Bucic

I for one get your point. From a point of view of someone passionate about DCS things have been rather quiet since the release of the new fog rendering. So this newsletter, after the last update being solely on mission updates, can seem like a filler. That is all. I'm pretty sure most people are hopeful things are going to pick up some pace before we go into the second quarter. Especially with regard to The Core.

Some of my very best ones I shared in the first impressions thread

My suggestions on behalf of all the DCS dads: 1. Top 10-50 for each category based on rating and downloads. Monthly picks maybe as well? 1a. Same as above but additionally curated by ED. 2. One click "Watch" plus "Watched" in the user profile that is filter-able by category. 3. "Ignore" per category. 4. Liveries: 2 separate "Fictional" subcategories: one for completely fictional, one for "misplaced" liveries that are of very high fidelity to the originals but are implemented for a different unit or country. Example: Stock ED-provided RAF livery in the F-5E module.

ED: "we are limited to how much we can include to save hard drive space" Heatblur in Bentusi voice: WE WILL NOT BE BOUND! Seriously, I hope there's going to be some policy established in this regard. A policy that wouldn't even be needed if not for Heatblur.

So bob weight implementation is missing. Thanks for the info.

Could you please give an example of what's wrong or missing?

When you increase the airspeed after trimming the aircraft a forward pressure on the stick is going to be required. The weight bob is a single small weight that works upon acceleration only (G). There is no airspeed dependent force feel mechanism in the F-5 family of aircraft.

@_BringTheReign_No worries. You're doing god's works. As for BOM errors I wouldn't say they were critical unless someone orders nuts and bolts with not a single spare. Please take a look at our email (subject line: F-5 century series grip - availability of units for sale) and forum PM conversations. I just did and can't see those BOM notes, sorry. I'm sure I mentioned it).

Might be an error. There are still errors in the BOM as well, as far as I remember.

OK, questions from my side are going to make more sense after I actually read a GBU-any employment procedure in the F-5E... for the first time in my life

Ah. Any technical or employment differences worth noting?

According to DCS manual the F-5E only has the GBU-12 in the arsenal. Other variants aren't even mentioned.

Understood. I edited the previous post to also include a document on spin recovery investigation. I like how one of the docs called F-5E an air superiority fighter. I understand some may chuckle at it but the more I learn about the plane the less funny it sounds. The shark nose, LERX, handling studies, safeguards... Back on topic: I've noticed recently that the horizontal stabiliser movement rate is some twice faster for pitch down, compared to pitch up. I have a drawing of the horstab assembly but I'm not sure whether the behaviour stems purely from the geometries or is 8t an internal implementation done inside the end hydraulic actuator unit.

@Flappie@NineLine There's a comprehensive mildoc on F-5E fatigue evaluation program. Do you have it? It goes by ADA032403.pdf. While usefulness of a fatigue-related infor for DCS is low, the document has a section summarizing past STATIC TESTING done on the F-5E. EDIT: I also have a model spin-tunnel investigation for spin recovery, including the effect of external stores. It's AF-AM-422 or NASA TM SX-3556. Just going through my library...

Watch the first 8 seconds of this video. I don't even have to ask to know he's using MSAA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WajlGAJFbrM

It was just for fun. At one point I could let go off the stick and maintain over 15 deg AoA.

Ad ps: Amen! Turning F-5E into an F-35 by draining the front tank first is so much fun! Ad pps: The real flight manual is pretty clear on the very specific scenarios you might want to deviate from AUTO. You might read up on that. Hint: It's easy to confuse descriptions of flap operations for different F-5E variants.

When you hit the key command for the DCS built-in performance metrics (RCtrl+Pause?) it opens another floating window with lots of additional info, including current (real-time) FOV. I fancied below 60 deg so I set it right in the DCS graphics (system) settings. A kind reminder: seat height adjustment is bugged (reported). You need to untick 'Show pilot body' in DCS to inhibit the bug until it is resolved.

Cold you post a track?

Welcome to F-5E No RadAlt either, no INS.

The new South-East Asia livery, NTTR. (middle mouse button click or open LINK in new tab on mobile for "original" images)

OK, time to join in. I planned on making my own issue report but it seems our observations overlap. So, in the order from specific (1A through 1C) to general with regard to deep night cockpit lighting 1A. Knobs and switches on the side left and right consoles are invisible in dark night conditions while in reality the mere ambient light that the panel backlight give out would be enought to light them. The darker the night, the clearer the phenomenon. 1B. Knobs and switches should even more so be visible in the presence of dedicated ambient lighting in use anywhere in the cockpit. 1C. Not a single cockpit component should be anywhere close to invisible at night unless in an outright shadow. If anyone intends to insist on blinding effects, let's be real here. This sort of mechanism can only be achieved once the overall cockpit lighting is sorted and even then it will remain highly debatable due to the differences between accomodation of a real eye in such an environment and the perception in a display-player setup. 2. The left and right consoles seem to be barely affected by cockpit ambiet lighting overall. I know all GPU coding is cheating but the F-5E side panels seem to have gotten the dirty end of the stick. They seem to have "affected by ambient lighting" attribute "not enabled." 3. The two ambient behind-the-ear lamps are non-functional. They do light up and blind the player if in the field of view being 100% white but don't give any meaningful lighting effects to the cockpit panels, consoles etc. For starters, here's a full video recording of one of my test flights. I've done several sessions in that particular IA night flight Caucasus mission. Sometime later I'm going to include a track file. Additionally, here's a photo of a real F-5E panel with backlight on, 100% brightness. ... EDIT: Track file attached. SPECS Gamma 2.1-2.2 LG 27GP850 27" 1440p IPS 165 Hz G-Sync 108.79 PPI 16:9 (1.78:1) RTX 2070 MSI Ventus 8GB Intel Core i3-12100F Windows 10 bug F-5E REM cockpit ambient light 2025-02-06.trk dcs - Copy 2025-01-06 bug F-5E REM cockpit ambient light.log

This is definitely a 2024 fall/winter regression. My DCS time is almost always an F-5E routine, same IA missions. I immediately noticed something's seriously off with MSAA. It's hard for me to narrow it down as I didn't update for about 3 months prior to F-5E Remastered release.

Floodlight #2 They don't turn on or they don't give adequate flood lighting to the cockpit. If the first, then try to manipulate the lighting knobs on the right console.

Track and dcs.log included along with some screeenshots. Check out the wing-to fuselage fairing (trailing blending profile) on that C-17 against the bright background. There are 100% not-anti-aliased blocks of pixels there. https://1drv.ms/f/c/66cf2646234394fc/EowPEn5iAQxCrDzmIbQQ_80Bp1jRvZTWnyfm5upSgGZikQ?e=FOKfn9 nVidia RTX 2070, nVidia Studio driver MSAA 4x vs DLAA with 0.75 sharpening @Flappie Please check your PM for the relevant DXdiag.