notproplayer3

Concerning the c130j, I am really looking forward to it but being this close to having my dream aircraft, the ac130, I am wondering if it is feasible to have it come down the line. Mainly, my question is, can you take a base c130j, add the guns and the associated systems in the back of the aircraft, perhaps tweak the flight model a bit, and end up with a ac130 (of some version) ? Granted the weapon systems are probably very complex so I wouldn't mind paying for a separate ac130 module, but I'm just wondering if the ac130 is just adding things to the c130j without many differences on the base aircraft itself.

Yeah, in that case I'm getting what you mean, I agree it can be frustrating, especially if you bought the ah64d module hoping to have the fire and forget variant already available. The only thing you can do now is wait unfortunately.

What he said was right, the agm-114K IS NOT fire and forget but the agm-114L IS fire and forget. Our ah-64d module will be getting the agm-114L missile which IS fire and forget but it isn't available as of now because our module is in development.

Yeah, I've got the same sentiment about deserts too, the three desert maps we have in DCS (Persian Gulf, Nevada and Syria) are quite varried and have quite the different "feel" between them, definitely adds to the immersion if you're role-playing a certain era or mission. I'm also all for desertic looking maps as long as they had significant aerial conflicts take part in them, I'm very content with Sinaï which brings the Arab Israeli wars to the table, on that streak, the two other desert maps I'd definitely want would be Iraq and Afghanistan. However, these are about all the desert maps I would be interested in, and seeing how they aren't that far between each other (especially the Sinaï and Syria maps), my main concern would be to have these maps eventually connect.

Come on, he is a paying customer and he isn't obligated to suck on the dev's doo doo every time he talks about them. Yes it is constructive because he documented some issues neither of us pointed out (even if we saw them for ourselves), the dev hasn't yet responded to this thread so who knows if these issues are really due to it being WIP in the developers eyes or perhaps these issues weren't that obvious to them in the first place. Just be happy someone is ponting out for you the issues in the product you bought and simply let it be. I for one am going to add the fact that the 3d external model needs some work, something about the the different bump and normal maps makes the surface of the model look too "smooth" without much grooves, bolts, scratches and things like that as opposed to the other DCS world modules. Also, under the over wing control surface with the holes in it (don't know the name but it is in the 5th picture that the OP provided), there is only a flat texture. I would be lying if I said that the external model makes the module unplayable for me, no, I don't care that much and I enjoy flying the f1 just fine even with these small problems, however I hope this will bring the issues to the dev's attention so that it will eventually be addressed.

For those who just wanted a single version of the F1, I can see why the pricing might be steep and not totally worth it considering they wanted a cold war plane whose price is on par with other cold war planes in DCS, however, I believe the end product itself deserves to be priced at 80$ (granted it is of good quality) because the four versions would indeed require quite a lot of work from the developer (I'd guess), you'd need to model a second cockpit for the BE, change some avionics in the EE and change a whole lot of stuff for the M (new hud, mfd, and a boatload of other systems). So in that aspect I do believe this product's price is just like any other in DCS, for some it's worth it because they are interested in the plane for others the opposite, in any case, to me, the price would probably be equally proportional to the work being done by the dev as the other DCS modules.

Yes, the issue is that you downloaded the module before downloading the latest open beta (that just dropped a couple of minutes ago), the update should be online in 30 mins to an hour, wait til then, donwload the update and then you should be able to install the F1. You can check if the update is available to download here:

At this point it's almost as if they somehow lost all of the project files and they had to redo the kiowa from scratch. This does look that way to me because something that was initially going to release at the end of 2020 and instead everything went quiet for well over a year is concerning to say the least. On the other hand, I am also wondering how the gazelle FM rework is coming along, still no news about it for a long time. Hope polychop isn't silently going bankrupt.

F4E because it is famous and the F4J because naval operations, I couldn't care less about the other versions, I'm already happy heatblur is generous enough to provide two version.

I do very much agree and to add to that, I do also wonder when the hh60 model rework is going to be worked on, not only has it been 2 or 3 years since players who bought the supercarrier had to see that disgusting model but even before that, those who bought the fa18 and operated from the free stennis had to deal with that too. From my point of view, ED hasn't got their priorities straight.

I do hope for a Super étandard, it's a very interesting plane that offers carrier ops, plus it'll fit right at home in the falklands which will give some purpose to the map seeing as we currently have no planes able to simulate that war (apart from the awesome a4 and pucara mods).

My metric for mission editors being the arma 3 Eden editor, not only am I sad to see how inferior the DCS ME is to the one arma has but it is also straight up driving me nuts that such basic features such as drag select and unde/redo aren't yet implemented, yet alone other quality of life improvements. I hope their silence in this thread isn't hinting at the fact they don't care about the DCS ME, because it very much looks that way to me, being stuck with a mission editor that looks and functions like it hasn't been updated since 1995.

Simply excellent, the mirage trully became one of the best DCS modules because of the work you put into updating it and this engine update shows yet again your commitment to your product, thanks a lot for that ! On that note, are there any other major reworks that are planned for the M2000c or that you know you will end up doing down the line ?

Trailer for the Falklands map, goes live 5 minutes from now !

Other brand new F15E video that dropped today:

Some more F15E content for today:

Je m'avoue choqué d'entendre cette nouvelle. Il était l'un des meilleurs créateurs DCS en mon gout qui, comme tu l'as dit, nous a accompagné dans notre apprentissage de DCS (moi y compris) et qui prenait toujours le temps de répondre à toutes les questions qui lui étaient posées dans les commentaires, selon moi, ça montre à quel point c'était un bon type. Il aura laissé sa marque sur toute une communauté et je pense qu'on peut lui en être reconnaissant . Mes condoléances à sa famille.

Yes please, unfortunately it seems that adding this would change the PG rating of DCS so ED would rather not do it.

You didn't actually explain how any of his assets are illegal, you just said that this guy posts wip screenshots which don't amount to anything in the end. While annoying to some I don't see what's wrong with it, at the end of the day it's a forum and anything related to DCS can be posted. I think you should perhaps explain yourself a bit more though, if mods censor what he posts perhaps there is another reason I didn't understand.

Don't get me wrong, the apache feels perfect the way it is and I am also very happy about how it handles well, I just personally feel like the ka50 has the edge in tight maneuvers and in power too, mainly at high altitude with heavier loads, you can feel the apache has trouble hovering and taking off but the ka50 still handles like a dream. But handling is partly subjective anyway. Cool to know for the lock modes, I am having quite the trouble hitting moving vehicles with the agm atm.

The apache is awesome however, I find the ka50 to actually be quite a lot more effective on most day time missions, in single-player that is. Things I miss in the ah64 is not having as good of a gun as the ka, not feeling as nimble and as powerful as the ka, and not having any contrast lock (is the apache supposed to have this too?). Overall, that and the simplicity of the systems coupled with that fact that the ka50 is a single seat helo, make it more effective for me in practice. However that doesn't mean I'm not having fun in the apache, I freaking love flying that bird in combat, I especially like the mws system.

Here are my steps: 1) go to the cpg seat, then go to the wpn page, from there go to UTIL page (upper right corner) and then check if laser is on (the dot next to it must be filled). 2) make sure master arm is on 3) click on "sight select switch, TADS", you can use a keybind or you can click on it on the right hand grip, it is a 4 way hat with TADS written on one way. 4) now you should be able to slew the tads, the last thing is to fire the laser, use "RHG-LRFD Trigger - second detent" to fire the main laser, it is under the right handgrip keybinds. You should be able to see the lines coming out of the center crosshair if your laser is firing correctly.

Oh wow, so you feel like reducing options for people who are looking to learn DCS modules ? And in what right can you say that DCS isn't the right game for folks that enjoy it through learning the modules from the grim Reapers? This is ridiculous, as long as someone has the same enjoyment out of DCS than you, just because you are more hardcore doesn't mean you are any more legitimate as a DCS player than he is regardless of how casual he may be. Well, as a personal note, I really like many grim Reapers video because most of the time, the cut straight to the chase, especially when it comes to operating X system or cold starting an aircraft. I have flown and enjoyed DCS for over 5 years and as scary as it can sound to you, I never read any manual nor have I watched a 1h in depth video on a particular system. Most often, I just play the training missions, and for the things that aren't covered in them, I quickly search on YouTube and the grim Reapers have the exact video I need that goes straight to the point unlike some other DCS youtubers. So perhaps if you feel like the Grim Reapers are taking part of the viewership of other DCS youtubers, you should think for a second on why the Grim Reapers are getting views in the first place. Perhaps you might not like it but you shouldn't be intolerant like you seem to be now.

not on VR, however performance is quite bad on my end. Am using: i7-6700k, rtx3070ti, 32gb of ram and DCS installed on an nvme ssd and currently playing on a 1080p monitor and I am getting about 40fps in Caucasus with many dips bellow 30 and some stuttering, while not unplayable, I tried out the f16 and f14 in the same setting and got easily 100+ fps which points the finger at the apache having some kind of effect on my end. I don't see how I could get any good VR performance with these results. Is there one setting that might perhaps be totally killing the performance for me ? I don't think that's necessarily it but if I had the option, I would like to disable all the animated eye candy in the cockpit.

Lezzggooooooo, hopefully it's gonna be in the 17th patch that was just announced