Harlikwin

Too bad ED is not using those models for their stuff and has doubled down on FC3 quality radars.

Still largely irrelevant IMO. We got the J8PP cuz it never served, I'm sure IF they could have done a similar era J8 that did they might have done it.

Given that you can goto a library and check them out, yeah I'd say they are open source.

Mostly just rumors. Supposedly they are going back to the Fox1 API and finally putting the R27 etc on it. Hopefully they fix the 530's as well.

From the soviet side, tons of documents are available on ECM/EW/Sam stuff well past VN... Literally manuals are out there for all of the single digit soviet sams, with EW stuff baked in. Same for red ARM's, same for jammers like the 141, etc. The way ED/DCS handles sams/ECM overall is generally really bad and mostly IMO it is not a documentation problem, its a developer/talent problem. I mean, when your "simulator" can't simulate clouds, how good is it gonna do with more complex things.

So I posted this resource for SAM sites, and any other associated modeling. Sat images from the 1970's, so it should generally cover fixed sites there. Honestly the best historical map for this would be circa ~1970. I'm sure there is a ton of declassified Corona imagery of the area due to the fact you had 2 wars there 67/73 in very short order so while not quite "google" maps ease of access, the actual imagery does exist to pretty good levels of resolution (6 foot resolution). https://www.usgs.gov/centers/eros/science/usgs-eros-archive-declassified-data-declassified-satellite-imagery-1 And aside from doing the airbases, you'd basically just be deleting most of the cities on the map and maybe adding farms, as the were like 1/5 the size or something like that in terms of population. Yuup... Here are some "large" area photos, there a ton more in more detailed resolution too. Like 37 pages worth with IDK how many images per page 50? null

Yay this worked! Thanks!

I managed to fix it. the new SteamVR update was screwing it up.

Mine was working fine in 2.9. However now OpenXR and DCS are not playing nice as of today, the only thing that changed was the steamVR update as far as I can tell. DCS now is locked to 10fps. Anyone else seeing this?

Oi vey So DCS is broke. Something updated today (steamVR?) and now DCS is locked at 10fps on the damn load screen and everywhere else using the Varjo OpenXR. This was also the case for MSFS (11fps there). MSFS will work with the steam version of openXR back to normal. DCS will work with the Steam version only on the load screen (90FPS) but then promptly crash if trying to load anything even the ME... Anyone else seeing this? I literally reinstalled 2.9 2 days ago and it was FINE. Also, OpenVR does work, but its all distorted (cross eye?) IDK.

With regard to the seeker settings. I'm pretty sure this had to be set on the ground, which could be set via knee-board stuff. You guys are doing the shrike, which this is more or less a miniaturized version of that last seeker with some improvements, albeit with a much smaller antenna which isn't going to couple well to lower frequency radars. It is a bit of an assumption but the 7 "bands" are likely pre-sets for various soviet systems in use at that time, or at least portions of a given band that would contain one or more threats that would be differentiated by things like freqency/prf etc. Given that the operating frequencies/prfs of most of these radars are known (and I assume you or HB have them in the new RWR model) if not I can point you to them. The key distinctions here would be that its very likely this missile can only engage "track" radars rather than search radars that are of course much lower in frequency. Given that, the most likely systems its going to be looking for on 1980's battlefield are going to be primarily on the SHORAD side of the equation, so stuff like ZSU-23, SA-8, sa-15 as likely its primary threats (which also both conveniently operate at around 14Ghz). I'd also assume systems like Sa-6, and Sa-11 would also be of interest, and then possibly Sa-2/3 with the various sub-variants of this likely eating up different bands it could pick up. I very much doubt it could/would target stuff like the SA-4/5/10 etc.

I think there is significant demand for the older 70s/80's "red" modules, which you guys have shown you can do well (i.e. the Mi-24).

Ah yes, the famous sukhoi runes.

Well, its pretty apples and oranges. Aerodynamically the F-13 was much lighter and more maneuverable than the bis, but had a weaker engine. The bis is kind of a pig compared to the F13 aerodynamically and much heavier. Otherwise the F13 was basically a guns fighter, but in VN service it could carry 2 R3S (improved aim9B) missiles. Unlike the Bis it had no radar beyond a rangfinder for the gun, and weird canopy arrangement as well (poor forward view). The DCS bis is a very poor stand-in for a VN era F-13... And overall the bis in DCS is quite dated and has a bunch of problems and inaccuracies with alot of its systems.

Yeah, the red-SEAD stuff will probably one of the harder things to do/get right. Though AFAIK there are docs on it.

Probably, I just copied that from somewhere.

Apparently its confirmed that Galinette (radar wizzard guy that did a fantastic job on the F15E radar) will be doing at least some systems coding on the 23, so the radar and possibly IRST should be done really well (IRST probably will have major issues unless ED actually adds clouds to the game IMO).

Honestly PC should copy Petro for the gunner at least. This hopping around between seats is a) unrealistic, b) lame to do.

We need more weapons grade speculation when it comes to the Su-17M4... And he wasn't the only person to think about that, I mean ED has said for years that they don't wanna spend any more resources on FC3 than they have to, so they aren't remaking it for outdated FC3 jets IMO. Which opens up "weapons grade" speculation. The jets that did use it are the Su-17, and Mig27, later 25's, as well as later, multirole mig29's. Thats the short list at least. Frankly I'd be ecstatic if it was the Su-17, and since its out of service in the USSR and has been "for a while" it might be doable for ED (maybe even as a test case), though personally I think they have their heart set on the 29, and the 9.12 didn't carry KH-29's but later multirole 29's did i.e. 9.15. Mig29M i.e. the 9.15 The aircraft external stores can carry the RVV-AE, R-27ER1, R-27ET1, R-27R1, R-27T1, R-73E air-to-air missiles, the Kh-29T, Kh-29L, Kh-31A, Kh-31P, Kh-35E air-to-surface missiles, the KAB-500KR (OD), KAB-500L guided bombs, as well as rockets and free-fall bombs. Besides, the aircraft have the GSh-301 built-in gun. The Naval Mig29K I think could also carry the 29T, for some versions at least. So ED "might" be pushing for a mig29. Though if this is the case I hope to christ they also do an older 9.12 version since its vastly more relevant.

LOL literally no one cares. The DCS MP, "need muh bestest jet or uber missile" mindset sucks frankly. The phoenix has been and continues to improve and be more realistic, which is what matters. And frankly the Cat is quite dangerous on most period apropos 70s/80's servers if its flown by a competent pilot at least. But you are right the days of the "I win button" are over and that probably makes some people sad. The easy "I win button" got taken away. Some people can't cope with that.

Well... Its lame, but they don't have much to work with for the SHAR. However, neither the Gr.1 and Gr.3 had a radar, and Razbam has hinted the Gr.3 might be possible. And as I recall the sooper snoot did serve in the falklands. But, per their roadmap... 1. There is still a plenty of work to do on the F15E for all ze weaponz and all ze datalinkz, and all ze new TGPs (god I hope ED actually models FLIR/IR someday that isn't terrible). 2. The Mig23 is next in the pipeline and I'm hoping its consuming lots of resources. 3. They have heavily hinted they will do the AV8B+, which would be logical since they can heavily leverage their F15 radar model for that. (ironically so could ED, but for reasons of pride IMO, they are doubling down on FC3 2.0 level radar for their modules which is a shame). 4. The Pucara, Super Taco thing, are also gonna be done at some point.

I agree. But it needs to get fleshed out more, at least for MP server owners. While you can damage systems now (or at least some of them), "clever" MP players can easily circumvent this. An easy solution would be an option to enforce the damage, i.e. you can't repair it. This would allow for less cheating, and more flexibility when trying to shoehorn certain planes into certain earlier eras in MP.

Yeah missile integration is generally really misunderstood by DCS players in general. And while the seeker may be on the missile, things like performing the search pattern were typically on the plane for most of history.

Yup, exactly. Gimme my SA-7, 14 and redeye

Honestly the best way to deal with this for ED is to include a "reliability" setting for each missile. And have mission designers/players/server owners set it how they like. And then you can have like a few failure modes, motor, seeker etc. I see 9B's with 100% reliability in MP servers and I shake my head. I also think ED should allow mission makers to disable systems on jets, this would be useful for alot of things to simulate maintenece etc, or to simulate "older jets" i.e. disable HMCS. But it should be enforceable server side. My perspective here is 100% from what the MP community has been wanting for a long time.