Qiou87

Yes, that is an interesting idea (playing the Huey campaign by Reflected right now, would be fun with human gunners!). There needs to be a big change on DCS's core level, all SP missions have only a "Player" slot, and you need "Client" slots to make them playable with many players. But it also could be easier than hosting a MP server if you just want to invite a friend in your SP mission... So there is some work to do. Well the Autopilot of course. Some (idiot) people are doing it in cars, why not in virtual planes?

Cue the "no AV-8B is not the Sea Harrier" crowd. Don't know if both South Atlantic and Mudhen have anything to do with each other. I would definitely appreciate a bundle offer because I plan to purchase both, but I don't think they fit together at all. It would also put additional pressure to release both at the same time when both modules don't necessarily have the same timing.

In this case I am curious about mental/task overload of the pilot. I mean, if the jet has 2 seats and is not a trainer, I am guessing that is because there are certain tasks that need to be performed in parallel. I know we have autopilots and what-not, that help of course, but if you are flying a low-level attack profile your concentration has to be on the terrain in front, you cannot prepare the weapons, slew the TGP or do something else at the same time. This is the reason why many jets still have 2-seater variants, and why air forces still purchase them. In DCS any F/A-18C or F-16C pilot can probably attest to being sometimes overwhelmed, especially in air-to-ground or when dealing with unplanned changes to the mission. And I know obviously we can have this in multiplayer, if we find a buddy to play backseater with, but for all SP content, having a limited AI would have helped. If we don't have it, I hope it won't be detrimental. You are still at it... Let me give you an example: if I own 2 rifles, one I use for duck hunting, one for target practice. If I tell you that I kill 100% of my ducks with my first rifle, does it mean the second one is bad at it, or cannot even be used to hunt ducks? Or it is just due to my usage of each? The USA are using F-15C in air dominance missions, F-16C in SEAD, F-15E in strike etc. So of course, air-to-air kills will be with the 15C, SAM kills with the F-16C, just because this is what they are used to do. Does not mean the F-16C cannot perform an air superiority mission if necessary. Same for the F-15E. Statistics reflect the usage of each aircraft by their owner, not their capabilities! You keep citing the F-15I by the way, which is the Israeli version of the F-15E. You seem to be under the impression that in order to be called a jet fighter, a plane needs to be a specialized air-to-air platform. This is simply not true, however long you want to keep repeating it. And those are going away because nobody wants to buy a one-trick pony... I am curious how you want to call the Rafale and Eurofighter by the way. Both started out in series production as exclusive air-to-air platforms because the rest of their systems was not ready (F1 Rafale, Tranche 1 Eurofighter). Today, they are multirole. So, are they jet fighters?

That, and a paid upgrade paying for all the fixes (that should benefit all). So if you don't want the eye-candy you keep your Huey, but the fixes are still done for it. The "II" version of the module just brings this higher-res cockpit, and potentially a couple of additional gadgets (like Mk82 bombs - similar to the Lebanese UH1Hs - perhaps? ). I am not advocating for anyone to lose anything they have paid for, far from it. It is just about bringing this module up to 2022 standards and help bring new players the joy of the Huey. Now it sits at the back of the module catalogue as an old dog. I feel like the A10C II upgrade brought that module back to the forefront, and something similar could maybe be done for the Huey.

Agreed, the Huey is popular - as it should be! It is iconic, used by many countries for many years, it can do many things. It is easy to learn and hard to master. I would definitely be ready to pay for a Huey upgrade that brings its cockpit to current standards (Hind is a great example of a beautiful cockpit). What's more: all the content created for the Huey would benefit from the upgrade (people who had the Huey sitting in their library would pick it up and look for missions, paid or free, to enjoy the upgrade).

Indeed, Huey is one of the oldest. Just wanted the wishlist to be thorough, and I also think it can help with the other items: if the ED team considers to make a full revision/new version, not just some bug fix, they can dedicate some man-hours to other items in the wishlist and amortize it by selling the graphical update (like with A10C II). Looking in detail yesterday, the instrument panel is actually not so bad, but everything else is very flat. The frame has rivets and bolts that are just texture-based, for example ; you can clearly see it once in VR. It is fine, it is an old module ; but some love for it would be highly appreciated, it is still a lot of fun to fly and a great learning experience to get into rotorcraft in DCS.

Sounds actually perfect for me. I might get a buddy in the backseat occasionally but I also play offline, if I can use the plane just as well alone that makes me happy. Thanks.

No problem, again I know it takes a lot of work to rebuild everything. Good idea on the map marker, indeed I checked and there were none. Thanks for your other answers and quick feedback.

Thanks for the recommendation, but I have tried a couple of times, and honestly in VR the whole interface thing just breaks my immersion. I manage the Hind just fine because I don't need Petrovich most of the time. I am into DCS and VR flying for the feeling of flying, not for clicking on stuff and figuring out how to get the AI to do what I want. I am hoping the Mudhen is going to be the same, where I can do everything from the front, but can rely occasionally on the AI to help or for limited tasks only.

Let's not be close-minded: a fighter jet can engage in air-to-air combat. The F-15E, being a multirole strike fighter, can perform such tasks admirably. One of its main advantages indeed is that it is a strike aircraft that can escort itself. It carries medium to long-range missiles, has a capable air-to-air radar, and the power-to-weight ratio to fly high and fast for BVR engagements. The fact that, historically, the Mudhen has primarily been used as a strike aircraft is because it has this capability and the targets were mostly on the ground (the US hasn't faced a capable opponent in the air in a looong time), but the Strike Eagle nevertheless has the fighter aircraft capabilities. A great addition to DCS, I am eager to see it and especially the AI system for solo flying. The reliance on the AI backseater has deterred me from purchasing the F-14, but I have great hopes for the SE.

Hi @Reflected, Don't worry, I love the campaign (cleared Miz. 7 yesterday). I just have a couple of improvements: - in M06 I think it was noted already, when picking up guys on top of a hillside you are supposed to ask them to count to 10 and FM home on them. The homing works for 2-3 seconds only. - During a cold start from the left seat, as you made it so that the helo captain is in the left seat, aligning the main compass is very difficult. You have to lean over to the right, check the backup compass and align the co-pilot's compass on it... Not so easy. Would love to have a way to ask the copilot to align it! - Is there a way to implement a command for the copilot to change radios? I find it quite ridiculous at times that I am flying the helo, navigating, and also managing the radios. At this point and before we get to the gunship part of the campaign, he is just a useless cheerleader. I preset the radio on the ground as much as possible but it can be very challenging, when retasked in flight, to change a frequency whilst not flying into the ground... - In M05 (I think), when transporting the general from HQ to a ship offshore, I would love to have a possibility to recall the instructions. I was busy taking off when told to head south-east to a ship heading north, and I understood "go north the ship is heading south-east" - as a foreigner such things take a little bit more brainpower than for a native speaker perhaps? Lost 10min flying in the wrong area... A reminder in F10 radio menu maybe? Is there any plan for the future to convert the campaign to the WWII version of the map, when released? I know this is a lot of work. I am just curious how much more immersive it would be with less luxurious homes and SUVs on the ground. No pressure, but if you do, I will happily play this campaign again on it.

I did not see in your wishlist, but is the damage model discrepancy considered? I get bullet holes inside the cockpit, on the front cockpit glass and side door, but when switching outside (F2) the aircraft looks unharmed/clean. After 10min of CAS as a gunship being shot at by AK47s, that was quite a surprise. On latest build, playing the Marianas DLC campaign from Reflected. Don't have a track but if it is needed I can probably make one easily. Another point I would love is a graphics upgrade, could be paid of course (similar to Blackshark or A10C), the 3D model and textures of the cockpit are really lacking and look really terrible in VR. The frame of the cockpit (around the glass) is low-poly compared to a modern module. The texture of the instrument panel cover (top and sides) is poor. I personally think the exterior looks fine: given that we spend 99,9% of the time in the cockpit, this is where I would like to see improvements.

No problem, we all come from different backgrounds with different experiences I am flying the Hind a lot for the past 6 months, so the Huey is a bit of an adjustment. I like it nonetheless! Regarding performance, I have a similar configuration to yours, albeit with a slightly more powerful GPU. Could be it, or a small tuning necessary. Hope you manage to find a compromise you are happy with. Btw, I forgot to say thank you for the short review. I did not wait for anyone's opinion as I know Reflected from his WW2 campaigns, but it is great nonetheless to have people share their honest opinions after playing through the campaign. I know how long it takes to make such a campaign...

Related to VR performance: Marianas has seen a recent upgrade in FPS with 2.7.9. I don't know what version you played on @Tobse? For me the map is playable as is, and the first mission ran fine. Your comment about difficulty made me realize how much of a mediocre Huey pilot I actually am. I do not find landing in a tiny LZ in the woods under fire "easy". So far I am enjoying the campaign and I recommended it to a few buddies who fly helos. It is great to see some use for this map as well!

Honestly I feel the same like the OP, it took me 3 missions to figure out the wind direction was wrong. I was setting up my carrier to go towards 090° for example, so I wanted the wind in the same direction (meaning coming from 090°) because that's how it is done IRL (carrier turns into the wind for launch and recovery). It really took me a few times to figure out that typing 090° into the "DIR" box for direction meant the wind actually came from 270° and I was giving my mission a tailwind. I wasn't using the arrow, just measuring the heading of the carrier and inputing that as wind direction (resulting in a tailwind). Maybe it is clear for you, but having an arrow pointing in the opposite direction of the number indicated in the box "wind direction" is very confusing, and I'm guessing it is for a lot of people.

Hi there, I created a coop mission for the F-16C and the Mirage 2000C. It is a deep strike in enemy territory, flying low and fast to avoid SAMs and interceptors. Your target is the house of a terrorist leader, with a secondary target of opportunity nearby if you still have ammunition left. The mission is for 2-4 players, voice-acted, with full briefing, target pictures & custom kneeboard. If you have suggestions for improvement or you just enjoyed it, I'd love to hear about it here. Download Link (User Files)

Rain and dense clouds also can block or at least affect radar. Not in the same way as a targeting pod, of course, but radar in bad weather is not a magic bullet. I am also in the camp of "more options, more fun". In a simulated environment we have more freedom to think about ways to use those systems, even if IRL they aren't used so much - this is also part of the fun of a simulator.

I think the SC is fine as it is. It doesn't break MP. The WW2 pack breaks MP by dividing the community ; there I see a problem. Why not simply replace all assets with boxes of the size of the unit if the person doesn't have the asset pack? Therefore, if you don't pay, you can join the mission, but the units look bad. Fine, if you don't pay, you don't enjoy the nice work the devs did. At least you can play with your friends, and after a while of being tired to see boxes on the ground, you pay for the pack. It would make sense in my view: more people playing the game means more revenue down the line. Today we have a paywall that simply turns some people off. Adding boxes instead of the assets is to have the right target size, but not waste dev time on lower-quality models for example. It would also possibly motivate other third parties to make asset packs, and mission makers to include as many of these shiny assets as possible. I would love for assets to be a profitable part of the DCS business model, but it simply cannot be if it divides our small community.

Definitely, if you are between values, default back to 12° (and sink after launch) I think this is the kind of table that tries to give you a feel for what to do, not a precise instruction (for example, at 44,950lbs someone might prefer to use 17°, someone else will chose 16°...). This is a sim and not real world, I honestly don't check my T/O weight everytime and just do it with a basic rule: - A/A loadout 17° (meaning AMRAAMS and 1 tank) - A/G loadout 18° - heavy A/G loadout (8x AGM-154, or 2000lbs bombs on each pylon) 19° Interesting that the manual doesn't have 18°, this is my most-used setting and it works very reliably when I have a medium-heavy A/G loadout for example...

The C-101 is a lovely module, although it hasn't really been used widely and engaged in any combat - I always fail to see the point of a real trainer in DCS. How good is the campaign in this module? It was released this year as I see - I'd say the quality of SP content is an important point to consider when picking up a new module. It's all fine to have a nice jet but if you don't have anything to do in it to help you learn, I find it is a shame. I have quite a lot of hours in the F-5E, I don't know that I would be so harsh. Yes, stuff needs to be fixed, but I haven't honestly found anything that annoyed me so much. Same for the "very questionable systems", I've found them reliable - I wasn't looking for bugs, just flying the jet to accomplish the mission. Even in IMC I didn't find any problems...

Highly agree, and I want to add that all planes with fly-by-wire can teach you very poor habits because the jet will correct your mistakes. Of course a Gen4 is easier to fly, it is made so in order for the pilot to be able to fly with his head down on the FLIR/radar screen. For actual flying and BFM, the F-5E is a great way to learn: you don't have a computer to fly so you need to fly properly, you don't have loads of power so you need to manage your energy, etc. Same for using "dumb" bombs, once you master their use in the F-5E, you will truly appreciate the new, guided munitions and understand when/how to use them to your advantage. Many of the flying skills you learn in the F-5E are transferrable and will make you a better pilot once you go for a 4th gen. There is kind of a natural progression to DCS, and going for the most advanced/complicated module to start can overwhelm a virtual pilot. The F-5E is a great stepping stone, it feels great to fly, and I also recommend @SorelRo's DLC campaign. I learned a lot about this jet, and my flying improved due to the variety of situations that this campaign put me into, from large-scale air-to-air fights with MiGs to tree-top SAM rockets attacks, it was a load of fun all the way.

Hi, I am currently writing a SP campaign based on the F-16 module and Syria map. I was fascinated with the rich history of the F-16 fleet of the Turkish Air Force, the many theaters in which they have been involved in the past 20 years, so I thought I would take inspiration from some of these real-life events. My aim is not politics, therefore this will be a ficticious setting, but of course past and current events can influence some missions during the campaign. I would like the help of the community to find sources and information about the Turkish Air Force and especially their F-16 squadrons. I could find information about the technical stuff, how they train etc. but I am interested in the details that make a story feel real. Examples of details I am looking for: - Nicknames: do the TAF pilots also use nicknames and if so, are they in English? Turkish? What would be typical nicknames of fighter pilots in Turkey? - Callsigns: do they use the name of their squadron as a radio callsign, for example "Raiders 3-1"? - In France squadrons have a home-base but can operate from other airfields of the air force, for example if the mission dictates it (like air "police") or for large-scale exercises. Is it the same in Turkey? I am going to have to use Incirlik for the story, which is the home of KC-135s in real life but no permanent jet squadron, so I am looking for a good reason/explanation why F-16s would be there. I know Turkey is part of NATO, its F-16 pilots train in the USA, so a lot of what I know from US or NATO pilots applies as well. But any country has its own culture, especially the military. I want to give the impression that the player is really a turkish pilot, not just a US pilot with a Turkish skin on his jet. I tried to find a book written by a former fighter pilot from Turkey that would tell a little bit about what it is like, unfortunately I wasn't successful. I do not speak Turkish (only French/English/German), therefore I am probably not finding the right books in my research. If you have any non-classified information, please post here or contact me in MP. I am also looking for volunteers for voice-overs, especially if you are from Turkey. The campaign will be in English, but a true Turkish accent would add a lot to the realism of the coms as well, and I'd like to avoid AI-simulated voices as much as I can.

I am afraid I know what you mean with the AI, I play around a lot in the ME and using AIs as stand-in for humans (when creating MP missions). Their "abilities" sometimes baffle me. I played this mission twice, the first playthrough the wingman killed both helos first pass. Then I hit the water like an idiot by focusing a bit too much on killing the boghammers. My bad for the notification, there is a bit much going on at this time in the mission, I missed it then. Oh and yes, I'm enjoying the campaign. I am slow to complete it, because I don't play solo so much, but it is mighty good fun. Like I wrote somewhere else, you outdid yourself with this one.

Had a strange thing with the second wave of Ka-50 in this mission, the wingman shot the first one down no problem, but then was "dancing" at 100ft AGL with full burner trying to point his nose at the second Ka-50. The second one shot at him (apparently you set the wingman to invincible ), then some AAA on Abu Musa shot at the wingman as well. Finally I decided to end this miserable display of AI airmanship and shot my last 120 at the helo. Still, those iranians on Abu Musa probably had a huge laugh, seeing the Ka-50 point its nose effortlessly and the F/A-18 from Ford 420 just dance around with full burner trying to get a lock on the helo while he was being shot (and hit), must have been quite funny. Btw @Badger633, I think this mission is missing a cue that they platforms are about to blow up. Or maybe I missed it? I was killing the Boghammers to cover the helos, going back up for another pass, when the wingman told me the rigs had exploded and it was "quite the show". For safety reasons (since they ask us to cover them from the Boghammers) as well as for entertainment, I would have liked a message like "Five seconds to detonation" or something. Just so I can steer clear of the rigs, and watch the fireworks.

V1.2 uploaded to User files. CHANGELOG 18/9/21 (V1.2): - Normalized voice-overs of JTAC to match that of Mission Control - Added random position of mortars for replayability - Added random position of artillery for replayability - Modified briefing map to reflect initial mission briefing - Late activation of artillery to avoid surprise kill on the way to the FARP