BrzI

Yes , that will make things much simpler for end users... But, will you have access to their new versions before release ? Or will there be a time where we will need to wait for you to update your packages.. Just asking...I realize the amount of work you put into this and then provide it at no cost to us... much appreciated and thank you.

OK...so that means when the new stable version is released all the missile tracking issues will go away...the current beta will become the new stable and I will not upgrade your packages... Will wait for the next stable release before I chime back in... Cheerio

I did a full repair of current stable version of DCS...took a while Removed all add-ons except TacView and latest Russian asset pack ( CH Military Asset Pack Russia 1.1.0 ) Running MT version of DCS - same thing...the AntiShip missile flies to where the target was at point of launch.. CH - would it be possible to note the versions of the Open Beta and Current Stable that your packs are tested with ? Thanks Navy collisions2.miz

Not sure if this has been mentioned before. Core DCS antiship missiles track targeted ships fine. However, all CH antiship missiles from the Russia pack track the targeted ship position at launch. They do not adjust in flight for the target ship movement and always fall behind the targeted ship. Thanks

Figured it out. Used successfully on a Mig-29S and Su-33. If anybody is interested in doing this feel free to drop me a line.

Hi folks, this is a question for the mod makers.... I just downloaded the Codename Flanker Su-30. Unfortunately, in order for it to work, you have to remove the Su-35 mod. However, I would like to keep the Su-35's RVV-L and the R37M for use in the Su-30/33. Can somebody outline what files I would need to carry over/edit from the Su-35 folder in order to use these two weapon in the Su-33 ? Thanks a lot...

December 22 2023 Russian asset pack. Looks like with DCS 2.9 all 3M54T amd 3M55M antiship missiles aim for positions-at-launch of their assigned targets. They can no longer hit anything. Thanks Navy collisions2.miz

No...

Tried it but no go... HUD lines on Su-33/27 J-11 are still jaggy. DLSS does nothing. Only option is good old-fashioned MSAA. Pity that DCS will never give us full-fidelity Soviet/Russian aircraft Thanks though...

My NVIDIA control panel settings are ALL on default.

Did some experimenting: Running native monitor resolution 3440x1440. Turned upscaling off. Guess that makes the sharpening slider redundant ? MSAA x 4. Looks good. I am seeing what I was expecting to see. TAA.. Jaggies DLAA.. Jaggies Looks like all these new features give me no visual benefit at all. Curious to hear what Flappie and co. have to say. Thanks

Here you go...Thanks options.lua

I have updated to 2.9 MT and indeed - performance is much better. I have a minor question : When flying the SU-33/27 the HUD lines are more jagged than they were before. I pushed all AA settings all the way up but no joy. It almost feels like AA settings do not apply to the HUD and the situational display... What do you folks think ? Is this a bug ? Thanks

Here is my version of the same problem. SCUDs overshooting big time. Test_SCUD.miz

Thank you..

Just reporting the issue where missile trails become flickering black and carrier white lines also blacken - depending on view angle. If I use dynamic weather the clouds will also turn flickering black - depending on view angle. This seems to happen when a significant number of missile trails need to be displayed. Happens in both basic and MT version. No response needed. Hope this helps to improve graphics performance. Navy collisions.miz

Yes, it had it for years... Wish somebody would make it clear if this is going to return or not.

Looks like my axis profiles got corrupted. I re-mapped the controls and all is good. Thanks

Title says it all. Happens in both ST and MT versions - whether starting on the ground or in air. You have to start the right engine manually. Thanks

Did the standard update on a standalone version. Nothing special. Tested some missions with loads of objects and graphically intense weather patterns. Overall a 25% increase in FPS.... great job folks ! PS. I wonder how many people miss the fact that they have to use a new executable to launch the MT version...

Issue still present as of January 2023. Weird that nobody else complained about this ...

Yeah, still leaves the R-33 under performing in my opinion. But that is only my opinion. Will not be losing sleep over this though...

Sorry - I am not buying this story. If you look at even the very first version of the R-33 it behaved better (in terms of top speed and range) than what we currently have in the sim. The example mission has 4 R-33 and nothing else. But when I add an R40R and R40T the Mig31 will actually launch an R40R first. There is no logic to this as the declared operational range for the R40R is smaller than the R33. There is something not right here - imho But as the devs seem content with it's current state we will just agree to disagree and move on. Thanks

Did some thinking. It looked like the size of the building was too big to fit into the target designation square. So instead of designating the whole building I aimed at one particular window in the command post. Sure enough - it hit where I aimed it. So - it looks like a bug to me - or is this a real-life limitation for big buildings ? PS. a lifepoints bar for the command post would be nice... Thanks K500kr overshoot(not) .trk

With the latest update I have noticed that K500kr and Kh29T both overshoot when you try to hit a big target like the bunkered command post. This happens even though you get AC on the display. I have added a .trk file with the TV bomb but the Kh29T also overshoots. It does not happen with smaller targets. Curious what others may experience... Thanks K500kr overshoot .trk