Raven (Elysian Angel)

When we have more news to share, we will. Thank you for your passion and support (and dollars/euros/roebls)...

I used to spend a lot of time in trainers, just for the fun of flying (I share your sentiment about the L-39). These days I rarely take them out for a spin. A short free flight perhaps but that's pretty much it.

That's debatable I for one don't consider it even remotely ready for regular use... Though that might depend on individual preferences/expectations. The advantage of pre-ordering (or just buying before full release) is indeed the reduced price, provided you are confident the final product will be up to your individual expectations. The Kola Peninsula is an exceedingly beautiful area (in real life), and given the reputation of the developer I'm reasonably confident it will get there - eventually. For me it's just not there yet...

Past, absolutely. I'd even go as far as saying I'd have preferred it if the most modern stuff in DCS (both maps and modules) was mid-'90s. So we could have a decently capable F-16, F-18 and Strike Eagle but no GPS, no data-link, no helmet mounted queueing systems, ... Oh and RedFor wouldn't be hilariously outdated by comparison. Present-day maps (while I understand they are far easier to make than past versions) don't make any sense to me whatsoever, for all of the reasons already mentioned.

Hmm the only other 2 things I can think of you could try is: - recalibrate your joystick (either in windows or the dedicated software); - use the mod manager to delete the F-16 and then re-download it (this has helped some people in the past with issues).

Perhaps this just refers to the newer 3rd parties who are working on already announced modules, but haven't made anything else yet for DCS? Such as Aviastorm (Tornado), Aviron (Kfir), CheckSix (north Australia map + PC-9), Crosstail (A-1), FlyingIron (A-7), Grinnelli (F-100), RedStar (MiG-17), ... or even MIlTech (Bo-105).

Have you checked for any double bindings?

Yes exactly: on neither the F-16 nor the F-18, the helmet mounted sight is modelled correctly for that exact reason. But we also have the older style helmet (not default, but can be selected in the ME). There the situation is simpler: visor up or down - with the default being down as shown on the external 3D model of the pilot.

True enough: it’s just what they themselves said. I'm not trying to make excuses for them. Several of those bugs and non-working features quite annoy me, and keep me from flying that module

By RAZBAM's own admission, there is still a lot of work to be done on the module - primarily on the bug fixing department (as Hilok said). There were several "low priority" fixes that they knew had to be done, but never got around to before the current situation became evident. Sure but that doesn't have anything to do with how bug-free or complete a module is I quite enjoy the F-15E too, despite all the very obvious bugs.

I used to use Project Lasso as well. I no longer find it necessary - but that's just me.

Yup: just yesterday I had my PC hard crash because the ME made my video card run out of VRAM (I got a prompt saying I need to check whether my system meets the minimum requirements - apparently 16GB of VRAM is not enough). If you use the unit icons on the ME to place units properly, it also loads in their liveries (which is utter insanity imo). Have enough units in your mission and your PC will hard crash (nothing I could do except press the restart-button on my case...

A proper simulation of aircraft helmets would fix that without the need to adjust gamma every few minutes. What we need instead is working visors - and aviator sunglasses for WW2 modules and certain helicopters.

Brilliant! Words fail me when I try to communicate how much I’m looking forward to flying this little helo!

It's all been explained before: on the forum, on the in-game tooltips and Wags made a video about it. Don't touch the Special Options unless you have a force-sensing stick. If the special option is disabled, your normal axis/deadzone settings are used.

Indeed: the OH-58 feels so much more stable to fly and care-free to control while it is 4x lighter And the OH-58 FM is quoted by Casmo as being (one of) the best helo FMs in DCS.

Will this rework be part of the DCS core, and thus affect all other helicopters as well?

I have been flying both without issues.

As far as I understand, ED always wanted to do both the MiG-23 and MiG-27, and even blocked 3rd parties from making those. I imagine they had other priorities for a while so decided to better have a MiG-23 sooner than later, even when it gets done by a 3rd party

Nice! Will there be a working visor for that helmet, or aviator sunglasses?

The changes are definitely noticeable: I ran a quick test with the SoH BVR mission: before this patch when I launched 2 Phoenixes (yes under proper conditions) always 1 of those 2 would fail. This time both connected, even after heavy defensive manoeuvring of the 2nd MiG.

He's just been insanely busy with a lot of other things, including new campaigns which quite frankly affect a lot more people (and generates more revenue) than fixing broken training missions and older campaigns. There is only so much 1 person can do. He has too much on his plate for 1 single person to deal with, it's as simple as that. If tasks had been delegated better initially, training missions etc could have been fixed much much sooner.

Yes you're correct there is something fishy going on here. Performance is horrible for me too, not just in the F1 but in the OH-58 it's even worse (though the latter improves after a little while). I doubt it's the module itself (or many others would be posting about it including myself), but it must be some weird interaction between the module and some aspect of your specific mission... Let's hope Aerges can figure out what's wrong...

1. This track requires a mod to replay (civilian asset pack), which I don't have so I can't test it on my system. 2. Did you perhaps forget to clear FXO/Metashaders this time? Performance for me is just fine - better actually than the other modules you mention.