Lau

FSRecorder in DCS could be an awesome training tool for single players. I used to record all my flights in another sim with it and create realistic traffic by combining and replaying all the tracks at the same time. After a year of recordings airbases, airports where very much alive with traffic following real life procedures. A simple and amazing peace of software that would be very much welcomed in DCS. Having FSRecorder in DCS does not mean that players will stop flying on-line, its just one more interesting tool to hone our aviators skills.

WW2 has not been shelved; it's just on pause, albeit it might be a long one... The birds are here and they are very good looking, the feeling of flight feels very nice to me. I will therefore never give it up, I rather hold accountable ED for pretending to work on WW2 assets and planes, for not following up on customers feedback and diligently fixing bugs. The reality however is I do not know, WW2 birds might be on sale (discounted) more often than not because ED has perhaps given up on the WW2 project altogether? It is not the first time that customers have to voice their concerns for ED to reconsider things, the problem is that we do not voice it together as a group and have no way to talk the matter with ED to find solutions (e.g. pay more). Most of us got in the warbirds taking advantage of the many sales ED offered, while it felt nice to increase our virtual hangar size it was a trap in the end that got us interested on an unfinished product. As you say, it will probably never be finished if ED runs out of business. I have always supported ED the best way I could, buying old products through sales, even if I had little interest in some of them, did it for the big picture, so part of that investment goes in to the warbirds and WW2 asset pack. Ultimately we are all interested in seeing ED grow as a company. At least I am. The problem I have right now is not the waiting, is seeing ED play with us, doing every possible effort to ‘shushhh’ any discontent by a very heavy moderation, even like that it is very hard not to feel it or witness it in the different subforums. Just recently and to take an example, the artificial horizon has been broken in all warbirds for over a decade, Nineline finally showed up, deleted our messages, locked the topic, apologized for the delay (over a decade of delay!) and moved the topic from investigating to reported as high priority (over a decade later)... There are other reasons as to why I did not purchase the KOLA map, mainly related to feedback from the South Atlantic Map and for fear to anything related to Razban, even if it is an ORBX product, the head of the project apparently is also head of the South Atlantic map project. Then it also came to quality, take away the complexity of our modules and the landscape surrounding our sim sessions is lacking in quality, but there again, is it possible elsewhere to have all this complexity running smoothly like we do since MT? Kudos to ED for the performance improvements. It is never easy to have the big picture, the maps are bigger and bigger and DCS engine needs to cope with the new challenges we customers throw at it, boundaries have been pushed hard since I have discovered DCS and I am confident many more will be pushed 2024 and beyond! DCS will always be an unbelievable challenge, if you have used and studied your modules however unfinished they are you can only agree. The only point I am trying to make is that in an ideal world, all the products ED decides to sell should be supported and move forward, If customers take the time to test and report, the ED staff should be there to take action, products should be thoroughly tested before release and as close to finish as possible. This is what Heatblur is trying to do, it’s not perfect, but we can feel it through their released products. ED has other sources of revenue, I just learned about MCS (Military Combat Simulation), maybe DCS is becoming less and less important to ED in terms of revenue, after all government agencies have far more revenue than private individual customers. Again, hard to assess the big picture. What is sure is that ED should rather talk about the challenges they are facing, faithfully explain the direction they are working on even if that means recognizing that the warbirds and the WW2 project has been moved off the shelves. To me that would mean to remove it from the store or make it clear up front to future customers that it might take a very long time before the product is considered as released/playable, the meaning of 'finished' with ED products being hard to define, I guess as far away and advanced as possible, so every user can feel that the product is close to completion and that the list of Bug Reports have considerably reduced. Considering that ED could fail in this big project, I find it ever more important that customers voice in an organized fashion their concerns but, at the same time continue to support ED achieving the different goals, trying to keep the big picture in mind as long as we can feel ED support on a daily basis, as this is the only way we have to feel the business is growing healthy and strong, respectfully to all parties even if that means we have to confiscate their barbecue for a couple of months. With regards to VR, I have not made the step yet, mainly because I use a tablet where I can read my flight planning and documentation. I am not a specialist of VR and I am sure there are solutions to that, like switching off one eye on the headset. That being said one does not have to be an expert to feel the gear we use is already struggling to run with the graphics quality mix that satisfy us to know if VR could be an option without an upgrade. While we wait for kneeboards in game to be more advanced (ability to write on it like on the canopy with the F4E), I will continue using my old TRACK IR. Respectfully, TIP: Take a screenshot of your messages before they are deleted

Yes we do, forget the Air Force, the Army and the Navy and hire some coders, 3D artists, Beta testers, Support Staff able to liaise and address customers feedback, bug hunting. Forget about "and beyond", finish products now 'and they're here' to match the investment many of us have made with nearly 1000 EUR 'worth' of modules. Warbirds and WW2 Pack...........S............O...........S.......... Just to make sure we are on the same line, Pretty please, with many cherries

A very faint voice from the warbirds development undergrounds and WW2 asset pack...... S.....O......S.... Either through news letters or even better through change logs / updates. Thanks,

Then it is time to hire more staff. I am sure I am not the only one who spent almost 1000 EUR in modules. Did this based on trust that modules would not be abandoned and support would continue over time.

@foxit @McFly0081 Further to my previous message, I also noticed that no one is following this thread. It is therefore likely that no one is aware of your message. You can also flag members to attract their attention so they get a notification. Finally you can private message any member through your private message inbox. After the above, never give up and try making smoke signs. Best, Lau

Hi foxit, I would very much doubt that they are not interested in your application but rather that the person who is supposed to come back to you has some real life commitments preventing a quick answer. Perhaps give it some time. Hope you get an answer anyway! Best,

Let’s just hope for a better future where ED will level their work to their advertisement. I rather believe that ED has no resources to allocate to war birds than even consider that the DEV team could have any difficulty in fixing an artificial horizon, they have done much harder than this, kudos to ED on that perspective. However after all considerations, in whatever way you consider the current situation, it is actually very sad for the community. If past coding is hard to fix, then just erase it and provide us with at least some sort of an attitude indication, forget suction and all the other realistic stuff and at least make the product usable, for us and the content creators like reflected simulation. The same goes to all other issues reported like tail wheel strut and main landing gear, they have been fixed after a very long wait and to be honest, I could not see the difference in between the realistic final solution and what we initially used, however one important thing changed: The plane can now taxi, land and take off. Breaking a product just to make it more realistic is not a solution unless you do it in house and then release something that is working, Are we customers really asking for too much...? Thanks for your passion and support,

Please merge posts as required but please fix this. Thanks

The way to go Boys, let’s keep this issue in the mind of ED so we can expect a fix soon, this problem has been ongoing for far too long and reported too many times for ED to continue ignoring issues that are essential to the SIM. It was common practice for WW2 airframes to hide in the clouds, to do so you need a working attitude indicator, the same goes for night flying or bad weather all around. Simply put, it makes no sense what so ever to not have this gauge working in a flight simulator. Thank you for your passion and support, Typos: flight i/o flying

So I can’t post the video showing this after getting 10 warning points for just spelling three letters... - Basket contact points with airframe or drogue can displace/dammage basket, movement of basket caused by airframe depression just before contact - Basket movement caused by weather turbulence - Hose physics (Depending on how fast the pilot connects a strong contact can send a wave movement throughout the hose length. - IA control of the hose length, for instance when the pilot is flying dangerously or when refueling is complete and pilot does not disconnect. - Possibility to break the basket or damage the AAR pods if the connection is too strong. - Instances and a probability of not connecting properly to the basket, perhaps due to a too soft connection leading to a fuel leak with fuel spraying over the refueling aircraft canopy with possible consequences like fuel vapor in the cockpit if relevant bleed air system is not closed (i.g. for the F14s) and impeding view that makes formation flying on the tanker more difficult. It would be nice to have this in DCS. Thank you for your passion and support,

While flying and enjoying the 4YA WW2 Normandy server and applying WW2 stealth techniques by hiding in the clouds, I remembered that this simple yet essential instrument has not yet being fixed by ED since 2019, nor anyone from the team acknowledged this problem for the last 5 months. Thank you for your passion and support, Please fix this.

After last update, F4E AI is disconnecting after double the refueling time of the lead. Lead refueled in 5' and wingman in 10'. It is known that wingman use more fuel than the lead but something seems off with double the time. Both planes carry the same configuration. Refueling happens just after take off and wingman precisely followed lead route in formation. Thanks,

Release of new products and AI ability to use weapons should be part of the essential tasks prior to any release. While I appreciate that the AI side of the code rely on ED side, HB should follow up with ED to make sure things are working before the public release. If not done prior to the release, then ED will not make this a priority. I for one used to believe that upon release of a module these things where granted to any ED & partners quality product. After all it is expeced that users and content creators will extensively use AI. To do so in a combat simulator can only mean giving the ability to AI to use A/A and A/G weapons, fly formation, perform AAR, things we were used to with any new module. I feel that with the ever growing complexity of modules this is being left behind. An issue that was quickly fixed after the release of the F14, I hope it will get fixed ASAP for the F4, dynamic campaigns like liberation rely on the ability of the AI to do it's job to be playable. Anything done in the ME heavily involves AI, please wee need this feature. Thank you

FIXED it was a time synchronisation issue

FiXED it was a time synchronisation issue

Unable to use any paid module failed to get authorization data error code is 500 no saved authorization found Using latest build

Unable to use any paid module failed to get authorization data error code is 500 no saved authorization found Using latest build

Hi, Noticed that AI HB F5E is having troubles to maintain formation on the tanker while other wing elements (in this case only one wingman) refuels. In this scenario the lead that has just refueled will proceed to form on the right wing of the tanker and upon reaching the desired position will just dive and go on a loop trying to form on the tanker, dive again and so on. The AI loses a considerable amount of fuel during these maneuvers which is a shame after just having refueled, therefore compromising the rest of the mission. Thanks,

THanks for taking the time to report this problem, hopefully it will soon get fixed.

On a three ship AI F4E formation I noticed that #3 will be the first one to AAR, wich makes sence since wingman uses more fuel than the lead. However and while #2 will fly in the OBS position to be next in queue to AAR, which is also correct, lead will just fly to #2 position and crash in to it i/o flying formation on #2 to be the third arcraft to AAR. Please fix this as it is breaking my missions. Thanks

Hi, Noticed on the gorgeous external 3D model of the F4E that there is a WSO top canopy mounted mirror, however once in the WSO seat it is inoperative, something coming in the near future I suppose ? Since it is not possible to check six from the WSO seat if the aircraft is not turning, this feature would be much appreciated. Cheers,

Very similar to what I had reported back in 2022 for the F/A-18C and that is still to date not fixed and continues to break missions. AI FA18C Stalling link to topic This is often happening on AAR when the AI is trying to intercept a tanker. While I have not seen the AI F4E crash like the F/A18C, it will lose significant altitude on high AOA with full burners and stay stock at speeds close to stall for a long time before resuming normal operations or just giving up on refueling when other mission triggers take it to the next task and eventually run out of gas. To be noted that there are no valid reasons why the AI should try to catch up a tanker at stall speed, clearly a bug. Thanks,

HB AI F4E not able to drop LGBs under any task (CAS, Bombing, Precision Strike, etc...). Also reported on the HB side of the forum AI unable to employ Mavericks, HOBOS, LGBs, rockets

Initially reported this on the HB side, but their feedback is that this problem is not related to their side of the code. HB AAR bug that could be related Just ended the session with two F4E AI, both going for AAR just after take off with three external tanks. First disconnected after 15' and the second one did not disconnect after 30'. Thats 45' flying in formation with them waiting that they finish AAR. Now I did add a trigger "switch to waypoint X by 97% of fuel, just to see if that could help to no avail. Note: In the mean time I finally found a kind of way around, it is not ideal but at least I can now play the mission while the bug gets fixed on the ED side. To force the AI F4E to disconnect I setup a refueling duration of 10' Not sure how this is accounted since two AI F4E had time to refuel and carry on with their mission. It is possible that the second AI F4E had less fuel than it's lead, but hey at least the AI is not stock to the tanker this way.