Jump to content

Horns

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1322

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Horns

    Looking for a plane with a similar "vibe" as an AV-8B or Mirage 2000C

    in DCS 2.9

    Posted

    14 hours ago, lascaris said:

    I really like the feel of the Harrier and the Mirage. They are both pretty capable while taking a bit more effort than AMRAAM spamming while being not quite as complex as a Hornet or Viper. I'm looking for some recommendations for aircraft with the same kind of feel as it seems pretty obvious that with Razbam bailing that the two modules will eventually have glaring bugs in their operation (beyond what Razbam never fixed in the first place.) I own Hornet, Viper, and A-10 II along with the Harrier and M-2000 but have no issue buying another module if it's something I'd like.

    If A2G is your thing I'd say the Viggen might be worth your while. It's older with less complexity and no MFDs, which means no learning endless MFD pages. It was my first FF module, and I really liked that everything was based around low, fast flight, so my entire experience was refining that one way of flying. I really got a buzz out of going supersonic so low I had to *gain* altitude before releasing AIR bombing. It also took most of the difficulty out of target spotting, it's a lot easier at low altitude.

    • Like 1

    AV-8B Harrier II Plus

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    27 minutes ago, Mikey74 said:

    im sorry 😄 was late and wrong thinking, i mean something like attack, or suggest

    I thought so 👍 All good, everyone does late night word salad sometimes lol

    2 hours ago, upyr1 said:

    SUggest would have worked better than offer which would have worked better than offend which I think could be an auto correct error  like ducking mad

    c0d370ce14e65ac41a88ebab1f15635b.jpg

    I had to add the 'f' word to my iphone dictionary so that would stop happening 😄

    AV-8B Harrier II Plus

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    22 hours ago, Mikey74 said:

    I know, this probably wont happen, but my 1st FF was the AV-8B back in 2018/19 i think. With all the pain we all had while EA, knowing Razbam in DCS is dead, i would like to offend ED to make a AV-8B Harrier II PLUS instead of the F-35A. Not that i dont like the F-35A, but i want my 1st Love alive and updated. Please think about it.

     

     

    I suspect the word 'offend' has mistranslated, can you offer an alternative word (synonym)? Or am I being a dummkopf? 😆

    • Like 1

    Eurofighter 2026+ release?

    in DCS: Eurofighter

    Posted

    If we get the air-to-air only EF next year (and it's as polished as the F-14 was on release) I'll be happy, I figured it was further away than that.

    @baltic_dragon I noticed your roadmap says 'Eurofighter Tranche 1' - has HB said anything more about which tranche we get, or is this just a 'worst case'?

    DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum FAQ

    in DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum

    Posted

    Purchased and looking forward to this 👍 Do ED currently expect to deliver the "At final release" features when the module moves out of EA, or during product sustainment? Curious about when ED expect to get the full manual out - and I know, as always with Early Access, everything is subject to change

    • Like 2

    "Coming Soon" on DCS Page

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    9 hours ago, upyr1 said:

    It would be horrible if we got rid of it. When I read the suggestions I just thought in the shop page and products page you could have a link showing the figure modules and assets. It would be a great way to highlight what is up and coming. I'd orginize the page in the following categories product type, era, projected release

    You nailed it. Good ideas for how to organize it too. If the 'and Beyond' builds someone's appetite for a particular module, the 'Coming Soon' would offer them the opportunity to check back every so often and check if there have been any updates. Easier than sifting through the forum, deeper than a dev roadmap and far easier than searching old newsletters.

    • Like 2

    "Coming Soon" on DCS Page

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    9 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

    What about this? Probably reaches more people than the website

     

    Yeah, but it’s only once a year and you never know how far or close anything in it is. The two should go together, I’m not suggesting we get rid of the ‘… and Beyond’, neither would do the job of the other.

    Persistent Aircraft Maintenance, Wear & Tear From Pilot Action and Environment, and Time Based Failures

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, bephanten said:

    It's already in the game. Check Heatblurs component model system. Only F4 uses it ATM. It's open to licensing for other third party developers.  Personally Im more likely to buy a module that uses it. 

    Does the HB system carry over the aircraft state between missions? I thought that was just within the same mission, I could be wrong though.

    Persistent Aircraft Maintenance, Wear & Tear From Pilot Action and Environment, and Time Based Failures

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    On 6/2/2025 at 7:25 AM, CallsignPunch said:

    I’d like to propose a major addition to DCS Core that would deepen the simulation experience for both single-player campaigns and multiplayer squadrons: a persistent aircraft maintenance and degradation system.

    Core Concept:

    Aircraft and their systems should wear down over time based on:

    • Flight hours and engine cycles

    • Pilot handling (e.g., over-G, hard landings, over-torque)

    • Environmental exposure (desert sand, saltwater corrosion, cold weather)

    • Maintenance performed (or neglected) by mission designers or logistics scripts

    This would mean a way to assign specific serial numbers to aircraft and the maintenance record stays with that particular aircraft.

    Proposed Features:

    • Aircraft Serial Numbers where in DCS or your squadron, you can have specific aircraft serial numbers

    • Component wear and tear that accumulates mission-to-mission, pilot abuse or care, and environment like desert or ocean.

    • Failures triggered not only by combat damage but by long-term stress, poor maintenance, or harsh conditions

    • Mission editor options to conduct routine maintenance, repairs, and inspections

    • Optional “Maintenance Status” window or digital maint. logbook showing aircraft condition before flight

    • System degradation like engine spool times increasing, longer startup sequences, reduced sensor accuracy, hydraulic lag, etc.

    Example Applications:

    • In a multiplayer squadron: AH-64s that repeatedly perform hot landings or overtorque rotors without maintenance might suffer drivetrain or sensor failures on later flights unless serviced.

    • In single-player campaigns: A neglected aircraft in a harsh environment may gradually show reduced performance or suffer critical failures mid-mission, encouraging smart flying and logistics.

    Why This Matters:

    This would raise immersion, reward disciplined flying, and add a whole new layer of realism and mission design. It turns logistics, planning, and maintenance into part of the game loop, just like in real-world aviation operations.

    This system could be opt-in and customizable to suit both casual players and hardcore milsim groups.

    If the devs are reading this, thank you for the incredible work you’ve done so far. A system like this would push DCS even further into the realm of full-spectrum aviation simulation.

    Sorry dude, any opt-in features that add persistence are features I won't opt-in to and I don't think enough people would opt in to justify the amount of work it would take to implement this.

    There are strategy games where this idea might find a home, but I don't think MMO-like features would be welcomed by the DCS community.

    "Coming Soon" on DCS Page

    in DCS Core Wish List

    Posted

    Potential new or returning customers are going to look at the DCS page to work out if there's anything interesting in enough to draw them in. Many won't want to sign up for the newsletter, seeing it as just another email coming into their already crowded inbox that they will often have little interest in. I just wondered if it might be worth adding a "Coming Soon" section to the DCS page, so that potential customers can easily find the modules likely to become available soon. You could combine this with a "Recent Releases" section, so people who haven't looked in a few months can easily find modules that might have been announced and launched since they last looked (eg: Cold War: Germany map).

    ED will have the analytic data, so they may have an idea of how many people this might attract. To me creating a "Recent Releases" and/or "Coming Soon" section seems like a modest investment of effort for plenty of potential benefit, but of course that's not my call.

    • Like 5

    Our Incoming MiG-29A vs Non Warsaw Pact Variant

    in DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum

    Posted · Edited by Horns
    Grammar

    On 4/2/2025 at 2:12 PM, AeriaGloria said:

    The MiG-29B non Warsaw pact version would mostly have differences for the player only in IFF. Instead of automatically interrogating anything on radar, you need to manually press an interrogate button on the stick that replaces the normal “unlock” button. And on 9.12B, in order to then unlock a target you need to press a button in front of the throttle. On 9.12/9.12A, this button instead is a switch that allows the radar to lock on to only enemies or also friendly IFF signals. 

    So to the player, if we got 9.12B the only extra thing we would need to do is manually interrogate, and we wouldn’t be able to have it only lock onto enemy contacts or both enemy/friendly. 
     

    This thread has some good posts on it, you’ll just need to scroll down a bit https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/soviet-russian-iff.792/#post-9051

    Apologies, I thought I had replied previously.

    Thank you for such a comprehensive answer. If IFF and its related switchology are the main difference, it seems that the forthcoming module will be a reasonable analog for the MiGs of any country who owned them, be they USSR, WP or non-aligned. Much appreciated.

    the reason why navy retire the f14

    in DCS: F-14A & B

    Posted

    15 minutes ago, Jar72 said:

    Well, sometimes, one does not read every post of a thread in detail... 😂

    Sorry, I don t understand math symbols the way your are using them. Writing a sentence usually is better for understanding, or a simple sketch. Yeah, I m old school. 😂

    Anywhooo, thanks Joe, much appreciated sharing your library. I did not know a lot of them.

    My post wasn't meant as a criticism and I wouldn't necessarily read every post either, I just happened to remember those comments being in the thread and was about to post more or less the same thing as WarthogOSL so this seemed to follow forum convention better. Apologies for any offence, was not the intent but perhaps I could have thought longer before posting. 

    Question mark was to show I was treating it your post as a single composite question. You'd asked if "The Pentagon Paradox" was the book Joe1978 was referring to, mentioned finding other books in your search and asked if it was worth reading for a Tomcat fan. I was trying to convey that each quote that followed answered part of your set of questions. I see now how that isn't terribly clear, I wanted to post an answer to your question but had limited time to do it, so this was quicker than double quoting your post and cutting down to the part answered by each question.

    the reason why navy retire the f14

    in DCS: F-14A & B

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Jar72 said:

    Agreed about the "sterile discussion". Thanks for your reference, the perfect answer to this post.

    Are you referring to "the pentagon paradox" ? I found several other books. 

    Would you recommend to read it for a tomcat enthusiast? Or is it off subject?

    Cheers.

    ? =

    On 2/25/2025 at 7:58 PM, Joe1978 said:

    I recommend this book: "The Pentagon Paradox: Development of the F-18 Hornet"  James Perry Stevenson 

    +

    On 2/26/2025 at 5:40 AM, WarthogOsl said:

    JPS wrote a great F-14 book as well!

    I'll leave it to Joe to tell you if it's any good

    F-14B(?) Upgrade as featured in DCS 2025 video

    in DCS: F-14A & B

    Posted

    On 2/25/2025 at 2:21 AM, PhantomHans said:

    About the F-14D and APG-71...

     

    I'd love an F-14D.

    I'd love to pay for it, I want to encourage HB to make money.

    My vote would be to make it as realistic as possible with the information that we have.

    Approximate things when it's appropriate, and fall back to modeling it as it is on the F-14B / AWG-9 where and when it's the best you can do.

     

    The important thing for me would be to admit when an approximation was made, and to explain how and why.

    Its one thing to sell me a simulator and say "all of this is as real as it gets!" when you know it's not, and it's another thing completely to sell it to me and say "This is as close as we can get, and here's why"...

     

    Most of what interests me about the 14D is front seat stuff anyway.

    Personally, I feel quite different. I'd prefer to stick with "aircraft we can recreate to our usual high degree" rather than "best we can do with what we have", and I'd buy accordingly. That's a choice for each individual though, of course.

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...