Dehuman

Б = B, С = S. What it stands for I'm not so sure. But I found this

You can still see them, their, contrails, and they show up on player radar. The "Invisible" command just means they are ignored by other AI.

There's this and this Were the drawbacks it's performance or did it never get past a mock-up as the drawback was unsatisfactory flight performance?

This story gets a little more embellished every time it is repeated. EDs statements on the subject have always been along the vague lines of "it's tricky because we're Russian". When asked to clarify this they've always refused.

I take it back, you should marry this woman.

There's lot's of speculation, but I'd not take it seriously. Both of those aircraft have been definitively retired from PVO and VVS service for a long time. Even the export customers have mostly withdrawn these planes.

Girlfriend sounds obsolete :smilewink:

Left the landing lights on, clearly an AI :smilewink:

:cry: :cry: :cry: I will happily donate once my finances are back in the black in a month or so. On the AWACS subject i had an idea. They could be set to invisible so they ignore each other. They're still visible to players and RWR on this setting but getting rid of these as BRA calls would be nice. I'm starting to worry I'm coming across as nagging but I just LOVE this server.

What is the missile tone meant to represent? I'd assume a seeker acquiring a target however this does not seem to be the case in practice. With a lock tone missiles can fly straight ahead without tracking at all. Without a tone they can turn and lead a target straight off the rails. (Track) Is the tone being generated according to a set of criteria determined by the aircraft rather than the missile? Without any sensors of its own this is surely a bug? IRAAM tone.trk

In the Monthly update videos.. So far he's talked to the Falklands team and Tim from Metal2Mesh

No, but their father probably did :megalol:

:thumbup: I really enjoy the Q&As with members of the RAZBAM team, hope you'll get to pick the brain of Zeus and Prowler someday!

Anyone got any info on the Mercury LLTV being integrated? From what I've been able to find it was proposed but I can't find anything definitive about it actually being tested or used.

Popular hearsay. From what I understand from the very few ED have actually made on this topic (Wags, Chizh) Su-27SM - wasn't allowed, several years ago. (Note version "SM" so very modern) Su-24M - wasn't allowed (Again modernised variant with sophisticated avionics, sensors and weapons) MiG-29 - doable but a hassle and F-1X fighters seem like better $$$ Russian aircraft in general - complicated (have refused to be more specific than that) for a Russian company. People also often say there was some law in 2011/2012 that made it so... No specific law is mentioned of course but this around the time Sergei Shoigu became the defense minister and introduced a number of anti-corruption measures. To OP, yes there was a Su-32FN mock-up/prototype proposed which was a naval version with a tailhook.

Love both of these heaps, but I'd say get the MiG if you're only allowed one.

L-39 is a bit buggy at the moment RKL will pick up NDBs on the other side of the Caucuses sometimes.

in this video

The radar are either features that aren't able to be replicated in the current DCS radar framework or until recently, secrets. What's wrong with the CCIP and CCRP? I know the CCRP used to chronically overshoot the target (how it's meant to be for GBUs?) but seems as good as one should expect from a fighter aircraft these days.

Channel "01" is the guard frequency on the MiG-21 150mhz by default edit: on this subject "no report waypoint pass" would be handy for the AWACS

Just tested this, works fine for me from 230km away at 5,000m altitude.

Do they though? Do they make a quantifiable difference between each other or ground target or not pressing anything at all?

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic They didn't have to give them back, they sold them to Russia. The USA was paying Ukraine to scrap them at the time as Ukraine neither had a need for them nor the funds to keep them. Also Antonov may have found itself a Ukrainian company after the dissolution of the USSR but it's not where it's roots are

As a MiG pilot I am for this, As an L-39 pilot, not so much, However it seems reasonable to have corridors where low level flight is safe. However part of the problem is the omniscience of AI in DCS, skimming the trees at supersonic speed and MANPADS and AAA will still know you're coming and be ready.

And here we have the two camps of DCS Those that just love the challenge of flight, be it aerobatic or combat. And those that want hi-fi ace combat