Schmidtfire

I can confirm. It's even possible to detect, lock and shoot missiles at invisible "non activated" aircraft . This test was done on Caucasus map. I tried both IL-76MD (same as Rudel_chw) and with F/A-18C Lot 20.

I wish for an option in the Mission Editor to set a % slider of AI Thrust and G pull capability. It's hopeless facing the AI in dogfights. With WWII (and jets), the AI defies physics and will always be at an energy advantage while the player is bleeding speed and stalling out. AI also needs further work, but a slider to limit the AI SFM can solve a lot of current issues with not too much work.

The Viggen started as an internal project by a group of Swedes that was part of the Master Arms community (a Swedish virtual squadron). They worked on it for a long time without SDK access and eventually Cobra/Magnitude3 came onboard and got the proper licensing with ED. At later stages it was then finished under the newly formed Heatblur brand. From what I remember, not much (if any) development was handled by the current Magnitude 3 team. Perhaps Rudel can explain in more detail, but that's how I remember it. There was also some kind of fallout with Lazlo Becz that jeopardized the release of the MiG-21bis module. It was something like half a year before the release and got everyone nervous . At that time modules was a rare commodity and pretty much everyone was waiting for it. Luckily, it all worked out.

I have been playing DCS for a very long time and the only "Dots" I know are the Label dots set in the Mission Editor. Is the spotting dots something new added to DCS? Or is it the same thing?

It needs to get fixed. I can't tell how many times this has caused confusion, especially in multiplayer when players on different FOV levels calling out a contrail or smoke trail from a missile launch.

Currenthill does not LOD's at the moment, so there is a lot of work needed on optimization if Currenthill/ED decides to go down that route.

It won't be an issue. the La-7 module is not developed by Eagle Dynamics. The F-5E: Remastered only real offering is the new 3D model and ED wants to protect the model from being pirated by players or even perhaps other companies. I don't think that won't be much of an issue with the La-7. Also, skins can still be created. But it's not as easy or efficient as before.

I love DCS multiplayer, but lets be honest. DCS World had never been a multiplayer centric game/sim. Recently there has been some steps made, like the implementation of dedicated servers, VOIP and dynamic spawns. But majority of servers are kept running on pure enthusiasm and bubblegum solutions. Bloated with all sorts of scripts and netcode/desync issues. Multiplayer will continue to improve, but it's obviously not ED's main focus when it comes to development. Asking for modules to specifically cater multiplayer is a tall order.

@carss great find! I didn't know it was flown by North Korea. Makes it a little bit more interesting since we already have a couple of Korea compatible modules.

Ok At least the Iranian loadout should be covered by pre-existing DCS assets. I'll guess we have to wait and see if any additional missiles will be modeled.

Sidewinders aside. Iranians used AIM-7E (E-2?) on their Tomcat, so it should also be included for the early variant.

I think it's the developers interest and fascination of the La-7 aircraft itself that drives the development forward. He selected a module that he wanted to create. It might not fit with all the other WWII toys in the DCS World sandbox, but that was never the plan. Some players will be creative and "invent" missions where it has a place. Others will just enjoy free-flights. Some players wants to learn the quirks and systems. Others love to take screenshots... More assets is always welcome, but I don't think this module was created with that in mind. Just look at the F-86F and the MiG-15bis, two very popular modules back in the day. But no other "Korea period" AI assets has been released.

Iranians use/used AIM-9J and and perhaps the AIM-9P. Those missiles are already present in DCS (and on the F-4E), so they should be added on the early Tomcat. Other sidewinders might also be developed and implemented, since the F-100D is in progress and is in need of older winder variants. For a solution right now, it's very easy to add weapons and create custom loadouts.

I'm adding a Mark 13 Torpedo to the Hellcat Wish List. Being able to do Anti Shipping missions with a torpedo adds a lot of value and is a first for a DCS WWII module.

The elevation can be solved by placing the radar on top of a static object in the ME. One of my favorites to place in the ME is the "Electrical box". It will give you enough elevation in most cases and since it has a door, gives the impression that it is housing a generator or service equipment. If it's not wide enough for the size of the radar, two can be placed side by side. There are a few others of the other Static Object buildings in the ME that has a flat roof and will allow the radar to be placed on top without any clipping. And if you need any additional protection for the radar, you can also place the newly added barriers/sandbags on top of the roof.

It would make sense in a lot of ways. First gauge interest with the free Su-25. If it seems to be popular/commercially viable enough, continue the development and release a FF version. But a lot of it has to do with the FF MiG-29A being successful or not. I'm not sure ED will try make another Redfor jet if it fails.

Yes, I have tried almost every way at this point... sigh In the book "Gunship Ace" by Al J. Venter, there is a picture of Neall Ellis Mi-24, with an empty GUV 8700 mounted. Gatling and a AP-30 barrels laying on a tarp for inspection. But no mention in the book of the pods being used during combat missions in Africa. Perhaps it was for the cameras only.

Im interested in how the grenade launchers were used in real life. I know there is a table available for the module in DCS, but it’s not great and it would be helpful to know how it was commonly employed in the field. Slow speed to a hover with a slight pitch up? A high altitude flyover? High speed diving attacks? etc. It would make it a bit easier dialing in how to properly use and aim these things.

Yes, because there is nothing secret about a mid 2000's F-15C Good luck modeling the EW and TEWS capability without some degree of guesswork. Heck, here's already a lot of guesswork and estimations in DCS World, be it aircraft or missile performance. I'm all for highly detailed and well documented aircraft, don't get me wrong, but there needs to be room for both. As long as it is created with the "highest fidelity we can create" mindset, I don't really see any harm with the F-35A project. If anything it might open the doors to some projects that we would never see otherwise. And it's not like everyone will enjoy flying the F-35A and ditch everything else. Because it being that high tech is a niche by itself.

Also ED is running out of "commercially viable" aircrafts to model. F-15C and F-35A (possibly B & C) will keep this sim going. So will a Super Hornet if ED decides to go that route. As much as I love the Cold War jets, only a few of them has appeal enough for the mass market. I expect ED to make tons of sales on DLC's like airbases, highres areas etc. when the "world map" arrives. But until then, they need to keep the train rolling. Loosening up a bit on needed documentation is inevitable at some point.

I'm holding off for a bit. Mountains looks really cool though! My main critique reg. DLC maps is that they are a complete pain to set up properly. Creating functioning borders between countries (that can spawn intercept flights), civilian air traffic, a functioning SAM network etc. is a monumental task in the Mission Editor. DCS World is a combat simulator and maps should be released with some sorts of pre-built templates or a UI in the Mission Editor to easier set up a "framework" to build missions upon. At the end of the day, these new big empty maps offer little over Caucasus except better looks. More integrated functionality would make it a more interesting purchase from a customer standpoint.

I purchased F-5E on release day. Good old times Everyday since 2016, new copies has been sold of the F-5E. Maybe I'm naive, but a portion of those sales should have gone into more fixes and maintenance over the years. After all, it's not reasonable to keep selling 8 year old products at top prices. From my perspective. The F-5E got left hanging in the wind when Belsimtek merged into ED and started focus on new product. Even if many players expected a free update, I don't think $10 or even $20 pricing would have been an issue if ED truly had delivered a full Remaster. Many players feel the F-5E always needed more fixes and a finishing touch, and to them this DLC does not live up to it's name or the "7000hrs+ invested" hype. Bottom line is that the product needs to deliver and meet expectations and it seems like the F-5E Remastered fell short. Anyways, it is what it is. If players find value in the F-5E Remastered version they will buy, otherwise they won't. Simple as that.

Perhaps new Radio and INS was incremental updates and not included in the initial batch of F-5E-3? Strange choice perhaps, but I think Belsimtek wanted to add value with the RWR without going into INS and more advanced radio. Also, might also be a documentation thing aswell. Since they had trouble finding info on things like AGM-65 integration. In my opinion they could have added a few more optional items and called it ”ED edition” (sort of like the Ka-50 III). It’s already a bit of s Frankenstein edition anyways.

This is probably the thinnest and most ungenerous DLC I have purchased for DCS World. It does look better. But come on... 7 liveries on release (mostly grey and Blufor), no working hatch for the gun bays, no new afterburner effect, no sounds, radar effects totally untouched and to top it off - it turns out that the cockpit model is pretty much the same with some tweaks. And while some of the mentioned issues will be added in an upcoming patch, there is no and i repeat no, reasonable excuse why they are not implemented on release day. Marketing this as a Remaster in the shadow of real remasters like A-10C II and Ka-50 III is somewhat misleading in my opinion, even with the low price. I have no problem paying for good content, but this was not a generous update. It feels like an afterthought with assets slapped together to form a new DLC. Anyways, I will enjoy this purchase for what it is. Just a bit sick of always getting the short end of the stick when buying a new DLC

Sometimes I wonder if the devs even play DCS themselves Don’t get me wrong, details on the landing gear is awesome. The external model looks very impressive sitting on the ramp or in the air - for videos and screenshots. But as a regular player flying and fighting in the F-5E, my eyes are INSIDE the cockpit. And in prominent view is the radar. Again, I don’t think most of us expected a radar rework. But some tweaks to the clutter and indication-files could have been done in photoshop without much time spent. Anyways, lets hope that ED can find some time to improve. Or to allow indication textures to be properly modded (and IC allowed) by the users themselves.