Mr_sukebe

No, that’s not the case. The current core batch of WW2 were voted for around 2014. The reason for the mismatch is the guys who wanted the most common Spitfire, and the best versions of the 190 and 109.

I believe that the blue and red coalitions have access to all modules, regardless of country

Empty your FXO and metashaders, the start working on your settings, which would appear to be too ambitious

I’ve owned Virpil gear for around 7 years now and have a number of their items. I’ve found their customer support to be excellent.

Try setting Textures to medium

It would be a whole lot easier to just buy the Viggen when it’s on sale…

With the F14, you need to salute befit starting the cold start, then again at launch from the cat

We do currently have the Hercules mod. I’ve flown it, it’s pretty cool. As it’s free, why not present that to the FS community to see their interest? My personal assumption is that a large element of the FS community want to just see the scenery, which is not the best advert for DCS with its map/theatre limitations. For all that, flying an S3b tanker might appeal to some.

I was out in an F4 over the Falklands yesterday, with textures set to med.. No 900’ issue. In VR, I really couldn’t tell a difference to the interior of the F4, though maybe there is if you pixel peep. Either way, it’s a compromise that I’m happy to use. Using Med also resolved the performance issues with the Chinook. It really is worth giving it a try

We’ve already had some patches. No idea who’s doing them

Personally I use a pair of over ear headphones. I used Koss KSC75s for quite a while. Much better than you'd expect bearing in mind the cost.

The incoming 29a is looking very cool. Question on the RWR. My assumption is that it’s used in a number of Soviet aircraft. Is the new SPO-15 created as a logical unit that could be retrofitted to other existing Soviet aircraft with little effort, eg Su25?

Thanks for advising. Apologies for the dumb question, but does that mean that ships will appear on radars in day the F18, as provided by datalink, or available via F10 if “fog of war” is selected?

Others that spring to mind: - Duxford, the obvious one. It’s massive and really is a must visit - Hendon. Much bigger than I expected, great day out - Fleet Arm Arm (Yeovelton area???). Adds in the Royal Navy variants and had a lovely Phantom - somewhere in Norfolk, an early warning GCI site. No aircraft, but a great example of what an early warning radar and control centre was like in the cold war

Here's a question. A mission creator cannot to my knowledge change underlying ground textures, add airfields roads, or change elevation on maps. We can however add new buildings and clear existing ones. If a user were to build a city with the same number of buildings that exist in a professionally created theatre, would that have the same resource requirements on rendering and similar? The background to my question was a thought about the viability of populating cities on maps that are outside of the detailed areas.

It would be worth including your timezone, as DCS players are scattered around a lot of different countries.

As I understand it, in DCS, we as pilots can not request the equivalent of a bogey dope to an AWACs to provide details of enemy ships. In reality, this is very much possible. Can I please be added as a capability to AWACs units and also via datalink from other friendly aircraft.

As a temporary workaround, I used my Apache, but without FCR and Hellfires

I did mean in the game, so as to understand capability. If the real AWACs can detect ships, can we please add this capability into the wish list for a future implementation into DCS?

I was literally thinking about this kind of topic on the way to the office this morning. Sounds awesome. Very much what we need for cold war scenarios.

For those who like to try to create historically "inspired" scenarios, something came to my attention yesterday that I thought worth mentioning. I'm guessing that most of us are aware of ChatGPT, which sources data from all over the place and has several degrees of accuracy, depending upon your subscription. My son showed me a video yesterday about a new AI tool called Notebook LM from google. I'd never heard of it before. In short, it's something of an AI hybrid solution, where you can upload up to 50 "assets" (e.g. PDFs) to your "query", and when you then ask the type of questions that you might have put to ChatGPT, it'll source it's answer from the assets that you've uploaded. I gave it a test this morning, by uploading around 20 pdfs that I'd found on the net about the Iran/Iraq and Desert Storm wars. Those pdfs were anything from 100+ pages to 600, so pretty large. Uploading was very fast, maybe 2 mins for the lot. Post that, it was dead easy to ask questions such as "how many tanks did Iraqi divisions have in Kuwait". The benefit over ChatGPT is IMO the ability to deliberately limit the sources of info, so you're not going to get some random opinions mixed in from for example certain political spectrums. In short, I'd expect the data to be more accurate. Going through the documents myself would have taken man days. Notebook LM gave me the answer straight away. Utterly awesome. From what I could see, Notebook LM was free (at least at the moment) and before anyone asks, I have no relationship to Google.

Should we expect the frequencies for ATC at existing airfields to potentially change again? If they do, would you please be kind to enough to advise which do change, such that I can update my kneeboards, without checking every airfield.

My guess is that ED have no intention of adding a lot of scenery in Iran. For one thing, it’s not part of the stated deliverables and secondly that it “might” result in performance issues. If it’s not a performance issue, then I’d certainly be happy to pay more to have the detailed coverage extended to include Iran. Eg we have been sold Iraq North and Iraq south as options. Maybe ED would consider a DLC to add Iran north?

That’s bloody clever. Love the out of the box solution!

One thought would be that if you have sufficient spare resources (eg a spare PC), it would be viable to run a couple of servers. Server 1 could host part A Server 2 could host part B Server 1 could have a trigger to load the “return” part of the mission once the player has finished Part A, but then pause and wait for the player to complete Part B That might make the switchover for the player more seamless