some1

Guys, don't waste your time submitting tracks. As you can see this thread has been marked "GFM in progress" two years ago. GFM is still in progress. Hope it won't be "in progress" two years from now in the future, but one never knows with ED. Until it's released, I wouldn't expect improvements to DCS FM.

No, thanks. Two years ago I'd have probably bought it just to support the developers, but now after Razbam debacle I'm much less enthusiastic about spending money on DCS.

It took Razbam more than 10 years to make those 4 airplanes. Sure, you could argue than a more focused and competent developer, already familiar with DCS, could make them a bit faster, but who's available? ED barely makes one aircraft a year, more like 1,5 years to early access. Heatblur takes even longer. Hope we'll all live long enough to actually see those "replacements".

Yes, haven't played dcs recently, but that was still bugged a few months ago. Come on guys, with stronger ffb hardware this becomes a real safety hazard.

It's even simpler than that. Don't touch Steam, just copy the folder from old drive to the new one, turn off PC, replace drives, turn on PC. Last but not least check if Windows assigned the same drive letter to the new drive as was used by the old drive, if not, correct that in Disk Management. That's all. No need to fiddle with 3rd party cloning or partitioning software.

You can order from amazon.com with shipping to eu for a few extra bucks.

Not only bombs but also 530 missiles are fired in a salvo now.

Compared to other DCS aircraft from ED, the dynamic glass reflections on instruments are much too strong. Also, the effect is using a low resolution map of rear headrest area to create "reflections", which gets very jarring once you start moving the head around the cockpit. Default view: Shifted view: The "reflected" area. For reference, here's how this effect looks in ED P-47 and Mi-24 aircraft parked in the same spot. Note the reflection is maybe half as strong (or less), and more blurred, avoiding the very jagged lines we have in F-5.

Licensing is one of the issues. You can't just slap the data scraped from Google maps services into your software for free.

Good idea, added.

Dcs shouldn't have issues with two identical devices as it is, it handles them fine. The only issue may be that it changes the order in which controllers are shown in the menus, so it may not be obvious which is which, but the mappings stay in place once done.

Yep, it looks like VOR/DME issues have been fixed at some point in the last few years since I made that post. I checked a VOR/DME station on PG map and DME works there using TACAN radios. So if you have a VOR/DME on a map, you should be able to receive the distance on a Tacan radio if you dial the corresponding channel. Unfortunately a standalone DME like Paphos (108.90) here on Syria map does not seem to work. And we still don't have an ILS/DME navaid type defined in the sim, so most real world approaches can't be flown. Looks like here the map developer attempted to recreate ILS/DME setup by manually placing a DME near the runway threshold, on the same frequency as the Localizer. Except it's only on a single airport, and it doesn't work anyway.

In case you experience very long DCS loading times, exclude DCS folder from antivirus scan. That often helps.

It is not messy in real life. All the existing navaids with their locations and frequencies are available online for free from the respective AIPs. For example here's Norway (enroute are in part 2 ENR 4, landing navaids are in part 3 of the document, separate for each airport). https://ais.avinor.no/no/AIP/View/136/2025-01-23-AIRAC/html/index-en-GB.html Obtaining historical data is more difficult, but since the maps in DCS represent modern times, this is not a big problem. The problem is that DCS developers do not know, or do not care about the issue.

Personally, I don't mind having this aircraft added to the sim. It's a very interesting platform that should be quite fun to play in DCS, even if parts of it will be made up. And it's probably the the only way we're getting one for DCS in this decade, or the next. It should sell well and bring good money for ED, even if some hardcore simmers would skip the purchase, and server owners that care for balance will disable it. Maybe it won't even be such a power beast in DCS, given that it probably won't have full sensors integration with other platforms like in real life. Also a lot of combat in DCS focuses on dogfighting, where fat Amy struggles anyway. One problem I see is that DCS currently doesn't really have much of modern AI opponent units. No advanced versions of Sukhois and Migs, no modern Chinese aircraft, no 5th gen aircraft at all. No advanced SAM systems. Even the blufor side is lacking. And the pace at which ED adds new aircraft AI models (or updates the existing ones from the previous century) doesn't inspire much optimism. So quite possibly it will be another cockpit simulator without any battlefield environment to match its timeframe.

Nope, it's still in the beyondland.

Technically a 49" monitor is only as tall as a regular 27" monitor, but as wide as two of them. These proportions are quite suitable for racing games, but for flight sims you may feel it's a bit cramped in the vertical, certainly not better than a regular monitor. Personally, I use 42" OLED TV as a monitor for most of my leisure flying in MSFS, but for DCS and IL2 it's VR only. 2D is still unbeatable for graphics and image clarity. VR for immersion.

Yep, huge improvement with this patch. It took a long time but at last the game looks good in VR again. So far I settled on 1 pixel setting.

- range. The radios require beacon to be in the line of sight. Flying low like a helicopter does most of the time, you're not getting much reception. - weight. The radios add extra weight and space requirements, and this helicopter is overweight even without them. - operational considerations. In the middle east, where the helicopter operated in this configuration, there's not many radio beacons to begin with. Risk of GPS spoofing was very low and GPS/INS system was much more suitable for the job than tacan based navigation. Still, it's mostly GPS/INS nowadays, with radio navaids network being gradually shut down.

To be honest the liveries situation is what is holding me off from buying and installing the module right now. Thing is, I haven't installed any repaints for F-5, and I still have (in my vanilla game) something like 20 liveries for USA, 16 for Switzerland, and a dozen or two spread between other countries: Iran, Greece, Turkey, Norway, each have several, other operators at least one. And now we're swapping all this for 7 liveries in total, with a promise for 5 more coming "soon" in some undefined future... that doesn't sound like an upgrade. I really wish ED reversed their priorities and put those 7000 (or whatever) manhours into remodelling the cockpit and just bumping exterior textures, instead of remodelling the exterior and just bumping interior textures. More than 95% of my time in DCS is spent in the cockpit view. Couldn't care less for 3D ammo feeds and opening service hatches. Ah well, not the first puzzling decision from ED in 2024.

An OFF switch is not a simple matter? You can still turn the spotting dots off in 2D, you could turn them off in VR before the infamous "rollback" of spotting mechanics 6 months ago. 6 months we're dealing with this! And now with the new fog update it's even more broken that it was before. Seriously ED, this is embarrassing.

It wasn't in the race to begin with, the aircraft teased first in the "next year and beyond" videos very rarely made it to release that year.

Yeah, the feature list is suspiciously light on details, would be nice to know what is improved/added besides better graphics.

Good news about F-5E remaster, the module shows its age. I hope it will be brought to modern DCS standards, and other old modules will follow. The price also seems reasonable.

no a lot. You need almost 1 kgf just for the breakout force, 6 kgf for maximum aileron deflection and 18 kgf for maximum elevator deflection. For reference, Moza at max settings is about 3 kgf. no no no no More detailed info here: https://www.reddit.com/r/hotas/comments/lm9lqk/how_stiff_is_a_joystick_of_a_real_fighter_plane/ The stick in the Hornet does not have a dynamic FFB, at least not to my knowledge. The magic happens inside the FBW computers, that translate pilot inputs to varying control surface movement depending on the situation. So the pilot can get a constant g per deflection, or constant pitch/roll rate, or whatever was programmed into the system to that phase of flight. While the stick remains a "dumb", spring loaded device, albeit with much heavier springs and dampers than our toys. Most of the effects you describe may be felt inside the cockpit, but rather as the whole airframe shaking and vibrating, not just the control column. So it would be more a task for something like Buttkicker than joystick FFB. But of course you may turn them on in FFB software for increased immersion.