Raven (Elysian Angel)

Yes, CCIP and CCRP with Mk80-series should be possible…

Okay I’ll call it: the DCS “2026 and beyond” video will announce a full fidelity “DCS: TR-3B”! Mark my words!

Yes and we (Belgium) recently got our first F-35A, which is Block 4. So Block 2B will be a far cry from operational birds, but still… Blegh…

Yeah I'm fine with MSIP II really. An F-15A would have been nice too but given the general audience in DCS the -C makes much more sense. And it’s not FBW so I’m happy. ED have stated they have no intention to bring the AIM-120A to DCS, so we’ll have to do with 2x AIM-9M, 2x -120B and 4 -7M(H) for early ‘90s CAPs over Iraq. I don’t understand why the AIM-7P was mentioned in the FAQ since that’s a Navy-only weapon as far as I know.

I doubt that: there’s a core audience that’s been around a while who are very vocally opposed to this module. There are sources that claim the startup is so automated it’s pretty much just pushing the start-button and the aircraft takes care of the rest. Just look at the cockpit: there’s not much there in terms of buttons and switches.

I agree with you, but let’s not dirty this subforum with that. The question still stands though: I heard that at some point the cockpit was updated but that was very late in its career (so probably later than mid-2000s. So if the difference is just in software (and thus weapon support), I’m a happy bunny: I want to at least be able to reliably pretend to be in a 1991-1994 Eagle

Hello, As far as I understand, MSIP II F-15Cs were already around in the mid-‘80s - though few of them, and they were deployed to Desert Storm as well. Can someone clarify how a ‘80s MSIP II bird differs from a mid-2000s one? Is it just weapons and JHMCS and datalink, or something else as well? Will we be reliably be able to turn off modern features in order to simulate a late ‘80s - early ‘90s F-15C? Thanks!

Did you read the FAQ? I’m not interested in it at all. I have no doubt it will appeal to a lot of people (it’s been proven there’s a large audience for the “latest and greatest shiny toy”) - primarily the younger audience I imagine.

I find this extremely puzzling as well

Get yourself a proper browser then Full fidelity F-15C made my day! But what is that other thing? KF-21? And more importantly: why? DCS is already too much of an incoherent mix, so why make it even worse?

This made me giggle

Last year we got a very comprehensive '2024 and beyond' newsletter on January 5th if I remember correctly. So a lot sooner than this year

I'll give you one, because I can't be bothered turning this into a virtual pissing contest: PoE2. In any case, that's not the point of what I was saying. The point was, that it depends on the skill of the programmer how well Vulkan will work and how much (if any) performance advantage it gives over a competing API. And since ED is taking their merry time, I see that as a good sign.

Yes, or used to be - if you can believe the drama on Discord. He's the one who wrote the radar code for the Mirage 2000 and F-15E.

And yet that's exactly why I did say what I said. A tease now and then doesn't hurt anyone - and it makes me smile. offtopic P.S. That reminds me of the times I was in a hardcore EverQuest 2 guild. We were 2nd world-wide on progression just slightly below a US guild, and an Avatar had just spawned so everyone in the guild got a text asking us to turn on our PC and log in (it was early morning, around 8:30am). I was one of the first to log on, and when it became clear it would be a bit before the guild was ready for our first pull, I calmly said on voice chat: "Right, looks like I have some time then to go and put on some clothes..." and then dropped the microphone... The response from the others was priceless

Yes ideally we would have VR headsets with a horizontal FoV of 210 degrees, but that will take quite some time. And also our current vertical FoV is too limiting.

Yes so do I. But I don't specify that on every post I make: I have said it plenty of times before, and it's been normal practice for at least a few years now. (Likewise I don't feel the need to specify I take off my clothes before stepping under the shower either)

There are plenty of people who can paint, but not everyone is Peter Paul Rubens. As far as I can see, Galinette is special. People like that should be treasured.

It depends on what you use. With a FFB stick, the trim as configured normally makes you crash all the time: the Gazelle is unflyable with normal FFB settings. Instead you not only need to have FFB selected in the general DCS settings (which for a normal spring-centred stick you DO NOT want enabled), you also need to tick the extra "special for FFB" (I forgot what it is called exactly) in the Gazelle Special Options AND you need to set pitch/roll FFB force both to 0 (zero). Only then will the trim work.

I was referring to what Draconus talked about: the first time you load into a mission and/or module, since that's who you quoted. Good. Neither do I.

I beg to differ. I could point to (very) recent release(s) that have both available, where Vulkan runs a lot better than DX12 with much smoother frametimes, and that's in 2D - VR is something else entirely. But as far as I understand, it puts a lot of pressure onto developers since they'll need to be smart in their programming instead of simply relying on the API to do the work for them automatically.

You missed the point. I said that showcasing Vulkan in a video would be boring, not that implementing Vulkan is / would be boring. *edit* Sniped by Vakarian

Oh I have noticed. It is in fact so much NOT of a non-issue that I never judge DCS performance (after for example performance improvements in a given patch) the first time I load up the sim after patching: it is that much of a difference.

Sadly a lot of what ED has been saying has been reduced to that. I too hope that changes at some point... "The most realistic desktop simulation of a MiG-29 on the market" ... uh-huh... as opposed to what exactly? The only competition is their own FC3 iteration. Not exactly an exciting comparison. Now if they would claim that about the DCS: F-16C, that *would* be saying something as there is an obvious point of comparison. But I don't think they will in that case, since it would be a false statement

On top of that, it also depends on how you have the Realsimulator software configured. "BFA roll level" and "BFA pitch level" to OFF (which is recommended) instead of for example MIN makes a huge difference: I still get a response even I gently tap my fingers on the stick (even with the proper Special Options) which makes especially aerial refuelling so much easier.