly. Actually has no details about them (surely in the fridge awaiting news).
The Mk-36 Destructor mines are part of the Destructor (DST) naval mines. Destructor Mines are general purpose low-drag bombs converted to mines. They can be deployed by air, either at sea as bottom mines or on land as land mines. With the MK 75 Modification Kit installed, a MK 82 bomb (500 pounds) becomes a MK 36 DST.
The conflict in Southeast Asia saw the introduction of a different kind of mine called a Destructor (DST). Destructors Mk 36, Mk 40, and Mk 41 are aircraft-laid bottom mines which use General Purpose (GP) Low-Drag Bombs Mk 82, Mk 83, and Mk 84, respectively as the mine case and explosive charge. The bombs are converted to mines with the installation of a kit of modular components that comprise a mine-type arming, detector, and firing system. The kit contains an arming device, an explosive booster, a magnetic-influence firing mechanism and associated hardware. The arming device and booster are installed in the bomb's nose cavity and the firing-mechanism (with battery) installed in the bomb¹s tail cavity. The same kit of components and method of assembly are used for each one of the destructors, but the kits are available in a number of configurations, each with a different circuitry to meet a variety of operational requirements. It should be noted, however, that since the bomb cases are small, medium, and large, they require different flight gear. DST¹s became the first mines to be used on both land and sea. When dropped on land, they bury themselves in the ground on impact, ready to be actuated by military equipment, motor vehicles and personnel. When dropped in rivers, canals, channels, and harbors, they lie on the bottom ready to be actuated by a variety of vessels including war ships, freighters, coastal ships, and small craft.
MK65 Quickstrike
Conversion of Mark 82 [500 lbs. (227 kg)] bomb. Superseded Destructor EX-52. Marks 62, 63 and 64 are known as the "Quickstrike" series and have a variable influence target designation system that can be used against either land or sea targets. Quickstrike was conceived as a new series of ground mines, replacing the ones that had become compromised as a result of the Vietnam War. These new mines use the same design concept as do "smart" bombs, that is, they are simple bolt-on additions to a standard air-dropped bomb. Quickstrike's design emphasizes ease of maintenance and ease of mine preparation for use. For example, the older mines required refrigeration of their batteries to prolong life, the Quickstrikes do not.
Other mines capables to carrying the F/A-18C will have the old Mk 52 and 56 mine types.
Mk 52 has 1,000 lbs. (454 kg) ground mine of the new design series. Mod 1 acoustic fuzed, Mod 2 magnetic, Mod 3 combined pressure and magnetic, Mod 4 was not issued, Mod 5 combined acoustic and magnetic, Mod 6 combined acoustic, magnetic and pressure. All variants are 18.8D x 70.2L inches (48 x 178 cm). Weights are respectively 1,130 lbs. (513 kg), 1,170 lbs. (531 kg), 1,190 lbs. (540 kg), 1,200 lbs. (544 kg) and 1,235 lbs. (560 kg). Charge for all was 625 lbs. (284 kg) HBX-1. All Mods use identical mine cases and removable instrument racks so that the firing assemblies can be stored apart from the explosives.
Mk 56 has Air launched 2,000 lbs. (907 kg) class moored mine. 22.4D x 114.3L inches (56D x 290L cm). Actual weight 2,135 lbs. (968 kg) with a charge of 360 lbs. (163 kg) HBX-3. First deployed in 1966 and still active as of 2001. Similar to the submarine launched Mark 57. Uses a "Total Field" magnetic exploder.
The Naval versions was that configurations:
Country / Name / Generation sensor / Type / Fuzing / Max Anchor Depth (m) / Max Case Depth / Weight (kg) / Warhead (kg) / Contact Damage / Full Influence Dmg / Severe Major Minor Damage / Laying Platform / IOC / Remarks.
USA / Mk36 DST Mod 3 / 2 / Bottom / M / 92 / Int I / 286 / 87 / - / 79 / 47 24 12 / Air / 1967 / E, Mk82 GP bomb
USA / Mk36 DST Mod 4-7 / 2 / Bottom / M, S / 92 / Int I / 286 / 87 / - / 79 / 47 24 12 / Air / 1967 / E, Mk82 GP bomb
USA / Mk40 DST Mod 3 / 2 / Bottom / M / 92 / Int I / 501 / 202 / - / 120 / 72 36 18 / Air / 1968? / E, Mk83 GP bomb
USA / Mk40 DST Mod 4-7 / 2 / Bottom / M, S / 92 / Int I / 501 / 202 / - / 120 / 72 36 18 / Air / 1968? / E, Mk83 GP bomb
USA / Mk41 DST Mod 3 / 2 / Bottom / M / 92 / Int I / 949 / 429 / - / 175 / 105 52 26 / Air / E, Mk84 GP bomb
USA / Mk41 DST Mod 4-7 / 2 / Bottom / M, S / 92 / Int I / 949 / 429 / - / 175 / 105 52 26 / Air / E, Mk84 GP bomb
USA / Mk52 Mod 0 / 2 / Bottom / P / 47 / Shallow / 496 / 283 / - / 147 / 88 44 22 / Air / 1961-2012 /
USA / Mk52 Mod 1 / 2 / Bottom / A / 47 / Shallow / 543 / 283 / - / 147 / 88 44 22 / Air / 1955-61 /
USA / Mk52 Mod 2 / 2 / Bottom / M / 183 / Int II / 568 / 283 / - / 147 / 88 44 22 / Air / / C
USA / Mk52 Mod 3 / 2 / Bottom / P, M / 47 / Shallow / 573 / 283 / - / 147 / 88 44 22 / Air / /
USA / Mk52 Mod 4 / 2 / Bottom / P, A / 47 / Shallow / 521 / 283 / - / 147 / 88 44 22 / Air / ?-1978 /
USA / Mk52 Mod 5 / 2 / Bottom / M, A / 47 / Shallow / 571 / 283 / - / 147 / 88 44 22 / Air / /
USA / Mk52 Mod 6 / 2 / Bottom / P, A / 47 / Shallow / 546 / 283 / - / 147 / 88 44 22 / Air / /
USA / Mk52 Mod 11 / 3 / Bottom / M, S / 47 / Shallow / e550 / 283 / - / 147 / 88 44 22 / Air / /
USA / Mk56 / 2 / Moored / M / 365 / Int IV / 1010 / 159 / - / 101 / 61 / 30 / 15 / Air / 1966 - 2002 /
USA / Mk59 DST Mod 3 / 2 / Bottom / M / 92 / Int I / 389 / 183 / - / 114 / 69 34 17 / Air / 1985 - 07 / E, M117D bomb
USA / Mk59 DST Mod 4-7 / 2 / Bottom / M, S / 92 / Int I / 389 / 183 / - / 114 / 69 34 17 / Air / 1985 - 07 / E, M117D bomb
USA / Mk62 Mod 1 / 3 / Bottom / M, S / 92 / Int I / 227 / 87 / - / 82 / 49 25 12 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1980 / G, Mk82 GP bomb
USA / Mk62 Mod 2 / 4 / Bottom / M, S, P / 92 / Int I / 227 / 87 / - / 82 / 49 25 12 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1980 / G, Mk82 GP bomb
USA / Mk63 Mod 1 / 3 / Bottom / M, S / 92 / Int I / 454 / 202 / - / 126 / 75 38 19 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1980s / G, Mk83 GP bomb
USA / Mk63 Mod 2 / 4 / Bottom / M, S, P / 92 / Int I / 454 / 202 / - / 126 / 75 38 19 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1980s / G, Mk83 GP bomb
USA / Mk64 Mod 1 / 3 / Bottom / M, S / 92 / Int I / 907 / 429 / - / 183 / 110 55 27 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1983 / G, Mk84 GP bomb
USA / Mk64 Mod 2 / 4 / Bottom / M, S, P / 92 / Int I / 907 / 429 / - / 183 / 110 55 27 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1983 / G, Mk84 GP bomb
USA / Mk64 Mod 3 / 4 / Bottom / EP, M, S, P / 92 / Int I / 907 / 429 / - / 183 / 110 55 27 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1983 / G, Mk84 GP bomb
USA / Mk65 series / 3 / Bottom / M, S, P / 92 / Int I / 1084 / 513 / - / 231 / 139 69 35 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1983 / G
USA / Mk65 Mod 0 / 3 / Bottom / M, S / 92 / Int I / 1084 / 513 / - / 231 / 139 69 35 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1983 / G
USA / Mk65 Mod 1 / 3 / Bottom / M, S, P / 92 / Int I / 1084 / 513 / - / 231 / 139 69 35 / Surf, Sub, Air / 1983 / GFuzing types:
C : Contact CMD:Command M: Magnetic S: Seismic A: Acoustic P: Pressure EP: Electric PotentialRemarks Key:
C : Mod 2 has deeper depth.
E: Destructor series
G: Quickstrike series
That post will be expanded with AI and other modules capable to carry that armament, as the future HeatBlur A-6 and some other naval aircrafts as AI S-3/SH-60/B-52, etc, actually on DCS. Other countries as Russia / UK / Chinna will be added.-
1
-
-
Roadmap:
Mini-Updates
Last newsletter with info:
12 minutes ago, Raviar said:It has been a few years since the Hornet was launched. It would be nice if ED could update us on the progress of the Hornet. Several weapons, including the Sea Mine and Fire Bomb, are still not delivered, either due to core engine limitations or other reasons. The HOTAS functionality seems to need an update (as I recall Wags mentioned in a podcast, though I might be mistaken). Is there any update planned for the Hornet's flight model?
There are still some weapons missing on the Viper, such as the Sniper pod and towed decoy. We haven't heard about MDC, the dynamic campaign, and Vulkan since 2019.
Thanks EDSea mines and Fire Bombs has core features and require implement first, has "outside" of the actual F/A-18C modules but affect to all incendiary bombs on simulator, and Sea Mines require implemente some technologies first to working sea environment into DCS World (ex Underwater explosiones, ships damage models, magnetic / acoustic / influence fuzes, a sonnar engine, flodding, etc).
-
2 minutes ago, ESA_maligno said:
Well, as I have commented in another thread, I think that the anniversary of the battle of Midway is a good time for an announcement...
It would be nice to know something about how the projects are going for those of us who like the simulation of that time.
On that case, has better wait to the Battle of Philippine Sea (June 19–20 1944) or the Marianas and Palau Islands campaign (June - November 1944)
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Stratos said:
I know that, I'm asking once the map 4 parts release are completed.
3 Parts, no 4.
-
6 hours ago, w3nder said:
YES! where is it?!as a developer I assure you that a lot of stuff is done in a year, not just the ground units that a useless post from 6 months ago talks about, and these posts are confirmation that they only serve to generate hype so as not to lose interest, but years have passed, and instead of fixing a game that is now lacking everywhere, they first removed a developer, then they realized that a plane released years ago has even a wrong pod, which they were developing into sentiment....for me they are just clowns...per non parlare di quella buffonata della SC venduta a 35 euri, MFS fa la stessa roba a gratis
ED dont have put any "Deadline, write on stone or promise" about a date of release about the Dynamic Campaig..... The claimed post please?
The 2024 New year post, about ED features on progress, has very clear, Dynamic Campaign continue on develop and actualy has none a release date:QuoteHere are some of the interesting functionality improvements coming to DCS:
Save Game. Our new game persistence system will allow you to save mid-mission and return to that save point at a later time.
Replay System. The current track file system was originally created as a debugging system that simply reproduced game input to construct a replay of the mission. However, this system depends on limited DCS version changes between when the track was recorded and when being played back. The system in development for 2024 is designed to address this and will offer additional capabilities.
Infantry Unit Improvements. We will be working on new infantry models and animations in 2024 along with more life-like behaviors.
New Air, Ground, and Naval Units. New units will be available in 2024 that will range from World War II to modern day. Each unit requires thousands of man-hours to create and will be provided as optional packs at their highest levels of detail. Standard versions will also be available for free to ensure both single-player and multiplayer compatibility for all.
Graphic Improvements. In addition to the graphic improvements that the Vulkan API will afford, we will also be making improvements to the Render Graph for better VR performance, new and improved special effects, and further advancements in the FLIR rendering system.
Weather. The weather focus for 2024 will be on a new fog system and towering clouds with appropriate line-of-sight blocking.
Voice Chat. 2023 saw great connectivity improvements and a unique, real-time voice processing allowing users to modify voices to replicate different radio eras and technologies. In 2024 we will continue to integrate radios to vehicles, ships, and other units. We also plan external application support and other player-requested features.
Spherical Earth. One of the biggest changes coming to DCS is the Spherical Earth. This substantial work is ongoing however we do not expect to release it this year due to the size of the endeavour.
Dynamic Campaign. Please read our Newsletter for 29 December 2023 where we discuss DCSDC in detail.
Air Traffic Control. Although we have a solid design to provide an exceptional ATC experience, much of the work in 2024 will involve how we generate the voice dialog and create a much-improved interface.
Improved Accessibility. To make DCS more accessible to new players, the Graphic User Interface will be updated to make it more user-friendly and include a Launcher with new capabilities. New interactive missions are also being developed to shallow the learning curve with popular modules like the F/A-18C.
Air-To-Air Missile Development. We plan to migrate the R-27 (AA-10) family and R-73 (AA-11) missiles to a new component structure and flight dynamics. This will be coupled with a new proximity fuse model that accounts for Doppler closing speed, modified seekers, and a more realistic interaction model between the missile and the supporting radar. This will be done within the larger MiG-29 project framework. Other missile types will also be developed in the same way.
Air-To-Ground Munitions. We continue to develop new munitions as well as update existing air-to-ground weapons to include a new component model with advanced flight performance. This includes guided bombs and tactical missiles.
Regarding Anti-Radiation Missiles (ARM), we are developing narrow-band specialized seekers that were used with early ARMs of the 1960 to 1980s prior to the more modern AGM-88 HARM class of missiles with broadband seekers. These older ARMs, such as the AGM-45 Shrike of the Vietnam era, will be modeled with other older ARM systems.
ECM. We are developing more advanced principles of electronic warfare that will allow simulation of a greater variety of electronic warfare attack and countermeasure modes and capabilities. This is a very complex task and confidential subject. We cannot promise quick results, but work is underway to deliver a satisfactory simulation of this opaque area of modern warfare.
New Landing Gear. A new two-component landing gear system was released for the Mosquito last year. We will continue integrating it to other aircraft this year. We plan a separate newsletter article that will explain the new capabilities and what it brings to landing gear behaviors.
QuoteDCS Dynamic Campaign (DCSDC) is one of the most important tasks for the future of DCS as it will add a new and much-demanded evolution/improvement of gameplay for both single player and multiplayer. Rather than mimic past solutions, we hope to set a new standard, one that provides a high level of interaction, authenticity, immersion, and ease-of-use. Our goal is to deliver a system that allows players to create their own dynamic (non-scripted) campaigns that will evolve based on strategic and tactical AI decisions, indirect player influences on AI actions, and direct player influences on the battlefield. This will all leverage existing DCS features such as Voice Chat, new ATC mechanisms, etc. This has been a tall order, and the effort has been underway since 2018 with a small but dedicated team.
Our focus in 2022 was on the creation and testing of General Air Operations tasks. In 2023, we shifted our DCSDC efforts to Ground Operations. This area will break new ground for dynamic campaigns and includes the following tasks:
The creation of a realistic road network system that is based on a new road editor system. This allows units to have appropriate road movement conditions that are tied to the logistics and supply network. This also integrates into the movement of ground unit formations.
A new ground unit formations editor was created that allows for the accurate assembly of units-based levels of command from platoon up to division, with all command levels in-between. Command structures vary based on the country and era, just like the real world and with correct terminology. Unit formations then operate realistically within their larger force structure based on tasking such as road march, meeting engagement, assault, defense, retreat, route, etc.
We addressed ground forces behavior once engaged. This was one of the biggest, most complex tasks. Much of this was dependent upon force tasking, support from neighboring forces, organization of frontline forces, logistics (munitions and fuel), and disposition of enemy forces.
To assist with these items, a new and improved path-finding mechanism was developed that considers both the terrain topography and restrictive zones within it. This allows more sensible routing of formations based on the terrain properties.In addition to Ground Operations tasks, we continue to work on Air Operations related tasks. For instance, many airfields currently have too few parking spaces available for a large DC. We don’t want to be limited to such limited numbers for large scenarios. To address this, we have developed a new process to expand spawn points for aircraft.
Next, we will finalize ground tasking, increase the level of internal and external testing, and begin work on the important Graphic User Interface (GUI).
Move alone... nothing to see...
-
49 minutes ago, vgilsoler said:
Just as a curiosity, (not requesting anything to anybody)
If a 3rd party was interested in creating a module of WW1 plane, does the dcs core need to be modified? Or will the current state be enough?
There is already a biplane (applies to triplane?), there is already multicrew with machine guns, there is already infantry, tanks and artillery. Perhaps will trenches need a dcs core update?
Regards,
Biplanes was opperative on early WW2, about Triplanes.... @Yo-Yo surely can answer them.
Trenches will require a core / TDK update, but actualy has not a propper funtionality properly modeling ,on fact, the Ugra Media Normandy Pointe du Hoc trenches has only a placebo, and trenches has none exclusive from WW1.
-
1 hour ago, stonewall197922 said:
It`s better limit license distribution of modules developed under agreement with ED by developer (maybe this term already included in agreements). e.g. Not to use results of development under agreement with ED without permission of the last. If ED invested some funds in development or agreement has terms about distribution to 3rd party. Violating such terms is serious.
Remember the core simulator and your tools has property by ED, and the "military/training" versions, dont use the "normal" DCS World license... that will be a very hard problem if RB has used them whitout ED clearance. (Remember ED has denay all colaboration or use of DCS on that "Training" simulators).
The DCS EULA has very clear:
Quote1. LIMITED USE LICENCE
In consideration of you agreeing to abide by the terms of this Licence, Eagle Dynamics SA hereby grants to you a non-transferable, limited right and licence to install the Program and the Documentation solely and exclusively for your personal use on the terms of this Licence. All rights not specifically granted under this Licence are reserved by Eagle Dynamics SA and, as applicable, Eagle Dynamics's licensors. GOVERNMENT AND COMMERCIAL ENTITIES MAY NOT USE THIS SOFTWARE UNDER THIS EULA. Government and commercial entities wishing to use this software in conjunction with training or demonstrator applications must obtain a license directly from Eagle Dynamics SA under a separate pricing structure and terms of use.3 hours ago, Blackeye said:And it was ED who blocked the payments causing RB to block the development... and maybe that was caused by RB.... It's hard to tell who's to blame for what in this incident without knowing all the details.
But it doesn't really matter to me as customer either, because it's quite clear who is to blame for continuing to sell the modules without any mention of those problems and no (communicated) plan for such an event. So for me it's "no more modules at all" until I feel confident that a business dispute between ED and their partners isn't something I have to bear all the consequences of.
We dont know the license agretmetns of ED (Main company) and RB (3rd Party), but have a rules to comply and RB has only has "show on public" a dispute, remember that has a legal case... no only "get me the money" with RB, has open the Thunder box, and that will be sancionate by broken licensing agreements ("miranda warning").
-
21 minutes ago, Munin said:
Any news about the drift meter? Doing some proper ww2 navigation would be really interesting.
And a windscreen wiper for rainy bad weather landings.
Remember Newsletter:
QuoteMosquito FB VI. This year we continue working on the features from the Early access list. Including AI crew members and the Drift recorder.
windscreen wiper for rainy bad weather landings has a core feature, no exclusive from Mosquito module.
-
4 minutes ago, GomesPT said:
In my opinion, this situation is very serious and has greatly reduced customer confidence in ED and in the future purchase of new modules.
I don't know who is right in this case and I don't have anything to do with it.By? Remember that situation was started by Razbam, publicizing their dispute, no ED, and that has a Contractual issues, with surely finished on lawyers hand....
-
3
-
-
9 minutes ago, killjoy73au said:
Well it'd be nice to hear from the actual developers...
The real developers has active on ORBX discord.
-
19 minutes ago, LimePartician said:
What product? Got a link for it?
Talked by ED, but not confirmed yet.
-
21 minutes ago, irisono said:
I don't think you've even come close to understanding the problem. Have you tried doing ACM with AI Migs with their current FM? It's like fighting UFOs, completely unrealistic. So, ACM and improved AI-FM behavior by using GFM do have something to do with each other, don't they? I won't no longer comment on your posts here until I've seen that you've understood the problem.
That has a problem of the old AI Flight Model..... Remember the newsletters...
https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/newsletters/a134f231fe8269e1c78dd6d0dd8c3c9d/QuoteBefore describing our new General Flight Model (GFM) for AI, it may be useful to review the development history of flight models in DCS since inception. Initially, we used a trajectory model called Standard (SFM) for human players and a very simple model for AI which used primitive laws of physics. Eventually, the Advanced Flight Model (AFM) and its successor, the Professional Flight model (PFM) were developed and the SFM was adapted for AI aircraft. Although SFM produces accurate trajectory parameters such as turn rate, specific excess power, flight envelope, etc. it suffers from a lack of natural short-period movement and switched models for ground and flight.
Expanding the use of PFM or even AFM for AI aircraft wouldn’t be smart due to several key factors, notably AFM and PFM both require substantial work to create each individual aircraft flight data model. In addition, processor workload for runtime data in the mission would be excessive and greatly affect performance, especially when many different aircraft are present in the mission.
The approach in our new GFM will deliver accurate AI trajectory performance and copy the PFM’s short-period characteristics from the player-controlled models that we already have. The GFM ‘pilot’ will use the same control surface deflection as PFM and can naturally stall and spin as well; the GFM also experiences air turbulence. It is interesting to note that the short period characteristics of the new models also naturally depend on Mach numbers.
The greatest challenge when starting the work on GFM was creating a unique multi-level autopilot system capable of controlling any and all aircraft. Unlike standard autopilot programming approaches, which demand that each aircraft be adjusted individually, the new approach permits automatic use of aircraft flight parameters. This saves substantial time and delivers more accurate and realistic auto-pilot behaviour that is particularly appreciated for trans-sonic and supersonic regime changes, which now no longer require substantial tuning.
This fundamental work required about two years of programming with formation flying alone requiring an additional 5 months of intense development. The main task was to teach the AI to fly correctly but not as a supernatural drone but rather as a human pilot would, including micro-delays, errors and limitations. Soon, every pilot can practice the formation lead role and develop highly realistic skills without having to play online and depend on inadequate wingmen to hone his talent.
QuoteGFM
Development Progress
Mig-29 Fulcrum
Following the completion of tight formation GFM implementation our current GFM task is development of algorithms loose formation behavior. Due to the large turn radius for loose formation modes, wingmen must follow their own independent trajectories in order to position correctly on the leader. New algorithms are being developed to take both kinematic trajectories and pilot/aircraft visibility conditions into account, similar to what real pilots must to keep their lead aircraft always in sight.Stab and trim position during speed changes
Stab trim position during acceleration and deceleration
The above graph is a recording of the stab trim position during acceleration and deceleration. As increased power creates a nose-up pitching moment, the stab trim positions are not the same for acceleration at max AB and deceleration at idle, especially at low speeds and requires more nose-down input. Mach-related changes are noticeable near Mach 1. We are really excited with the progress being made and are confident that the wingman GFM and general AI aircraft GFM will be unique in any simulation worldwide. Please follow the news for more information as we continue to enhance this highly complex general flight model.None of them has a easy task, and that has maked on the Backends.... include AFM / BFM tactics.... That require has patience and ED put a develop update.
-
22 minutes ago, irisono said:
I cannot accept such statements. Especially since ED has made it clear that it will promote trends such as Cold War era simulation with the corresponding maps and modules. But Cold War air battles mean ACM/BFM with early Fox-1, rear aspect IR missiles and cannons. These weapons, but above all the behavior of the AI planes and the AI flight models, must be reasonably realistic; otherwise none of this makes sense. The prerequisites for such scenarios must be created before the maps and modules are introduced. Today we are a long way from having reasonably plausible ACM/BFM. In the meantime, ED sells us the modules which actually have little value to us due to the missing prerequisites. They keep us waiting for years with promises to improve the AI situation e.g. with GFM.
The GFM has only apply on the use of AI flight behaviour FM, has nothing to do with ACM/BFM tactics, that has work appart. Remember the GFM stamemt and AI Tactics on Beyond newsletter:
QuoteUnit AI Improvements
In 2022 we saw great improvements to the Beyond Visual Range (BVR) and Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM) AI for our jet aircraft. Moving forward, we now intend to improve multi-ship BVR and Air Combat Maneuvering (ACM) tactics and appropriate AI tactics for World War II aircraft.For ground units, our primary AI tasks include improved pathing and implementing suppression effects for more than just infantry units.
General Flight Model (GFM) for AI Aircraft
Whilst the updated BFM AI can make a significant difference in how the AI flies, the General Flight Model (GFM) will provide improved flight dynamics for AI aircraft that better constrain the aircraft to true-to-life performance.GFM is a significant improvement to the Standard Flight Model (SFM) that is based on drag and thrust characteristic trajectories. The SFM can provide a good Center of Gravity trajectory model, but it relies on reliable source data to tune the overall performance that includes the entire flight envelope, sustained and instantaneous turn rate, energy gain, etc.
GFM adds additional short-period aircraft movement by adding our base solid body, contact models and aerodynamic moments. This results in more realistic control displacements during maneuvers that provide more human-like appearances. With GFM, the AI will also encounter wake turbulence.
None of that points has release yet by ED, and meanwhile dont put more news about your progress, only we need wait.
-
Other Modules present:
- UH-1 (Norway)
- Mi-8 (Finland)
About future modules (some has no propper version, but can mach):
- ED Mig-29A (Russia)
- Aerges F-104 (Norway).
- Airplane Simulation Company C-130 (Norway / Sweden)
- Crosstail Studios A-1 (Sweden).
- Miltech 5 Bo-105 (Sweden / Finland).
- Polychop OH-58 (Sweden / Finland). (Simulate Jet Ranger).
-
2 hours ago, PAW said:
Kola map is a very nice thing, no question about it. But what I miss is always the same drama. You bring out new maps and the aircraft of the respective countries are missing. Norway, Sweden, Finland - "no" F-16, F/A18, F-15. Does it always have to go with some mods that are complete nonsense because hardly anyone uses them, and what if the other party doesn't use them? If you're going to bring out new maps, you should also make sure that the respective parties are also available.
No propper versions compared with the F-16CM blk 60, but Norway used F-16A/B MLU, Retired on 2022:
https://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article12.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aircraft_of_NorwayFinland use F/A-18C/D, to replace them with F-35A.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aircraft_of_FinlandSweeden has Grippens (and previously HB Viggens), but actualy none 3rd party has build that module, the same situation with the F-35A. Maps has open to use with the mission maker put on them, has none restricted.
Meanwhile NATO forces has deployed on Norway on Cold War (USAF / Marines / UK / Canadians, etc) and after, and now on Sweden and Finland.
-
10 hours ago, J-man said:
Interestingly, the newsletter in Steam ends on a slightly different sentence:
"We trust you enjoyed the DCS: F-16C GPS + INS Whitepaper and that the new save mission functionality will meet your needs. Please stay tuned for next week’s DCS Update!"
What new "save mission functionality"? That is not mentioned anywhere in the newsletter...
"Save mission funtionality" was talked by ED from some years ago as planned... now has light on the end of the tunnel. On fact, appears on the Features 2024 Newsletter.
-
2
-
-
When its done...
-
44 minutes ago, Schmidtfire said:
This should have been resolved the first weekend. Now it’s two months later.. What is still being discussed? Seems like a complete deadlock without any solution in sight.
I have spent hundreds of dollars on Razbam modules. The latest one still deep in EA. It does affect my willingness (at the moment) to buy other DCS World products or recommend others to do so. The whole 3rd party model as such is being tested.
Many cool modules and maps waiting on the horizon. Just hoping that this current situation won’t spoil all of that.
Someone missing with that has a "contract dispute", no a simple error... that require legal actions
QuoteFrom experience, corporate contract disputes often go months before even going to legal mediation, and often months after..
It's disappointing when people assume it's a simple "OK cool, handshake, signed check, resume work." between 2 people.
-
-
Do you have the newsletters, the develop videos and the forum post when have a progress or a update...What's wrong with keeping "paying customers" more informed about what is being worked on, and the progress being made?
Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk
-
By now, none 3rd Party has claims that module.
Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk -
Beta testers has required by vacant personal post request, and actualy ED has not post new posts require them.Hi ED,
do you ever need more of these? If yes, do you advertise as such, with the requirements?
Cheers.
'52
Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk
-
14 hours ago, tripod3 said:
Among other missiles, there will be improved KS-1 Comet with 130 km launch range.
My data about Badger B and KS-1 missiles. Remember the KS-1 has a Beam Riding / Terminal SHARH missile.
Tu-16KS [Badger B] Attack
Man Rtng: 0.5/0.5 Damage Value: 47
Size/Signature: Large/Large Bombsight: Ballistic
Counterm: 2nd Gen J&D Inflight Refuel: N
Sensors: K-1M Kobalt-1 radar, Gen 0 RWR
Throttle Setting/Speed in knots
Altitude Cruise Full Mil Reheat
Low: 300 360 --
Med: 430 480 --
High: 430 490 --
Ceiling: 12300 meters Engine Type: TJ
Cruise Range: 2635 nmi Int Fuel: 28730 kg
Ordnance Loadouts: Payload: 5445 kg
Off Guns: fixed single AM-23 23mm (1.4)
Def Guns: dorsal, ventral, tail twin AM-23 23mm (1.4) with PRS-1 Argon [Bee Hind] GFC
• 2 KS-1 Komet [AS-1 Kennel] missiles
Remarks: In Svc: 1954 - 1968
Must extend Kobalt-N guidance transmitter to provide missiles guidance, max speed 300 knots. KS-1 can only be launched from Medium altitude. Only 1 missile may be guided to seeker enable point per target per 120° target arc (max one a/c can attack at once). Tu-16KS must aim directly at target to provide guidance. Typical regiment is 16 Tu-16KS, 6 Tu-16SPS, 6 Tu-16Z.
• Deliveries: 68 Tu-16KS 1954-57, 59 Tu-16KS(ZA) 1957-58.
• Air Force regiments (TBAP) 1954-60: 12th Tartu, Estonia; 685th Ostrov, both in Baltic.
• Navy Regiments (MRAP): Black Sea at Gvardeskoye - 5th Guard Apr 56, 124th Jun 56; Baltic - 12th Tartu 1960-65; 170th 1956-May 61; Northern - 574th at Lakhta Nov 57; 924th Guards Jan 57, 987th 1957 at Severomorsk-3.
• Jun 57: Declared operational.
• 1958: Each aircraft may launch two missiles at one target.
• 1958-59: Inflight refueling training commences.
• 1960: Increased to 6 aircraft attacking at once per 60° target arc.
• 1961-62: 25 Tu-16KS, 100 KS-1 to Egypt. All destroyed Jun 67.
• 1962: 12 Tu-16KS, 100 KS-1 to Indonesia. Soviet support withdrawn 1965, Third World maintenance. Struck Oct 70.
• 1962 - 68: Remaining 50 converted to Tu-16KSR-2.K-1M Kobalt-1 radar
Country / System / Function / Gen / Range detection: Large / Medium / Small / VSmall / Stealthy / Engament Targets / Arc / IOC / Remarks
Russia / K-1, K-1M Kobalt-1 / Surface-Surface, Missile Fire Control / Gen 2 / 162 Nm / 134 Nm / 77 Nm / 43 Nm / 24 Nm / 1 Targer / 360° / 1955 / Tu-4KSKS-1 Missile
Country / Name / Guiadance / Gen / Range (nmi) / Speed (kts) / Flight Path / Hang Wt (kg) / Armour Penetration Damage (cm)1 / Signature / IOC / Remarks
Russia / KS-1 Komet [AS-1 Kennel] early versions / Beam-Riding/TSARH/1 Gen / 35 - 55 Nm / 572 Knts / Low Cr. / 2735 kg / 63+D6 31 / Small / 1955 - 69 / A
Russia / KS-1 Komet [AS-1 Kennel] late versions / Beam-Riding/TSARH/1 Gen / 35 - 70 Nm / 572 Knts / Low Cr. / 2735 kg / 63+D6 31 / Small / 1957 - 69 / BA: Single msl in flight at one time. Terminal homing at 10 nmi.
B: Aircraft can guide 2 msls at once at same target. Terminal homing at 10 nmi.-
4
-
-
Whats the status?
in RAZBAM
Posted
The API has the SDK, required to all 3rd parties build propper aircrafts / helos modules on DCS World. Maps require the TDK API. All provided by ED.