Art-J

Also, remember to temporarily remove or rename your Saved Games/DCS folder. Reinstalling the core game only won't do anything good if there are still any modded leftovers in Saved Games.

Mustang we've got pulls 61" dry / 67" wet, so it's already a standard rating for 100/130 fuel. Performance-wise -D can't go any "earlier" than that and -B/C would still be faster at the same manifild pressures simply because of better aerodynamics. DCS A-8 can already use the same trick as P-47, ie. overboost from ram-air effect in a dive, even though it works only at altitude before supercharger kicks down from 2nd to 1st speed. One can overboost to 1.55-1.6 ATA this way, albeit last time I tested, it didn't yield any airspeed increase at all for whatever reason (unlike in P-47).

Devs need hard reference data to trace it down, however, and there's none of it posted here, apart from a guess that that 10xx cards might be the culprit. The more data the better, especially when number of guys using these cards in DCS is not high anymore. Both of you guys should post your DCS logs, settings and dxdiags, preferrably in that other thread where it will probably be noticed by devs and testers faster.

^ That might be the case. I'm on a newer gen card as well, so maybe that's why I don't see it. OP hasn't mentioned what card he uses.

Yeah, you're not the only one who's experiencing it. No clue so far about why it happens, unfortunately.

Although all these new subtle details are welcomed of course, there's one major thing that concerns me - audible blade flap frequency is too high! As if we had a helicopter with more blades in main rotor, or diameter of it was lower (and thus RPM higher). The videos above do seem to confirm it to my ear, but let's take more scientific approach. One can already notice the issue using time deceleration to 1/8 and seeing that sound is out of phase with rotor movement (sound is faster). It's easier to do it in F2 external view. Actually, using stopwatch and counting the audible blade "chops" we can calculate their frequency as 2.5 per second when slowed down, which is 20 per second in real time, which in turn for a 5-blade rotor means 240 RPM. The problem is - real Mi-8 rotor at 95% setting rotates at 192 RPM (that would be 16 "chops" per second), maybe getting closer to 200 at full takeoff power, but certainly not higher. Incidentally, I've found that the smaller diameter Mi-24 rotor speed is 240 RPM in cruise, which leades me to assumption that these new Mi-8 sounds are conversion of Mi-24 ones, which is obviously not quite correct given the hefty RPM differences between both helicopters. I don't own Mi-24 module so can't compare. @btd Can you please comment?

OK then, do you use any frame-generation gimmicks on gfx card driver level? In either case, perform the usual DCS "troubleshooting trinity" and see if it helps: 1) disable and remove any unofficial mods you might be using (including the ones located in Saved Games location); 2) empty the "fxo" and "metashaders" folders in Saved Games location; 3) Run DCS repair & cleanup command to restore the game to vanilla state.

You've ben answered in the other thread you started: If you launched DCS at least once, then there is a folder created on your system partition here: C:\Users\[your windows user name]\Saved Games\DCSworld\ It might be hidden by Windows, but it's certainly there. Un-hide it if needed. You have to go there, create \Mods\Aircraft\ sub-folder manually and extract A-4 archive over there. It's the only way to make the A-4 mod work.

Probably because OP is new here and can't find his way around this forum (I don't blame him, because from navigation point of view, it is a mess for newcomers). Admins will move the thread if needed. Back to OP. Once again read what Winter wrote - DCS resides in TWO folders on your PC: a) One where the game itself is (in your case steamapps/common/DCSworld); b) the other one is in Saved Games location WinterH typed 6 posts above. A-4 Skyhawk mod has to be extracted ONLY into the latter. There cannot be any files of it left in the former.

No, not experiencing it myself in 2.9.2. If you see it on other warbirds as well, it will be more of a global issue then rather than module-specific. Kind of reminds me jittering problems people reported when DLSS, FSR, DLAA and TLAA were implemented. Do you use any of these new 2.9.xx features? I only use DLAA by the way.

Pt.1 it is then! Oh, no worries, I plan to use them as intended .

Reflected already confirmed that in the "last minute" change before the 2.9.2 went live, Ugra messed up parking positions on the map and thus in some missions you're not spawning where you're supposed to. It's gonna be fixed in the next patch, hopefully. Look around in the campaign forum section for more info: https://forum.dcs.world/forum/1208-dcs-p-51d-debden-eagles-campaign/

Ah, yes, there it is allright! I didn't plan to install all of them so was only checking the unit number. Just have to figure out now which livery it takes tailwheel and wing textures from, cause they're missing - I use only a couple of skins chosen from each pack. But I know that description.lua will give me relevant clues.

^ Hmmm.... I don't know.... The problem is - "our" beta IS the "seperate testing branch". Always has been. Some users are just more interested in testing and reporting properly (they're smaller group I suspect), while the others are more interested in getting access to new content earlier (this is majority I'd hazard a guess). The former will always be active on the forum with more detailed reports, while the latter will not. But that's just a human nature, and In my opinion this proportion will never change. Thus I don't see how creating a yet another, more closed / "elite" separate branch could solve this issue, especially when ED MUST rely on wide scale public testing because of their internal QA resources limitations. I've no idea how to tackle this problem. They have to persuade/force people somehow to submit bugs in a better, standardized, repeatable and more effective manner. Just posting guidlines in a sticky thread on a forum clearly doesn't work, 'cause some player follow these while the others do not. Maybe some sort of a separate "public" bugtracker database, which won't accept a report entry until player fills all the blanks properly (logs, tracks, screens etc.)? As for the original post concerns, let's not forget that switching to current trend of updating stable version with one big patch every few months was direct consequence of a period 3-4 years ago when OB updates were thrown out almost every two weeks and stable updates following almost immediately - unfortunately together with a myriad of gamebreaking bugs, which inevitably had to slip through in such haphazard workflow. It just didn't work. So that's quite a tough nut to crack. Having stable updates more frequently would bring long awaited fixes more frequently... along with higher number of new bugs at the same time. How to find a good balance point?

Awww.... the yellow-striped 2/SG10 didn't make it to part 3 it seems. I was looking forward to that one. Will wait for it.

MiG-21 is a bit of a special case. It started its life as a private mod made by 1 guy based on FC3 code, then got taken over by 4 other guys (at that time) who created the very first official 3rd party team contracted for DCS, then they reworked and released the plane in 2014 as fully clickable commercial module. Not long after, the team has split into two separate companies to work on other projects. So it's the oldest 3rd party DCS module at the moment and because of this complicated "half-mod, half-team" history, it just is a mash-up of FC3 code, proprietary code and a bunch of duct tape and zip-tie fixes added through the years later. To bring it to modern standards would most likely require a complete code re-write and no company will do it, unless in a form of a payware "2.0" edition like in A-10C and Ka-50 case. We know from Mag3's last year post that some form of a MiG refresh is considered for the future, but at this pont in time it's uncertain how deep this refresh will go and when it's going to happen when they're fully busy with Corsair and Crusader projects now.

1. What speed the target jet flies is irrelevant, because you both fly together and thus - relative speed between you and your target matters more. Not much more, however. It's going to be within 50 m/s, which is negligible compared to bullets speed of 800+ m/s at impact. 2. Because of point 1 above, bullets fly through target's exhaust for a fraction of a second, which is not enough to even warm them up much, let alone cause any melting... 3. ... which would never happen anyway. Engine exhaust temperature is shown on relevant instrument in every jet plane. For MiG-15 it's typical for all no afterburner engines of the era, which is between 500 and 600 C (900-1100 F) in cruise, closer to 700 C when at full thrust. Meanwhile, .50 API/APIT machine gun bullets had typical construction for any bullets, which is mostly copper and brass alloy jacket with steel core (plus a tiny little bit of other incendiary and tracer stuff). All these materials have melting points in the range of 900-1500 C (1600-2700 F), so they couldn't melt even if kept in jet blast longer.

Nah, I don't think that's the case. In my track I took off on main LH, then switched to fuselage for a while, then tried drops and they seemed to be feeding allright. Did it all in shorter intervals than OP though, so he must've experienced some more wicked glitch in his mission. Maybe I'll try to replicate his exact "recipe" for problem later.

As BTD said in the other thread, new Mi-8 sounds are WIP. I think the hissing sound is just compressors noise, which is indeed very excessive now with any doors open, while with all doors closed it makes blade flapping and link "chirping" only barely audible. I'm more curious/concerned about higher frequency of blade flapping sound. Just as if the number of blades was higher, or rotor RPM was higher. That might be more accurate, I don't know. Will have to listen to some onboard recordings of the real thing, maybe even try to measure it in-game with stopwatch and decelerated time. All and all, I think I preferred 2.9.1 sounds overall, even if they were too quiet. Balance in 2.9.2 seems to be all over the place.

I see, better than nothing then. The Russian one is 138 pages, though.

I don't own either of these modules so I don't know what can be found in their respective "Doc" folders, but I can see 430+ "Early Access Guides" for both airplanes on ED website, so I guess these are the docs Cheese is talking about. Taking a brief look at their structure and content, these "Guides" are not really different from other module "Manuals" I own it seems. If you're only nitpicking about the title, that's a silly thing to do to be honest. EDIT: Quickstart guide for the -24 is much shorter in comparison, but it seems to have very basic info needed to get you going. They should translate at least that one to English, even if it's not "finished".

^ Not quite. Both versions update the same way, ie. when launching the game the updater auto-checks for a patch, but only once per 24 hours. Or we can just manually click the "update" link from Windows start menu, whenever we want any as many times as we want. In either case, yes, one needs to update to latest OB version anyway.

Maybe you've found a new bug, but more info is needed to investigate. Was it single- or multiplayer? After refueling or straight from mission editor? I tried to replicate, albeit with much shorter intervals between switching tanks (every few minutes really) and couldn't - all tanks seemed to feed properly. My replay track is posted below. In either case, please save and attach yours. 2.9_P-51D30_tank_test.trk

Certainly not normal. In my experience, it should always be centered. I'm a track hat user, though.

Gunsight mod changes only REVI-16B.tga file, so we can still use it with this cockpit retexture, or Massun92's one. Unless they decide to hardcode the cockpit textures some day, we should be fine.