cypc

Unfortunately the Little Bird is a no go for DCS because it is used by US special forces ...

The threat list is great! On the long run, having a page per unit with the list of countries where they are available in game would be very handy IMO

I just checked in 2.5.1 update 1 at Tbilisi-Lochini and it's not fixed, signs alongside taxiways indicate different names than we have in the kneeboard or in the DCS_GND_Charts document. Ex: Taxi Bravo (in kneeboard) leading to runway 13R threshold is indicated as Charlie in game. Taxi Alpha between Apron 1 and the middle of the runway is indicated as Bravo in game. Taxi Echo leading to 31L threshold is indicated as Alpha in game. I don't know which one is correct, but having the kneeboard and airport signs indicating the same thing would be nice.

It has been said times and times again that it's not (only) a Razam issue ... Here is the proper thread.

If offline mode does not address unexpected internet connection outage, please ED, just move the 3 days period to 8 days, so those of us playing on average once a week don't get too penalized when it happens. (and it does happen, once or twice a year on average for me in France)

F-111 is supersonic at mil power, just saying :music_whistling:

Wags said in an AMA video a couple month ago that for the AH-64, the question was more WHEN than IF. So it will happen, and if ED does it, it will hopefully come just after the F-16.

I confirm, it's not possible for now and has been requested a couple of times already :)

Looking forward to test these improvements ! Let's say it was to back up your suggestion, I did read, I swear :music_whistling:

Jammer only affects radars, therefore IR SAMs and manpads are not affected at all.

Hi ! With the changes to F10 map units labels in 2.5, I started using lotATC again, and I have a couple of suggestions / feature requests to improve readability. (most of it based on real world ATC software) I have this weird behavior with labels, when I hover a plane's label, it will reposition itself on the 6 of the plane. I find that extremely annoying, when i set a label on the right of the unit, I'd like it to stay there. An option to disable that behavior would be great. An option to make the link between unit icon and it's label more visible, I personally find it too discrete. An option to make labels showing up by default always at the same place (usually right side of the unit). A way to filter ground units off the map, most of the time I don't need to see them (only their threat range) and it makes the situation unreadable when planes fly over areas with many ground units (generally airfields). A way to apply multiple filters in the unit list, I generally want to display all planes and helicopters. Those are the most important things I can think of for now, I hope it can be implemented (especially label things, that's IMHO the most critical). I'm available for any questions/precision about what I mentioned above, and I'll come back with more feedback if I have any :pilotfly:

Nice catch, I don't speak russian, so if translator fails me ... :no_sad:

Russian MOD representative said 41 out of 103 missiles were intercepted, that's 40%, not 70 :music_whistling:

Also airports signs show different taxiway names than we have on kneeboard charts and on DCS GND Charts document (for Caucasus map only, it's correct in Nevada), any info on this?

How long does it take to create a new AI unit like a tank? What about a ship?

I never said there are no problems (also called bugs) or that these missing features are insignificant, thanks for proving my point further that you don't want to even try to be objective. Of course they accepted, being exposed at the E3 is a great opportunity. The mirage got neglected for about 6 month, and maybe you didn't read the forum well enough, because Razbam clearly explained they had to pause mirage development for some time and could not disclose why because of NDA. When E3 started, they explained what was going on. I agree there are many small bugs, and I also wish Razbam would fix them faster, however they are not blocking, and don't affect aircraft's performance. About INS update : It went into "release" just so it could get on Steam, I agree it was not really clean, but at least there is an explanation. I can't recall a single update breaking the Mirage, and when I mean break, I mean you can't fly the module in mission at all. Mig-21 used to crash DCS in various situations and cause many performance issues (for example, some point IIRC, turning radar on would crash DCS) It's not my philosophy, it's the just way it is, whether you like it or not. And if you are worried about supporting devs, don't worry, buying a module at release will support them as well, in fact, it may encourage them to make it a finished and polished module faster ! 90, 95%, doesn't really matter, the point is we have everything we need working (not bug free, but working) for air to air, and for some air to ground (which is not what the Mirage is supposed to do anyway)

And you obviously didn't read the whole post or just decided to ignore it :book:

I respectfully disagree, most of Mirage's announced features not yet implemented are because ED needs to do some work about it (terrain following radar, anti-runway bombs ...). For the rest, FM took time, but wasn't it worth it? Manual took time, but wasn't it worth it? If you look at Mirages patch history, it always received regular updates, and the post was edited no later than yesterday. The only period of time when the Mirage got neglected was from early 2017 to the E3, because ED proposed to show the Harrier at the Expo, so Razbam accepted and had to dedicate a lot of ressources to make it flyable. Don't forget how other 3rd party modules development went: Mi-8 was in early access for 3 years It took 4 years to get EGT management on the Huey For many years the Mig-21 broke every 2 update And the Hawk holds the record, I won't start a list here Overall, is the Mirage feature complete? No Does it work for 95% of it's missions? Yes Is Razbam still working on it? Yes If it was as broken and unfinished as some dishonest comments stated, there would not be that many squadrons flying it with great success. (Oh, and buying something in early access means giving up the right to complain, many people forget that, those should wait release to then decide if it's worth buying or not)

And lucky you Razbam stated they will work on new sounds for the Mirage once the new tools coming with the F-18 will be available to 3rd party :thumbup:

Last year while Flight Model update was in the work, some people were saying "Razbam is not working on the Mirage anymore, only on the Harrier, the Mirage won't get any more updates and will stay unfinished ..." Couple month later the update arrived, shutting down all these criticisms about FM. The exact same thing happened for the manual and the 3D model ! Now I'm just patiently waiting for Razbam to show them wrong again :pilotfly:

Two things: If you need a solution "ASAP", then it means you should fly 1.5 release version, not 2.5 BETA :thumbup: "DCS 2.5 Open Beta Update 4 - MP. Fixed issue when client can only see up to 5 ground units that are stationary." According to changelogs, this issue was addressed two weeks ago, have you tested with the last version ?

In my experience as a GCI in DCS, AWACS/ground radars will see you without any doubt when you pass a ridge, and sometimes in valleys depending on their positions. Then a fighter can easily sweep the valley and get a radar contact at 2 to 5 mn. Helos are particularly visible for radars when moving (>50kt)

IIRC updater sometimes (or used to) also download files modified by mods leading to bigger update than necessary.

I only had 3GB to download, did you disable mods before patching ?

Was it in single player or multiplayer? On which map were you playing? Was the Mirage a player or an IA? Did the radar have line of sight? Do you have a track or a tacview file? How do you know the radar didn't detect the plane ? F10 map, GCI radio? If you took a bit of time to put down all these basic informations needed to help you instead of creating 20 topics a day, people would be more inclined to reply :thumbup: