Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'noted'.
-
Three off the top of my add. Others please chime in .... 1. ZIPLIP Case 1 recovery procedures 2. Ability to request touch and go's 3. Night ops - Turn on nav lights as nighttime salute procedure. 4. Logbook differentiate between traps and shore landings (you can train a monkey to land ashore ...) Yours Aye
-
Greetings. I know that its still WIP and I will equally get the same amount of comments regarding that. However please can we have more variety when receiving damage. It seems 9/10 times its a fuel leak followed by a flame out. I would love to see some hydraulic failures. Electrical or isolated bus failures or some requiring EPU activation. How about an occasional engine fire ? Let us use that annunciator panel some. If the base and core systems coding is there it should be easier to enter a variable or variety based on location of damage or strike etc. Any insight would be nice. Thanks
- 8 replies
-
- 10
-
-
noted Mav boresighting is very annoying for me, any workaround to get rid of it? (I guess no)
Guest posted a topic in Wish List
No, this is no post about how boresighting works nor do I have any problems understanding the procedure and the physical background (parallax effect...). I also know that it is the nature of this procedure that it is not always 100% accurate and that boresighting may still result in slight disalignments even if you've done your best to get it perfect. I know why this has to be done in real life and I am fully aware that this "feature" adds to the realism of the Viper for those who like ist as real as it gets. Sadly not for me. I have to say that this feature of the Viper annoys me so much that I do not use the module anymore. Currently I've completely uninstalled the Viper only because I really hate this boresighting thing. May sound as a radical step to most of you, but for me it is the best solution to currently not have this module on my hard drive, even although the module is way more than AGM-65 under a F-16s wing. But it is my decision, simple as that. I know that real pilots have to do it every time they load these AGM-65(D/G/H/K) under their wings. The point is, realism is ok, but the pilots who fly the Viper IRL do this as their main job and get paid for this. And I'm fully aware that in every job there are tasks that are fun and that there are also tasks that annoy. This is the nature of having a job you get paid for and if you're getting paid, you'll have to accept this. So far so good. But there is a difference between a real world Viper pilot and me. I am no Viper pilot. I do net get paid for flying the Viper in DCS. I want to do this in my spare time and it should be fun and help me to get a few moments where I can get my mind off of all the problems life brings up (job, family, children, the defunct washing machine and so on). In its current state the Viper does not deliver this fun and recreation for me, simply because of this annoying boresighting feature. Ok, my fault for having bought the Viper, so everything is fine, I can live with that. It is totally ok for me to give up the Viper and journey on to another module that matches my requirements better (and draw the appropriate conclusions for me to inform myself better the next time before buying a module). But before giving up the Viper completely, I'll try one last thing, one last chance. Perhaps I have overseen something, some secret feature that avoids having to boresight the mavs and lets me use them with the tgp like in every other module. I know that it has been asked several times that there should be an official option to deactivate the boresighting and that this has been accepted but given very low priority by ED. But maybe there is some other sort of workaround to avoid the boresighting and still be able to use the mavs with the tgp? I think I already no the answer (it is "no"), but perhaps fortune proves me false. And no, no one needs to tell me that I have to boresight these missiles in the air with a target at least 5nm away, better 8nm and so on. I already know all this. I know how to get the best results out of the boresighting, but I don't want to have it anyway. It is the procedure itself that annoys me, not the fact that the alignment is not always perfect. -
Hello All. I really love Cold War DCS era. Old jets and helicopters. But fly over some modern maps can be frustrating. Too modern Airfields, buildings and stuff. If you want to add some Tu-95 or B-1 to the stand, you will be sad because super low resolution of old models. So I realized that for really cool gameplay the best way is to have special Cold War asset pack. It will be cool for reproduction of historical events in singleplayer, or even some Cold War serverswill use it. There may be some special stuff like Soviet KM-1 ekranoplan, some amphibious hovercrafts, special trucks with big jet drone indide, bombers like first Tu-22, Tu-95(I know about mod), B-70 Valkyrie, SR-71 Blackbird, some cool tanks as IT-1 Dragon or BRDM with 5 guided rockets Malutka. It will really refresh cold war scene and add new tasks and tactics. Also will be cool to control it with Combined Arms
- 29 replies
-
- 9
-
-
- assets pack
- coldwar
- (and 1 more)
-
-
I would like to know if the development team is working further to improve the explosion VFX and ground damage of bombs. The graphic effect present is not bad, but I think it is a bit standard for all the devices available. The damage and smoke that an MK-82 causes is different than an MK-83 or a GBU-10. Is it possible to get information about it? Inviato dal mio SM-G998B utilizzando Tapatalk
-
this would be cool designating targets for the AI
-
If it would be possible in the future, like with the A10 and Black Shark upgrades, I'd love to see Tape upgrade to for the F-16, which would bring more capabilities. Off course paid upgrade. from: https://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article2.html M5.1 tape Integration of capability for stand-off weapons (AGM-154) Introduction of more advanced A/G weapons (EGBU-12) Introduction of advanced Stores Management System and Joint Mission Planning System Introduction of an improved GPS/INS system (more accurate and jamming proof) Introduction of new Link-16 message standards to improve interoperability between different aircraft types Installation of AN/ARC-210 VHF radios to enable radio contact with FAC’s on the ground M5.2 tape "Clean-up" tape (intended as correction to imperfections found in earlier phases) Maybe even M6 tape. M6 tape M6.1 tape Improved IFF system (Mode 5 waveform with better distinction between friendly and enemy aircraft) Introduction of AIM-120D missile (two-way datalink, improved navigation and High-Angle Off-Boresight capabilities, a doubled range) Introduction of more advanced A/G weapons (GBU-39 SDB, GBU-54 LJDAM) Integration of improved Link-16 functions with net-centric capability Integration of a new Universal Armament Interface to standardize communication between the aircraft and the weapons, illuminating the need for new OPF tapes with every new weapon system M6.2 tape "Clean-up" tape (intended as correction to imperfections found in earlier phases) Included minor updates like Auto GCAS capability nearly eliminating Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) accidents, a leading cause of F-16 loss of pilot and aircraft accidents.
-
Is there a way to control volume of uhf and vhf separately when using the ky-58 encryption radio? The normal volume knobs seem ineffective.
-
With the cold war heating up in DCS I would like to propose the AH-1F preferably from the 1980s. There were a lot of these made. They have a pretty good, and would be unique in DCS weapons system. And they would fit well with other cold war modules like the Uh-1H we currently have. And it would be a proper counterpart to the Mi-24P. The becoming packed cold war servers are going to need some bulefor rotary wing tank busters. Not to mention this aircraft like any from the pireiod, has a ton of history behind it.
-
New to DCS , long time sim pilot, and real pilot. Flying WWII planes, blackout is modeled, and from real world experience seems fine IMHO, but the pilot does not get tired, he can turn forever, and pull Gs forever and his stamina is not affected. Is this something that will be modeled in the future?
-
In VR, I find that the default head position in most aircraft is way too far forward, like i'm trying to do a line on the glareshield. Unfortunately, when I adjust the position to something more comfortable/realistic (head against the headrest anyone???), the mirrors are all too far inward, and all i can see in the is my pilot's face. nullit would be nice if we could get an option to adjust the inward/outward angle of the mirrors to accommodate different seating positions, or at least a couple extra baked-in angles. I understand that the current positions are chosen to work with the default head position, which is as far forward as it is to make life better for players on a flat screen, but it makes the mirrors entirely useless in VR.
-
We need more Soviet/RF aircraft, especially helicopters. I'd like an Su-15 and an Su-7B. I'd also like a Ka-26, and variants thereof. A Ka-52. An Su-24 would be good. And a full on Su-25 variant would be nice. On the Mikoyan side, a MiG-25 would be very welcome. And a MiG-31. Then there's the Tu-22M3. And so on. Finally, more Russian and Russian-related maps. On the other side of the aisle, a Cobra would be great. That is all. Carry on.
-
noted Other transport Aircraft possibilities after C-130J?
carss posted a topic in DCS Core Wish List
It is no doubt that the C-130J module will immensely add a whole new slew of capabilities in the transport category and more. So what other future modules with similar capabilities do you think we can see in DCS world? Maybe we can go large? Or smaller? The C-295 and its many variants like the C-130J Just a couple of examples I can think of! But what else would you guys like to see? -
Hi, Bump Acquisition has been mentioned several times in the forums, but I can't find any report about this missing logic. Currently, selecting AACQ from STT via castle right does nothing. It should command bump acquisition which should try to acquire a different target (out of a exclusion zone around the current one) within one antenna frame, or lock again the current STT target if nothing else is found (Ref to description of Long Range Automatic Acquisition (AACQ) - WITH DIGITAL DATA COMPUTER CONFIG/IDENT 92A AND UP) Track attached. bumpacq.trk
-
A female friend of mine who has recently got into DCS was astonished that are no female pilot models available for any of the aircraft! 20.0% of USAF pilots are female Even the Russian Federation has its ‘angels of death’, female pilots! ED?
-
I would like to see full fidelity tank modules like Abrams, Challenger, T-72, etc, one day.
-
With the announcment of the c-130 becoming an official product, I wonder what the interest would be in larger ww2 aircraft such as medium and heavy bombers. With them seemingly doing well in civilian flight sims i'd be curious to know how much interest there would be in being to actually use them in a historical scenario, dropping bombs among other things. that and multicrew would make them rather more interesting. Ideas would include, Lancaster, B17.B24, B25, A-26. As well as a Bomber version of the Mosquito, Ju-88 and HE-111. These bombers would introduce dedicated bomber aircraft using things such as the nordern bomb sight. As well as allowing those of us with an interest in old school planning and navigation to be able to make use of the aircrafts range and performance.
-
How do we use the TGT DATA page? For the life of me I can't find any information on it.
-
So...Is the T6C on the radar for any developers? Would be awesome to have a modern trainer, I'm sure plenty of us real world pilots would throw our wallets at a modern prop aircraft with all the gucci avionics and systems along with ground attack capabilities.
-
Hello and good day together, unfortunately the following settings are still missing for the above mentioned weapon: ATK AZ, EGEA, ROB. Is there an approximate time window for the introduction of these settings.
-
So are we not getting any of the other features such as TAD symbology, HMCS symbology, etc. that are missing? Datalink for non AI flights?
-
So yea, since Heatblurs making an F-4 and Aerges is close to releasing the Mirage F1, how bout a Jag for DCS? If possible the GR3 Variant? When it comes to historic RAF inventory, the Jaguar GR3 has to be my fav (ofc excluding the Spitfire) Not sure about Documentation tho, since the RAF loves to keep things classified, but it’d defo be a sick module to have in DCS (Shoutout to Aircrew Interviews, they’ve got some good footage of Jaguar HUD Tapes)
- 42 replies
-
- 20
-
-
-
Right now a lot of nations don't have infantry and those that do, don't have enough to simulate a platoon or a company. The Russians and the Americans have the most infantry represented in DCS Russia has riflemen with AKs and grenadiers with the RPG-16 and the US has the M4, M249 and the M1 garand in the WWII asset pack. Then Germany has the KAR-98 in the WWII asset pack. We need enough small arms to represent a typical company. So there needs to be light and medium machine guns, DM rifles, portable anti-tank weapons
-
With external tank, hot refuel on ground does not fill the external tank even if I select 100%. Only internal tank are filled at 100%. With same configuration it's ok with AAR. All tank are filled. Have you already notice this problem ? Thanks Track : https://mega.nz/file/l74kwJyD#mFrOGuH8ME0ABFpWqoscqXcwZV3KVBLT5nwOzlyXZ9c
