Shahriar0

Wow, what a great update! There are a ton of improvements. Fantastic. Much appreciate the hard work of the team. I just hope with all this progress, we are that much closer to a Su-35S release too.

May I ask for an update for the turbulence issue flying behind large engines during close formation flights which causes oscillations during aerial refueling? Also, since Iran has reportedly received its first two Su-35s as of end of November 2024, I am keen to flying it more using the updated cockpit which has been under works for many months now. How close are we to getting at least the new cockpit if not the entire updated model with all the work that has gone into Su-30? Any timeframe you can share? Many thanks!

If it wasn't because of the rather large antenna behind the Remastered F-5E cockpit, then I would certainly upgrade. The Tigers I fly do not have this addition and therefore this upgrade would break the many liveries I have for the original F-5E. Must skip. Too bad!

I just watched a number of AI planes taxi for take off and the F-4E was the only one that the rudder deflection on the vertical stabilizer was in the opposite direction, i.e. when plane was turning right, deflection was to the left. Should be a simple thing to fix. Thanks!

I agree and do use it regularly when flying. Many thanks for full explanation of the logic, and what is to come. Interestingly, I currently set the target aspect before engagement but it looks like Jester is going to handle that for me. Great!

Ok, intetesting. This explanation does make sense to some extent, but I am able to do other things related to Jester handling radar such as setting range. How is radar elevation different than that? I don't want to turn Jester off. He is valuable to me. All I want is to control radar without using the Wheel. As good as its implementation is, in VR, it breaks immersion when I bring it up. I rather use Hotas to command Jester to do something for me, if that makes sense. Edit: I replied before reading Zabuzard's comment. I get his point. It is not HB's intention to work the way I like it to. Understood.

Why is that if I jump to the WSO seat and manipulate radar elevation, everything works as expected but as soon as I return to the pilot seat, the radar elevation returns back to center? Why doesn't it keep the antenna where it was left? When I try to manipulate radar elevation from the front cockpit (thanks to the temporary WSO commands brought forward), the antenna resists moving! I can see they slightly move in the direction I am trying to tilt the antenna but they quickly return back to center. Obviously, I am missing something here. Beside using Jester Wheel what should I do to manipulate radar elevation directly by the pilot? Thanks!

Thank you so much for commenting. Using the Dynamic, as opposed to the default Center, gave me what I wanted and made the selection to behave as it is currently implemented in the F-14. Perhaps this should be set as default. At any case, problem solved in the best manner. No code or script change required. Appreciate it.

Currently the Jester Menu selection using a line with a circle at the end starts at top of the wheel when opened as opposed to the one in the F-14 which is at the center. Is there a way to change that in Phantom to also start at the center? Right now, if I want to select something on the bottom of the wheel, I really have to lower my head (headtracking in VR) way more than I need to to make the selection and lose my focus from the HUD or cockpit. If the starting point is at the center, then I need to lower my head only slightly. The F-14 implementation in that regard is effortless. Hopefully this can be accomplished via a user setting somewhere in a LUA file rather than a change in the code. Thanks!

Thanks for the patch. With this fix, I can occupy the pilot seat but for some unknown reason I cannot steer the plane! Control surfaces do not move. My controls are mapped so I don't understand what the issue is.

It's exactly the same with me. All works in 2D but no mouse cursor in VR!

No luck! It froze fifteen minutes into a single player mission with Phantom in the MT. This is not good. My preference is not to play with ST since it is supposed to go away anyway and MT has to be stable enough, but also, there is a one major issue with it, and that is the VR yellow mouse pointer in MT is black color in ST! That makes it near impossible to see the knobs and switches and operate them at night missions (which I fly a lot). There is always something. Can never enjoy DCS at its full potential

Once I disabled the new Launcher to start (there is an option for that), it did go back to as before and my Saved Games\DCS is now recognized. Great, but goodbye to the Launcher! Now, I can test the only thing that matters to me; has the hard freeze of PC that was introduced with the Phantom release fixed or not. Prior to that, I rarely had any crashes or freezes. After that, in MT, I pretty much experience a freeze every single time I run DCS, and in ST, roughly about 20%-30% of times.

This release is ignoring my Saved Games\DCS folder (set by a blank "dcs_variant.txt" file under the main folder) and creates a new blank one called "--restarted"! How can I set it back to using DCS folder? Thanks!

Not sure if this has been reported or not, but a faint print of the old HUD layout is still present. It clutters the HUD a lot especially at night.

In addition to "Dragging Chute" and 'Release Dragging Chute" commands, can we have a toggle one so chute can be operated using a single command much like all other modules? This would be greatly appreciated.

Regarding the item "refueling light gain", I would say it's more than just gain but also angle of the light as well - which is easily 30-40 degrees off! The thread about this goes back at least to Sept 2020 (yes, approaching four years now) when @IronMike said he had forgotten to put a tracker for the issue but he did it nonetheless. In every ED release since then, without a fail, I immediately scroll down to the list of fixes for the Tomcat to see whether this issue has been addressed or not. Needless to say, I have been disappointed far too many times. In my view, this is a top issue that needs to be fixed as a high priority item as it prevents long night CAPs (and no, NVG is not the answer for the early Tomcats). )

Could this "CWS 1.8" zip file also be made available for those of use who are not on Discord? Thanks!

No, I did not find a source corroborating that. Tom Cooper & Farzard Bishop's two books (Iran-Iraq War in the Air, and Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat) only state the number of claimed downed Super Etandards by IRIAF, but do not mention anything about the said engagement on that day. Col. Mazandarani, however, is a decorated war veteran and an extremely reliable source for that matter (he even responded and corrected one of Showtime112 video's about the first Tomcat kill), so if there is a "video" interview of him claiming the kill, I'll take it with confidence. Having watched several of his interviewes (on YouTube) in the past, I don't immediately recall that recalled engagement. It takes time to search and rewatch his interviews so I can hear first hand about how the engagement and subsequent kill went down.

I searched the Internet and there is nothing beyond what is known publicly about Fakour-90 (latest variant designated as AIMF-90B). Articles are somewhat high on propaganda (such as missile having higher performance than original AIM-54) and low on useful technical data that can be relied on to model it's performance accurately. Here is a link to a public article (https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1399/08/18/2385086/گزارش-تسنیم-از-تغییرات-در-مهمترین-موشک-هوابه-هوای-ایرانی-گام-های-بلند-برای-پرکردن-جای-فینیکس). Please use Google translator.

Good points on both sides. Now, R-73 would be an exception as its adaptation most likely does not require any change in the cockpit in terms of switchology. The techinical aspects such as weight and drag are also known, so adjusting module for its adaptation would be accurate and realistic. What remains is more proof that this missile is actually deployed in service as a standard weapon as opposed to a one-off experiment. Even if such evidence comes to light, I don't see HB jumping to support it. The problem with modding it, of course, is that it will breaks integrity checks and that limits its usage in DCS greatly.

Obviously it would be great if HB supported that for IRIAF.

I was also impatient and went ahead with removing openbeta from my directory names, both for the main install folder as well as Saved Games. One thing to add to the above steps is that after renaming the "Saved Games\DCS.openbeta" to "Saved Games\DCS", you need to edit the "dcs_variant.txt" file (under the main install folder) and remove the word "openbeta" and save it (essentially a blank file.) Without this step, DCS keeps looking for DCS.openbeta folder and when finds none, it creates its own empty one. I suppose this can apply for Stable release too which the file includes the word stable as oppose to openbeta.

The livery for this SM variant has the following arguments: [619] = 0.5 , -- 0=Mk , 0.5=SM, 1=MKM [620] = 0.05, -- 0.05=SM , 0.05-0.15=MKI , 0.15=MKA [622] = 0.0, -- >0.5 Show Comparing to the arguments for one of the default SM liveries show small difference: [619] = 0.5,-- 0=Mk , 0.5=SM, 1=MKM [620] = 0.02, -- 0.05=SM , 0.05-0.15=MKI , 0.15=MKA <<<<< [622] = 0.0, -- >0.5 Show I will change the second line to 0.02 and see whether that makes a difference or not. Just to add that the pilot's head is not missing all the time. In fact, in many flights that I have had with this mod, I only noticed once that the head was disappearing and reappearing continuously. Edit: After several flights, the pilot head remains present over the body Hopefully problem is solved. Having said that, the notation clearly says "0.05=SM" so the value of 0.05 used was not incorrect.

Not sure the issue of headless pilot has been reported or not, but I noticed pilot's head in the mirror keeps disappearing and reappearing. I took this screenshot from outside to show. It's a bit freaky.