gospadin

True, but really, you hardly have to defend the whole of your land mass. A half dozen big cities and ports on each coast and call it a day. If someone wanted to invade via Nunavut, good luck to them.

You can drop them, but they really only can be modeled as bombs right now. Potentially you could script a mission such that a boat near the dropped bomb could be made to explode, but nothing is automated.

strafe is relative to current view angle so look forward, and strafe left then rotate left 90 degrees, strafe left (to move camera backwards) then rotate forward 90 degrees, point down, and take your picture (for example)

FYI, it'll be a lot easier for everyone if you just pick 1 thread and update it, instead of making a new post for each update.

VORTAC is a co-located VOR + TACAN station, for both civilian and military usage. The DME for both systems is the same. As such, both civilian and military planes can navigate from VORTACs.

I don't believe so, but will double check in an hour or so and edit this response.

We did not hack any DLLs. Everything is written in lua. Beyond that, I prefer not to say. =P

Yup. The 350 KCAS at FL250 optimal refueling speed equates to a KTAS of roughly 525 knots

Most consumer SSDs are rated for around 200GiB/day for 5 years. Normal usage comes nowhere close to that number. For reference, with my 3 copies of DCS and a pile of texture work, I've averaged 65GiB/day on my drive. At my rate of usage, it'll last 15 years. --gos

We decided to make it free, because we didn't want to be burdened initially by deadlines, the pressure to be perfectly accurate, etc. It was a way for us to just have fun making the mod. We have been discussing internally about what it would take to make a DCS-quality paid module, but we are not making any commitments. It's a lot of additional work. --gos Мы решили сделать его свободным, потому что мы не хотим быть обременены первоначально установленные сроки, давление, чтобы быть абсолютно точными, и т.д. Это был способ для нас, чтобы просто получать удовольствие, делая мод. Мы обсуждали внутренне о том, что было бы предпринять, чтобы сделать DCS-качества заплатил модуль A, но мы не делаем каких-либо обязательств. Это много дополнительной работы. --gos

You're welcome. Apologies in advance for google translate butchering your language.

Another radar test: s2SBQ5kdvSU

Radar Modes: hqwiyJoO_qY Night lighting & radar cover: U2H9XwpaKqU

Hi everyone. The A-4 mod will be a free download. $0.00 Unfortunately, I do not speak Russian, so we need to use google translate, but I'll try to start reading this page more often if you have questions. October update: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2938093&postcount=102 Всем привет. А-4 мод будет бесплатно скачать. $ 0.00 К сожалению, я не говорю по-русски, так что нам нужно использовать Google Translate, но я постараюсь, чтобы начать читать эту страницу чаще, если у вас есть вопросы. обновление октября: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2938093&postcount=102

Attached is a temporary version of the Nevada page to match the 2.0.4 NTTR release. It adds VORTAC radial information from airnav, and fixes a few bits of runway information. Note that with the frequency changes, no airplane defaults to usable frequencies in NTTR so I've zero'd them out. When the module creators update their defaults, I'll update the channel IDs. --gos Nevada_v3.pdf

Version 7 updated and attached to the first post. removed DAGGETT, HECTOR, NEEDLES, SILVERBOW, GRAND CANYON, KINGMAN, CEDAR CITY, ST GEORGE, and COLORADO CITY as they're now part of the 2.0.4 NTTR base beacon list I also updated the overall map picture as well. Enjoy! --gos

just click on them as WP in the mission editor and they'll be waypoints automatically

Just like everything else in DCS: Q: Why not _______ ? A: Because nobody has taken the time to make _________ yet.

FYI, I am sure my mod is incompatible with today's 2.0.4 NTTR patch, but I'll get my mod fixed tonight and update this thread again when it's finished. --gos

FYI, the fix for pitch moment with flaps is in 2.0.4 patch notes

You've installed a mod which has an "empty.tga" file in it, which conflicts with something they pushed in 1.5.5 (or was part of a 1.5.5 update to one of the modules) I think BigNewy posted about it, but i can't find it now. --gos

Only a cursory look at this point, but yes, we recognize that a basic EFM would improve a number of the above issues. To keep the scope small(er) we are going forward with the SFM version, and not making any other commitments at this time. --gos

First, nothing below is a criticism of the SFM. It's serving its purpose very well, which is allowing modelers to get a set of baseline flight characteristics matched to real performance, within a 5-10% margin for error. Hats off to ED for the baseline engine capabilities. [Edit: Second, my schooling was not in aeronautics, so take what I say with a grain of salt. I'm sure I've misrepresented something below...] As far as specific limitations... SFM has very simple lift/drag coefficient system as a function of airspeed/altitude, and it just has a simple set of relationships between surface area and drag, and no individual modeling of wing shape and its effects on lift/AoA/drag/etc. Modeling of variable wing structures (spoilers, flaps, airbrakes, etc.) is simplified, so we had to do a "trick" to add drag when the wing spoilers deploy. We cannot dynamically choose how the wing stalls beyond critical AoA, and the baseline SFM stall and spin characteristics are very benign. With SFM, the CG doesn't change as fuel is exhausted, and you have no ability to model the fuel tanks individually. All of our support for external vs internal fuel displayed is derived from initial conditions and a few tricks from monitoring flow rates, and the A-4 draws fuel from all external tanks simultaneously. We cannot change this behavior. With SFM there's a fixed braking coefficient, tire traction, and suspension rebound and damping, so you cannot implement individual wheel brakes or a free-castoring nosewheel. Our landing distances are thus WAY shorter than in real life. (Landing at the minimum weight and applying max braking results in an ~800 foot landing roll, which is what a Cessna 172 can do) On top of this, while drag modeling of individual stores may or may not be valid (up for debate), with SFM we have no way to change the overall model drag when stores are loaded onto stations or racks with varying aerodynamic properties. (e.g. the actual drag of 6 Mk-82 stores on a centerline MER is less than the sum of the drag of 6 individual Mk-82s and the MER individually) Tuning for a clean airframe results in something a bit too slow when loaded, while if we tuned for the "typical" MER payload, we'd have too much acceleration with a clean airframe (until we hit the airspeed table boundary). SFM doesn't allow interaction with a catapult (nor does EFM at this point, though that is coming) so we had to make a thrust hack to allow takeoff from carriers. Tailhook is integrated into the SFM already via a parameter, but we haven't yet figured out how to make the cockpit hook control clickable without breaking it. We also have no way to alter the effectiveness of control surfaces based on loadout or configuration of other surfaces. There's a single set of parameters for inertia and moment. Surface trim in the SFM is purely based on stick deflection, with the same limit as actual stick movement. All that being said, we will make it as accurate as possible within the above limits, and we believe everyone will enjoy it. It won't be perfect, but our goal is to get pretty darn close. So far, if you fly by the NATOPS procedures, everything works more-or-less as expected. --gos

definitely needs Southern England and Calais edit: "need" is strong, but it just seems weird to not include it. Essentially, there's no way to do a scenario that includes pre-invasion content without air-starting every asset. Anything prior to June 1944 doesn't make sense with the map as-is.

Has someone simply asked Vyrtuoz if he can tweak TacView to use more of the name? His TacView thread is here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=139148