skywalker22

Track please

How is with the notch with AESA radar regarding doppler notch thing? -- And btw, notching is more like a gamble then 100% success. Its 50:50. I would put it like that, if you really have no where to go, you can try it, but don't count on it, specially against some tough oponents, who know what they are doing. Those are my (more or less bad) experiences. To see what I'm talkin about, I just did a simple example with 2x AI, check the tacview (I should be dead with 1st missile, vulnerability on off). And got pretty decent notch, right? I guess not good enough. Also 2nd missile was more like a luck that missed me. Tacview-20240708-220632-DCS.zip.acmi

Now it makes a perfect sense Thx so much. Here we go bug_village_terrain.miz

If you can answer on my question, it would become pretty clear to me yes.

1st of all, I think this thread is a bit ambiguous. Are you guys talking about HSD or HAD? In anycase, lets say that the expand modes are ground stabilized. What happenes when it goes out of gimbal limits of HTS (or FCR)? I seriously doubt expend modes are ground stabilized for the FCR, but I am not sure about HTS pod. I would also say the same thing, it still has limited "field of view", I think its 180deg (in DCS only 120) forward looking. So sooner or later it will fall out of gimbal limits. Will then still be ground stabilzed? Doesn't make sence.

I was looking some TV show about the Israel in which there was some talking about a Masada hill, which is right next to the Dead sea, and went looking into Google Maps, and found out how mountainous and rough this terrain really is. Then I went to check how this same terrain looks like in DCS, and was quite disappointed, its almost flat. Which means the mesh is way off as it should be, and its the same all over the map (very unprecise mesh regarding elevartion differences, and textures as well). That I don't talk about the parts whats human made, there are just some random textues, which are also not complete - UVW mapping is badly done! You can see what I mean from the comparision images bellow from approx. the same spot real life vs DCS. Masada is infront on the right side, that rocky mountain with a plateau on top (very famous one actually, because there are some rumours some very famous man died there a long time ago): Same place in DCS (with oil storage facilities??) That's just an example. In general this map looks nice, until you don't know how it actually looks like in real life. 1. It truly needs some fine touch (textures and uvw mapping), 2. To put all over ground objects into appropriate places (objects where they should, and where they shoulnd't be - example are oil storages from pic above), 3. and fix the mesh to some degree it would look more like a real thing (example images above).

I doubt there was any bigger update then this one up to now (lots of aircrafs and at least 3 maps, 1 new, 2 with huge modifictions)

Today or tomorrow, depends when the new DCS update is coming out.

Seems like most of these impatient people have really nothing else to do in life. ED - take your time. It's your game, it's all up to you.

I'm also on GS weekly. And I'm pretty good at it. I hardly get knocked down from these kind of params, only in cases when I'm not careful enough. But I ones got shot down (which is my record) from 52nm away, from roughly same params as yours, but at that moment I didn't think it's possible to shot me down from that far, that's why I was pushing towards him. Now I know its not good to mess up with high an fast flying F-15E. Here is the Tacview replay on youtube. Just my example of being greedy and how to learn it in a hard way

Exactly. Maybe against to those who hardly know what they are doing. Or if you get very lucky against to those who know that they are doing from very high above (Angles 60-70) at Mach 1.5+ . If not in these parameters (lower and/or slower), you hav to come waaaay closer.

Has there been done anything on utilizing Tacview's performance in DCS? What I have in mind is Tacview not being supported by the popular servers in DCS just simply because it has too much of an impact on servers performance. The only exception I know is Growling Sidewinders. Would be cool if there some optimization would be done, if it hasn't yet. It' really a shame not having it, its such an awesome tool.

Did you guys consider adding some airfields outside of Afghanistan (later on)? Would be cool to have them, to fullfil the map entirely.

Please stop arguing guys, ED has their plans, and few posts here won't change that, not in the way this thread is going. And BN will close this thread. Stop acting like a children, whos bagging for a candy.

Orbx is not looking here at this forum, for contacting them about anything, or you use their Discord (as mentioned), or their forum (website). Here is the converstion about this topic: https://kola.orbxdirect.com/posts/27/official-screenshot-s-vs-reality

There should be houses on that hill, based on the google maps: Btw, why would placing a single unit at that location help? If so, what kind of unit, any, a tank would be good enough?

Whats the point, if you can't use RSBN or ARK in multiplayer servers? I don't fly offline at all. I asked @BIGNEWY and @-Rudel- to include fixes into DCS (also for the upcoming Afghanistan map). It it not a lot of work to make it work.

As you said, the KC-135 MPRS in real life can do both, actually three different types of refueling: 1. MPRS - provides two drogue-refueling points at the KC-135's wingtips without affecting the centerline boom's capability 2. boom - MPRS cannot not be used at the same time (planes like F/A-18 and F-16 can interchange between each other) 3. drogue refueling through the use of the boom-drogue adapter (BDA), but it has to be install on the ground, and cannot be changed during flight. Limitation is that MPRS cannot be used. -- Due to DCS engine limitation, MPRS tanker cannot use the boom version. I hope this will be changed in the future.

I did the RSBN navigation table for the Kola map, for all the airports which are currently there (also for Severmorsk-2 ), and also the appropriate kneeboard. It works like charm. Here you can download it: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3339195/ -- BUT WE HAVE AN ISSUE, changing the R_NAV_data.lua file fails Integrity Check in multiplayer. File is located in folder: ...\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\Mods\aircraft\MIG-21bis\Cockpit\Systems So, I am asking @BIGNEWY or @NineLine if is it possible before next update of dcs on July 3rd comes out, to change the file R_NAV_data.lua from Maps_Table = { "Caucasus", "Nevada", "Normandy", "PersianGulf", "TheChannel", "Syria" } to this: Maps_Table = { "Caucasus", "Nevada", "Normandy", "PersianGulf", "TheChannel", "Syria", "Falklands", "Sinai", "Kola" } So we could use RSBN navigation system on all the maps without IC issue in multiplayer. Then we have to create files: R_NAV_data_MAP_NAME_HERE.lua (examples: R_NAV_data_Kola.lua, R_NAV_data_Sinai.lua, R_NAV_data_Falklands.lua). Question is, does these files also have to be somehow implemented into IC, to avoid failing in multiplayer? PLEASE ED, is it possible?

Ok, thx for clarifying it, didn't know all that. So everything will stay the same way it has been until now.

Btw, @BIGNEWY, there are some discrepancies in RSBN navigational system of DCS between files, for example: - in Causasus map folder (Beacons.lua), channel 20 { display_name = _('Mozdok'); beaconId = 'airfield28_8'; type = BEACON_TYPE_RSBN; callsign = 'MZ'; frequency = 820000000.000000; channel = 20; position = { -83636.195312, 154.866778, 834226.937500 }; direction = 82.763916; positionGeo = { latitude = 43.790367, longitude = 44.602658 }; sceneObjects = {'t:678823329'}; }; - in Mig-21 aircraft folder (R_NAV_data_Caucasus.lua), channel 9 { airbase = 'Mozdok', --9 lat = 43.79167, long = 44.60056, alt = 150,--155 rwy = 83.2, length = 3500, code = '-- --- --.. ' --/N/ Moz_ }, This two channels should be of the same number, right? It goes for the same becon station. I found this issue my self, but not sure how many there are, I doubt its the only one. But in the Mig-21 only the channel 9 works. 20 does not. Would be cool fixing it.

I agree. Since in DCS we have pre-Gen4 aircrafts, it should be self-evident that the map would have these 2 types of navigational system ebedded and fully working. Its not that much of a work, compared to the map it self. Its really a shame we have to constantly use F10 map instead, to visually check where we are and where we are heading (at least thats what I do, since there isn't any other way for this types of aircrafts).

N 35°59'31" E 36°23'49" Its true that the village actually the houses are on the hill slope in real life, there is no such parking there, and if nothing else, its not made that way.

Hi, how close are you to finish files for ARK and RSBN navigation?

This is the same, its been reported, but hasn't been fixed yet.