av8orDave

My man, the Hornet was released in 2018 and the Viper in 2019. My point stands that these modules are all released early access and remain that way for an excessive amount of time, 7 years in the case of the Hornet and 6 in the case of the Viper.

Without question I understand your point and it is a point well-taken. Having said that, from a pragmatic standpoint, everything that ED and the 3rd parties release is released "early-access", and remains so for years upon years. Some may never reach a full-release state, and it is pretty murky as to when this "full release" actually occurs, so if you're going to buy modules from ED or the 3rd parties for DCS, it'll be in early-access. You don't really have another choice to buying early-access other than to not play the game / sim. Razbam aside, this creates big questions regarding the 3rd party model. I personally have the M2000C, the Harrier, and the F-15E, and I fully anticipate that if Razbam is really a memory at this point, those modules will stop functioning eventually. I am pretty darn reasonable as far as gamers go in my assessment, but even I think ED has some clarifying to do for their customers on exactly how this 3rd party scheme is supposed to work. By virtue of volume, the mass-market non-military popular flight sim does this well as it is pretty well understood that 3rd party aircraft or sceneries are bought on a buyer-beware premise (they may work today, may get developed further, may meet some varying and undefined standard of quality, and may eventually not work in the future). If that is the case with DCS, ED should say so.

As of the last CH-47 update, it seems like none of the user liveries I've downloaded from the user files section show any of the tail markings anymore... just an unmarked tail. Any ideas?

I've played DCS for probably 15 years and never knew this. Anyone know if there is some kind of reference doc or manual that outlines some of the "nuances" or "quirks" about the AI?

Try virtual desktop. The software is considerably better than the alternatives, and performance lately has been quite good.

Regardless of the sim platform, I have enough history with these RB guys now that I’d really think twice before buying anything from them. Wherever they go, a circus seems to follow. I know that is probably an unpopular view, but this deal with ED/DCS, while definitely the worst in their history, is hardly out of character for RB.

This is the answer. Thanks buddy, greatly appreciated.

Maybe this is already known, but I went to use the QAG with the Marianas map yesterday, and the F4U isn't available with the WWII era setting. Also, when selecting the F4U with any setting, carrier start isn't an option. Will this be added?

Thanks for the reply, and I do trust and believe the team is working on it. The reason for my negativity is that this process has been what I would say is really, really long. The link below is from 2021, and estimated implementation of Q3 of that year.

Has there been some news that I've missed regarding Vulkan implementation? It has been discussed for probably five years or more without any actual evidence of the work, so I'm skeptical that we'll ever see it. I hate to be so negative and I'd be glad to be proven wrong.

Any Corsair nerds know why the preferred fuel tank selection for takeoff and landing is the reserve tank rather than the main?

Same as above... would love to know what this option does.

I suspect it maybe is somewhat map dependent. I was getting bad framerates on The Channel map, but good framerates on Nevada. I'm curious what effect the cockpit texture settings have in special options but haven't tried tinkering with them yet.

Works now... you can ignore.

The E-Shop link in the changelog just links back to the changelog page.

I love your optimism. It’s DCS. I’d bet on September.

Are you new here? This is the standard DCS launch process, has been for nearly 20 years.

I chuckled when I read "not receiving timely monthly updates." Not only that, the modules aren't receiving ANY updates. Not only that, core features of the modules are starting to erode. If we're being honest about the situation, the whole "maintaining modules to ensure compatibility" is not really happening. The JTAC ATHS feature on the Harrier, for example, which once functioned, hasn't worked in nearly a year.

Nope. They've already added an additional day.

Ha, I feel like I've been burnt by the DCS hype-train too many times to count. At this time last year, the release of the CH-47 was "imminent" and then was delayed for a few months seemingly out of nowhere. I've learned that no matter how much I like the subject matter (and I definitely like the Corsair), it is good to manage my own expectations until the product is actually released.

Sure looks like it. When was the most recent F6F news?

I've experienced the same, and I can't provide a fix or answer your question, however I can suggest a solution. If you use Oculus Debug Tool, setting ASW on, off, or auto still works.

They’ve not worked consistently for me for a while now. I’ve been using Oculus Debug Tool to turn off ASW before entering the sim.

Yeah, I think the CH-47 experience is the one that finally put me out of the pre-purchase world. I haven’t bought the MiG-29 and won’t until it is launched and shown to be in some basic functional state, and until we can see that the pace of updates / development is reasonable.

I had exactly this in both the A-10 and the F-18 over the past week while flying the Afghanistan map. While descending to land, the plane suddenly had a wild pitch-up force, as if the trim had suddenly been adjusted to full-up.