NineLine

Hi all, as stated earlier we will look at Terrain Avoidance down the road, but currently it's low priority versus other tasks, the F/A-18C pilots we talked to say they have used this system 0% of the time for their flights.

Ok, the issue was partial fixed but as you can see still has issues, its still a high priority to fix and the team is on it. Thanks!

Thanks, I will look into this.

In this short DCS: F-16C Viper video, we’ll be discussing the new option to select how the control stick Flight Control System dead zone and force gradient is calculated. Until now, the dead zone and force gradient has been calculated based on the actual F-16C FLCS input logic. However, this has been best used with Force Sensitive sticks, and not self-centering, spring-loaded sticks that the vast majority of DCS pilots use. In the last update, we added the option to either use the actual dead zone and force gradient settings for the F-16C or one that mimics your Axis Tuning values. Select the Option gear icon, then the Special Tab, and finally the F-16C. When enabled for pitch and roll, the actual FLCS control gradient is used, and best for force sensing sticks. When not enabled, it uses a linear gradient and best for traditional self-centering sticks. When enabled, the pitch dead zone is also set to a realistic value of 4.375% and roll dead zone of 5.9%, but again, this is best used for force sensitive sticks. If not enabled, the dead zone will mimic your Axis Tuning dead zone setting. Please be careful when setting the dead zone if you are not sure about the centering of your joystick. A dead zone setting of just 0% could result in commanded inputs like disabling autopilot. Remember that even a little control stick input can result in disabling the autopilot. From the Special Tab, you also can manually set pitch and roll dead zone values. We hope that this improvement will better allow players, regardless of their control stick type, to get the maximum performance out of their DCS Viper.

Thanks will look into it.

It is the better modelling of radar shadows behind objects, we have had it for terrain for a long time but we are also now adding it for ground structures. Thanks.

I am sorry to say that this could not be further from the truth. Currently, most of our Viper work is focused on the Sniper Pod, radar and DTC. These tasks are manpower intensive and demand a lot of attention and work. You may see lulls in patch notes but that does not equate to lack of care, moving on or abandoning. The Viper is a flagship module for us, I do not see work on it stopping anytime soon. Thanks.

Hi, the thread is marked as investigating, meaning we are looking into it. Many of our SME's are not looking for attention, or in some cases are not even on these forums. We do not divulge sources or contacts just to do so. So yes, to a certain degree after many many years in the flight sim business, you will have to "trust us". So trust us that if it's marked investigating we feel there is enough to take a look at the issue noted. Thanks.

As mentioned in last week's newsletter. the F/A-18C is undergoing a refactoring of the FM/FCS. Please test again one this effort is complete and let us know and If you still see issues, please reply back with tracks. Thanks!

Yes, we always request this. How long it takes is generally up to the creator of that map. Thanks.

We have been doing some heavy testing on this and have decided for this upcoming patch to roll back the changes so that we have more time to prepare a system that will adjust the don't based on what headset you are using (or if you are on 2D). We are also looking to see if some options to adjust yourself would make sense as well. We are sorry for the delays on this but trying to test across a broad sample of setups does take time.

Very nice template, thanks for doing this!

These are created by the team that makes the specific map. Thanks.

Hidden off-topic, this is about news related to the dispute, the countdown is about them attending the show in Japan, if you look at the countdown image on their website its background is a blurred and darkened image from that show. Not for discussion here. Thanks.

They are still there, although very subtle. We are working on standardizing these effects and then looking at the possibilities of user options for strength. Thanks.

The thread is marked as investigating, let the team investigate. We were addressing another user about the document mentioned. We are well aware of it and BN responded. Thanks. Edit: The team is investigating this, I will lock it for now and when/if we need more info we will share it. Thanks.

Sorry all, this seems to have gonna off the rails now. Closing. Thanks all.

Please keep the discussion on the newsletter, thanks.

Slip up, was supposed to be a M-2000 campaign, not the module, we are waiting on the Steam person to fix.

Nope, probably just a mistake, I have asked our Steam guy what is up already. It was the M-2000 campaign that was supposed to be 25% off not the module, so it was a mistake on the guy setting the prices for Steam, but as I said its been pointed out to him to fix.

It depends on the surface, areas around runways and such do not throw up dust, this is a known issue with terrains. Other locations should show it just fine. Thanks

It should be in the next release, so you can check again then. Thanks.

It's a Combat Simulator, it's a game, many games are simulators, and nothing needs to be changed or noted. People should understand that we are not making a military-grade sim for their living room. You are buying a game, it's a Simulator game no more or less than any other type of simulator game found on any other platform for sale for Windows PCs. I am not sure if that is a serious question. Once again, these modules were never meant to be 1:1 replications of the real aircraft for an assortment of reasons. I am not saying that this means any of the listed modules are finished, I am only pointing out that they will never be exact. Whether its unavailable documents, protected systems, requests from manufactures, etc.

LOD tables are being redone, but this is also a huge undertaking, so things are being worked on even if it takes time. Understand that some of these changes need to be made before moving forward, such as multithreading, etc.

There are a few things to consider with this though. 1) The A-10C and Ka-50 benefited from other work outside of DCS that afforded much more detail and the permission to have that detail, not every module has this sort of access and we MUST be careful what we model and what we don't. 2) If you expect a 1:1 simulation of a military aircraft that are still in service or recently in service you will be disappointed. Even the A-10C as much as it had/has is still missing a lot of things that are simply not allowed to be included. This includes flight modelling, weapons and systems. We are not making something that can be used to train pilots to fly, and we are especially not making something to train pilots to fight against. 3) This is an entertainment product, a game. It is also very complex for many things that we are allowed to model, it doesn't mean that the instructions on how to model it are in a manual somewhere, in that the code needs to be created for any source material we can use. You cannot copy and paste that into DCS and it magically works. Many of the systems on the F/A-18C, AH-64D and F-16C are more complex than many things seen in the early modules. Even the CH-47F has a completely different Flight Model than we have ever done, so it has its own challenges. DCS is and always will be a journey, especially when you get in on day 1 of Early Access, some days it can be frustrating but I think I can safely say that all our modules, even the ones not complete are still a ton of fun. And even though they are not 1:1 simulations, we hope you find them to be, when completed, to be a very faithful and immersive experience. All the aircraft listed above are still being worked on. We are not done with them and they will continue to get better. Thanks