Buzzles

Sure, when ED actually finish the module and deliver working side by side multi crew, and if they decide to actually focus on a verison, unlike the mishmash we have now. As they've only partially delivered that, then no, I'd be unlikely to pay for Huey 2.0 as it stands.

Not that it's a super accurate source, but wikipedia reckons the missile was only available to newer versions of the -21, not the bis version we have: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-21_variants#Armament See down for the -93 and Bison.

ED have ignored it so far, despite requests going back many, years. I've posted the reasons why I think it'd be good for the DCS engine in one of those threads, so I'm in support of DCS WWI.

Delete them.

Using the D9 and K4 as examples isn't great, namely because of the massive amount of info the Allies found or researched themselves during and post WWII on enemy equipment. As it was Intelligence, it was all filed nicely and kept over the years. It's a weird situation where there's more data for them than some Allied planes, like the P-47, Mossie etc... where the manufacturer had the data and it's been lost over time as it wasn't as stringently recorded and kept. For example, ED had to do a load of CFD analysis themselves for the P-47, as that data had been lost over time. It'll probably be the same for a lot of planes, gathering as much as they can, seeing what blanks exists, and deciding if they can, or if it's worth it to, fill them in to a high degree of confidence. ED have said before if it doesn't meet a certain threshold, they won't do it. As for the other points, lack of adversaries only really applies to the more A2A orientated aircraft, and only then under some scenarios. There were enough different types flying in WWII that a lot of matchups did happen or were possible, if rare. Obviously it's not a completely moot point tho, as they'd be no point developing a pure night-fighter if there's not at least one major opposing one to come later on.

Not yet:

No-one has ever said or implied it's an information issue. ED stated they didn't have development resources, so it's on the backburner. It's a widely exported aircraft, with just over 5000 built and a long service life. Info isn't going to be an issue. Also your statement that "not many Phantoms are still flying" isn't entirely correct, especially when implying all the ones that do are civil ones. Phantoms are still active in military use, namely Turkey, South Korea, Greece and Iran. Japan only retired their fleet last year in December!

Clearly a troll as, as pointed out above, you opened a thread on the same topic less than a week ago.

We've been asking for the 0,0,0 black knobs to be fixed for 5 years now, if I they won't do that simple thing and restore their previous textures, a full cockpit reskin is clearly out of the question.

The module WAS Belsimtek, they were absorbed back into ED the other year. It's definitely now an ED module.

Claiming it'll decrease performance when it's been done in games for a decade or more in some form or another... yeah, not buying that unless ED are simulating individual blades of grass as physicalised objects in the world. But it's definitely a low hanging fruit and not really worth it. The dust kick up is much more useful and actually worth getting working correctly imo.

I still disagree. Using your previous "correct" distance for 10kt bombs, being ~1.36km for moderate blast damage, that's still a large area. That SAM site? Gone with one bomb. That airport? Gone with one bomb. And you don't even need to be pinpoint accurate with it. Players will take the _most efficient_ weapon they can get their hands on, for DCS where there's literally no other penality or decision factor needed, that'll be the one with the biggest bang. For the Mig-21, why take a pair of FAB 250 or FAB500s on the wings and need to be super accurate with them to take out 2 targets, when you can just take the nuke and just be somewhat close and take out multiples? Honestly, I just don't think player controlled nukes add anything to DCS. AI delivered ones? Yes, there's an argument there as it'll potentially lead to some interesting missions, but even then, it'd probably just be a failure scenario.

The nuclear panel should be simulated if possible, for system completeness. The only bomb that can be dropped should be the inert training version. Player dropped nukes in DCS are honestly pretty pointless, as they're basically close to 'I win' buttons, which is why the Mig-21's are disabled on most servers. They add very little, but can take away quite a lot.

@NineLine / @BIGNEWY Any hope the muzzle velocity is tweaked for the big 2.7 patch? It's been 5 years now that bullets have been falling short of the pipper due to previous changes, resulting in aiming being semi-broken.

Yes, it's been broken now for 5 years: Discussion in this thread, as the gunsight isn't off per-se, but the bullets are too slow:

Already happens. The content creators just need to PM the Community Managers/Wags/3rd Party Devs and offer it. If they haven't, that's up to them.

Well, not that it affects me, but while space may be cheap, bandwidth might be another matter. There's skins in CoreMods that are *far* too big for what they are and definitely should be a lot smaller. I could see why people would gripe about having to dl them, especially if they're on a poor/slow internet connection.

Troll thread right? No-one gets to 100+ posts and doesn't know the name of the company's forum they are posting on.

Yes, once they've finished the Kiowa:

Why don't you instead have a single link to something like Linktree, or another place where they are aggregated? Therefore you won't be reliant on ED or the forum software, and can have as many as you like.

I've been reading the thread but not contribuing bar my single post, and no-one but you has suggested hands off Auto AAR. The suggestions have all involved player interaction.

Gonna be honest, last time I posted in the other Easy AAR thread, I was against it. However, I've been convinced by some complelling arguments with decent solutions, namely the one saying you still have to get into position and roughly hold it. Yes it makes it a bit easier you don't need to go the full hog and be super precise which I'd normally be for, but the point of EAAR unlocking more missions for people and therefore removing the use of Unlimited Fuel as an option is what swung it. I'd much rather see people doing Easy AAR than using unlimited fuel.

It actually used to be a option back in the day if I remember correctly. Not sure why it went away, I assume it was an issue opening the pdfs from inside the app.

Yeah, prolly the modulation. It'd actually be really handy in the F10 view to show what modulation the freq is using eg "127Mhz (AM)". I get tripped up sometime.

Buy the biggest you can get for the price you can afford. That'll be a normal SATA SSD. NVMe are good, I have one for a boot drive, but honestly the performance difference for random access betwen NVMe and SATA is nothing in comparison from the jump from HDD to SSD. You'll want the space for DCS too, it's far bigger that it needs to be (yay for maps, uncompressed textures and silly big liveries!) and it'll only get bigger. Plus as mentioned, you 100% do not ever want to max out a SSD, 80% usage tops. I'd recommend a 1TB or more SATA really, you'll want the space.