AnarchyZG

Eagerly awaited instantly makes me think of more or less up to date Russian plane since that part is underrepresented in DCS. Can't think of anything else that is universally eagerly awaited.

I think you should really take a careful look at DDCS (manual) P.S. How about giving FC3 planes the ability to plan mission waypoints in multiplayer (or allow F10 map markers export so we can develop external tools for navigation)? FC3 are indispensable as we only have one (conditionally) "redfor" modern aircraft yet they are handicapped in MP environment by this deficiency

Interesting! However, I must say, I've given up on hardware button boxes. I fly different planes and choosing one button layout for all is futile. I went with software / smartphone/ teblet option and never looked back. Sure would be nice to have tactile feedback, but you get used to it + vibration haptic feedback.

Like TLTeo and Gahab141 have stated, it is a simulator in terms of procedural simulation (you know, the cockpit switchology - button-pressing simulator). Regarding actual COMBAT simulation, no, it's a game, more or less arcade(ish). Some of the shortcomings are based on: - lack of information (data is classified so ED has to make an educated guess) - limitation of real-time simulation (e.g. you can't use CFD for flight modelling in real time) - lack of interest (or priority) by both customers and ED in improving combat aspect of the game/sim (I play DCS online 99% of time and I'm personally very interested in more authentic combat mechanics, but many are more interested in procedural sim offline and don't find the combat authenticity as important)

Maybe I could suggest to allow map markers export to ED :DDD I was playing with the idea of making a stand-alone instrument (smartphone app) to bring some life into FC3 planes in multiplayer environment, I mean some indispensable aircraft like Su-27, MiG-29 and Su-25 are handicapped by inability to plan the sortie in MP environment. Later add options for server integration (like AF coalition status, ability for tac cmdr to assign targets to players, GCI...whatever), maybe even an online mission planning tool but first I wanted to use the most convenient method, add marker and voila - you have your flight plan. But DCS ecripting is bitter-sweet affair I guess...oh well I got better things to do in life anyway

You have my vote

MATRIC is configurable "button box" on smartphone for sending commands to PC. Not specifically made for DCS but fits perfectly

No one?

I rarely use CA and I don't think many people have HOTAS bindings for CA, so I made this MATRIC deck for those rare moments when you need to hop into and use the vehicle yourself. Deck is split into 3 pages: gunner, driver and PPI, with each page containing commands in context of related position, switching the page in deck also switches in game seat. It is available on MATRIC Community gallery: DCS Combined Arms

Sadly, the "combat" part of Digital COMBAT Simulator was always the weakest part. ED seems to put very low priority on developing actual combat simulation as opposed to avionics and procedure simulation. As it is now, air to air engagements are very "low fidelity" and unrealistic. We can only hope they find interest in developing this part further, right now it has some laughable oversimplifications. Just one question, do all fox3s exhibit the same behavior?

First congrats Deka for a fantastic debut into full fidelity aircraft! Now onward to future! I thought about what is makes sense in DCS scenario, would be interesting to fly, not already being done by others (AFAIK) and no MFCDs :) : MiG-25 Who doesn't want to go Mach 2.8 and fire telegraph pole sized missiles? Panavia Tornado IDS Iconic cold war attack jet for those who like to get low and fast Saab J-35 Draken Amazing aircraft, exotic Swedish take on 2nd gen fighter interceptor Mirage III - MiG-21 contemporary, Middle East scenarios, Falkland... F-104 Starfighter - main NATO fighter before F-16, main antagonist to MiG-21 Su-22 Not winning any beauty contests but is an important aircraft historically Sepecat Jaguar Not winning any beauty contests either, counterpart to Su-22

First the background: I'm trying to create a smartphone/tablet application to serve as sort of navigation/HSI/RWR (offline and on servers permitting sensor export) to help keep FC3 aircraft relevant in multiplayer environment (after all JF-17 is the only up-to-date "conditionally" REDFOR). Think of it as a bolt-on-MFD for SU-27/33/25/MiG-29 One of the things I'm trying to achieve is to have flight planning in multiplayer environment by reading player created map markers, but couldn't find any reference how read them using lua. Does anyone have any info if this is even possible?

As a software developer (see my sig) I can say that from my perspective the model pay-once-get-lifetime-support-and-updates is not sustainable unless you're selling Angry Birds or something like that). It's like a pyramid scheme: if you want to have income to cover the expenses you need a constant influx of new customers. But what if your customer base is rather limited (say DCS players)? Subscription model allows you to have steady income and can invest in development and you do have an incentive to support the customers AND produce new content, invest more in customer relations to kep'em happy. I think premium subscription would work if it gives tangible benefits.

Allthough, real world tests show it goes for flares 1/1

My point is: why doesn't the TPOD stabilize like a simple gyro, you know keep pointing at a certain direction. No need for fancy stuff ins/gps/rangefinder/calculation etc. Just stabilize, not track or designate.

[someone enlighten me, if the TPOD can't ground stabilize beyond laser range how come it can perfectly stabilize from any distance when slaved to SPI from radar or pre planned point? I'm a bit confused:huh:

So slight visual difference (not spinning, who cares you don't see it from cockpit anyway) vs totally incorrect simulation (beam riding). I don't understand the reasoning

I wonder how these would look like on stream deck

What A simple, free and open source application that displays MFD frame and clickable buttons over DCS MFD export video. No more, no less. Why When I bought Jeff, I found it really hard to fight effectively due to most important controls being on MFDs. I have a secondary 14' monitor where I export the MFDs but still had to go to cockpit to click buttons. The idea The idea was to create a simple app which would draw MFD frame and clickable buttons over DCS MFD export. Buttons are configurable (configurations included F-16, JF-17 2 MFD and 3 MFD versions), clicking a button will emulate virtual joystick (vjoy) button press which you can bind to DCS commands just like you would do with a real joystick. Download and use OSB Overlay Download the app here (sorry, 0.2 version is not signed) unzip and install http://matricapp.com/download/osb.0.2.1.zip to load/reload configuration right click and choose Load/Reload To reposition the overlay window, right click, chose Move window and drag it over your MFD export (note, you might need to resize MFD exports to allow for bezels) When satisfied with position, right click and uncheck Move window, it will save the active configuration Configuration is just a json file that can be edited by any text editor. Lok into your My documents\OSB folder Draft manual can be found on git as well https://github.com/tgudelj/osb-overlay/blob/master/doc/manual.docx OPEN SOURCE The source is available at github: https://github.com/tgudelj/osb-overlay ISSUES This is version 0.2, but I use it every time I use DCS and for me it is good enough, howeveer there are potential issues: OBS Overlay includes vjoy installation and in current version it will overwrite your existing vjoy installation if you have one Vjoy interferes with Logitech/Saitek drivers, your hotas like X52 might stop working (mine did), however all I had to do is unplug it, reinstall Logitech drivers and plug in again SUPPORT Discord https://discord.gg/Y7BSM5v I hope you like it, I made it for myself to complement MATRIC, but I found it useful and good enough to share with the community. Nothing would maker me happier then if someone finds it worthwile and forks it on github as my time is rather limited and basically it is already good enough for me :)

How about more convincing missile and countermeasures modelling? After all it should be Digital COMBAT Simulator, not just cockpit button pushing simulator. Every time SARH missile goes of the rail for the chaff for 30nm away the simulation part of DCS is lost on me. And don't get me started on EW jammers... All in all I believe combat part was a bit neglected compared to cockpit procedures and systems modelling

I've just noticed that bindings for center mfd U4 and U5 are switched (hotkey/hotas button bound to U4 will trigger U5 and vice versa). Anyone else noticed this?

cold

I tried the AKG in multiplayer COO mode, added PP points, they are visible in flight plan, program the missile target to one of the pre-planned points eg.38 and launch, however POD does not report missile distance nor does TV camera turn on, what could be the cause? I have a suspicion that missile went god knows where. Works in single player...

I strongly support the notion that everything should be bindable, I do not know why are we having the discussion at all. Not just for simpit builders, maybe even more so for us that have a generic HOTAS and maybe a touchscreen/tablet/stream deck/keypad on our desks. I read somewhere something along the lines of "why would you bind landing gear to HOTAS?". It actually makes a lot of sense, in my example X52 Pro has nice set of 3 toggle switches on the stick base that I use for every aircraft for flaps and gear. Remember, 99.999% of us do not have JF-17 cockpit replica at home :)

:thumbup: