Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'not planned'.
-
As mentioned in the JF-17 SD-10 thread, there are pictures of a/multiple J-11As carrying the PL-12. You can see here:: White antenna section behind the nose, the Black-grey nose cone, only present on the Su-30MKK and the J-11A RKL-609 on the Wingtip, also only carried by Russian Versions It also doesn't have the Beidou MAWS in the picture
-
Will they be removable in the ME like they are for the Mi-8/24?
-
These are a vitally needed difficulty option. Although everyone else here might be a real true ace pilot naval aviator blocked from becoming the next Maverick only by, you know, not actually flying anything, I am not skilled enough, or patient enough, to take on air to air refueling without blowing the tanker out of the sky. Perhaps it's sad that I didn't buy DCS to learn this skill, but it's an area I would like some assistance with until I'm able to take it myself. I would say that it's a vital frustration reduction setting that is directly linked to my credit card and my ability to pry it from my wallet in the future. This was an option in the old days of LOMAC, it should be an option now. Maybe it could be squeezed in right next to the ability to take no damage, or have unlimited weapons, or jump between the front and back seat of an F-14 in mid flight instantly, or any of those other horrible realism breaking options. -
Looking to the size of the latest maps, Crimea can be aded to Caucasus as in the past. Why not?
-
Hi, I was wondering why non of the announcements recently have included plans for an Official F15-EX? I understand from Wag's interviews that with many of the latest fighters the reason is DCS not wanting to put out pure guesswork models or get themseleves into trouble with the DOD if the accidentally put out capabilities that by chance match the real aircraft. However, with the F15-EX, there are many public figures from seemingly reliable sources including some from Boeing themselves (eg vidoe of 9g turn and QA version performance in Qatar (QA shares the same basic platform as EX). 9g normal 12g over G Turn Rate not disclosed but video of the QA version which the EX is based on shows manouevres approaching the f22 Fly By Wire Mach 2.5 800mile range 29,500lb pay load Raytheon ANAPG82 - Pulsed Radar - Detect targets including high Hypersonic and small vehicles on surface - Most advanced radar on any aircraft Legion Data Pod SEAD capability Sniper Adanced Targetting Pod enabling ground vehicle targetting Capable of carrying new over sized US Hypersonic Missiles (currently under development) Given the EX data is out there (or at least some publically available data is) and the EX would be an easy mod for ED from the standard F15 (simply new glass cockpit and some adjustments to the flight characteristics), why haven't ED announced an EX version? Surely it's a no brainer given it's almost totally already modelled. Source for a lot of the above: Task and Purpose (ex military guy) (video includes cockpit instrumentation view): Sandbox News (an ex US Navy Pilot):
-
Be nice if Crimea was fleshed out by you guys or by a modder please. Thanks.
- 1 reply
-
- 1
-
-
Right now, even with the ability to remove the FCR and the AGM-114Ls, the apache is incredibly powerful. One of those reasons is the missile warning system installed on the AH-64D. I would like to see at some point the ability to remove the system as an option for mission makers to balance out the aircraft with other helicopters especially in a multiplayer server. Also with cold war becoming a popular setting for DCS, being able to remove it would put the helicopter more in line with an apache that would have been around in the late 80's to early 90's. Obviously there are still many difference between the AH-64A and the AH-64D we currently have besides just the FCR and CMWS but those willing to take more creative liberties would appreciate it. Even in the setting the helicopter is based around (which is from 2002), removal of the CMWS is not unrealistic considering the thumbnail for the Wikipedia page of the AH-64 features an AH-64D flying in Iraq without it equipped. (See attached picture or look up the page). I don't know how tied to other parts of the aircraft CMWS is or how easy it would be to disable it but it would be a nice small addition.
-
Well i have to ask it. Can we have the iPad on Heuy like the Gazelle? And the NS430 mounted also? . P
-
This would be a map heavily revolving around Soviet aircraft. The Chechen wars would be optimal for singleplayer and coop multiplayer COIN warfare, while the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflicts were more conventional and saw air-to-air combat too - which would make them suitable for red vs. red aircraft PvP multiplayer. Definitely a very versatile map. The map would cover several time frames and conflicts: Armenia-Azerbaijan 1988-1994 as well as 2020 and the First Chechen War 1994-1996 and Second Chechen War 1999-2009 along with a lot of other clashes in that southern region. From what we got (coming) in DCS module wise were active in this region: Su-25, MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-29, Mi-8, Mi-24, L-39 for Russia as well as Armenia and Azerbeijan. Chechenia also is the only conflict where the Ka-50 was actually employed, so this map could be the historically correct playground for this helicopter. We got so many maps focusing on western aircraft and conflicts, i think it would be great to have a map highlighting eastern aircraft only. Map would be roughly 700x700km detailed area (same as Sinai map) and afaik cover all relevant airports for those conflicts: Mozdok, Budyonnovsk, Kizlyar and Makhachkala for Russia. For Azerbaijan: Baku, Dollyar, Kyurdamir, Sitalchay, Nasosnaya. For Armenia: Erebuni, Shirak, Arzni. There is also the chance of properly redoing Georgia, as the current map is quite inaccurate/generic and also missing important airbases like Marneulie. Maybe it could be even extended to the west later (once TDK allows) to include all of Georgia. The old Caucasus map could stay in as a "low-resolution" free asset, the way more detailed remake and extension be a full price module. edit: if there was conflicts with ED due to (re)doing Georgia btw, i think this region could be left out/low-resolution. Main focus should be Chechenia, Armenia, Azerbaijan. New Georgia would be a big cherry on top.
-
Hello everyone! I like Soviet 3rd generation aircraft much more than "computer planes", so the MiG-23MLA impressed me, and I'm waiting for it. But what about the MiG-25? The legendary Soviet interceptor, which was used in 5 big conflicts (Afghanistan, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, the Persian Gulf), was on service in 16 countries. The fastest interceptor, which was designed to intercept strategic bombers, but was also used against conventional jet aircraft. There are 2 versions that I think should be in DCS: MiG-25PD (interceptor) and MiG-25RB (reconnaissance/supersonic bomber). Both options are really cool. I know about the maximum limit of 5G, but this aircraft is not a dogfighter like the Su-27 or even the MiG-21. But it's super fast (M=2.8 also find info about 3400km/h) and can intercept targets at high altitude (maybe even an F-14A flying at 40,000 feet). He doesn't have a lot of amos on his wings, but if you check the information about him on the wiki, you will be surprised by his abilities and invulnerability. Also, I can't tear myself away from not watching photos and videos with this Soviet monster. There are some documentation about it in web. Can be equipped with 4*R-60(R-60M) on 2 outer points+2*R-40/5 tons of bomb. Can track 6 targets at the same time. Also can be used to intercept standard trgts (B-52) on many servers. Please do Foxbat in DCS. It really deserves to be on the Cold War`s front line (and not only).
-
I'd like to bring up a point that may have been mentioned before, but I believe it's worth addressing. When engaging Air-to-Ground (A/G) mode on the F/A-18, there's an automatic switch of radars that I find inconvenient. Specifically, I suggest that Eagle Dynamics consider removing the automatic switch of the right DDI to Ground Radar when A/G mode is selected. Personally, I prefer the ability to manually change radars based on my needs. Typically, when I choose A/G mode, it's either to utilize A/G armaments, check my air-to-ground armaments, or configure them in-flight. An additional issue arises when transitioning from the ATFLIR on my right DDI to A/G setup. The automatic switch to ground radar upon selecting A/G mode is not only undesired but also disruptive to the flow of my activities. In summary, I propose the removal of this mechanic as it proves more annoying than beneficial. Having control over radar changes would enhance the overall user experience by eliminating unwanted interruptions during critical moments.
-
It would be useful if it was possible to place Irregular Armed Forces in the Missions, such as Hamas Hizbollah Huti Al-Qedah ISIS PLO -
Firstly, I'm not suggesting to simplify the systems of the Apache, or to turn this into an arcade shooter or that action mode that was part of original Blackshark, or even Flaming Cliffs. That would be an injustice to the beautiful features of this sim. What' I'd like to have, is the full sim experience. But without the investment into a HOTAS, seats, desks, justification to family members etc Yes I know that's part of the experience and if you're lucky enough to have that viable in your life, then you have my admiration. But that's just not the case for most people. Although a console controller, and mouse and keyboard, well they are inexpensive and unobtrusive, and many folks already have these. What I envision is: Flight controls, and firing of weapons on the controller. Keyboard for advanced functions, that aren't needed in the heat of combat. Mouse for looking around the cockpit and pressing buttons and switches. For the above to work, the flight model would need to be greatly simplified to make it forgiving for the inaccuracy and short throw of a control pad. Ghost Recon Wildlands is one example of extremely easy helicopter controls (although perhaps too easy as it removes the hovering and floating feeling of a helicopter, but it's a good starting point). You can put the controller down, and then use mouse and keyboard to do cockpit work. I would also like to suggest combining the mouse look and cursor into one - similar to first person shooter, where mouse movement changes where you look, and there is crosshair in the middle of the screen to point at buttons and switches. Given that these input devices are so prevalent, it could be a good business decision for Eagle Dynamics to increase the accessibility of DCS to a larger audience. perhaps even console support (they do support mouse and keyboard btw) and also playing on the go. Laptop and a controller, and you can sim from anywhere! Especially in a multi-seat aircraft, it'll open it up to that friend that wants to be part your crew but won't the input hardware for the aforementioned factors. DCS is already quite a niche product, why further limit it's reach because of the input requirements? If you look at Steam, there's clearly a big market for realistic and detailed milsim games. Thanks for reading, happy flying, and happy holidays -
My squadron has several 70+ pilots (2 @ 80yo), and while I expect most of my squadron pilots to be able to AAR in their 'primary' airframe, I don't have the expectation that my older pilots are able to. For many of them it is their first SIM and first video game period. It would be nice if we had an option to allow an easy mode AAR so we could design more of our campaign missions with AAR. I would suggest either an autopilot AAR, or preferably ( and probably easier to implement ) a radius based AAR, if you are within X meters of the tanker you get refueled, only allowing AAR within a certain cone behind the tanker would be good also. Ebein Tides VFA-106 Gladiators
-
So I have been playing dcs world for 2 yrs now. SO far i have learnt the Jeff and uh 1 , above all that i still struggle to find time to enjoy dcs world . I recently decided to visit the old relics of ED and i found the original black shark from 2008 . From what i was impressed was that it had a simplified avionics mode which basically made it a nearly arcade game and it was so fun. I request the ED team to please release this same mode for dcs world keeping in view the limitations of the game engine. i have posted this question in so many forums and everyone is toxic about it. this video from glowingAmraam shows the simplified mode beatifully...................... I want an ED developer to answer my question. thanks in advance
-
Personally, I’m just getting into DCS World after having avoided it for many years. I first discovered it when I found DCS: Black Shark 1 while searching for flight sims I wanted to try as a youngster, but I didn’t buy it, and I’m glad I didn’t do so at the time - I certainly didn’t have the patience to play any flight sim properly in my days as a teenager. Now, however, I’ve picked up DCS World and intend to purchase the Flaming Cliffs, A-10C and Black Shark 2 modules during the summer sale on Steam. However, I’ve quickly come to realize that the DCS series is, for the most part, all about them ‘study sims’, which is arguably it’s greatest strength as a franchise. And yet, this also becomes it’s one of it’s greatest weaknesses as well. Why? Let me explain a bit, hopefully before the poo flinging starts. :D I’m not saying that there’s anything wrong with DCS focusing on high-fidelity aircraft models that allow pilots to operate their virtual aircraft exactly like a real-life pilot would, far from it. That kind of fidelity and attention to detail is great and really inspiring, and there is obviously a real sense of accomplishment when you master an aircraft. The problem, is that that kind of mastery takes time and effort, two things which some people don’t have or aren’t interested in, and that’s fine too. There’s also the fact that the human mind can only retain so much information, and it often requires constant practice to do so effectively. Since each aircraft takes a large amount of time to master (or even just learn how to use it relatively effectively), many prospective players may only buy one or two modules and leave it at that, since they won’t have the time or patience for more. Not only that, but there is definitely a market out there for simmers who just want to pick up a combat sim and spend a weekend blowing things up and generally just having fun during their small bit of downtime, but DCS can’t really cater to them and thus they avoid it altogether. Considering that DCS is an excellent game, and one of the only modern combat flight sims focused on the modern era currently still supported, that doesn’t sound like something I want to hear. Flaming Cliffs is probably one of the first modules a new player should buy, and for several reasons. For one, the aircraft contained within are easy to use, and can be good for new player to earn their wings with. Not only that, but FC3 is one of the most cost-effective packs when it comes to acquiring aircraft. While a single, high-fidelity airplane like the Mirage 2000C can cost anywhere from $50 to now even $80 for the Hornet, FC3 gives a player five different aircraft to play with for the same price as a single high-fidelity model. And not only that, but the aircraft provided are easier to use, something that encourages the player to fly a larger number of aircraft, which could, in turn, encourage them to buy more modules and thereby increase the profits of ED and its associates. Making more low-fidelity aircraft for the game would be a sound business decision - more modules would be sold, and a wider player base would be created as more casual simmers are drawn into the fold, possibly to move on and become study simmers once they find the time and motivation. Another thing I’d like to see, desperately so, is for aircraft developers to build in and/or retrofit ‘easy modes’ into high fidelity aircraft modules - kind of like what ED did with the Ka-50. This would make each aircraft released available and attractive to both study-simmers and Sunday simmers, increasing profits and thereby driving the creation of more content for the game as a whole. There’s nothing wrong with that, is there? To make a long story short, I’d really like to see the developers add a number of brand new low-fidelity aircraft to the franchise, alongside ‘easy-mode’ setups for all of the current and future high-fidelity aircraft modules. That way the game becomes more accessible for those who want a less intensive/in-depth simulation, and making much easier for many of us to pick up and enjoy a wider selection of aircraft modules. :thumbup: -
Russians have declassified their Smart Bombs. We are waiting for Devs to update DCS accordingly so we the sim-pilot people can blow shute up here at DCS in style and precision! Roger Doger, over & out END OF TRANSMISSION:
-
I just found out there is a animation for the crew to bail out of the Apache like with the Huey and I got to give props to ED for it but it does leave 1 question. If ED put the effort into not only having the M4s in the cockpit but also having a small level in interactivity with them, why does the crew not grab said rifle on the way out?
-
HELLO DCS FANS WOULD IT BE GREAT THTA WE CAN SELECT THE PARKING SPOT ON THE CARRIER FOR FLIGHT NOT ON RUNWAY FOR AI FLIGHT AS WE DO ON A GROUND AIRPORT? IF I MISS IT DO NOT HESITATE TO TELL ME HOW WE CAN DO THAT FLY SAFE STEPHANE
-
i said this a while back. Being a Star Citizen backer from many years ago, they offered hangar modules where you could purchase different hangars and view your purchased aircraft. I think this would be a great addition to DCS and another revenue stream. 1. Give us better fleshed out FPS mechanics for free. 2. offer a free base hangar feature that replaces the main menu. All your aircraft are there. Just walk up to the one you wish to fly and GET IN! 3. Offer purchasable, increasingly elaborate hangars. 4. Customizable characters with purchasable accouterments. 5. Profit! The free benefits of a fleshed out FPS greatly outweigh the monetization. The Combined Arms modules then becomes a very valuable module with an Arma-like experience. ED just hire me!
-
P137 of the manual describes the FFD display option, which is marked as N/I. Not clear whether this will ever be implemented, but if would make the digital map much more useful. It wouldn't even need to show all of the features the real aircraft is capable of - even just water, roads, urban areas, forests and ideally political boundaries would be awesome. I guess it might be quite a lot of work to construct this for each map, but actually I'd be delighted if we could have the F10 map on the TSD somehow, even if it isn't realistic. Using the charts are fine, but if you zoom in much it disappears, and while you can set the map scale independently of the zoom scale it is immediately lost as soon as you change the zoom so is a faff.
-
a mid to late 1980s/early 90s F-18A would really help fill out those iconic scenarios and conflicts the earlier hornets took part in like desert storm/ operation el dorado canyon/operation deny flight etc that we cant quite do with our 2006 F-18C due to advanced systems we cant reliably remove or limit in the mission editor like the jhmcs or link-16 and missing equipment we've already been told wont be getting on our current hornet like the nitehawk tgp on top of other differences like the radar or engines an F-18A from this timeframe would complement our current 18C very well by giving us a much better reach into virtually any legacy hornet operation throughout all of it's service life with the A filling in early scenarios and the C taking good care of everything after the year 2000, give us better access to simulating some more export hornet users like spain, canada and australia who all used the 18A as their main fighter aircraft for a substantial ammount of time and finish perfecting the DCS legacy hornet experience with both variants being relevant to their own thing and with little space for one to end up eclipsing the other. If money was a concern with this idea something similar to what heatblur plans to do with their naval phantom variants or something similar to what was done with the A-10C2 or BS3 upgrades could be considered and the 18A could be added as something like a separate add-on or module rather than be fully integrated into the F-18C module, the interest for something like this seems to exist from a good part of the community given the ammount of content and discourse there is around these earlier operations and conflicts involving the earlier F-18s both in multiplayer and singleplayer environments so i think it would be liked and do well either way
-
not planned Sphere Entertainment Venue to be added sometime??
The_Nephilim posted a topic in Wish List
Hey Guys, I was wondering when ED is gonna add the Sphere in Vegas.. if you dont know have a look it is pretty cool: Sphere Entertainment Venue -
Just a thought/idea, if this could be fun to boost the DCS community, without reducing profits: Lending ones own planes to other players. For a "shipping" fee to be payed to ED. Allow player A) to lend his/her purchased planes to player B) Add a "shipping" fee to pay to / determined by ED (maybe ~10% module price?) Player A) selects if he/her or player B) pays the fee Player B) confirms the transaction Player A) can't use the plane then while player B) has it Player A) can however reclaim the plane at any time free of charge After reclaiming player A) can lend the plane again for the same "shipping" fee to other players, or use it again themselves Main goals/motivations: Having an easy, uncomplicated way to have an ad-hoc way to play/try DCS with a friend who is new to DCS. "ad-hoc" meaning spontaneously, with no commitment and with no downside other than the "shipping fee". Right now doing "ad-hoc" is a bit tricky because of the prices for full purchases or not wanting to "waste" the free trial. Being able to transfer/spread bought planes to different accounts to be used on different PCs for local events (LAN parties, DCS showcasing events). Where it would be infeasible to make extra accounts / purchases just for this weekend event. Interaction between people, enhancing the community spirit. Other (potential) benefits: Would make less popular planes (like jet trainers?) more popular: I'd be less hesitant to purchase (especially trainer jets) if I knew that I could lend them to others, that they wouldn't become a mostly unused, "wasted" purchase that accumulates dust and rust in my garage. Makes it feel more like a real, physical asset than a digital commodity, leading to more engagement / perceived value? From an economical standpoint the trick(y part) would be to find the sweet spot for the "shipping fee". Where it would overall lead to more customers/purchases. --- I was also wondering if adding a fixed (maximum?) leasing time would make sense. Or as an option, for a discount on the "shipping" fee. But I think that would defeat the purpose of being an uncomplicated/easy option, where you don't have to think / calculate / worry about the best options too much. So I'm not sure if that would make sense. Another thought was whether it would make sense to then allow purchasing identical modules multiple times for the purpose of lending. I'm mostly thinking of a local flight (sim) club scenario who maintains a room of PCs / sim gear for its members. (But not sure if this could lead to some weird secondary market effects? But maybe that could be prevented by disallowing third parties selling leases in the general terms and conditions.)
-
Hi gents, in the latest video Wags says But what does that mean? They add flight datalink, so I guess we can see other Apaches. Can we also share targets? The second sentence I interpret that there will be no other aircraft (F18, F16,A10) visible on the TSD, no target sharing and not even displaying friendly units, like the green crosses in the A10?
.jpg.dc2505692a15b3ed54ee5748c23a76cb.jpg)
