ResonantCard1

Hello, I'm trying to modify the cockpit of the F-15C and I'm wondering if there are layered templates for cockpit texures, at all. I don't remember seeing them.

Yeah, we can only really compare with Flanker 2, LOMAC, FC2. Which are done by the same people so probably it will behave the same way. But I think asking for a fix is kind of far-fetched, FC3 has clearly fallen out of favor and they can't really sell bug fixes, so we will have to wait for the FF modules, IF they come.

I hope they do it eventually. Seems unlikely at the moment but at least they said they want to do it. Hopefully it will be a soviet one instead of the export A or B, although I'd take any.

Any news about this, ED?

Thanks man! This worked, it's exactly what I was looking for.

Hi, I got the Kamov when the new cockpit was released, and since them I've been wondering if you can change just the ABRIS' language and leave the rest of the cockpit in Russian. I don't know enough Russian to handle the ABRIS properly, but I can manage with the rest of the cockpit and I like the immersion of having it in russian. Is there a way to change just the ABRIS language and leave the rest of the cockpit in russian? Like a config file to modify or something?

Very interesting find. Although I still say that the MiG in the picture is using the wrong type of bomb for tandem carry. Compare the M62 (sleek) to the M54 (chubby). They're different shapes, the M54 could probably fit in the rack as it's shorter than the M62

I considered that as a possibility, but that bomb looks too big to be a 250

Yeah, saw that same photo on the book. It's listed as carrying FAB-350s. Which certainly put me off as I have never seen anything about a FAB-350. However in the book is also stated that the bomb that can be carried there is the FAB-500M54, so the more blunt one, similar in shape to the FAB-100 we have in game

Except for the fact that ED hasn't put a lot of effort on the recent red-related releases. The Kuznetsov being exclusive for the supercarrier package (not even offering it separately, if you love your Su-33 and want a better carrier you have to pay the full Supercarrier price for a product that doesn't even get deck lights or some attention to detail. Looking at the CIWS physically hurts) makes me believe they don't have a lot of interest on throwing red players a bone. They said "substantial discount". Selling a 80 bucks module for 20 is already very substantial, so they will sell it for 20. If a handful of players get mad they'll just be drowned by the people saying ED is too good for this world, and their complains disregarded just like the requests for making the Kuznetsov available separately have been.

Ok so they said the BS3 is gonna get a "substantial discount". I can't wait to see the discounted price being 20 bucks for old owners. About the no demand for Red planes, if they themselves say there is no demand, then there's no hope.

The Ka-50 was too expensive iirc. The single-seat nature of the thing also meant the role of scout helicopter was more difficult on it than on a 2-seater. I'm not an expert on the Mi-28 but I can see why the Ka-50 is said to be superior, honestly

Hi, I've been reading Yefim Gordon's MiG-29 book, and he says the Izdeliye 9.13S (MiG-29S) could carry 2 FAB-500 bombs on MBD3-U2T1 tandem racks. We don't have those in-game. Is the information on the book correct? Could we get them?

Fair points

DCS is a "simulator", it should strive to represent real world scenarios as well as possible. Balance is not up to the devs. I'd argue in fact that DCS needs no more Red jets than it needs blue jets. The MiG-23 is coming and that's the last plane we need to represent modern US Vs. Someone conflicts, where the MiG-21 and the MiG-23 were the backbone of the enemy's air force. We've most of the American planes already, we're missing the MiG-23.

I'd like to see the source for these 2, if you have it. I fully agree with this

I'm sorry for looking at the current state of the game and its community and drawing assumptions according to those.

I'm inclined to believe that the Apache, being American, was a bit more off-limits to them. But they did the A-10C, so I'm completely puzzled. It's really one of the most iconic helicopters ever, it'd grab the attention of even the most stubborn fixed wing players, and even bring new people to the sim as the Apache is just that iconic. The Ka-50 being the only attack helicopter is hurting the sim, its systems are old and outdated, the helicopter itself is obscure and unknown to 99% of the aviation community, the weapons are okay-ish at best, the ergonomics are questionable... ED should really consider releasing the Apache ASAP, as it's the main thing that it's missing from the sim. The Apache and the F-15, really. And we have an F-15C, and will have an F-15E. So it's just the Apache. It's weird they chose to make the Mi-24 before the Apache, it's not a module that's gonna finance anything.

Firstly, I'd like to remind you that the community has been continuously asking for things that shouldn't be possible in the planes. This is a big issue. The Viper, according to people who actually worked on the wiring of its pylons, can't use HARMs on the inboard stations. Yet we're getting them. The F-16CM Block 50 in ANG service in 2007 also can't carry the triple mavs launcher if I understand correctly, as the software support isn't there and there's a chance it'll bug out. The damage inflicted to the plane by the Mavericks' launch also isn't modelled. The Hornet uses the Litening TGP, an Spanish variant moreover, while the USN/USMC has always used the ATFLIR TGP. The community is very happy with having inaccuracies on the modules as long as that means more capabilities. If you gave them the option to have a possibly inaccurate Apache, and a fully realized Ka-50, you'd be surprised of how much people actually goes to the Apache even if it wouldn't be fully accurate. Now, one could argue the jets are frankenjets, thus these should be allowed. In that case just say you're making an F-16C Block 50 and an F/A-18C and be done with it. Ignore the particularities so that you can make the module you want to make and add stuff as you see fit. Example: Razbam's F-15E. Secondly, while ED's playerbase is definitely not 100% western, it seems to me that the biggest chunk of the playerbase is, which would push ED towards a more western-focused lineup and business model as that would allow ED to maximize profit (which according to Chizh is their top priority when choosing modules). And let me explain a bit that "Abandoned" thing. I don't think they'll deliver us an F-16 (I really, really hope they don't), do Multicrew/AI Gunner, and call it a day. They've told us the progress on the Mi-24 and it seems to be almost done, I believe we will have a nice module when it releases. The problem is that things always break, and there are always things to add, finish, polish, etc. Once they've Multicrew/AI Gunner figured out, they'll move the helicopter team to the Apache, and any kind of support for the Mi-24 will end. The Apache simply will attract more, much more sales, thus it'll have much more attention from ED. Logically. Kinda like with the Supercarrier and the Kuznetsov. The Kuznetsov still doesn't have deck lights. But ED won't spend time adding them because it's not what brings them money

The Apache actually has a way more advanced HMCS than the Kamov. The Kamov's only allows for Shkval steering, while the Apache's is, just like the SCORPION, a mini HUD mounted on the helmet. It can also project FLIR images I think. So the Kamov, at the end of the day, is way more blind than the Apache. Seeing how they've handled the Kuznetsov, and how sweet of a deal the A-10C 2 upgrade is, it is my opinion that they're in fact promoting more the NATO side than the red side. But we can't blame them, that's what sells

I believe the Mi-24 is just a prototype for the Apache. Once they have the AI Gunner/Multicrew thing down, they'll probably "abandon" it and move on to the Apache. The Mi-24 isn't gonna be a top seller, so wether or not the thing is 100% finished or had vital features missing for most of its life isn't that important. When the Apache drops, ED would have already nailed the MC/AI Gunner thing, which will help boost the (already massive) sales. It's basically free extra points.

The D isn't the only variant of the Apache. They could have done the A, and people would've loved it more than the current Ka-50. Even if it wasn't a 1-1 representation of the actual Apache, it'd be more popular

Why didn't ED do the Apache instead of the Ka-50? It'd have been infinitely more popular, more capable, cooler, and better in all aspects. If they can do an Apache, why haven't they done it already?

Hello guys, We all know the Multiplayer slots system. It's kinda awful and doesn't allow the mission makers enough flexibility when placing aircraft as they always have to make a compromise between the different types that they're placing. The list of slots can also get extremely long. The slots system should change, maybe it could be replaced by an screen where you could choose your take off airfield, then the plane type, and off you go. The plane would be dynamically spawned at the airfield instead of preemptively placed down and waiting to be activated by a player. Furthermore, with this screen we could do some basic mission planning already. We could choose the general type of mission we would fly and the callsign. We could have a map of the area, put down a marker to mark our objective, and other markers to create our waypoints. This could be used to see other people's objective markers and mission, which would help coordinate strikes. Lastly, we could choose our starting loadout on that screen too, although that can be done relatively easily on the airfield already. It'd just be a bit unrealistic.

FC3 isn't going to be touched anytime soon. The Hornet and the Viper are both very incomplete and need finishing, and those are the clear focus of ED at the moment. Also, ED said on an interview that they're trying to get the license for the MiG-29A, which means they aren't going to touch the MiG-29 because "They're making a FF one, there's no need to work on the FC3 one". Besides, you can always say the russian sources are biased or something, and that the intel sources that ED may have come across to model the MiG-29 and Su-27's radar are more accurate. I wish to see the performance fixed but it's just not going to happen. Maybe for an FC3 2 package, that fixes performances on the jets...but still, the performance of these radars is atrocious, I wonder how people can say these jets are good