thezapper

I just started an update for DCS and it's downloading about 17GB of data, even though I don't have that much installed. I just looked in the CoreMods/aircraft folder and I have the F-14 folder at 16.6GB and the F-15E at 5.87GB, I don't own the F-14 and only yesterday bought the F-15E which is why I've turned on to install it. I used to have the Nevada and Normandy maps installed but removed them in an effort to make the rediculous update sizes a bit smaller. I want to play the Syria map a bit as I've hardly touched it, but it's currently over 65GB on my HDD so I expect partly responisible for the massive update sizes. Not all of us have gigabit connections available, mine is only ~40Mb so when I see a huge 15+GB download half the time I don't bother and just turn the game off again. Is there some way to make sure it doesn't download content I don't have?

Yeah, fair enough, I just meant that if it was modelled accurately, it'll probably still get shot down! Or fall apart :)

I'm not sure about that. The Yugoslavia F-117 shoot-down happened at 8:15pm, it was identified by radar from 23km away, not visually, and then hit by a 1960's era SAM. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_F-117A_shootdown

Exactly. This post needs to be copy/pasted into all the "I wish we could have..." threads.

Well, DCS already has a "Game mode", where everything is made easier. Perhaps you could include these imaginary flight model aircraft there. You could even have that magic radar that sees everything in all directions, and have a 'next target' button so you don't have to do any work yourself, just like those old sims. :) I used to really enjoy Enemy Engaged Commanche Hokum, but I wouldn't want to play it now just because they updated the graphics.

The problem with adding modern up-to-date platforms is that the performance characteristics are mostly secret or protected, and the avionics are very secret. Radar performance, like stealth, is super secret, for example. Even on old aircraft like the Sr-71, some people still claim that the actual top speed is classified. Adding such aircraft would result in a guess at the performance and as a result dilute the accuracy of DCS which is what hard core simmers appreciate. So don't expect (or keep wishing for) the F-22, F-35, Silent Eagle, Pak-Fa, Su-35, Typhoon etc. If you want to play a game with these sort's of aircraft then you're limited to the likes of Ace Combat, or as I like to call it, Call of Duty - Flight edition. I know this is a wishlist section, but there's really no point wishing for platforms that'll never make it.

I bet you were the sort of person that flew London to Sydney in MS Flight Sim in real time. Anyway, you can already do this. After requesting a re-arm, set a timer for 30-40 mins, wait for it to go off, then continue "playing". Maybe next time you crash your aircraft you could delete the game and never play it again, to simulate death.

Why would you need to shut the aircraft down to refuel? Do you glide for mid-air refuelling! :)

I don't know why people start these "Aircraft I want" threads, then proceed to list dozens of planes. The F-18 took how many years? And it's still not working properly months after release. Also, what's with all the love for the F-117? Yeah, It looks cool and was the first stealth aircraft, but it was slow, held two bombs, and wasn't even that stealthy. I'm pretty sure it couldn't self lase either so would require a ground spotter. It was basically replaced by Tomahawk missiles. If one of the limited number of decent dev teams out there is going to devote time to a new aircraft I'd rather have something else than a tiny bomb truck!

I'd love to see this functionality. The ability to fire another action when flipping a switch to off. Modifying the lua files is a pain and updates keep ruining your modifications. For example, I'd like to map the EAC switch on my TM warthog to the Ka-50 laser on/off. Flip up - laser on, flip down - laser off. But currently the switch acts like a button, flip up - press and hold, flip down - release. You have to flip up and down, to turn it on, then up and down again to turn it off. There should be an option to register joystick buttons as toggles, so you can assign a key bind to both the 'press' and 'release' portion of the action.

What you're describing there is training a neural network. And from your description it's obvious that can't be how DLSS works because DLSS is supposed to work on a single graphics card and produce instant results. You're describing a process that takes a huge render farm, terabytes of data, and years to train. Bearing in mind that "deep learning", "machine learning" and "AI" are all fashionable terms that every marketing and PR person want's to throw around at the moment, I'd take the Deep Learning part of it with a pinch of salt.

I'm pretty sure that's the Ka-52, the two seater version of the Hokum, and called The Alligator. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamov_Ka-50#Ka-52_%22Alligator%22

Erm.. the Ka-50 is the Hokum. Maybe you're thinking of the Havok?

I'm not sure what you mean by giving us "near seamless views", from what I've read DLSS sounds like an improved version of anti-aliasing. It'll just make the final image look nicer, sometimes. What you mean by new features it could add?

Also an SDK is available now, I'm looking into it to see what it can do...

A flight manual is not the same as performance statistics, though. I doubt the full capabilities of the Longbow radar would be in there.

Yes! Helicopters are much more fun and interesting to fly. I doubt we'll get an AH-64D, or the Eurocopter, too modern and the data for them would be limited or just wrong. Would love an AH-1W (AH-1Z too modern), the Cobra just looks cool. I'm not really interested in non-gunship platforms myself, it is a Digital COMBAT Simulator after all, although maybe a Blackhawk or a Chinook (which can be armed) could take care of any pickup/dropoff missions anyone is thinking about. I'd really like the Mi-28, but I think Russian hardware is difficult to get data or a license for. A Hind would be cool, transport and gunship.

When do you expect this tiny strip of text be visible or useful? It's actually not difficult to do, and the capability is probably already there in the damage modelling code that draws bullet holes and damage over the aircraft mesh, it's just a bit pointless.

I'd like to see more helicopters. Specifically An AH-64, AH-1 and the Mi-28, with two seat multiplayer ability. I'd like to play the AH-64D, but that's a current platform and unlikely to be able to get any real information on the systems, same with the Mi-28. An F-15E, but again, it's too current.

You are applying real world logic to a video game. In the real world it's important to have a trainer aircraft with lower performance, simpler systems, and possibly two seats, because it would be madness to ask a new pilot to get straight into a Gripen/Eurofighter/F-22 (or whatever) and try leaning to fly. The main reason for this is safety. It's very likely a new pilot would crash such an aircraft and die. Secondary reasons would be cost of operating the platform and availability of the aircraft. These are the reasons display teams don't use their top military aircraft, they simply cost too much to run, and are generally needed elsewhere. Fortunately, the downsides listed above don't exist in DCS. I can quite happily learn to fly the F-18 by jumping straight in the seat and randomly hitting switches, releasing weapons and ejecting or crashing, as many times as I want with no worry of bankrupting my country or upsetting my family. Also, learning to operate one of the study-sim aircraft (A-10C, F/A-18, Ka-50, etc.) is an in depth task that takes a lot of time. I really don't want to waste my valuable spare time learning all the systems of some crappy trainer aircraft first before I can start using the aircraft I'm actually interested in. I have zero interest in trainer aircraft being added to DCS and would much rather see developers spending their limited resources creating interesting and capable platforms that make this game (it is a computer game after all) actually fun to play.

I'm slightly confused as to what you're asking for. It seems like you're implying that because three of the aircraft in DCS are used by display teams around the world, why are they not making the MB-339 - which is used by the Italian display team? I don't believe ED or third parties are specifically making display team aircraft, rather they've just included display skins for aircraft that also happen to double as display team aircraft. The F/A-18C, Su-27 and Mig-29 are all very capable and potent modern combat aircraft and fully fit in to DCS World, the Hawk, less so, and I think also has had less interest and as such fewer sales. It's unlikely that a developer is going to devote a large portion of time making an aircraft that doesn't really fit in with the rest of the DCS world, just because it's the aircraft of what might be the world's best display team. People don't seem to grasp the massive amount of work and funding required to build a new module, and as a result developers have to carefully select aircraft that will sell enough units to cover their costs. The upshot of this is that you're unlikely to ever get niche aircraft like the MB-339, when machines like the AH-64, F-16 or a proper Su-27 are still not available and much more likely to net the all important sales required for a developer to survive. I for one am not interested at all in trainer aircraft. If it's your thing, Aerobatics can be performed in all of the other fighter jets. I much prefer to drop bombs and fire missiles, so an aircraft with low performance and two pylons has no draw for me. Why don't you just get the L-39 (which looks really similar to the MB-339) and make a skin of the Frecce Tricolori yourself?

No interest whatsoever in a long range bomber. May as well add a 747.

Just keep hitting it. I've added the moskova to a mission and made it passive. Playing with a friend we counted around 13 GBU-12's and a bunch of mavericks are required to sink it, maybe more. I think it took two A-10's worth of GBU-10's. Look for the secondary explosion, when you see that they sink.

I have, it didn't help in my opinion. I also tried changing rendering resolution which made no difference. I heard the issue also affects the SU-25 and Ka-50 targeting systems. Fingers crossed for a fix, I've currently stopped playing because of this 'feature'.

I hope so, the pod is basically useless now as an IR camera since the new ground textures update. You can't differentiate between targets and the ground. I was going to buy the A-10 redflag campaign and Nevada map but not until the TGP works.