zerO_crash

Honestly, not sure. I imagine that the spots are left open, such that you can insert them into the mission as active SAMs. Either SA-5s, or other types. I've noticed a few good places for strategic units (EWR/SAM (division-level)). I'd have to check if those were actually used IRL.

That's basically what I see in VR, with depth perception. It does take breath away. Considering how similar this is to the videos you can otherwise find online of pilots flying. Yeah, one would almost have thought that Orbx read this thread. They have set a new bar, for sure! Colors are particularly important for this map, as the sheer amount of forest/green is staggering. It will likely be the map which has the most forest/green in DCS (except earth). It really comes from low levels of population distributed over large terrain. I'm glad we didn't have to raise this issue further with Orbx. I'll probably do a separate request for 2.9 in general, to correct the hue on the other maps as well.

Maybe I do It's good stuff

My pleasure I can understand that some people might have slightly lower performance than with other maps, or that they were unfortunate to spawn in an area that is literally only topography and standard ground-layer with a couple of trees. With that said, giving it an objective look, go to the areas which have been worked (at least a little) - you will be blown away. What's doing the knack on this map, is the impression/feeling you get. Coastal cities actually look like coastal cities, esp. in VR, you can almost feel that fresh, cold air from the sea. It just gives you that impression. The flatter areas filled with forests, are in many ways featureless, which also gives you that void feeling of "where am I?!". Western Sweden and Norway, mountains and fjords. Lots of smaller islands, interesting terrain, new places to visit. It just pulls you to see more end on end. I gotta say, if money isn't an issue, and you have the hardware to do it, then waiting is criminal. I cannot enjoy it enough.

I wrote my main impression after 6 hours of running the map here: With regards to our topic here; I don't see any problem with the hue/haze or colors in person. Videos, depending on how someone has their DCS configured, can change the output of the image. Sometimes, in attempt to edit the picture as more vivid and fresh, one can overdo it. Having tried it with my VR (G2), that's what I believe Orbx might have done with the latest images. One can adjust a fair bit of the abovementioned with gamma, btw. Though there are limits so as to balance the image for all light conditions (day/night). In any case, the colors appear as very good to me. While they are more on the "ideal green" side, what I'm seeing through the VR is definitely something you see often during summer in Scandinavia. The colors do not come as overdone, and the hue isn't as pronounced as in the images. Beyond that, while the map is a very early access release, with much to be fixed/added, I can not recommend this map enough. As I wrote in the other thread, it is absolutely fantastic. The whole theatre is amazing, the sheer size is giving the feeling that you can get lost, the nature is varied, so are the cities, architecture, etc... It makes you want to explore end on end. Again, I cannot recommend it enough!

After spending around 6 hours: The area that the map covers is fantastic, both IRL and in DCS. From middle Finland/Sweden and east through the whole Kola peninsula, it's somewhat flat. Westwards from Finland/Sweden and to Norwegian cost, it's all mountians. They are generally in the range of 50m - 600m. In other words, this isn't Caucasus. Still, quite unique to the scenery, are fjords with sea entering every valley there is. The type of nature, and formation of mountains is very different indeed. If one observes closely, the main difference between e.g. Scandinavia and Caucasus, is that while the Scandinavian Peninsula has relatively low mountains, they are incredibly steep. That makes the whole terrain look just completely different to what other regions have. The topographics are splendid, and geography, really good. The coastlines themselves are amazing, and infrastructure (air ports, cities, etc..) technically very well made. Fascinating thing about this map is that the architecture seems different between what's found in Russia, vs. what's found in Finland/Sweden/Norway. Even the cities look different, with different models/size of populaton/etc... This is similar to (Israel vs. surrounding arab countries on Syria/Sinai maps). It's really fantastic, and one notices it. Visually, the map is stunning, albeit many areas aren't finished nor even begun. East of Murmansk is mostly clean (not started yet). However, those areas that are even semi-finished... oh dear... Piece of art! I can honestly say that flying with e.g. the Ka-50 from "Kola bay" (in the north) and following it south all the way through river "Reka Tuloma" to "Verkhnetulomsky", is the most beautiful place on any map in DCS. It's stunning. This, especially in VR. There is something about a wide bay/river which has infrastructure ftom tip to toe along it's length. Shipyards, cities, bridges, generally low terrain (grants view to the horizon)... It's amazing. Also, the map is huge, as in enormous. Comparison-wise, while South Atlantic is some 3100km from east to west, Kola is approximately 1420km. With that said, Kola is 1420km of pure land, and incredibly long from north to south, whilst South Atlantic, great as it is, is rather small in land (in comparison). Performance-wise, the map runs great for what it is. It's complicated in many technical aspects, thus it's not surprising that it takes some power to run. I am nowhere near maxed out, graphics-wise (closer to medium - VR), and it runs pretty well. With that said, having tried it maxed (lower fps), it is breathtaking in VR (G2). Personally, I truly enjoy all the terrains in DCS, they are all unique in visuals/conditions/architecture/etc... However Kola, has literally become my number one along with Caucasus. The areas are interesting, the mission scenarios are endless, and the quality is overall up top. With issues/requests adressed over time, this will remain among the top maps. I can also mention, that this map is different in person, than watching a video of it. I can not recommend it enough. That, with the understanding that it's a early access release, a very early access release.

Yup, don't lose your hope though. I'm sure that as mentioned, with better hardware/software, we'll get updates resembling the iconic nature even more Будет хорошо!

That is all as per initial mention of the feature. I always take a clean AJS-37, and fly in a SR-71 type of arc, where the underside of the Viggen is exposed towards the radar, so as to not mask the U22/a pod. Still, as you see yourself, the actual accuracy of the pod is somewhat poor. I don't mind that at all. I would, however, like to get an exact/semi-exact answer on whether this is in the ball park of the original capability. If that's how it was, fantastic, we'll work with that. I just don't want to alter the mission-style to something that might prove a bug. Again, a formal comment would be nice. I still see value in this system, such as determining the actual type of SAM, as well as it's rough location. It just means that you can't build specific SEAD missions based on ELINT alone. Also, the kneeboard way of reading elint, is perfect, especially for VR. It is preferred above restarting DCS or such.

People claim a lot. The map is fantastic. Sure, it's work in progress, thus much remain to be done. However still, at this stage, it is essentially on par with Syria/Sinai, albeit in a different climate. Splendid stuff!

It definitely works. I tested it in low/medium/heavy winds, and it holds speed practically on point (10-15km/h deviations that keep correcting themselves). In heavier winds, the Mi-8MTV2 will fluctuate somewhat on altitude, trying to correct for uneven wind and turbulence, but it stays within 5-6m +- from the altitude set when you engaged the channel. To add to what AlphaOneSix wrote. It has to be activated above 150km/h, otherwise the AP will hold the desired pitch and not speed. I can post you track if you still have trouble with it.

There is much that "should be", but as you know, there are a myriad of requests that need to be processed. It's a balance of priority/time/manpower. People believe that even AI-tuning should be a quick fix. Well, not really. Consider how much time, research and money ED had to put into a realistic AI crewman as Petrovich/George/+++. There really is no other simulator which comes close to the 3D perception modelling, recreating human abilities/deficiencies. As such, it's not only a matter of giving a unit a "cone of scan" and set a rate of a revolution. It's a three-dimensional aspect. There are questions of the optics and their capabilities, a question of how often a commander would alter between wide-view optics vs. narrow point-optics. There isna question of crew prepararion, reaction times, ability to see moving targets in different types of light, and at what distance such objects would be visible. There is far too much to mention. The problem is, this is a simulator. People come here from simplistic games, used to updates coming every week or so, and expect the same here. Just look at the complaints coming in and surprise as to why it takes 6-8 years to fully develop a module... Well, most don't even know basic maths. If you (anyone) can do it faster, go right ahead and make it. The point is, if you'd ever have access to a professional simulator used in business (I have, both from a instructor-/performer- seat), then you'd see just how much time it takes for any changes to get implemented. Updates coming on a yearly basis, sometimes more seldom. Mind you, not exhaustive lists like ED does. Far fewer fixes being done for the amount of time spent, than you would expect. This for the reason thay these are very complex environments, and by making a change that isn't thought out well, you are introducing the risk ruining the whole environment. People need to learn patience here. We all want DCS to look and perform as best as it can, especially ED (it's their salary afterall). However, good things take time. Patience!

A somewhat late update for anyone reading the topic. Here, Chizh explains precisely why correcting heading by the magnetic method is only recommended in the case of necessity (i.e. if you need to reset the INU in flight due to a failiure/damage/loss of power), in essence expanding on what I mentioned: "Вопрос: Какая разница между магнитной коррекцией (МК) и коррекцией по заданному курсу (ЗК)? Ответ: Коррекция по магнитному курсу не даст требуемой точности, такая коррекция дает ошибки от половины градуса до единиц градусов, что будет заметно при работе с запомненными точками на больших удалениях. Это происходит потому, что сам магнитный компас имеет погрешность в несколько десятых долей градуса, а при вибрациях и тем более в полете показания компаса считываются с точностью вплоть до 3-5 градусов. Коррекция по заданному курсу позволяет получить точность вплоть до 0.1 градуса при достаточно кропотливых измерениях истинного курса вертолета с использованием карты и линейки." In any other case than failiure/damage/loss of power, you wish to perform the manual method - for increased accuracy. Because of people who have no idea of a given subject, expressing their "quick solutions", it furthers misunderstanding and inability by other systems to work properly. In this specific case, correcting heading with MG, makes "precision" alignment useless with datalink, as it introduces too much inaccuracy. If you want to have to most accurate INS, and usable datalink, then perform a "precision" alignment on ground power (if not possible, do it on batteries), engines running are a no-go. Furthermore, perform a manual heading correction. That will allow as low drift as 1% - 2% of the total flight route. Also important, is how you fly. Remember, that above 12* pitch/roll, the doppler won't provide accurate input, as such, it will perform off "memory" mode. That will intoduce more drift. If you fly for 60 minutes in memory mode (higher altitude and/or above 12* pitch/roll), the output from PrPNK will turn to readings off TsVM-N - reckoning mode (air speed) as it considers that more accurate at this point. That's the least accurate measurement of patch, but also least probable (you'd have to perform a flight at high altitude most of the route). In layman's terms; for most accuracy of the PVI-800, after performing "precise" alignment (ground power/batteries), make sure to fly relatively stable without prolonged changes in pitch/roll. Occasional input from "memory"-mode is not too noticeable, but heavy maneuvering will require a INS FIX before moving in on AO. The accuracy will primarily be noticed with datalink and "TGT PNT" usage. Enjoy!

Merci!

Since we already have a competent visual/aesthetic representation of spring/summer/fall as seasons, it moves the spotlight to winter. Overall, it's missing in that department. Winter is currently only represented in the form of a texture "layer", with weather alterations such as snowing, low temperature, ice halos, etc... I am, however, missing a snow-body on pretty much all maps where snow occurs. This is my idea in general steps: - Design a "body" of snow which can be layered on top of the ground. - Ability to select the average height of snow (editor), with random variations in height. - Have the weather affect snow, such as wind gushes creating whiteout. Another example would be snowing/snowstorm adding to the body thickness over time. Rain - decrease height of snow. - Simulation of ice; surfaces (runways, taxiways, roads, etc...), aircraft (requested as a general weather update - visible ice), rain increasing ice-formation overall, etc... - For spring, visualize a early seasonal change for spring where ice is melting. A mix of snow/ice/greater water amounts/green. zerO

Fair enough. I'll see if I can reproduce it. The problem was, that I could never replicate it on demand. It was only after flying for an hour +++, that the bug suddenly exposed itself when using the guns. It was a completely random occuring bug. By the way Flappie, please push on the team on the "wind" bug I reported. Remind them that its been reported in 2016, no excuses there. Thanks again, brother!

JA-37 won't happen for at least as long as Gripen with its current datalink is in service. The reason, being stated before, is that JA-37 had the same datalink that the Gripen has. Otherwise, it would definitely be a fantastic addition.

I noticed that there is one essential source (page) not added here by me: https://www.net-film.ru/found-page-1/?search=qКа-50 Maybe you can get it translated. In any case, there are videos here that never hot uploaded to Youtube or other pages. Think of this as a Russian digital video-archive containing clips from different epochs. You can search for videos of other aircraft/vehicles/subjects too. It's a huge library with anything from short glimpses to longer documentaries/films. It's mostly older stuff. Have fun!

Исправление: Забудь. У Ка-50 №23 и №27 могут быть разные лопасти и параметры. Таблица скоростей также отличается от №25. https://ionovmike.livejournal.com/3756.html

The threads should be merged with my original post from 2016 mentioning two issues (one being that the guns in rare circumstances don't fire at all, until trigger is recycled). #Mod

Here's an interesting article indicating the complete costs of purchasing different munitions used by the US Air Force: https://www.twz.com/32277/here-is-what-each-of-the-pentagons-air-launched-missiles-and-bombs-actually-cost In other words, if you are to shoot down a drone, the cannon might be more realistic than spending money on an AIM-120D.

S3G, huh?! You sir, sit on some cool piece of knowledge, that's for sure If it wasn't for the fact that it might be crossing some lines (secrets), I'd have opened #nuclear energy topic long ago here. Too many military folks which have experiences that are closer than the story of a friend's friend. Generally, when I'm up at night, it's because I read up on "green" and "energy" - not in the same word I remember reading about a occurrance near Petro (50s) where the dock managed to lower the top lid off a sub reactor four times wrong. Nope, you read it correct, four times, they managed to start the reactor, realising the lid wasn't sealed shut. Three emergency scrams in total, if memory serves. When you read stuff like that, you realize just how cool our forefathers were. Kids roaming nightclubs nowadays have no idea how to party with a boom. It's interesting, to say the least. Hahaha, ouch That is a cool trench though. With the Mars-like surroundings - it's a nice touch. Sadly, I've only seen pictures of the picture though. ChNNP, 3M Island, Dimona, T94, Sayda Bay, +++ - all should be 5 ️ ratings in Michelin guide. Yup, I'm very curious if Orbx models a rusting wreck or two. Besides that, honoring the spot of Kursk will be obligatory. Knock on the gate of Guba Ara. Otherwise, Murmansk, Severomorsk-3, ZEVS, Gremikha (hope to see K-159 which sunk with two nuclear reactors onboard, besides the storage facility), and more. Really hope ED fixes that map size-limit. Would be neat to have an extension eastwards - Sevmash and there around

Hah, now that is something. Guess the P-3 crew must have gotten a blue ribbon for their performance... Which type of sub did you serve on, if you don't mind me asking? A funny fact; the famous K-19 submarine (Hotel I) was repaired at Polar. Sad to say, it was a complete disaster. I read a memo from a higher-tier officer that confirmed the repair team in the dock got irradiated to death while working on it. He could only speak about it after the fall of USSR. Last I heard, one of the original crew members on K-19 bought it repaired and somewhat refurbished (he is a businessman now), and made it into his floating asylum (upgraded to Hotel II-class). One would think that the Bermuda triangle is about the most interesting the sea has to offer... Crazy stuff. It was even worse with the crew who participated in the reactor accident. I'd have to look it up again to be sure, but I seem to remember that the most irradiated sailor recieved some approximately 5500 rems (55 - 56 sieverts). For comparison, the rooftop on Chernobyl NPP had 10-12k rems after the accident in 1986. He worked in half the exposure for some hours, not 1 - 2 minutes. Complete madness. Absolutely, it's really beatiful. Very unique nature as well. The only problem is, there is a fair bit of contamination in the sea from rusting ships, nuclear leakage accidents daring back to 50s, and generally the Chinese diesels. That's what I hear at least. I admit, sea isn't my main domain though.

Posting a relatively short synthesis on the history of CK37 (14 pages) and a comparison to what was available at the time. It's written by Bengt Jiewertz - formerly of Datasaab and Ericsson AB. Enjoy! Viggenck37.pdf

Everything is correct as is.

We'll succeed where the Area 51 group failed. We'll have fence cutters