Volator

Es ist nicht verboten, aber unhöflich.

Sorry, ich verstehe dich nicht. Google Übersetzer hilft eben nicht immer. Therefore I suggest we go back to English.

Super, jeder verwendet jetzt hier seine Muttersprache. Das macht die Kommunikation natürlich viel einfacher. Oder vielleicht doch nicht?!

Same here, very annoying for mission building.

Something else i noticed in the trailer is that that the US F-5Es have aggressor liveries - at least that's what those big double digits on the nose suggest.

Lots of items for the Harrier and the Mirage in the current OB patch today, but nothing for the MiG-19?

Realistic skins have priority of course, but: Just like with the Ka-50, the Huey and the Gazelle I'd also like to have "what-if" liveries. In my case, a German Army Tiger look-alike skin would be great.

Well, of course you can see it that way. I on the other hand don't see any reason for that kind of negativity: Everything I heard and read so far about the Eurofighter project and the development team's qualification makes me think they know what they are doing. This and the fact that these guys actually flew the Eurofighter and the F-4F makes them a natural choice to bring these planes to DCS.

This is still an issue unfortunately. @BIGNEWY

Bump

The alternative would be noone working on the coding, and us never seeing a PAH-1. I'm happy Fragger found someone at last.

I recently noticed the GDR now has the -A. Thank you ED!!!

The ASW stuff could be added later on. As described in another thread, as with the Huey and the Hip we all would be happy to simply fly it around (the ships) initially. There is no need to have everything available at day one. Without external scripts the Huey and the Hip wouldn't have any real purpose than just enjoying flying them, so why should a Sea Lynx (using the German Navy name here) have to meet higher standards? And even today we could already do ASuW in DCS (in case of the Sea Lynx with Sea Skua and guns M3M), do VERTREP,... lots of things to do already than just flying around. A naval Lynx in DCS would be a dream come true! (Even more than an SH/MH-60, but being realistic I think that the Seahawk would be more likely to see light in DCS than a naval Lynx)

I don't really see why this is always brought forward against a real navy helicopter. When the UH-1 and the Mi-8 came, there was basically no real purpose for these in the game except for flying around casually, and without external scripts that would still be the case today. So let us have a helicopter to fly around that really fits into the naval scenario we have now with the Supercarrier and its assets. The Huey simply doesn't look good on the landing deck of a modern USN destroyer or cruiser, it's really odd. Let me make that choice for you: Definitely Navy! ***Edit*** I should add that of course even now there is more to do with a naval helicopter than just flying around. ASuW is possible in DCS today (in case of the Lynx with Sea Skua or guns), transport missions as well, VERTREP... so it's not a real issue that a naval helicopter would be without a mission in DCS.

Not sure if I get your point, but in the Army the aircraft commander (sitting in the left seat) points at a place and tells the pilot on the right seat (not co-pilot!) to fly there. So the a/c commander, the boss, usually sits left side and is not primarily tasked with flying the ship. The commander usually works the map, comes up with the tactical plan and coordinates with other assets via radio. But of course a/c commanders also get their fair share of stick time if they want to.

I think the last word was they are not working on any map right now and don't have the intention to do so in the foreseeable future, yet they are not ruling it out completely. I think the exact words by Cobra were "Never say never." Can't find the thread anymore though. Too bad for the Viggen, really. It deserves some Swedish airbases and countryside. Those russian airbases and the whole appeal of the Caucasus region with its soviet buildings and super-giant trees do it no justice at all.

Confirmed, got this bug as well.

Naw, it doesn't have fly by wire, and PC themselves in the end acknowledged that their FM needs some serious tweaking. We don't have to have any discussion about that anymore. I'm no hater of the PC Gazelle, if you know about this fact and take it for what it is, it is still a nice module, because we don't have anything similar in DCS. Yes, it's true, but with some practice, it can be done quite well. Just try it more often and you will become good with that. It's easier if you hover low behind trees or buildings, because then you have a better visual reference. For hover altitude control in auto hover, just press "C", and voila, you can control hover altitude manually with the collective. That being said, I think it's best to have a friend with you in multiplayer, one doing the flying (taming the beast), the other doing the navigation, comms, scanning for targets and aiming/firing. Single player you easily get task saturated and certainly will get killed by the one tank you didn't see while working with the Viviane sight.

Yeah, that part made me curious too. But then this is not really new to us here in the DCS universe. My understanding is that MiG-29 and Hind are still ok, anything more modern is not. Or would that include any russian military equipment that was ever used, say MiG-23 or similar? Would be interesting to hear more about this to have an idea of what we can expect in DCS at all in the future. Personally, I'm totally fine with Cold War equipment only, so my hope is that the aforementioned regulations do not rule out that as well.

Ich Bei den Modulen, die mir wichtig sind, geht einfach nichts über ein gedrucktes Handbuch. Am Bildschirm/Tablet lesen mag ich nicht so...

I beg to differ with these quotes. I don't see any evidence in any of my Tacview replays that Iglas and Strelas are worse than Stingers (employed by troops, Avenger, Linebacker). I always regarded them as better, maybe they are on par, but definitetly not worse. Same for Shilka vs Vulcan. The Shilka is a slower vehicle though, but tracking rate seems better than with Vulcan. But a Shilka spreads fire at least as effectively as a Vulcan. Can't say much about Chaparral, I see them rarely on MP servers. I just know that on one particularily famous MP server they were taken out and substituted by Avengers as they were deemed too ineffective by the mission maker. As for the second quote, BMPs and T-72/T-80/T-90 with their AT-5, AT-10 and AT-11 are extremely dangerous for blue helicopters.

Yes, that happens quite regularly. The consequence is I never allow other people to join in MP that I don't know.

The manual says the ADF position "energizes the UHF-DF system when installed". The question is, is the system installed in our DCS Huey? The other day I dropped a beacon via the CTLD script on a multiplayer server, and that provided an in-game message with the frequencies for that beacon. It came with three frequencies, one for the ADF, one for the UHF radio, and one for the FM radio. None of these three freqs worked though, I wasn't able to get a bearing on any of those. So now I'm puzzled. The fact that the maker of the CTLD script included a UHF frequency tells me he assumed the UHF DF equipment is installed, but I don't understand why it didn't work then. Maybe it's something with the script?

Yes, but it's not that hard to spot aircraft in real life like it was before these changes. I know from real cockpit time. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of the current status either, but simply going back to before these changes occurred is wrong as well. Before you were lucky to spot an aircraft the size of a MiG-21 at distances >1 nm, 7nm would be fantastic!