Repvez

and the big question is that the mig29A will be payed modul or an upgrade the exist modul? because the MIG-29A is already exist in two different shape. one FC3 bundle and one separate modul. both of them the same and their have already new accurate 3d model and cockpit. So the "new" release only contain the clickable cockpits and the backsystems or plus more improved 3d model? it will be upgrade automatically for everybody who already has the modul? Will the future plan be that the non full fidelity modules upgrade to be the dcs more consistent level?

yes agree, that's why writhe the damage model upgrade. Because the AC's have all system realiszicly modelled, but almost never use it for emergency case. I never experienced that I have only minor failure, fuel leaking or hydraulic problem to manage the emergency landing procedures. Nor I had to use the fire extinguisher system for engine fire ,airstart because of engine stall or stops or that I need to make the belly landing due to the landing gear failure. When I got shot, every time got instant explosion or such failure that I had to eject . I never used the trim to compensate the instabilities of the damage to reach the nearest airfield

The whole video is like a movie with real AC. I like to watch it every time . But what it is disappoint me a lot is that the damage model looks like. Since DCS1.5 isch every jet have a similar visual damage. break 3 pieces and burning like a hell, but the most annoying thing with this that the 2 wingtip which are most of the time not contain any fuel or just some quantity, burning longer and stronger than the whole fuselage where is located the majority of fuel and other burnable stuffs. The second thing the ejection sequences. There is a hyper realistic 3d modell and the whole AC acting like the real one but when the pilot need to escape from in it they get a arcade style ejection . Even the newest modul the F4 has the same .There is no any differences the high speed and low altitude , low speed low altitude, or high speed high altitude and low speed high altitude scenario. not mentioned to eject from the difficult position zero-zero or differences between the types of seats. every time it just repeat the same scenario, maybe it calculate with the momentum of the seat and some time delay open the parachute and if the pilot has enough room from the ground he survive, in the other case not. If the dynamic campagn will be introduce sometime. this event will cause a big difference the result of battle. Because it does matter that the pilot survive of the ejection and need to generate a rescue mission to them to pick up and fly another mission later on or lost the pilots and there won't enough remain to fight longer.

The biggest problem for me, that there is no any AC for multirole or at least precision attack in eastern side. unfortunately in real life neither. very limited of capability for self targeting for laser guided bombs. no targeting pod for MIG29 or Szu-35 or even laser, TV or radar guided weapons. Yes,I know there is some, but they are not use very often. So even if we get a full fidelity Mig 29 we don't have any multirole AC compare with the west side .There are multiple AC are capable ti carry and use those systems.

on one point I agree with the government. because even if the MIG29 is old , but through the DCS sombody (mainly terrorists) maybe learn, how can they start and operate them . Without DCS they never get this information and practice for them underground. The other hand I also agree someone who say there isn't any hide detail about the MIG29 because lot of plane were used by NATO country for so many years so the opposite side well known every details about them. So every aspect have a sttong argument

yes it totally understand that some system stil classified and not put in the game, but what about the unclassified systems or common used one ? The MIG 15/17/19/21 modul also use some similar or identical system like the mig 29 and the RAZBAM mig 23 also has some and already exist in game. So why can't put those in the MIG29 3d model? they don't need to work realistically only act like that. the hydraulic, electric and radio etc. have a similar job on the aircraft.

yes you are right not always only 80% of cases. and the result is the same 3 pieces of aircraft part I know that WW2 has a new DM that is why ask what about the jets?

I totally agree that the eastern type aircraft should go to high fidelity version , at least clickable cockpits. I don't understand that why only the MIG29 and szu 27 are not upgraded in the game properly. The opposite site the KA50 is a advanced attack helikopter which was the base of the KA52 and it has already 3 iteration of high fidelity version , not just 3d but system level. The Mig 29 special the A version I think it isn't use anymore so its outdated and most of the system fully identical like the MIG21 and 19 which are also implemented in the game fully. But let agree that the government is not allowing to do the realistic way, but why not to do that only kind of realistic? I mean if we switch a button for the battery then we can figure out what should happen without any manual. If we just see the input and the output, but we don't know what the realistic way for it in behind the scene it doesn't matter but at least it seems to work like the real one. And also strange that most of the eastern weapons are developed fully and use on the other aircraft. All in all, if they say that the government not allowed to do Russian aircraft then why are them there in game right now too? And the other hand I don't think the west gave the all technical manual for every aircraft and even put also such a system in game which are not so advance in the eastern part. but they did figour out how can they implement in game .

Any update about the DM for jets ? I saw the 2023 and beyond video and I saw that the jets explode exact the same way like earlier. and I also didn't read in the news letter that the DM will be upgraded in this year. It is very sad to see that when the other visuals are almost look like the real , but the explosions and the DM is result the same damage always . ( 3 broken pieces of plane , 1 fuselage and 2 wingtips) The another piece of thing the ejection. Is there any plan that it will be upgraded ? sometime the ejection could be survivable if the ejection could acting more realistically. Especially at low and high speed. It will be more crucial in dynamic campang, if it counting at all that the pilot is ejected safely in enemy territory. And the DC engine will generate a rescue mission or not. we will have a lot of KIA MIA or POW pilots instead of the rescued ones. And these two factors are combined also. Because the DM are acting like this as now. We can't able to reach to the base or even the friendly territory with the damage plane. IF the DM just blow up the plane at every missile hit we can't eject . Both cases we lost the pilots and the planes.

Yes, The explosions need some love. Not so bad, but every explosions are similar. there is no different between how big the bombs are or which direction can arrived from. the explosions' smoke and dusts go always vertically. there is no counting the inertia of the moved ground by bomb. Or there is no effect if something block the ways of smoke or dusts and they can move only sideways as the example video is showed above. And not only the ground explosions. the air explosions are also always the same . it doesn't matter where can hit the aircraft always boke 3 pieces one fuselage and 2 wing tips, and also the two wingtips are burning much longer and stronger than the fuselage one , but I don't know why, because most of the time the wingtips are not carry any fuel .at least not much than the fuselage. There can be modifying some vary in these damage. sometime it is very funny to see when there are some update which are fixed something not so visible or not big problem but there are some which are high visible and never touched to fix it or update for ages .

Hi, Can you explain , how can we use the new RSR or FSR features within DCS or is it supported at all? with Normal monitor az VR environment also. If it works , how can we enabled it what criteria need for? If not can you planning to be supported this feature in the close future ?

Is there any chance to change the unrealistic damage model for the all jets? Why happens is that the planes always break 3 pieces and the small wingtips are burning much stronger and longer than the main fuselage? The F18 folded wingtip doesn't have fuel tank and the F16 either and the WW2 birds also have the same situation .But there is the new damage engine there and still do like this. It doesn't matter if we hit with missile or cannon or just break due to the G force the result is the same all the time.

thank you your fast reply. I forgot to mentioned that I want to total modifying the whole joy. I want to change the gimbals and the throttle base also. I will design and 3d printed for a new case and I will make a new PCB with pro micro.A only want to use the handle of the FLCS and TQS, but also modified to fit the switch in there. The purpose is that It will be a long life controller without any physical and electronic problem. So if somebody has a good 3d model about the handles than I would be happy to use it for this project. about the T4 and T5, yes I know that it is the different between them but I mean that there are lot of different part number for the T5 like : T5-CK2212, T5-0079, T5-MB1212, T5-CJ1112 etc.. many of them but they look like the same. and also the same for the T4 . And I saw there is with Threaded body also which I think would be easier to put in the place than with electric tape or hot clue. Yes UI know there is need to design the Threaded hole also or a nut to hold .

Hi I found this topic and I would like to ask somebody who have a little experience about the otto switches. I have a Plastic (first version) TM F16FLCS/TQS and I would like to upgrade the whole inside , but I need some information . Those switches are usable for this Joystick also?The control panel would be an MMJOY2 with arduino pro micro. or do you know better softver for this panel? The most needed thing would be the TQS erase head ministick. can somebody offer which switch would be the best to replace it? linear X,Y axis and push button. There is any hall effect sensor version from otto or other cheapest solution? The PS3 minijoy and PSP doesn't fit in it. like this:https://www.otto-controls.com/products/electromechanical-switches/transducers J2S2 or J4 ? And also there would be nice If I find a good hall effect solution for all potentionmeter in the TQS. And what about the Trigger there is any alternate to replace it ? I found this but it is also very expensive: https://www.otto-controls.com/u2-016 or others And do you know what the differences the T4 and T5 4 way switches except the push function? because there is many of them on the site but they have different part number but they look like to be all identical . https://hu.mouser.com/c/electromechanical/switches/multi-directional-switches/

Yes, this is the problem, that every modul use different method for same purpose. so it cause more space and more difficulties to eliminate bugs and make patch. I think you misunderstood me. I didn't say that the unifiedity would be simplicity, it should be use the same principles but different adjustment to match every kind of aircraft. I mean, every aircraft has kompresszor, combustor chamber, turbine, control surfaces, same purpose devices ,these could be the unified base thing like a skeleton , but every aircraft could be different data for them , different compressor ratio, different temperature etc. every people has same skeleton but there is no two same people in the world either. I wish, but I can't programming, and I don't have support to do that. Yes as always everything says about the money. the open source doesn't mean it cost nothing, or illegal, but you can buy books or manuals from library or stores to get the info what you need without the restrictions.

No I don't think so, but everything is already exist in the game which they can use it that the cockpits can be upgraded . The things which are missing from the FC3 we can find it in different modul , because the radar , the radio , the RWS an the others are working the same principles. The only differences would be the different place and switches in the cockpit but they do the same (change the channel, adjust the volume, turn on the systems) As I mentioned, they just mimic the functions of the real aircraft. And most of the case the Russian aircraft use the same devices too independent the type of aircraft. just need some tuning for them . What would be so difficult that the MIG29 get the same function from the MIG21 or the upcoming mig23 with some adjustantions? That is why would be nice if the DCS have the same base skeletons for every aircraft. same jet engine module but adjustable for every aircraft, same radar principles etc.. It is allowed to make modding much easier or new aircraft for the 3rd party studios. because all would be the same detail of level. there wouldn't be a big difference between the modules. they can focus more on the 3d model.

Yes I know, but the FC3 was the beginning, so there was not opportunity to do the full clickable cockpit because of the games development state that time. By now they can upgrade them as they did the others , and they also updated the 3D exterior model and the cabin also, so there could have been a occasion to upgrade them and sell them separate. So if somebody want to fly with clickable they can buy them separate and somebody not there is the FC3 as it is. That is what I mean , if it is not 100% accurate or made from the manual just mimic the real one, but the whole thing was figoure out by the developer it should not cause any problem. because there is only the input (switch set on ) and the result (light bulb on ) will be the only match the original real one but between them just fiction. But even such way is give a bigger immersive to use than now. And as it we have a MiG 29 right now, so they won't do the other one with full clickable version. that is why would be nice the all modul would be the same level. I totally agree with that, but if they just use the open source data there is no violence. Or they just use the same way than the others or just put some thing like the common sense.

Hi! Can anybody answer about that why the FC3 aircraft not have clickable cockpits? I heard some rumours about that the Russia government not allowed to use the manuals of the mig 29 and szu25, szu27 for them, but ED did the PFM flight model with CFM about the MiG 29, and now they realised the CFM data about the R-27 . So my questions are if they don't have a right to make a realistic virtual model from manuals then why can make so accurate model for them that the western states compare easier the east aircraft and weapons for the west counterparts? And also I don't understand that these aircraft are not the most advanced version or even they don't use them anymore. But if this is the truth , why they don't make a reverse engineering ? Just to mimic the functions of the switches in the cockpits? They knows which switch and buttons what do. so they can create the functions for them even if they don't work like the real one. Although they use the same part other modul like the RWS in the MI24 and MiG 21. Which are also count sensitive devices for the Russia against the west. But they are modelled correctly in the modules. Also very accurate modelled the KA-50 which is advanced helicopters nowadays in the Russian air force. But there is no restrictions about the cockpit functions and the sensitive data and devices in the helicopter. And also very controversial compare the western aircraft, ED like an Russia based company is allowed to use from almost the most advanced US systems in the game almost 100% accurate modell. HMCS, SlamER, targeting pod etc.. And the Russian 50 year old analogue technic is not allowed to be modelled in game by Russian government. because they are sensitive and secret info. So why they don't upgrade the FC 3 modules for the same level as the others has ?

First of all, I know there are some pre set of clouds, but as far as I see all of them is almost the same. The 70-80% of the map are covered by clouds and very hard to see the ground anymore. The another problem that they have almost always the same 2 or 3 layer. it depends on the setup but under the bottom layer it seems to be always looks like a thunderstorm is there, dark shade on the ground. I can't see that under the clouds see like without clouds because of the cloud sometime more transparent between the two layer the clouds are block the view, up and down most of the time. Above the two layer it looks nice but even harder to see something on the ground if the two layer are not cover each other.

I reported the same problem with the shadows I think the problem is multiple. 1. there are different kind of clouds, some of them can let the light goes trough itself more some of them less. 2. the light is bouncing under the clouds between ground and bottom of the cloud from the brighter area. 3. the human eyes behave different way than the camera lenses. They can adjust for the dark area to more than the camera. 4, the monitor have a limitation to show so big range of dynamic Now if you can see the clouds of shadow from the distance is fine, because your eyes are adopt the light where you are, and it doesn't bother you the bright and the dark area and you can see the very dark area under the cloud. But if you goes under the cloud your eyes need to adopt this situation and set up a new range. but such a way that there is no over light the bright area. because if the pupil is not enough to reduce the amount of the light then we have an eyelid also to close the area. So this problems should improve in the DCS . maybe a new auto exposure or "eye game engine" introduce

If you did the CFM model, can you use it in the game also to show how they can modify the smoke and dust when we fly trough them ? and make some nice smoke twist funnel. I think you are did it something similar for the jetwash turbulence but it is not visible on the smoke and dust , we just "feel" the effect.

Yes, I have same problem with the DM. Every aircraft caught fire so easy. and even if they don't have there fuel tank. Most of the WW2 A/C have fuel tank in the fuselage, so if they get the hit in the wings why are they turn in flame? If there the new DM why break the wing if they suffer multiple hits? It seems to be just use Heal point and if they reach the limit broke anyway even if they didn't get hit . And this problem is also there in the modern jets. the new DM flame and smoke effect occur almost always the same. If the F18 get a hit by rocket it loose its wings and separate 3 pieces, but the main problem with it that the part of the wings itself burn and smoke heavier and longer than the main fuselage. But the main body has more remain fuel to run out than the small piece of wing. so what the reason to do that ?

the problem with gamma is that it is not eliminate the problem, because the high contrast between the bright and the dark side is still there. And If there is some part are bright , after the gamma level up , it will be more brighter and its colour faded.

The new 2.7 clouds look amazing, but I think they need some adjustment . The clouds shadow are on the ground too strong I think. And they are too dark too. specially if there are multiple layer. Below the clouds we can see like the night time . And the edge of the clouds are too big contrast between the bright and the dark side. I guess there need more light, through the clouds even if they are very thick . And another thought about the light, why the taxi light or landing light looks on the ground so sharp in the daytime ? It should be eliminated by the distance or at least there should not show so sharp on the edge of the triangular shape .

Hi, Sorry If I disturbe this topic, but I would like to ask some help for my MMJOY2 problem. If it is not the right plaece please send me PM or give me a link . (I asked this the another forums, simHQ and il2sturmovik.ru) https://ibb.co/N7CCKFj I have a Chinese version of the MMJOY with shield. https://ibb.co/85Xsxdz And this is in life: https://ibb.co/vL3Pv7c I coloured the pins where I put the wires ,same colour same wire. So my problem is that I use one of the shift register in my FLCS joystick handle grip. I connected those buttons like the pic show. red wire is the common GND and the others are the individual buttons. When I connected to the PC and set up in the MMJOY program (see above) the shift register is 74hc165 (i'm not sure about that because I can't see on the chip) and 3 chip the CS and DATA pins are D0 and D1. But the 4021B set up is no working . And when I want to test the buttons they only work in the top of the 2 sockets on the shift register ( on the pics are circled). If I put other buttons there, they also work, but just in those sockets. I don't know what could be the problem if all of the buttons are working and the program is also recognise it, except the rest of the 4 sockets . I have only one strange thing, If I connected the shield to the PC without the shift register just alone then there are some buttons (from 17 to 24)which are flickering in the program . These buttons are recognised and work from the shift register also. So from 17 to 24 buttons are in the top of the shift register 2 sockets. If we can solve this problem I would like to convert my FLCS/TQS. And I want to use this set up: https://ibb.co/p2kjmNV https://ibb.co/HDc5bTp https://ibb.co/3NwzgQX https://ibb.co/kJq0Bp1 But I don't know how should connect to the arduino pro micro these device. Which wires can I put together like the VCC and the GND. could The TLE5010's 6 pins of 5 be the common with the others? And can I use 4 TLE5010 and 6 other normal potmeter in the same time on only one pro micro? As you can see on the schematic, I would like to put the pro micro inside the TQS base, and the all others wires could be collected from others to there. Can somebody to check it and give me some advice to it? Or any other info about that how can I reach my goal that there be a workable HOTAS. other board or other program . Thank you.