Bogey Jammer

When it comes to creating a DCS module, 3D modeling is just a scratch to the surface.

By observing the current situation, planning of a F-15E would more sound like bad news to me. Come on, the waiting list is huge already and their first DCS module is not finished enough yet. Better ask this question in half of a decade.

I've recently reinstalled that another simulation too :D, I miss VR, but it feels so good to play in a feature balanced and fleshed out simulation :wub:

You don't understand because you fail to see that FB is not just a simple mean of communication. The FB argument apart, until we see real results, not just delay announcements of announcements, everything is yet to be proved. Third-parties history tells that studios can die even after announcing products. I wish they will eventually release nice modules in the future though.

Your tracks are fine, and clearly makes the aileron behavior at low speed hilarious, as if the MiG was made out of cardboard. That moment when it was perfectly perpendicular to the trajectory but still able to roll like it was straight at 300km/h was epic :megalol: Hopefully such situations in combat often result to a defeat. However I feel it's risky to compare the MiG-21 wing with so different in nature ones of F-15 and Su-27 because unlike the MiG-21, the lifting surface is the whole aircraft, not the wings only. They still can fly without a wing but the limited lifting surface of the MiG-21 is so precious that using ailerons at critical AoA has probably a much more sensitive impact on the total loss of lift of the wing (but that only would proves that the sim is wrong) rather than on roll effectiveness. The mass and architectures are also too different. I'd better suggest to correlate the results with the Mirage 2000, notorious for its extremely high roll rate and its true delta wing. Like you said, critical AoA of delta wings are higher because, if I correctly understood the principle, they generate out of their high swept leading edges some vortexes helping the airflow to not separate as easily as standard wings. So the behavior of control surface might be more effective at low-speed and high AoA. How better ? I don't know.

Facebook again :ranting: EDIT: just visited their facebook page… I see nothing except the only one publication of the 22th of march. That doesn't look alive enough for me sorry… Everything looks the same since the split.

Not any chance. We have not got any for the Mirage 2000 two years after release…

I can't remember the exact source, but what I understood is that the project is on hold in a way that the conditions which can resurrect it will probably never be met : — It's a WW2 aircraft supposed to be easy to model, yet Leatherneck has splitted and Heatblur proved that they don't need it to make much more ambitious modules. — F4U-1 version was selected, probably because the availability of sources. Fans of the whole Corsair family loves it anyway, but nitpickers hate that variant. — The Iwo-Jima theater was supposed to be made in the same time. Which means, the need to model a whole Pacific theater ecosystem for it and it's way too much workload yet. Plus the F4U-1 would not historically fit in it. — As a Pacific theater aircraft, it would be the most lonely aircraft of DCS World for years. — Magnitude 3 is in a undetermined state, the communication is dead, we don't even get change logs for the MiG-21. Only the 3D artist seems alive and yet nothing proves that this studio still has a future or is not practically dead already.

I'm afraid of the Harrier… I know we are seriously lacking of aircraft types but I'd like to wait a little bit to check the Harrier's performances as an early access module before it probably becomes one of the most tactically useful module for both sides… About the campaign, I have noticed some issues : — EWR statuses don't use the units the player has selected. — Tkvacheli FARP spawn locations are misplaced and half of the helicopter falls into the grass breaking things. — Crew convoys may not arrive close enough to all spawn locations, forcing the player to takeoff and get closer in order to load weapons. The requests : I feel that most of the time, most effective combat consists of placing/destroying SAMs all the time (with the exception of a couple of tanks and trucks on FARPs) Making 90% of my time flying the Ka-50. Can we add more variety of gameplay ? an addition to what has been already suggested about offensive convoys, can we add : — AI bombers to escort. — critical buildings to destroy. — Some scripted command center gathering intel, process it and giving general directives and missions suggestions to players. — Naval warfare, with aircraft carriers. — More usefulness for objectives like bunkers, the dam, … — Bigger rewards for using old fashioned aircraft types Maybe more later… :D

The F4U train has derailed a long time ago. It's not a planned project anymore.

Scent ? :fear:

I regularly watch this topic but apparently not enough to catch everything. Your picture definitely shows that the cams are now much better :thumbup:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3239963&postcount=1304 What do you think ? :D

So, are all these greases including Nyogel 767A fall in the calcium sulfonate category ?

Promises on price before development… LOL Why I have the F-35 picture in mind ? What if the price had to be adjusted to face the industrial reality ? or has nothing to do with Facebook which might have used its powers to actually lower it ? What if the software architecture is closed for performances/reliability reasons ? or due to low technology availability at the time leaving no choice ? Plus the exclusive content is a trait of all pioneering companies for earning the most $$ as possible at start until the rivals wake up. If they don't wake up the de facto standard becomes accepted like windows or steam, so why not to try anyway ? Come on, the CV1 needed years of development before releasing. Being "outdated" means nothing when the customer's budget is calibrated. Why the nintendo famicom, clearly technologically obsolete in 1982, was still a success for 10 years around the world ? You sound like a young communist yelling at the evil zukerberg, but since the release of the CV1, its relative industrial success, can't you even think of components price drop thanks to the manufacturing process optimizations ? Not to mention the logistics at the release, costing high, and the saturated support due to the early phase of the product. There still was a risk, and maybe it had to be reduced by raising the cost. Anyway when I look at the final product, I can't imagine at all that oculus wanted to sell an half-finished crap for money. Everything in the CV1 means to give the best of it for the customer. Now that the CV1&Vive proved that VR is viable and set benchmarks, rivals appear, components providers populate their catalogs and offers, investment money is poured. Today's conditions are much better for young pussies like Pimax, but during the CV1's development times, only two companies were able to finish the first wave. Wait for the final product to become reality. Always look the final product's specifications only, not the promises luring vulnerable consumers before the hard work is ever completed.

I'm curious about the display's refresh rate, afraid of latency, and potential issues between eyetracker and eyeglasses lens. The low resolution of CV1 lets me play with the naked eye.

Just by watching over the shoulder. The cockpit itself got a pretty obvious place-holder multi-segment font (Mirage 2000 too btw)

Some exterior mesh shapes look too alpha for me.

Hello, How have you got those figures ? About the ailerons' efficiency, we need to get their aerodynamic characteristics first. If they are as effective at both low and high speed, checks are needed if they highly deflect at low speed but just need to deflect a little at higher speed for the same roll performance because of the airspeed influence (or overcome hydraulic pressure). Post stall AoA behavior look strange though, but we are not sure it is not a real property of this kind of delta wing. This topic is going to be very interesting :)

Don't tell me that you just want to nuke… :disgust: The MiG-21bis module in its current state is still enjoyable a lot, in many ways, as I can read here.

That is actually depressing for me. These are artwork improvements only. Nothing about avionics issues. Sorry mate but you're just throwing your subjective impressions based on your own preferences. You need to improve your pilot skills that's all.

Besides the visual effects, destruction effects are unreliable and not consistent. Consider these bombs as educational material only.

The best is to ignore this kind of bomb. Nobody uses them online, and they will never achieve the eye candy state that every people asking questions about it secretly phantasms about.

It's a bug mentioned many times already. These are small lights attached to main landing gear, and keep on all the time, with this graphic glitch trough aircraft's mesh. Su-33 has a similar bug.

How do you know that ?