Schmidtfire

Using the wrong tree types alters the entire look and realism of a northern map. The solution (in my opinion) is to create conifiers with a size/shape/look that can create a dense forest feel, even if it would mean a slight unrealistic look when viewed as a single tree. And then use the more realistic speedtrees for individual tree or small patches of trees around towns, airbases etc.

I will wait. Seems like very Early Access. High price but not even the right types of trees or winter textures? It's a cool area, so hopefully Orbx will turn this into the map it deserves to be

Got it, It's for accessibility/gameplay Not everyone can afford the JF-17 so this makes the much cheaper J-11 a bit more competitive with the PL-12. Sounds reasonable.

The new pylons is closely associated with the missile mod used on GS server. So it's only natural to discuss the benefit of the J11 with PL-12 missiles as it's was the driving factor behind the new pylons. ...and if it's realistic, why won't Deka implement the missile aswell?

What I like to know is if you even get a proper loft profile with J-11? With JF-17 you can pitch the aircraft and initiate a loft profile for SD-10.

JF-17E Strike Thunder?

There is no way Im pre-ordering until I know what's happening to 5 (!) of my current DLC purchases, the F-4E Winter pre-order that keeps slipping, and especially not without a comprehensive Ch-47F feature list or information about a new DCS logistics system. Im sure it will end up a good module, but Im not ready to expand the circus until things settles down a bit Hopefully all of this will be resolved before the Ch-47F pre-purchase ends.

It might. On the other hand, It seems like most of Razbam team has called it quits. So even IF they eventually come to terms, it will be a miracle if we see any type of updates anytime soon. I have stopped flying the F-15E until I hear that there is a plan in place, I have no interest in investing my time into a module that has no development or support.

This brochure specifically mentions targets on the ground or sea surface. WMD-7 is the Chinese successor to their FILAT pod (FILAT is the Chinese equivalent of the LANTIRN) . Carried by attack aircraft such as Q-5 and JH-7. From what I understand WMD-7 or FILAT is not carried by fighters, therefore maybe no need for A/A capability? Aselpod is a different pod, developed and manufactured in Turkey. So what It can't and can't do is not relevant to the WMD-7. @uboats or Deka can probably elaborate more. But I think it is correct with no A/A mode, unless Deka decides to add the Aselpod as an option Aselpod most likely has somewhat different functionality, menu items and a different display elements compared to to WMD-7, so would be a bit of work to get it into the sim correctly.

I don't get this obsession with J-11A and PL12 on the GS server? It's unrealistic nonsense and not close in performance to a JF-17 with SD10. But happy you got what you asked for. Mod looked funny without the pylons^^

Would it be possible to get a guide or video in English?

I don't think I have come across any community with more patience. When players here are asking for things, it's usually long overdue and beyond what is normally expected in terms of EA product timelines. If development is taking time beyond what is considered normal, a brief status update by the developer goes a long way. Obviously they are not obliged to keep us in the loop every step of the way, but it's the respectful and decent thing to. It will cut out unnecessary frustration and speculations instead of frustrated players venting in threads like this. Anyways, that's how I see it

I have done plenty of BVR with AIM-7 in the Tomcat. If we talk strictly DCS, it's gonna be a lucky shot (or a totally unaware target) to score a hit at 10nm. Sweet spot under most conditions seems to be around 7-3nm. I expect to use Boresight and CAA modes a lot, dumping countermeasures and cranking like crazy. True BVR engagements I think will be reserved for high altitude intercepts and such. Maybe the occasional bomber or transport aircraft.

Yes. From the announcement: The OEPS includes an optical location station OLS that consists of an Infrared Search and Track System (IRST), a Laser Range Finder (LRF), and a Helmet-Mounted Sight (HMS) designation system.

I don't really understand this discussion. We already have FC3 MiG-29A and it's quite clear what weapons it can carry. MiG-29A is a good matchup for M-2000C, F-14 or F-4E. Not a F-16C Block 50 from ca. 2007. It's never going to be a fair fight against Amraam/datalink capable jets.

I currently use HQ-7 in an early Cold War setting. It's a great way to create an action filled mission with a very low risk of being shot down. So might be bugged... but in a good way

It's reasonable to ask for a small update once in a while. All developers has their own style of communication. Some show small progress every week, others are silent for months before a big reveal. We're just curious and interested that's all I have not seen anyone here complain about pace, no pressure attached.

IRL info, not stats from DCS: LS-6 CEP <15m GB-6 CEP <36m LS-6 bomb landing up to 15m off target is still within specs. In comparison: JDAM CEP <5m JSOW CEP <3m Not 100% verified info. But seems reasonable.

FINALLY FIGURED IT OUT: PART 2 Just for clarification. Here we clearly see that DCS World core changes disrupted the Viggen artwork. Initially the RWR lights was in fact yellow. At launch After DCS World updates Problem still remains. How do we know exactly what the screen looked like IRL? It's kind of difficult to know unless cross-referencing other green phosphor monitors of that time period. But if a former Viggen pilot ain't happy with the new iteration, it certainly needs some investigating. I found an old thread from 2018 where Cobra mentions fixing the green color because the tonemapper has changed.

FINALLY FIGURED IT OUT! Now, this is where things gets interesting. AJS37: Viggen was released 7 years ago. DCS World looked very different back then, before big graphic changes that affected all the light-sources etc. Look at this screengrab from 7 years ago, 2017. It is much closer to what we are discussing about dialing in correct color of the green phosphor. From AJS37 Review by Ralfi When we finally made the jump onto the new graphic engine (around the release of Normandy 1). It affected all aircrafts in DCS. especially any type of lights. They became desaturated and bland under daylight conditions. And cockpits became very dark. Some modules was tweaked, others not so much. Viggens Radar scope in the new DCS World graphic engine was not an exception and ended up like this: This is what we have known for the last couple of years, but it certainly did not look like this at release. Watch any DCS: AJS37 video from 7 years ago and compare it to videos after the new graphics update. But this has been the new normal for a couple of years. We have gotten used to it. I think the initial version from 2017 is closer to what we have been trying to find in terms of what the actual radar looks like. Hilmerby probably knows best as he sat in front of the real thing, but looking at different materials from 2017-2018 It looks like HB sort of nailed the radar colors back in 2017. It was DCS World updates that changed the look of it. For reference:

So, lets bring something new to the discussion that has not yet been referenced. Here is another reference from a little known Swedish feature film called "Älskar, Älskar inte". As you can see, radar is much closer to the reference pictures posted by MYSE. And not washed out as it was before the update. Scene is depicting a birdstrike with emergency landing on a road, but there are some shots from the cockpit when we see the radarscope. There are also some references on the Warning panel lights. They look different... Might be from the older AJ37 model or faked/re-created for dramatic effect in the film. Certainly grabs the pilots attention Pretty cool scene, but no subtitles. Swedish only. VIDEO LINK https://vimeopro.com/blueskyaerials/blue-sky-aerial-and-specialist-filming/video/60091080 @MYSE1234 EDIT If @hilmerby knows the new color isn't even close to the real AJS37, it should probably be changed or tweaked. Just interesting how every reference we find makes it look very green-ish on video (or on 35mm film stock as shown above). But as discussed earlier, might be related to the phosphor.

MIM 72G Chaparral produce no smoke when launched in DCS World 2.9 Not reduced or low visibility smoke, NOTHING AT ALL. In real life it produces lots of smoke: 4 years ago in DCS World, the Chaparral did produce smoke. Like in this Grim Reapers video: Something has obviously happened to it over the years and should be corrected for DCS World 2.9.

This pretty much sums it up. No matter how realistic and simulated F14/AIM54 is, it’s still part of DCS World. While it might function properly ”by the book” it’s overall performance is still bound to DCS World rules. Fighting against perfect RWR’s, simple ECM implementation, serverlag and netcode issues etc. In a stupidly busy MP environment (like on GS server) over land and mountains, it will be a nightmare and many tracks will be lost. In SP and in a fleet defence role - it performs as expected most of the time.

Channel Map has the same type of fidelity as Syria or Sinai maps so It should not be that different. Normandy 2 is in a different league. Not even sure that upcoming maps (such as Kola) will beat it in terms of detailing and varied mesh. I have not flown it in VR, but on a screen there is a big difference in sensation of speed between Normandy 2 and other maps (at low levels).