animaal

I haven't used up my "stupid question" quota for the day, so... The F-16 does everything. SEAD, Strike, CAP, etc. Everything except dropping the kids to school. In the real world (e.g. USAF), would a single pilot be expected to be an expert at all of it? Or would there be different pilots specialising in different mission types? It seems like a lot for one person to stay current on - flying A-A is a very different skill to attacking ground targets, especially with the range of weapons available to the F-16. IMHO of course.

I'd love to see inside the sausage factory. It'd be great to see a short documentary feature (maybe 30 mins) on the production of a DCS module. It could be released some time after the module has been completed, showing what went into its production. I'm very curious to see things like: - the internal discussion (or part of the discussion) to decide to implement that particular aircraft. - Are there visits to museums to see the real-life aircraft? What's the reaction from the team seeing it for the first time? - Maybe hear some of the discussion with the real-life experts who flew it. It would be interesting to hear their experiences. - what does the designer/developer/modeller's desktop look like? What does (s)he actually see during development? - a major problem that the developer/modeler experienced and is proud of solving. E.g. something with the flight model or weapons behaviour. - the release of the module. Is there a little celebration? This might not work well for a module with complex systems, like the Hornet or Viper - they get released in early access, with continuous improvements and features over an extended period. Maybe something like the F-5 or Mig-19 would be more suitable, where they're released more or less feature complete. Then, some time after release, it would be fantastic to have a short feature made available. I can see reasons why this may not be realistic. The developers have enough to be doing besides spending time explaining their work to a camera. There may be confidentiality issues with the development process. And maybe not everybody wants to be on camera. But as well as being interesting, could it be beneficial as a form of marketing?

Can confirm the same crash at the end of mission 5. DCS version 2.5.5.34864

Thanks Chuck, your guides make DCS so much more accessible. With the large number of modules available, it's easy to forget how to use a particular system, and it's great to have a collection of guides with consistent layout and style.

For me, the F/A-18 is an incredible weapons platform that happens to be in the air. The F-5 is a seat-of-the-pants plane that happens to have a few weapons. I get a lot of fun from the F-5, but it does suffer on most multiplayer servers, especially now that groups of F/A-18 have datalink. Looking at single-player DLC campaigns, I think the F-5 has two versus one for the f/A-18, but I imagine the F/A-18 will eventually have more due to the (presumably) larger sales of the module.

Thanks. I probably need more time to gain confidence to know when the SA page is not needed. I find myself using the SA page all the time. When I'm far from enemy territory, it shows me what to expect (positions of enemy planes and friendlies that are engaging them). As I get closer, it also shows threat circles for SAMs/AAA on the ground. And when engaging ground defenses, it has the JSOW ranging circles. I may be using it too much as a safety blanket.

Hi. Some time back, I took a break from the Hornet. Coming back to it now, there's a load of new stuff to learn. It has certainly come a long way! I'm finding the SA screen vey useful. In hindsight, flying without it is like being half blind. There's a lot of commonality between SA and the HSI pages. If using the SA page, is there any benefit to also looking at the HSI? I have noticed that the JSOW weapons display ranging circles on the HSI, and I haven't seen them on the SA page, but I may have missed a button to enable them. I'd just like to avoid taking up valuable MFD space with duplicated functionality. Thanks.

A lot of people find it easier to start with FC3, but it wasn't for me. I prefer a clicky cockpit. I find it easier to click a specific switch (that I can see) on a console, rather than remembering a keyboard combo or shifted HOTAS combo. As a beginner, I found the F5 great. It was quick to start and get into the air, simple to operate (not too many switches or modes), but had radar-controlled gunsights. And sidewinders. I find the Mig-19 to be a similar piloting experience for the red side. It's new to DCS, so not much extra content for it yet, but it also has IR missiles and a radar-guided gunsight. Not to mention an afterburner :D

I think other than the obvious things (dynamic campaign etc), the number one wish on my list would be a destructible environment. I'd like to see craters being produced, especially on airbases. Scenery being destroyed. Trees toppled.

Yep. Enjoy! Ooh, I think I just wee'd myself a little. There's my weekend spoken for. Thanks!!!

Hah, I had the Dora for a while, but wasn't any good at taking off. I managed to lift off maybe 1 time in 10. In the new FW190, I discovered the circuit breakers. It's much easier when stuff like flaps and gear are working! (D'oh)

Come off it, ED expect me to read that much content in the change logs? What kind of operation is this? Will somebody please read it for me and be outraged on my behalf. ;) Nice update today, I'm looking forward to trying out the new FW190 and seeing what else has been improved.

I bought the BS2. I have what I paid for - at least I will when the textures have been updated so I can tell which buttons are pressed. The BS2 is the most modern clickable Red aircraft available in DCS. I think. That alone means I will jump on a BS3 when it's released. Making it a cheaper upgrade for existing BS2 owners is decent, and means I won't be able to resist.

Personally, I play in DCS and *another sim* and enjoy both. What excites me about the DCS Viper is that what I learn/practice in either simulation can be beneficial to me in the other. I get frustrated returning to a plane I haven't flown in a while, and needing to look up how to start it... it's like I'm standing at the side of the road with a puncture, and having to call somebody for help. It' a definite pre-purchase for me!

Great, thanks!

I'm not sure this is a bug, but hopefully somebody can advise... The second F-14 mission (ship stuck off Iranian coast, enemy boats & chopper in the area, etc) I've tried it a few times, but I can't seem to find anything to do. First of all, the amount of fuel provided is barely enough to fly to the disabled ship and back. I can resolve that by refueling before taking off from the carrier. I follow waypoints 1 and then 2 to get to the ship. I spot the enemy chopper, but as per instructions, I don't shoot as I'm not threatened. A Tomcat doesn't feel threatened by a twirlycopter, dammit. Nothing else happens. My wingman runs out of fuel very shortly after arriving at the ship, and the rumoured Mig 23s don't show up. I've watched the TacView replay, and there are no other flying enemies. Is there something I should be doing to trigger some actions?

You guys think you have problems? I flew the F14 for a few hours yesterday, and didn't see the effect. I didn't even know it existed until I saw this thread. What does that say about my flying style? Not once did I stress myself and the airframe enough to trigger the effect. I hope it will be available long enough for me to see it this evening... Maybe I should just fly a Gulfstream around the battlezones instead. :D

I found it a great change from the style of other campaigns I've flown. As mentioned above, the feeling of being part of a larger coordinated initiative, rather than a "save the world" mission. The thing that stood out for me is that the campaign is far more detailed and realistic than anything you could get from a dynamic campaign. Yes, a dynamic campaign can offer innumerable different missions, but this one was far more immersive than anything I've seen in other sims.

I experienced that at one point. I think the problem was the metal in my earphones' headband. I put some separation between the headband and the Edtracker, and it's better now.

Yes, he's right. Every module I buy is definitely the last one.

I'm the last one who should be to be trying to give advice, but... Have you tried using your radar to zero onto the target? The accuracy has to be very good, and the Viggen navigation is a bit old and the tolerance for errors is very small. Also, I always release two BK90 at a time, to improve the chances of a good hit :)

A technique I've noticed when replaying some campaign missions in Tacview is to replace the wingman with a new fresh one. Typically, the wingman will leave the immediate vicinity of the player, be replaced with a new plane, and the new plane returns to the player. Maybe this could be used to "refresh" the wingman with full tanks?

I have no problem with how the EA model works at the moment. I'm big enough and ugly enough to know when I'm taking a risk. And I like to support this small set of companies that provides the virtual planes that I keep crashing. :) But I do worry for the future. The pace of module development/release appears to be accelerating, with sales of new modules funding the maintenance and further development of of older modules. This works ok when a developer has 2-3 modules. But imagine when developers have a greater number of modules. Will sales of a new F22 module in the year 2022 (I wish!) be able to fund its own development, plus the updating of 6 older modules from the same developer? Will that developer have the personnel and the time? A small team can continue to release one new module at a time, but that doesn't mean they can also maintain a continually-growing library of older modules. Maybe the future is a subscription-based service. I hope not. Or maybe the interface between DCS World and the modules can be made more flexible, so modules don't need to be rebuilt for each release and are more backwards compatible? E.g. each module requesting the features it needs from DCS and broadcasts the features it provides to DCS, rather than a static API that changes with each release. I have no idea how it works today; I'm only guessing. But it does appear that the updating of previous modules is a significant overhead even now.

Is it the case that the two folders are gradually repopulated, as you fly each module? If so, is there a command that can be issued to regenerate it all in one go?

Thanks :thumbup: