Search the Community

Hello: I apologize if this is the incorrect place to put this(if so please delete this). I am trying to figure the developmental journey Soviet Air-to-Air Missiles took to become what we now know as the R-77. I am attempting to write a piece on the topic. Anything from manuals to recommended secondary sources would be of the greatest assistance in this research journey. I currently possess the manuals for most late soviet aircraft, along with a Polish manual for the R-60, but past that I am without anything to delve into. I understand that many of you are extremely knowledgeable as to aviation history and where to find information(especially to do with a topic of this breadth). I know of, but know not how to get my hands on two secondary sources (Ред. Нестеров В.А.Основы проектирования ракет класса "Воздух-Воздух" и авиационных катапультных установок для них, and Книга «Советские авиационные ракеты воздух-воздух» - Марковский В.) If anyone has digital or physical copies I would be willing to purchase them off of you or pay you for scans of the material. Any manuals, pieces concerning the politics of development, or anything relating to Soviet Air-to-Air combat during the latter half of the 20th century would be greatly appreciated.

Correct me if I'm wrong guys, seems the airfields in Germany map is generally flat, from many screenshots can see the airfields are super flat and like a straight rectangles. I know the 90% of the time we're in the air but different terrain bumping can bring the special landing\takeoff experience, just like Ugra them selves did very good on the Syria map the İncirlik air base. And ED's Guam, they have non flat runways that's a sign of they care about Terrain experience.

Hi Loving Raven One Campaign I really am. but there's so much not explained like all the RT froim various sources like Strike etc.. So I find myself really not knowing what I'm doing a lot of the time. I do want to learn it but would be very happy if some of the RT was sent in a seperate file or something. Anyway on mission 9 I clear the helo's coming in then come back to Venom. He gives me co ordinates for targets he wants us to take out but when I put them in via the waypoint function on the left DDI it shows literally nothing. Both targets co-ords don't show any targets. then lots of RT with no explanation of what any of it means. then we try and get them out of there, again more target co ordinates use target designate with the pod and it finds nothing again. then it turns out after flying round and round for 20 minutes the APC is nowhere near them. by the time I found them I'was too low on fuel and now I'm going to have to try this mission for the 4 th time. If I'm doing something wrong please tell me as it's driving me mad!

Just tried out this campaign and completed M01, truly amazed, as I'm mostly a multiplayer flyer. I'm not very used to the Litening TGP, as in the squadron I fly in we only use the ATFLIR, not too much of a difference, I'm sure the Litening would be more realistic in this theatre, but I prefer the ATFLIR to maintain proficiency to squad procedures. I might change it for the rest of the campaign (if allowed to) even though will discard one of the waist AMRAAMs. Thanks to @baltic_dragon for the devotion and commitement in putting something like this together. Top stuff, thanks.

Hi Baltic, Thanks for the campaign. It’s been a mixed bag so far, but I’ll reserve my opinion until I’ve completed it and had some time to reflect. Like squeaks and rattles in an otherwise luxurious car, I think it’s the combination of small details that is affecting what is otherwise an overall decent campaign. I wanted to let you know that, in Virtual Reality, the popup that instructs you to switch PRI to Chainsaw and SEC to Base, etc., is overlaid directly on top of the kneeboard. This prevents the player from clearly being able to read from the frequency list. Or see the map, or anything that the player has on their kneeboard throughout the campaign Although not strictly realistic, I really appreciate the approach taken by Sedlo, who, within the comms, simply states something like, “Flight, push Chainsaw on 8 left.” - You actually do this a couple of times yourself. In DCS, navigating through pages to find frequencies and then returning to your previous page can be cumbersome. I believe the graphics used in your implementation, while visually appealing, are less effective than the default DCS popup system. The default system dynamically resizes and adapts to aspect ratios and player settings, allowing control over elements like font size, which greatly improves usability and readability Additionally, while also not strictly realistic, it would be helpful for VR users if default messages with coordinates and nine-lines remained displayed a little longer. In VR, transcribing information takes longer and can easily slip out of short-term memory. I know you’ve implemented a popup for this, but it can be very hard to read when overlaid on the kneeboard, and it isn’t always available. I have been forced a number of time to hit escape and scroll to 'messages' to review the info Lastly, I recommend revisiting the kneebriefs. Many of them are very difficult to read in VR, even with a high-end setup running a high pixel count and with good vision. For specific examples, consider the map in the earlier missions. Its low-contrast monochrome design made it difficult to discern, and during the first (second?) mission, I found myself backtracking multiple times just to figure out where I was supposed to park the jet because I didn't even see the writing on the other side of the map as it too was dark grey and in small font. In later missions you started using a blue sharpie which was much more helpful Consider giving the player at the end of the main mission a question from Magic - did you want to RTB or do you need to refuel. I actually did a A2A refuel on the mission where I started WW3 because the flight lead I was following had a bad habit of going in and out of burner the entire time and the Tupolev had legs behind it too when I jinked and had to catch back up. It semi bricked the mission with the triggers re-aligning when I landed and the flight lead was already shut down on the ramp, still got the 100% and moved on to the next mission There are more points I could mention, like blasting the Eurobeat at the end of the mission but I believe the issues above would significantly improve the experience for players. Some, like the frequency presentation, may come down to personal preference, but others—like the popup covering the kneeboard—are higher-priority concerns. I understand this campaign is your passion project, and I don’t want to diminish your efforts. However, I wanted to voice these concerns in case you’d like to address them in this or future campaigns. I trust you’ll decide how best to handle this feedback All the best,

I've played DCS since P47 was introduced. Came from Il2 and WT and instantly enjoyed the flight model. Now I own all WW2 modules. i used to play for long stretches of time without getting burned out but now im done, and not as in burned out, just done with DCS. It's the same old stuff, same people on the same server fighting at grass level on the same spot on the map even though it got bigger. it's so stale that i've flown with 4 squadrons already, the first 3 used to fly il2 when i joined and where in transition to DCS, everytime we lost people because it was too expensive for some, some didn't have a good enough system to run it. Then it just gotten stale and boring and people slowly stopped showing up. My current squadron is switching back to il2 to get some people back and it's a squadron with 25 years of history and had 200 plus players at one point. When we started playing DCS we used to have 20 plus pilots at the time and server admin's squadron would always fly their 109s to england to bust our balls, the good old days of Storm of War. What frustrates me the most is ED's inactivity. I know there are like 10 or less guys working on ww2 but still, you either do something well or you don't do it at all. How about instead of PTO they finished developing WTO, added a couple period accurate birds. I16 has been in for a while and now LA7 is coming but they havent started working on ETO (not that i want them to focus on that), no, they gotta do PTO because "Nick loves the hellcat". How about they fixed AA ai so it's not copy pasted from modern SAMs and wouldn't see you through clouds anymore. I know that they can't do much and they need 3rd party to make stuff but at this point is it worth it? Just move those 2 dudes working on ww2 to modern and forget ww2 existed. How quickly will people get bored of F4U only fighting against AI zero? You will be able to do the same thing on a badget and fight against 109 in a LA7 on Caucasus map. Give it 3 more years and a half baked hellcat will come and people will gobble it up. ED will waste time making a couple of campaigns for these new shiny toys which people will play for a week and forget about. Then players will go back to Normandy and it's gonna be the same old stuff. And after all that what are we going to have? One very encomplete theatre which people played so much they can't stand it anymore + One very barebones theatre with 2 birds on one side. Yes it has gotten better throughout the years but nothing major. The only ww2 specific thing they added was fuses on bombs. They fixed a couple of issues on anton, changed some gun sounds and started adding suspension. In 4 years they managed to make the Mossie, thats it. You can argue spotting was also ww2 centered since it's much more important in ww2 then modern and after all this time it's still borked, still too easy to spot, still white dots on clouds. Just thinking about ww2 DCS makes me wanna vomit and the fact that ED doesn't care about it make me wanna cry because i same as most of us have invested a gigantic ammount of money (compared to an avergage gamer boi) into something that ED barelly payes attention to. New update comes out: Sees biblical ammounts of fixes and new features for every modern jet, scrolls down, ::insert Ken Jeong looking at a tiny pice of paper meme:: ww2 - "adjusted gunsight brightness on the spit" or "adjusted weather in campaign" Ima check on DCS ww2 in 5 years, maybe

Hey guys Trying to come up with some close-to-reality binds for the F-15C. Seems like the stick is mainly set up to enable ACM modes (radar/IR), so how would the real pilot enter BVR/LRS modes? Somewhere on the panels? Also, it does not look like there are any buttons on the throttle relevant to weapons modes. Only TDC slew and locking on. The stick itself have a few interesting buttons (see attached diagram): Auto-acquisition (AACQ) switch: What does A/A supersearch mean? Not implemented in this model? What does "Return radar to search mode" do? Is it just unlocking targets? "Select boresight" I assume is the same as pressing "4" in the standard binds Seems like the nose gear steering button is used for short-range missile modes? (caged/uncaged). It all seems wildly different to how it is done in the Mig-29 for example. There you have a simple selector switch that cycles through all your modes. Thanks!

I tried the mission probably for the thirteenths time or so and I always get shot down. Either I shoot down the strikers and got shot down by one of the escorts or I shoot down one escort and then got shot by the second escort. Once I was in a dogfight with a Mig-29 and the Oil platforms where destroyed. I always tell my Wingman to attack the escorts, but he rarely shoot any of them down. I managed it twice to make it to the "grand slam" communication but in this case I'm out of missles and have to fight two F-14s with AM-54c. I skipped the mission for now, but I want to finish it successfully. Any tips are wellcome.

I was thinking and getting some aircraft like the C-146, C-145, and AC-208 would be cool. It would give us some more civil aircraft for those who like that and I think it would be easy to make considering you wouldn't have to make targeting pods, weapons, ecm, etc. for it. It would give us some support aircraft and there wouldn't really be any classified or hard to get information holding us back as they are (as far as I know) just commercial aircraft. I was also thinking about the EO-5C, RO-6A, U-28 Draco, C-26 Metroliner, or some sort of C-12 Huron variant but those seem to have electronic warfare capabilities with them and while I do think it would be cool to have something like that I understand the a lot of E.W. information is classified and not easy to implement in simulations. Although the C-26 deals more with optical surveillance and not so much with E.W. The Bronco II would also be cool. I heard that there was a Bronco module that was being worked on but idk if that's true or if anything came of it. I know these aircraft aren't very popular but it would still be cool to have them. Not only expand our knowledge of aviation but all the support and intelligence that goes into the final battle. I'm mainly putting this out here because I want to know what the community thinks. Should we have some support/ civilian aircraft? What about E.W. aircraft? Thank you and I hope all of you have a wonderful day. U-28 Bronco II AC-208 C-26 OR-6A EO-5C MC-12W C-146 C-145 Edit: The O-2 Spymaster would be cool.

Anticipation Builds: The Upcoming DCS F-4 Phantom Hey fellow aviators, I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling the excitement bubbling up as we await the arrival of the DCS F-4 Phantom! With its storied history and iconic design, the Phantom promises to be a game-changer in the world of flight simulation. For those who might not be familiar, the F-4 Phantom II is a legendary aircraft that has seen action in numerous conflicts around the globe. From its service in Vietnam to its role in the Cold War and beyond, the Phantom has cemented its place in aviation history as a versatile and formidable fighter. As we eagerly await its release in the Digital Combat Simulator (DCS) world, there's plenty to look forward to. Just imagining the adrenaline rush of flying this beast, whether it's engaging in dogfights, executing precision strikes, or navigating through challenging missions, gets the heart racing. Moreover, knowing the attention to detail that Heatblur puts into their modules, we can expect nothing short of perfection when it comes to the flight model, cockpit fidelity, and overall immersive experience of the DCS F-4 Phantom. Of course, with every new module comes a learning curve, and I'm sure many of us are gearing up to dive deep into the intricacies of operating this aircraft. From mastering its unique flight characteristics to understanding its array of weapons systems, there will be no shortage of challenges and rewards for pilots of all skill levels. But perhaps most exciting of all is the prospect of joining together as a community to share our experiences, tips, and tricks once the DCS F-4 Phantom is finally in our virtual hangars. Whether it's swapping war stories, coordinating multiplayer missions, or simply geeking out over the finer details of this legendary aircraft, the camaraderie that comes with being part of the DCS community is something truly special. So, as we countdown the days until the release of the DCS F-4 Phantom, let's keep the excitement alive and continue to build anticipation for what promises to be an unforgettable addition to the DCS line-up. Fly safe, everyone, and see you in the virtual skies! [VAF] CO | "AWOL" Recoat 6 Squadron (Spartons), Virtual Air Force https://discord.gg/virtualairforce

I bought a Leap Motion hand tracking device, and tried it out in DCS VR. The experience was not very great. Even though the tracking works fine in the Leap Motion App, my hands are all kinds of crooked in VR. My Fingers do weird stuff in DCS, even though they show up correctly in Leap Motion. And even worse is the pointing in DCS. The cursor doesn't go where your finger points, it is very awkwardly positioned, I had to twist my hand way left, and way down, so the cursor went somewhat in the right position. It seems to point from the middle of your hand, not the finger, which is very annoying. And it wiggles around so much, it is almost impossible to hit buttons precisely. Additionally, my hands disappear regularly in VR, without moving them. I have to move around my hands to get them to be tracked again. All of these Problems are non-existent in the Leap Motion Control Panel I also tried the "Fingers" app, that is supposed to emulate a mouse cursor by pointing your finger, but it also tracks your whole hand, not your finger, so I have to move my hand around in a very awkward manner to point where I want. I tried different tracking modes in leap motion, desktop, screen mounted and headset mounted, but nothing seems to improve the tracking. I am very disappointed with the implementation of Leap Motion in DCS. The Leap Motion Tracking itself is very good, but in DCS it is very very bad. Which is a shame, since finger pointing in DCS would be VERY beneficial for VR.

The one type of question I see asked most in these forums is "When will <insert functionality here> be implemented? It would be good to have official roadmaps for modules that give at least an idea of when something will be implemented, if at all. I suspect this would negate the need for a lot of questions and wasted time in discussions. I work in the software industry so do realize how much of a challenge having a roadmap can be, priorities change but it's always useful to have a target for something and a way of prioritizing dev workload. Roadmaps shouldn't be static documents and can change over time, it would give the community a better idea of what to expect and when (give or take 2 weeks... ) - Discuss