Tonker

No idea what's involved, so feel free to ignore/shoot down as required, but would it be useful to host a 'closed beta' server for slightly wider testing by those active here? Even 30 mins might help isolate issues for those who are normal SP only/have different set ups to Team I2J. As ever, just a thought

Sorry not to be able to give more accurate, more targeted feedback. Soon My impression of a quick sightseeing tour of Andersen in the Loach was that each area is great, loads of good (and immersive!) stuff to look at and play with! Just as I started getting hints (and it was only hints) of performance issues, I wondered if it would make more sense to cull a 'zone' rather than strip them all of their assets. Might not be a goer, and might not fit with your guys' priorities etc, and again that's cool EDIT: TBH that was all perfectly flyable @Devil 505! So this suggestion is very much an 'alternative' approach, in no way an 'improvement'...but I think if I were looking at reducing the workload around Andersen I'd be looking at eg: Move the F-5s to be with the F-4s (either side of a taxiway if feeling friendly, or back to back so you can only see the same aircraft type at spawn for that sweet sweet squadron territory vibe!) for a bit of Air Force consolidation. This area can then be detailed, taxiway to the active likewise as this would be shared with Marine fixed wing spawns - you're gonna see it every time. The other side of the field can then be blocked out with simpler assets The Army rotary area is awesome, but it could be culled to just CH-47s and give them a bit of focused heavy lift love. There're Hueys in the Marine's area, and how many of us spawn Loaches at Andersen normally?! Then in general maybe look at things like the number of windsocks*, placement of the music-playing huts** etc with an eye to getting the most benefit on the most spawns for each asset used and being savage about cutting/replacing those which aren't offering good 'value'. I know it's all tiny gains, but they'll add up I spend the most time noticing these things whilst running start-ups, so assets that improve immersion from spawn to takeoff would be my focus.*** Just some very loose examples, but hopefully that makes some sense? Really though, as I type it feels a bit like a solution in search of a problem. If it works as intended for the people it's intended for then that's the important thing *As long as you can see one from the driving seat - through any available window - then s'all good, right?! I've not actually noticed any wind effect whilst flying 'tho...? **Which I assume place higher workloads on the system than 'normal' huts, but assumption only. ***Once into the mission I'm busy! Whilst I appreciate the whole scene on departure/finals and landing, I've got a bit on at that point so spend less time poking into the details.

Yeah, the community's not great at constuctive feedback is it, bless us I hate to muddy the waters further*, but your fixes dealt with 99% of the stutters for me. Several groups were dealt with over a couple of slots/restarts. Only noticed stutters once, as reported before, well into my flight-time. Even then it was greatly reduced from the previous normal. So whatever you did mostly worked for me! But,as with others, I'm really keen for this not to start to feel like work for y'all. I can tell when flying that you guys love it, and it makes it easy for me to love it too. This is for you, not us, and I'm suuuuper chuffed that you wanted to share it. Thank you. FWIW, I did wonder if some assets could be tightened up. Flying around Andersen for example, notoriously tough on the hardware anyway, I frickin' loved the Marines' area...but wonder if it might be worth making some choices about what aircraft are based where. Perhaps just one Marine area, one Air Force; let the rotary guys start at the FARPs, leave the Bronco to Ore etc. Just spitballing. Thing is, my specs are well below your group average, and that's fine! Push comes to shove I can lower my settings, no dramas. Crucially the FARPS are still absolutely fine, and the static slots adds a lot. A bit more feedback once I've got some more time to base it on**, but mostly just thank you, gents. Puts a smile on my face every time. Reading future plans, that's not gonna change any time soon *Especially with only an hour or so tooling about in the OH-6A on the new version. ** Actually, just to report that I also often get identical group/CSAR spawns. I had assumed this was tied to starting spawn location, but again I've yet to test with intent.

Some off-the-cuff first impressions from a quick trip in the new version just now: Flight was a tour of the updated FARPs and strips till the CSAR event triggered, then a re-arm (M60 gunner and 7 rockets, which is becoming my fave loadout for this mission) and de-fuel at N Farp, CASEVAC from the hills in the West, dropping the casualty at the Southern MASH. Overall vibes: 'kin awesome General performance was good, considering all the new assets* The 'First Engagement Slideshow' dropped to zero...until my gunner started landing hits on a Ural 375 (?). Then it did return, but much reduced from before in severity and duration. Loving the StopGaps statics *I was experiencing significant stutters and audio artifacts whilst mooching round, but I think that was my system** freaking out in general, rather than mission related. I'll report back properly when I've been able to sink a couple more hours with ITJ. **12th gen i7, 32GB RAM, 3080Ti (laptop version), running in 4k - hardly top of line nowadays, being pushed fairly hard in general. More soon, but great stuff once again. So glad you guys shared this mission, it's a blast!

"ITJ - fun as fub!" Spotting a fair few updates in these vids, gents...

I would not have guessed that in 10 tries!

Sneaky! Thanks

Thanks for the update @TAT0R, much appreciated. I just spent an hour or so back in the Bronco for the first time in a little while. Sure, it's neither 'perfect' or 'finished' -whatever they mean - but it's a good time! It fills a useful role in the wider DCS ecosystem too, and I'm glad I have it installed. If it gets some more love in the future then so much the better Just to chip away at my ignorance - when you say "borderline" for the A4 systems, is that simply in terms of what's possible without SDK access? I'm assuming these are so bespoke to each mod that it would be no easier trying to lift the TACAN from the A4 wholesale than it would making it from scratch for each module? FWIW, I just flew the TACAN training mission (thanks @Rudel_chw!) and it worked well enough - dialed in the station, set to T/R and got a range and bearing, which is a lot better than nothing Here's cheers to Split Air's 2025 and beyond

"Yes...yes, twice. But it was dark. And we didn't land..."

Cannae wait!

And now we know ED ain't gonna...

Ta

No less keen to get involved! As someone teetering on the brink of diving into the mission editor, it's truly inspiring (and useful) to be able to follow the trials and tribulations from concept to release and support, so thanks for sharing

Woohoo, more for the brilliant A-4E, thank you @42jeff! This must be super frustrating, but well done for getting the campaign out and for providing great support and bug-hunting. I'd clocked the campaign in the User Files, and am just waiting on some free time to download and give it a go. I'll report back once I've flown it So, a quick bit of feedback on what I've seen so far: Blurb looks great, reads well, and has got me keen! Some more pics would be nice, so I can see the kind of places I'll be based and operating, maybe some cheeky hints of what the campaign has in store etc. The link from the download to this thread isn't displaying, but is a good thing and would be worth replacing (likewise placing a link to the user download in the opening post). Intro video is a great idea, do let us know when that update drops. Looking forward to it!

Agreed. On the first hits landing on enemy units - I think particularly, but not sure if uniquely the Ural trucks - in any aircraft, any weapon, including the OH-6A gunner. Then, after the slideshow, it all clears and is back to smooth (on a 4-year-old laptop!).

Woop woop woop!

Agreed with all that Eddie, especially... ...which might as well have described me! That said, the F-35A announcement was an Emperor's New Clothes moment. No need for me to go over it all, we'll know how we feel about it by now, but suffice to say it's now clear that the development in DCS' strengths (flight dynamics, systems depth) lies in our hands, not ED's. Looking at those strengths and weaknesses, it's a simple job of cost/benefit to see a focus on aircraft '50s-'70s (and so enabling scenarios up to c.'90s) makes the most of the platform. Linking back to the quote, one could look at the Fury (piston), Venom (strike), Canberra (bomber), Hunter (fighter/multirole), Lightening (interceptor), Lynx (rotary) as all offering significant value to DCS in terms of unique experiences, wide export customers, decades-long service histories, significant combat use, and leaning into DCS' strength at evoking the feeling of real flght. Half have equally, if not more, distinguished naval variants. I digress. This thread is to sanity-check my thinking and, if correct, identify 'intermediate' mods that are less demanding than going for full standalone aircraft mods. The Wokka and the Herc both tick a lot of boxes; personally an FRS.1 or GR.1 would get me to buy the Harrier 2 module, commercial shenanigans notwithstanding, but I appreciate these would have a much smaller market than US-built and operated aircraft. If these also increase revenue for ED and 3rd Party devs by generating sales that otherwise would not have been made, so much the better. I don't begrudge the cost, just can't justify spending money on modules I won't fly any more than on food I wouldn't eat! I'm an absolute neophyte, so it'd also be good to hear from those in the know about the practicalities of creating, say, a CH-47D cockpit. Also agreed! We'll see what Combat Pilot, Il2: Korea, CAP2 etc bring, but the next few years will see a lot more direct competition for ED than they've had to deal with to date. I predict a lot more easy-sell modules, and a lot less focus on sorting out the core engine. So what can we do with what we've got? 1950s-70s stuff!

Agreed, it's the solution! Grey...but I struggle for time to learn the complex aircraft I love in such depth; Midder...but find few servers as immersive as they are challenging; kid...but I didn't grow up in '90s America sooo...! There's no right or wrong, clearly, I'm just trying to parse what's been going on around the F-35A reveal.

Poor old Ardent. T21s will be a great addition to the sim, looking forward to them

Just spent an...interesting...couple of hours reading through the various F35 threads, and wondered if I could borrow you for a quick sanity check? Thanks My impression from the announcement - there's an F-35A in development, no more, no less. My impression from the FAQ and ED - it'll be as good an F-35 as they can make, info and core engine allowing. Okay, so far so good. My impression of the response: The greybeards, who got into DCS as a study-level sim, aren't too fussed and probably won't buy, but feel it's a bit of a slap in the face to aspects of DCS they care about, which has been watered down over the years anyway. The midlifers, in DCS for the systems fidelity and resulting PvP multiplayer contest, are fussed because of the fear it'll break their game and devalue their skills and/or toys, and don't want DCS turning into an Air-Quakey WarThunderFest. Say they won't buy, but... The kids, in DCS cos they get to fly cool planes they've grown up with, are stoked because they'll get to fly the coolest newest plane. Day one Early Access buy. So far so fair? My biggest takeaway: "Anyways, if you don't want the F-35 it's ok, I think even those who do not buy it will see benefits from this aircraft for years to come." @NineLine Ah. ED need a revenue stream to fund core development to stay competitive*; this comes from Early Access releases of new modules. The F-35 will out-sell anything else; the F-35 is getting made. *Looking at you War Thunder, Combat Pilot and Il2: Korea Looks brutal like that, but is that correct? A bit sad to see ED go the 'algorithm capture' route for customer growth, for all it makes sense, but that's by-the-by. Anything I missed?

Have some feedback - 'kin YES! - some support - congrats on all you've achieved to date, with so many hurdles cleared already I have no doubt you'll get the old girl to completion in time - and some help - I'll pop the kettle on. Geddon @Nivron, keep it up!

Issue: On the back of another "...and Beyond" which left me unmoved, I've come to conclusion that the things I enjoy in DCS are now fully in the hands of the third-party and community developers. So, if I care then I should do what little I can to support those devs, even if it's just to throw some grass in the air to see which way it blows. Why should you care? Well, maybe you feel the same. Only one way to find out! What to do about it? Trying to think practically, I wondered if a route to improvement (YMMV, of course) might lie in 'small' updates to existing paid modules. Perhaps replacement cockpits, followed by updated externals, followed by updated flight models, stores etc. Discreet projects of defined scope, but which impact on how we experience DCS. Examples? Prime examples to my mind are the CH-47 and C-130. Iconic aircraft both. Sadly, for me, the wrong models were chosen - the best fits for DCS to my mind being the CH-47D* and the C-130H**. *Introduced in the '80s, it's widely applicable to currently available maps and scenarios in DCS; not immersion-breaking for future Vietnam (or current 'Viet-Guam') settings, with some good quality of life improvements over earlier versions. I'm not a masochist! ** The standout model of the Herc, from the early '60s to today, hugely successful in the export market, and darling of a diverse mission set. As things stand, I won't be buying either. If they offered an experience I enjoy, I'd buy both. I have no right to this experience, but modding an existing aircraft seems much more within reach than trying to create something of A-4E or OH-6A (etc) standard from scratch. My view is that life is too short to look at screens on screen, so give me steam gauges! Whilst I don't have a VR set, I've heard across the social media spectrum that gauges look and work better than MFDs for VR users. With DCS' dynamic foveated rendering, and given MS2024's troubled launch, it seems silly not to double down on making DCS the VR sim par excellence. Also, I think pits of the pre-screen era suit the sim environment better, by giving me information I can then act on via my cheap'n'cheerful HOTAS/keyboard. I'm sure full-simpit guys are down with MFD functionality, but I find it tedious to have to reach for a mouse every time I want access to even basic flight and nav information etc etc etc. Last but not least, the undoubted power of the these modern systems actively detract from my immersion - and satisfaction - in a DCS session. I thought this was a flight sim?! I understand there is a huge amount of programming and other work under the hood to bring even apparently minor updates to us lucky end-users, and even the smallest of such projects are significant undertakings... ...but... ...surely a more positive approach than just screaming (headphones on) "I wanna VC-10" into the void, no? Questions: Is it just me? Is there a better way forward than this incremental approach? What are the implications of basing (freeware, obviously) community developments on ED/Third Party modules? I'm thinking of lots of early mods using FC base aircraft through to @Massun92 gorgeous period-correct Huey pit. This seems more productive than just wishing for others to make my dream fleet of aircraft; but what gaps do you see in the DCS ecosystem that we could fill? My thoughts on this are more about filling the ranks for certain eras/settings than 'I wanna *insert your fave plane here*' but feel free to state your case for XYZ! Thanks for reading, I'm looking forward to your feedback Tonker

*love*!

Some random unsolicited thoughts on possible improvements to the mod, based on being able to grab an hour or so on consecutive days to fly the Cayuse recently. I'm coming at it from the PoV of a) being a muppet, b) being pretty limited in available time for DCS and c) being keen on systems and the immersion that comes from using them, but often floored by not being an expert on the systems or how they should work...probably a pretty standard baseline DCSer. So the below are mostly thoughts on how to lower the barrier to entry for newcomers to get the most out of the OH-6A as smoothly and quickly as possible. Yes it's patronising, yes it requires effort by some to reduce effort for others etc etc etc, but I've appreciated this in other aircraft, and think others might for the Loach. Lastly none of this is in any way a gripe. We all know this is the best helicopter in the sim with the best helicopter flight dynamics. De facto the best helicopter simulation in the world. Not bad for a free 'community' mod! These are just a collection of little things that have crossed my mind as I've got back into DCS and back into the Cayuse. If you have other ideas do feel free to let me know/post below and I'll edit this post to collate all our thoughts in one place. Suggestions - community (stuff we can do, or have done but which is yet to be included in the base OH-6A download) Full Kneeboard Checklists The A4 is perhaps the best community example to aim for. I don't have the F4 but is the in-cockpit checklist/manual function a possibility, or for SDK-equiped devs only? See @GrEaSeLiTeNiN's Start Up Checklist here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3340687/ See @Sydy's Quick Start Checklists here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3341989/ Full PDF Guide, inc. useful resources @Charly_Owl's brilliant guides are rightly famous as best-in-class and, properly credited, would make for a good template to work towards See @MadCartographer's excellent-looking manual here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3342341/ (which I've only just found, reading now...) @GrEaSeLiTeNiN has also made a useful-looking profile for the Warthog, worthy of mention as I gather some potential resources in this post, here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3340696/ @MadKreator has a Helios profile, also worthy of mention, here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3341970/ Expanded tutorials The start-up and weapons tutorials are good, the included Playground mission great for testing skills, but a full suite of specific tutorials would be great to help those like me really get into the guts of all this amazing rendition of the OH-6 has to offer Examples I'd benefit from: systems, particularly radio and nav*; search light; float ops; advanced techniques (failure recovery, adverse weather, constrained LZ etc) Examples of what to aim for come from the prolific tutorialiser @Rudel_chw, as many of us know from other modules! *Are the FM and UFH radios now fully implemented? The An/ARC-83 ADF? I've lost track of what's still planned and what's done, forgive me. I'm keen on my navigation, F10 is such an immersion-breaker, so would enjoy using the on-board systems to get about/work out just how lost I am and/or find those wayward downed pilots etc Expanded mission set It'd be great to include a few missions with the download to let the newcomer get stuck in with their new-found skills, and to show off things like the fantastic in-cab cargos etc, some livery use-cases (air ambulance, Jurrasic Park tour guide etc... ; ) Maybe even a campaign...?! A textbook go to would be one made up of progressive training missions; a 'stretch goal' might be deployment to put the training into action I won't do too much name dropping here, but the User Files section (and this thread) has a few notably repeat offenders FWIW I'm a lippy b*gger (you'll have noticed...) and would be very happy to help with the writing/editing/researching etc for the documents. I don't yet know enough to take the lead, but this is a short-term me problem, learning is always a possibility! Also, I'd like to start learning the mission editor, and it's long struck me that making tutorial missions is a pretty good way into this - fairly simple and limited in scope, but still possible to ramp up immersion, learn and use complex triggers etc. I'd throw my hat in the ring as being somewhere I could contribute as a stretch goal, but timeframe unknown. Suggestions - devs (stuff we can't) Expanded control binding options - again the A4 is perhaps the best example of this, where there are multiple input options making for very flexible control bindings Minigunner body Method to remove cargo/PAX loadouts on the fly Audio cue for landing light switch (?) Does the damage model have some tweaks remaining? It's a bit disconcerting to find myself upside-down looking at treetrunks as the Cayuse bounces around on the deck! I also noticed that a section of canopy which gets shot away is that with the greasedot aim mark on it. Possible to remove the greasedot as part of the damage/move the damage textures so they don't overlap the greasedot? Such a tiny thing, I know, but s'all about the immersion I'm uncertain if anything remains on the to-do/bugfix list. I appreciate the Little Bird is the focus. Have a well deserved beer. Honestly, the Cayuse is so bloody good! I'd be embarrased to tell you how long I spend just rocking the collective and watching her go light on the skids as the blades cone Cheers and gone!