ViFF

Just for the fun of it I'd like to try installing 2.0 on our server without the NTTR and try to host a mission but I have a hunch that it will not work...

Good question! I totally agree with you, ED should not make "stuff" for free, but I think that some "stuff" is real content like 3d art and textures and systems modelling and some "stuff" is code that enables the product to run that content better/bigger/faster/smoother in multiplayer sessions. The interesting thing here is that many people who join multiplayer end up buying more modules from ED as a result of them having a good experience in those sessions. The existance of the multiplayer session is in part the result of content created by mission designers. So in fact ED is benefiting from this partnership of giving "stuff" for free (mission editor, free hosting, etc) for the community to create a synergy that becomes to the benefit of ED . DCS World is similar in that respect: you can host missions with all the paid content (aircraft modules) without having to own a key for all the modules available to be flown in the mission you are hosting. Similarly, a dedicated server shouldn't need any user content such as 3d art and textures, only the code necessary to host a session, and a command line or window based form of console / UI to manage it without any question of having this key or that key for an aircraft or for a map. The common practice of other developers is the same, they offer free dedicated server able to do hosting sessions for users that have all or partial content of the product. IL2 1946 - free dedicated server IL2 COD - free dedicated server IL2 BoS/BoM - free dedicated server ARMA 3 - free dedicated server Sorry, I'm from IL2 so other then ARMA this list is just off the top of my head but I'm sure there are more examples. Cheers

I highly doubt ED has any interest to get into the server hosting business. That is relevant for business like Gaijin who have their War Thunder / World of Tanks / World of Warships business models based on "Pay to Win". Cheers

If there was a real dedicated server executable available we shouldn't need to buy the map for hosting session on a server that has only a console to manage the session.

Sorry if this has been discussed before, I searched but could not find any discussion or request on the subject. Will the dedicated servers need to purchase the Normandy map? For example the server DCS ISRAEL is not a PC in somebody's home but on a dedicated root server sitting in a data center. This server has been financed every year since 2013 by the Israeli community and friends when we transitioned to DCS from IL2. We have been hosting missions on this server for the benefit of the whole DCS community as well as our own, and you find the server on the public list 24/7 with it being 99% of the time open without password for anybody to join and have fun on mission setups like the "Training for All" and the "Ace of Spades" Air to Air engagements with exports to statistic pages that was created by Xcom. Similarly I imagine that there are other data center located servers that have been a long time with DCS World, with involved people creating missions and hosting for the benefit of the whole community, like TAW and STP and some others I apologies in advance for not mentioning, but the list isn't that large. In short I am asking here of the community managers here (Sith, etc) please ask on behalf of us who have been actively hosting DCS World dedicated servers for several years now to make some kind of arrangement that we won't have to buy an additional key of the Normandy map just for having it run on our dedicated server that sits in a data center. I hope we can reach some sort of trust based arrangement similar to what was done for the IL2 BoS/BoM dedicated servers who did not need to buy an additional copy of IL2 BoS/BoM just for the sake of them being able to run a dedicated server host. S!

Zeus, please also bindings for [Next_Program] and [Previous_Program] S!

Zeus loves the community, really. If I were in his place I would have kept some of the tech to be available only on the Mirage 2000D, which if they do end up doing will be a day 1 purchase for me :D But don't get me wrong, I am very happy for the C getting this tech. I also think it was a very good decision to make it a selectable option to have or not. Just one small question: will the option be in the arming on the ramp or only in the mission editor? S! and thank you for all the work you are doing. :pilotfly:

Oh Look... F-18s at Mesa Airstrip - but its privately owned by the US Dept. of Energy! F-86s at Beatty Airport - such a small general aviation airfield! F-15s at Mesquite - such a small runway only 5,000 feet! Where is the realism police!!! this is not fun! shame!!! :megalol:

Did you read the part where it says that DCS is a "Sandbox Simulation" ? ERR WHAT???!!! :doh: Actually the Russian birds like the MiG-29 are quite capable of operating from dirt strips, and so is the A-10. I am all for the idea of adding fake ramp with parking spots for the small airfields like Mina whether it be for P-51s or F-15s. S!

I respectfully disagree. I think the majority would prefer the Mirage IIICJ Shahak. Cheers

Once the radar is turned off is it possible that the magic seeker will lose lock if the intensity of the IR signature is weak? Or is it's all aspect capability very good enabling it to stay locked even at the weakest IR signature?

I found a couple of sources in Hebrew that mention the radar was removed after the 1967 war, replaced by a small counter weight to keep the CG from moving too far back. It was probably after the arrival of the F-4E in 1970 because the two types worked together, for example the trap that they laid to the MiG 21s flown by Soviet pilots. I will try to find some more information... S!

wow.. what a fat turkey from that angle

There was no RWR on the Mirage IIIC Shahak. This is a 1960 fighter jet that was first received in the IAF back in 1962. You don't get any warning that a radar is looking at you or locking you up or any launch warning for that matter. The IAF pilots had to spot all the SA-2 and SA-3 launches against them visually, and they would perform their break turns instinctively as the missiles got close. In the literature that I have read in Hebrew the IAF pilots described the SA-2's as a "big brightly burning long telephone poles rising from the ground and coming right at you!" So these were easy to spot, but the SA-3 was a little trickier, because of its smaller length and slightly smaller size the SA-3 could easily be mistaken for an SA-2 being further away and not realizing it is actually the smaller SA-3 and its much closer then you think! The method used by the IAF pilots was to scan for launches and wait for the missiles to take their interception vectors. Once they see them inbound they would pick out the ones that "stop moving" relative to them - these are the ones that need to be outmanuvered! I read accounts of pilots having to dodge 4 to 5 missiles at the same time. In the 1967 war it wasn't too bad as there were only a few systems in place, mostly by the Egyptians. Starting from the 1970 attrition skirmishes and the full blown 1973 war this was becoming a serious problem as there many overlapping systems that were moved right up to the suez canal and there was also the newer SA-6 that was very maneuverable at low altitude, very difficult SAM to dodge. The proliferation of the ZSU-23 Shilka with their radar guided cannons and the advent of the shoulder launched SA-7 made low flying very very very dangerous... Interesting times ahead... Cheers

after start up quickly rev the engine to max while I hold the brake handle and full right rudder! lets see if the gyroscopic percession will push the nose over and plant the prop into the ground :)

There's just one small problem with this tactic: When doing a 360 degree big circle (12nm) around a target area you're *twice* crossing the FLOT / FLET / FEBA and at the furthest point from friendly forces placing yourself 12nm deep inside enemy held territory, which you can expect will be covered by overlapping air defense assets. Wrong choice of tactic in a battlefield aside, it is otherwise a good video and I enjoyed it. S!

I am very much interested in this for a mission that will feature areas with heavy jamming. Would be brilliant if the "certain aircraft" can be a helicopter, vehicle, or even a ground object with antennas that van be a stand-in for a jamming station. example of jamming helicopter Mi-8: S!

Perhaps is there any kind of script that I can use to render INOP the radars of the F-15 and Su-27?

Hi all, I would like to know if it is possible to create an area of heavy jamming, or simply have the whole theatre / map in a state of jamming, i.e. any radar equipped airplane will see his scope completely cluttered with jamming. Thanks in advance for any ideas how to implement this. S!

No, the "Fog of War" setting (which is required for GCI) in the F10 View Settings options allow missiles to be seen by the GCI, but from my experience I'm not sure if they are 100% seen all the time as I have seen some sneaky attacks take place while I was GCI. S!

The Block 52 is the one that fits snugly into the 1990s time frame of DCS. The later blocks are beyond the time frame of the Russian airplanes. Another point worth mentioning is that the Block 52 can also nicely represent the MLU program implemented in the late 90s by the European countries operating F-16s. Cheers!

:thumbup: thank you... this is very important!

Actually even the MF and PFM variants are far ahead when considering an equivalent era adversary. The variants encountered and engaged in combat by the Mirage IIICJ of the IAF were the: MiG-21F-13 (1960; Izdeliye 74; NATO "Fishbed-C") in the 1967 Six Day war MiG-21PF (1961; Izdeliye 76; NATO "Fishbed-D") in the 1973 Yom Kippur war / October war Also, in the 1967 Six Day War most of the aerial engagements of the IAF Mirage IIICJ were against MiG-17s and MiG-19s... S!

Hi Ciribob, Please, could this feature be disabled by default for the clients in CA slots? Reason is that they are usually doing GCI or ground based FAC duties. For example: The ground based FAC would be in a command car / hummer outfitted with a SINCGARS (or the older AN/VRC-12 set plus the AN/PRC-113 and -117 just to make sure he has the whole range covered) and several receivers, each of them with their own separate antennas (typically 2 to 3 receivers). With each receiver having a separate antenna there is no distortion. The FAC uses the one transceiver to jump between the various frequencies he needs to transmit on. Cheers!

from this post: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2853169 But from what I have experienced so far, I get better sustained turn rate with flaps in FXD rather then AUTO. It would be interesting to do a circle competition between two F-5: one with flaps on AUTO the other with flaps on FXD and see who has better turn performance. S!