derelor

Thanks, already reported (ticket #37346).

Already logged as ticket #37510.

Correct

Thanks, reported as ticket #37523.

Thanks, already known (#37310).

Already reported (ticket #37346).

Guys, please post bugs and problems in the "Bugs and Problems" subforum (1 thread per issue): https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=529 Thank you!

Thanks, already known (ticket #37504).

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=181514

Nice! Thank you!

Thank you, reported as ticket #37421.

What version of DCS are you running, DonJosh? Is the problem always there or only in special situations? I'm not seeing the issue in our latest development build.

According to the devs this is not a bug. IIRC in the D-9 only the left-most "Verschlusskontrollzeichen" is connected to the circuit (see attachment). The other three indicators are always off, because they are not connected. For the rest the upper red indicators (Verschlusskontrollampen) are used instead - probably because they can be better observed by the pilot. I am not 100% sure this really is correct and I don't understand why only three electrical indicators are used and not four. Maybe someone can shed some light on this issue so I can bring it to the developer's attention again?

I am glad to be part of this great community! The ED forums (and the bugtracker) are my second home where I learn new things every day. Over the years, I was lucky to interact with a lot of members mostly as part of my testing duties or from participation in virtual squadrons. A lot of friendly and very smart people from all over the world helped me to help improve the simulation. I even met some great community members in real life and made real “offline” friends. Flight simulator communities have always been “special” to me. People take their hobby far too seriously at times, myself included. On the one hand, we want our study sim to get as close as possible to (the impossible) 100% accurateness. On the other hand, we must not forget that ED needs to keep profitable, otherwise they will get out of business and development of our simulator will cease from one day to the next. While attention to detail is very important, it should not distract from the bigger goals of making a profit and expanding the simulation. We also have to accept that, in order to really experience 100% realism, one has to go out and fly the real aircraft. I think we should not expect a 50€ desktop simulator to perform better than a multi-million dollar simulator used to train real pilots and match all parameters of a particular aircraft perfectly. However, I can perfectly understand the frustration when a reported issue about one’s favorite module is not fixed immediately. After becoming a tester, at first I became frustrated, too, when I invested a lot of time to research and report several (minor) issues and not seeing them fixed relatively fast. At one point during development of the F-86F, I became so fixated on the bugs instead of enjoying the sim, I almost did not want to fly the module anymore, because I focused too much on the issues and only saw the errors. In the end, almost all my reported errors got fixed eventually. So, if you ever find yourself in the above situation, my suggestion is to support us by trying to give constructive criticism and to give it time. Take a step back, relax and try to take a look at the bigger picture. Keep in mind that even if an issue seems easy to fix, there is always the possibility that touching a specific part of the code to fix one issue introduces another, so careful testing is needed, which takes time. I know this can be hard, but try to keep a positive attitude and enjoy what you have so far. Please refrain from destructive aggressiveness, personal attacks, etc. – these do not belong here! Despite all its shortcomings, DCS in its current state certainly is an amazing product that you can have a hell of a lot of fun with – especially now with VR. And yes, even without a flyable F-18! With so much good stuff on the horizon, I am sure 2017 will be a great year for DCS!

Excellent! The recent progress and the news that the module will be finalized soon both make me very happy! In my opinion, documentation, avionics, internal and external models are already of very high quality. I am more than confident that the two AFMs will also not disappoint and that in the end they will be worth the long wait. You have set yourselves a difficult task providing two different aircraft variants in a single module. I know I say this for a lot of DCS videos and trailers, but your trailer really is exceptionally well done - especially the shots with cockpit lighting at night. Awesome! Let me tell you that I appreciate all the hard work your small team has invested into the module and that I am thankful for your perseverance and persistence in spite of all obstacles.

Einen guten Rutsch ins neue Jahr!

Welcome back!

Thank you for the update! Nice to see progress. I'm sure the EFM will be worth the wait. Merry Christmas, everyone!

Very sorry to hear that. I hope you get well soon!

Thank you, Dzen. I reflew the mission today and everything worked flawlessly. I think I may have turned left too early after takeoff...

Thanks kontiuka! Please review.

I have an issue with mission #02 ("Airferry"): Directly at waypoint 3, I always get the message "Deviation from the route. MISSION FAILED!". I don't know what I am doing wrong, I believe I fly exactly according to flight plan (i.e. follow the river to Vladikavkaz) and tried different heights including nap-of-the-earth flying. Does anyone have the same issue? What am I doing wrong? Great campaign so far!

Incorrect - they recently became darker (I'm not sure why this was changed, though).

Thanks, please review changes in updated document.

Yes, it would be a nice feature. There is already a ticket for it (#31016)...