Redglyph

That wouldn't require any modification in the existing missions, what is wrong is just what is displayed, in the mission editor and perhaps in the mission briefing - I don't know anymore because of this confusion. It was funny to see the other day that IL-2 has the same bug in its mission editor. Still, quite annoying because one never knows whether the wind displayed is correct or reversed.

Thrustmaster, further details in my signature. I'm using both the beta and the alpha, last time I checked (not so long ago), it was the same behaviour in both branches. Perhaps it's the real behaviour, who knows? It's not blocking at all, the Gazelle is pretty fun to fly and I can live with the weird "slow before accelerate" part since I'm not using that mode that often :) It's just a bit frustrating when one takes the time to report issues to help with the beta/alpha, and not seeing any hint that the devs have registered the problem. That's what is bugging me the most in DCS, I don't mind if it takes 4 months to fix, it's a beta, but posting PR's for nothing is both a waste of time and a problem which is most probably not known to them. I guess I haven't understood the logic of how it should be properly reported ;)

I never got any reply from Polychop on that strange behaviour (nor on the other problems for that matter), it seems they're not interested. I haven't tried anymore, to be honest. Thanks for asking anyway :) Yeah, I saw that, glad your problem was fixed and you could fly the Gazelle normally again!

For those who never tire of watching movies and documentaries on the subject... This one-hour documentary retraces the origins and shows most of the variants of that fantastic airplane. It gives quite a few interesting details on the systems, and the main modifications that were made. It's not exhaustive of course, but interesting enough. Some comparisons with its main opponents are also summarized. Near the end, at about 50' there's a pre-flight, take-off and a short flight of a well-known LF Mk IXb in which one can hear the sonorous engine we all love, both from within and without. Be warned, fairly high risk of goosebumps ;) for the impatients :)

Happy New Year to you, M3!

I don't feel it's outdated, nor in need of any upgrade, the only part that annoys me is having to patch the switch logic on every update. Otherwise it's a great module with a really deep modelling of the systems, and plenty of quality DLC. It will be an interesting comparison to the Harrier. What upgrade are you thinking about? Anything specific? Perhaps the feeling some have is coming from a need to see something new because it has been there for a long time. Personally I'd rather see new DCS features to enrich the overall experience like improved AI, ATC, mission possibilities, realistic weather and their effects on aircraft, state persistence, or maybe even new aircraft, than refreshing a perfectly well-done module. Unless on some monitors the textures begin to appear too low-res (like the Black Shark's), but that'd just be a simple texture replacement.

They rely on common libraries, scripts and other files. Though for individual fixes that are independent or living on the same common version, I'm wondering the same, just assuming it's safer and much easier to manage.

Still there should be a stable, definitive 1.5 release at some point, since 2.5 will not be compatible with many DLC campaigns.

Stealth update confirmed here ;) http://update.eagle.ru/ Or better, in the very handy DCS version history thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=114030&p=2249076 but since SkateZilla made this useful list, I guess this is coming from here :)

No response for that, neither in the other thread. I suppose I should create yet another thread, since I don't know whether it's normal or not. It does seems suspicious. But I'm not sure it's worth the effort, it will probably end up unanswered as well, I'll just let someone else report it if that's a problem for them.

No change in 1.5.8.12823.414.

The tracers are apparently only visible with deferred shading enabled, I posted a few shots earlier to see if there was a confusion about that, to know if that was normal but got no reply so I assume it's WIP (but then most people don't read the posts above theirs so it's hard to tell). Regarding the hit sparks and damage model, I hope we'll converge towards something similar to BoS. For WWII environment it's a treat for visual and structural damage in combat and with collisions (in DCS the aircraft just explodes when hitting a tree, for example). :)

I confirm, DCS/1.5.8.12667 (x86_64; Windows NT 6.1.7601), the bug is still there. Screenshot of debriefing, mission and mission log in attachment. Mission triggered multiple failures once in the air, but nothing really happened and no actual failures were endured by the airplane. Still, they are shown in the debrief. EDIT: apparently the log was again rejected by the upload... hope it's not critical failure2.miz

For being involved in development projects, I can say for sure there is no shame in not always meeting the "promised" delivery date. But Heatblur store credit gift cards instead? Or on top? I'm not so sure about that one... Still. Merry Xmas! :)

It was reported here, but never acknowledged, so I don't know if it was repaired by "luck" in 2.2, or if we can expect it to be repaired in the next 1.5 beta too... I'd say yes, probably, hopefully! But that's just a guess ;)

This has been silently fixed in 2.2, I haven't tried in 1.5.8. Do you still have this problem? Which version?

Good to know! Makes sense, thanks for the info, SiThSpAwN :)

That's what I don't like, as soon as I move my head I see those fake reflections and it's very distracting. I suppose there might be a mod somewhere for that ... but I have reached my quota of fixes with the A-10C switches, the MiG-21 switches and cockpit, TF-51, ... ;)

I'm confused. When I tested it on the latest version, - with deferred shading: cockpit too bright, more visual effects (tracers), better fuselage rendering, no sun glare - with no deferred shading: cockpit fine, less visual effects, fuselage rendering fine but plainer (not entirely sure about that last one), sun glare But Campbell says it's "awful" and "obscured"? with no DS (what is bad/how is it obscured?), and SiThSpAwN says it's too bright with no DS. Does it come from other settings as well? That's the only one I changed between the two tests, gamma didn't change. EDIT: providing some shots to make sure that's what the others see 4 first screenshots : WITH deferred shading (name is *_DS.jpg), on 4_DS you can see the tracers :) 4 next screenshots and last one for settings: WITHOUT deferred shading (*_no_DS.jpg), and HDR on, on 3_no_DS you can see the sun glare

Yes, it's nice in NTTR. On the other hand, the revamped Caucasus is on its way too, and it will be pretty. But NTTR makes for more variety when combined with another terrain. On the principle, what you said makes a lot of sense and I think that it would be unfair too. But again, are you sure there are many people without NTTR? Which one do you feel is like CAP 2 graphics?

Yes, to be honest I have no idea how to set it up to get the best rendering. I know in the past this used to mess with the colours. With the latest version 2.2, if I don't use deferred shading there seems to have some effects I can't see, like those nice tracers, but the colours seem more realistic and the sun is quite blinding where it's just a yellow circle with DS. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that with DS on, the livery was not exactly the same. :huh: I know, I should search in all the threads where there were discussions about that but it's tedious and I gave up long ago. I'll worry about it when 2.5 is there.

That was my first reaction, exactly :) But it may not be simple if we want a realistic campaign, and / or if we want to use a carrier during the campaign, which is harder to justify or at least more easily optional in the training programme (though I know those pilots usually spend a few days on a carrier to train specific operations). No carrier in Nevada, and perhaps fewer opportunities for a campaign, except maybe a Red Flag but we already have it for the A-10C, the F-15C and the M-2000C. A training in Caucasus and a campaign in Strait of Hormuz, on the other hand, could be an interesting option? I have no idea when we'll have SOH, but probably soon enough for such a campaign. Though as sze5003 said, NTTR is a nice environment for a training. Sure I'd not force users to purchase NTTR - at least for the training missions, but who doesn't have it yet anyway? It's part of practically all DCS deals.

I see at least 130 assigned/closed in the last 30 days. Are you sure you are using the correct view?

QED. Have you guys seen all the activity on their bug tracker, by chance? ;)

Jeez, that's the same old record again and again, from people who just want to be served their way. It seems people have lost their ability to read in this thread. All that has been explained numerous times. Wouldn't that thread better be closed? I can't see anything good coming from it.