dimitriov

Not yet

I'll perhaps give it a look and retroengineer it for the mavik. We'll see.

I don't think I will expand the pack anymore except for small additions and tweaks.

Hi, Yes it is planned, though it may not look like IRL since the drone will probably not hover over its target but act more like a standard bomber.

早上好 ！抱歉，那太复杂了。

I am ! I am simply playing DCS again and building another version of this : But I swear i am ! lol

That's right! That's right! Yes, it is! null https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PvzOzcpLKPBufO4UFW4kQ8ehySeQnOk0/view?usp=sharing Read the manuals The truth is, I stopped using DCS a while ago, so I'm just getting back into it. So I thought I'd bring you the latest dev version of the pack that's been sadly waiting. So here's what's new, because there's a lot of it, even if I never found the time to finalise the AMX-30s, sorry: - Leclerc redesign - AMX-10RCR redesign - New optics - Redesign of complex armour. - Mavick drone added - Infantry added - Real engine performance added. - Shell improvements. - Leclerc tank manual - Manual modpackscript - Added modpackscript with manual, allowing you to : - Create your own armoured group that obeys only you and whose AI is enhanced, giving you ammunition and status reports, as well as allowing automatic or manual artillery strikes at the click of a button across the battlefield. (No Combined arms required) - Request air support, CAS or SEAD. (No Combined arms required) - Request reconnaissance by Mavick drone (Yes, as in Ukraine) - Request supplies. (No Combined arms required) - Build fortifications and minefields (no Combined arms required) - Mask yourself using the smoke grenades available on some of the tanks in the pack. - Repair armour. - Request night illumination (no Combined arms required) - Carry out effective suppression fire on vehicles with little or no armour. - Get heavy armoured vehicles to

Yup, For the bugs, now it's up to PC to fix them. My personnal engagement toward them was to deliver a campaign, and I fixed it for 2 years for free so well... Their problem. For the snow in miz 11, it worked before 2.5 when old IR was in place. The only way to fix it now would be for you to edit and reduce not the snow but the fog (which is here to simulate the snow effect). For the meatboy landing on you.... I remember having fixed it 10 times since with every new ED update he decided to land on another place and generally on you... So well, you only can edit it. For the triggers, same, last repair of the campaign must be 3-4 years old to give you an idea. For not knowing what to do : get in your gazelle repertory on windows, docs, and you'll find a massive pdf which describes the whole scenario and each mission briefing. At the time it was not possible to put it efficiently directly in DCS. Regards

Retired from DCS for 2 years now

Hey Johnny Yeah I remember quite well your style when recording the audios, was a lot of fun to be honest and it sounded exactly the way a french like me can imagine a pure tea drinker british For the american voices I ended doing them myself if I do well remember. Regards,

Prettily glad to see that after so many years, people still break their teeth on my missions. Mouahaha Campaign was inspired after Harmattan operation where this kind of flight was common, though probably not as hardcore I admit, fair enough, it's a game. Flight by black moon at very low level, including low altitude in urban environments and shooting HOTS at ghaddafi elements. You don't fly at night with full moon, it's pointless, a single bullet could kill you. It never was intended to be realistic though, the scenario is one of the most wtf things I ever wrote, simply a serie of real challenges that one should handle once he really masters the helicopter, and more than all IFR. It's more a milsim battlefield campaign than a purely sim one. But real life is boring. I never made missions that I couldn't finish myself so I guess you still need for training, I played it recently and although it's obviously harder, it's still manageable. It's not because the scenario is goofy and hollywood style that you must fly it the same way. For the water part, simply fly IFR, use your instruments only. When in low visibility situation, the worst idea is to look outside, IRL like on sim, you'll crash. This is one the first things they teach you at flight school. "Fly looking outside and you'll fly backwards" So switch off your NVG, look at your instruments and fly. A good pilot blindy trusts his instruments. (Glider manual page 1) Of course it implies that you know how to set them up accordingly. If you even want a bigger challenge, disable your artificial horizon and fly using the drift marble, the compass and the variometer, you should be able to know which attitude takes your aircraft only with them. (Although less true with an helicopter than with a plane I admit, unless you don't touch at your collective, then your helicopter is a very noisy plane) So if you crash because you don't see anything, it's because you think that it's important to see something. (Pai Mei style quote I know) You must learn IFR, and stop even thinking about the fact that you don't see anything. Your aircraft has not any eyes and still, it flies. Being able to do so in a small cockpit like the Gazelle one will be of vital help for other more complex aircrafts. You have the heading, the wind value, the drift value. Far enough to cross the Atlantic from La Rochelle and land at La Guardia NY if you wish Plus you have a huge advantage compared to real life : wind stays the same all the way. Lindbergh basically did it in 1927 with this cockpit : So let's put it mildly : You're flying a Rolls Royce compared to this poor fella. He was an airmail pilot, and therefore perfectly knew how to fly in bad visibility situation, with instruments at this time that you would laugh about. He had a periscope to watch outside and his plane looked like this terrible piece of wood : So now you can get a glimpse at my philosophy when I produced this... Thing. You have in your Gazelle : - A nadir inertial unit with doppler addon, perfect stuff. - A gyrocompass (Lindbergh would not be able to spell this) - Two altimeters (He's passing out right now looking at them) - A variometer (Voodoo magic) - An artificial horizon (Like the real horizon but artificial) - Another artificial horizon (So you can get an insight of what 4 dimensional universe is I guess) - A trim (Aliens...) - Philippe, your fearless commander, who does nothing except trying to eat your soul with his eyes. Well camarade, let's say it : You're rich. Ah, btw, there is no trigger for the 5m level, actually it was a confusion of me for the radar SAM minimum altitude. You can fly up to 10m without having it shooting at you. I thought it was only 5 when I created it. Still, you should not fly higher than 2 if you're the boss And : "I know there will be some who might wish to prove me wrong by sailing through the missions, but someone at that level of skill is way beyond the average." Lmao thank you I guess But seriously, everyone can learn, it's not the skill, it's the method, and as most people on sim never flew an aircraft IRL they therefore don't learn properly. You need to read on it. Intellectual capacities never were a prerequisite to learn how to fly, I can tell you... Military procedures are what they are, but first a pilot learns how to fly. Regards

Affirm I did thanks ;)

Currently work on hold for private reasons, i should resume on it quite soon and yes there will be a Roland.

Hi, not the right place indeed, FrenchPack infantry is not even released yet.

Tbh, the current public script version is extremely old compared to the dev one. I can't say.

No clue works fine on our side. Hem I'm sorry but I only work with real factory blueprints and loads of photos. Nothing like this currently exist for caesar. C'est tout le but de ce pack, on a de quoi être fiers d'être français quand même dans ce pays dirigé par des pignoufs

Retexturing the 10RCR... Maybe will I include an Ukrainian version once we see which one they get.

Nice it's a pic from a 2007 prototype. I'd like to see its cockpit to note what I already know which is that there is no longer an abris aboard. Again, as simple as it is, Russian Federation President S never was coded and integrated in a 1980' civilian finnish computer. I would have thought it to be quite obvious. I perfectly get other people points that it does not this much matter etc. I myself fly irl and dcs is a game in my view. But as noted by other users some peoplr are kinda surprised to learn about the way it was really handled AFTER having bought it. And since the only way for them to learn about it is to read an english or russian forum... Man it's not fair. Nicolas

Read the manual you need to install the optics (frenchpack_ca folder)

This is not plausible arrangement because you lacked for a number, a variable or the exact shape of a vertice line on your MFD. This is an upgrade which is sold as something realistic while nothing about it ever existed and its arrangement in the cockpit with other already really existing systems is utterly incoherent. The level of plausibility and realism is the same than for an X-Wing module. The difference between a partial simulation and an invention is not only about semantics. I simply state that it should be written in the module description when you buy it. Else it's consumer misleading if not a pure and simple lie. And I litteraly and morally don't and can't buy this. When you sell something telling it's realistic while you know that you literally made up everything about it, you're in a kind of business scheme which does not lead me to want to work with you. Therefore they must write it, this is everything I say, as this is morally the right thing to do. So instead of this "DCS: Black Shark 3 is a further development of the well-known Black Shark and Black Shark 2 projects, which are dedicated to the Russian Ka-50 attack helicopter." Write this : DCS: Black Shark 3 is a fictionnal further development of the well-known Black Shark and Black Shark 2 projects, which are dedicated to the Russian Ka-50 attack helicopter. As actually, you tell me "don't buy it", if I was not to know about this stuff I would buy it thinking it's an actual real thing, further misleading my judgment on the value of my investment. This is an elementary worldwide business rule and is even decorrelated from the actual product which is in question. A good deal is a fair one. Anyway I go back on 3DS max, forum chat never changes anything ^^

Noooope lol

Thing is though that it is not modernized ^^ You still have 1985 onboard computers and technology and invented stuff above. It's the same level of what if than attaching Rafale wings on a Mirage 3 expecting it to work properly and coding the main page of Spectra defense and jamming system on the 1960' Cyrano radar screen because it would be cool. Indeed it would be... But 30 years of huge technological and computer evolution separate the ka-50 we have from the systems supposed to be plugged in. And anyway calling it President S as explained in post 3 is an extraordinary exageration. I don't have any problem with people buying it. But they have to be properly informed on what they spend their money in. That's the least ED could do. They should not learn about it in an obscurd forum sub. They should read it on the product page. Not everyone is a hardcore simmer and it is understandable, but people should know when it is hardcore modeling, when it is midcore, and when it is pure invention. Maintaining the confusion is quite a bold move and not a very good signal for the future products.

For me the problem is not how fictional it can be. It is fictional. All the BS3 addition outside from new INU is fictional. So get it written in your product description instead of making thinking that it is like the other modules. I don't know if there are some educated guesses on other modules though I never heard about them, but I don't think any module has ever been sold with content being 90% pure invention. But here lies the result of BS3 : Now we don't know. Perhaps after all this way of working is or will be common in the future...

Learn russian But basically the russian BS section of this forum is already full of very well documented informations. Found it back, the computer should be updated to this protocol : K-806 "Arg 52" with multiplex information exchange canal with protocol GOST 26765.52-87 ( MIL-STD-1553B) Ye can't make that up lol...