Search the Community

Hi ED, I just noticed, when you sort the user files by date, it sorts by date of the original upload. However, it doesn't take into account recent updates to the mod. Example at hand - Devrim's mods (currently 32) and his recent update of the Gazelles cockpit texture mod. I'd suggest, that sorting by date should show the most recent updates and not be sorting by a - at times - meaningless original upload date. Thank you for considering!

let me start with a few kind words toward the Mi-24, i love the Mi-24 module, i was an early adopter (pre-ordering it) and its probably the aircraft ive flown the most, i know it is the helicopter ive flown the most, Petrovitch is a lovely co-pilot and is quite helpful in combat and with a decent enough selection of weapons it makes the Mi-24 quite effective against most targets . . . but it could be better, so here are the things that i think are missing and Wishlist of things that should be added most of the following requires no elaboration, when i feel its needed i will put it in (parentheses), and if something is a joke it will be in italics first we will start with the fixes 1- Copilot-gunner multicrew jitteriness (when i enable the CPG's body he jitters alot like the animations are broken and when i move the stick his hand doesn't move with it nor does the check watch animation work) 2-external pilot head movement animations sometimes break (some times the pilots head will just be fixed looking down and to the left, i have experienced this while with a MC CPG and i was in the pilots seat) 2nd, onto the missing features (where did they go?) 1- working cargo bay lights (the switch in the cockpit does nothing both in blue and white modes) 2- working helmet visors (when you lower the helmet visor it should have some level of sunglasses effect so you can fly into the sun without it blinding you) 3-Air to ground mode for the R-60M's 4- the ability to "eject", to jump out of the hind 5- full manual (im sure it will come on release, but i am just noteing it here so its not forgotten) as for the updates, there is one in particular 1- better/more accurate blade tip lights, (i dont know what they look like irl, but in photos they look a lot more like 1 long round streak than the 5 individual lights) now for my favourite section, the Reasonable Wishlist of features, (most of these are also on my fellow hind pilots wish lists and most aren't out of the realm of possibility) 1- reduced loadout ATGM's (having one ATGM per rack on each side, some one who is assumed to be an Mi-24 dev said that they wont waste time on "exotic loadout's" but this is both bad reasoning, and untrue, its not hard to find picture's and videos from Afghanistan and Syria where Mi-24's are carrying only 2 ATGM's one on each side, it is a historic and common loadout and something i have many photos of, the apache has reduced hellfire's, there is no reason the Mi-24 shouldn't) 2- reduced loadout S-8 rockets, (i have been informed that in certain higher altitude parts of Afghanistan Mi-24's flew with only half filled S-8, pods 10 rockets per side, due to MTOW limitations) 3- ability to rotate the Pilot and CPG fans side-to-side (the brackets they are mounted on allow for this movement, along with translational movement, and in the front seat when you line up the gunsight with the bore sight the gunsight and cockpit fan physically conflict with one another, the blades clipping though part of the CPG's gunsight, this would also mean it wouldn't get in your way so much) 4- the ability to remove the PZU (PyleZashchitnoe Ustroystvo) dust filters (i have no idea if this would effect engine performance, intuition tells me it would only slightly, and it would allow the engines to be damaged by dust, the main reason i ask for it is because it looks cool and there are many photos of Mi-24P flying in Russia without PZU even in modern times) 5- PKT/RPK/AK-74 door gunner options with 1985 period correct clothing (PKT, RPK and AK-74 are all more historically accurate to the Mi-24 than the Kord (time wise the Mi-24P came out in 1981 and the Kord in 1998), as well as the PKT, RPK and AK-74 would allow Hind crews to not only carry more rounds of ammunition for the same weight and space in the cargo bay as well as it would allow Hind crews to have Door gunners on both sides at the same time, meaning the door gunners would be more effective against infantry and light targets (wider angles of fire), also as the PKT, PKM and AK-74 fire off the window mounts it would mean that the crew in the cargo bay would be more protected) (period correct kits for the older guns would be nice instead of modern 6B Ratnik kit (2013) on the Kord gunner) 6- remove the door gunner payload and artificial angle limitations (there is no reason i shouldn't be able to load GUV-8700 or Rocket pods on the in-board pylons while having door gunners, just dont shoot at your own weapons and you still have a large angle of fire, around where the pylon mounted weapon is, also the Mi-24's Kord gun mounts get artificially restricted when you load weapons on the wings, it doesn't just stop you from aiming the Kord at the weapons but also at the ground and sky below and above the pylon mounted weapons, effectively stopping you from aiming rearward) 7- Kord PSO scope (as it seem the Kord isnt going any where, nor should it, i think we should get a PSO scope option as door gunners commonly use PSO's on helo door guns, the mount is already modelled on the Kord in game and it would help on getting those long range shots) 8- P-50T Bomb (they are a training bomb, pretty useless in combat but can be used to mark targets and train bombing with, i think they would be cool to have and wouldn't be much effort to add.) now for the less reasonable but still possible features that would make the Hind feel more alive and add to immersion 1- Soviet Field binoculars for the Pilot and CPG (so they can spot targets at longer ranges, just a simple 3d model of a binocular case in the cockpit, click on it and boom you have bino's up at your face like the NVG's so you can see father out) 2- CPG able to use AK-74U out the window/hatch (seems the Kiowa is getting it, it doesn't seem that far out of the realm of possibility, it wouldn't add that much but it would add some great laughs when flying with friends) 3- 3D NS-430 for the front and/or rear seat (potentially as a payed addon like the rest of the 3D NS-430's, it would be a nice to have for post 2001 afghan flying (ANA got its Mi-24's around the same time the NS-430 was produced AFAIK)) 4- CPG kneeboard map and E6-B Pilot Flight Computer / Soviet Equivalent (it would be nice to give the CPG more to do, so i say give him a slide rule and a map, and make him navigate though the valleys and passes of Afghanistan) Now for a few Pics explaining some of the things i mentioned in the above image we can see the window mounts for the PKV/RPK/AK-74 door guns, it would be lovely to have a door gunner on each side at the same time, also you can see one of the dome lights i mentioned on the roof the above 2 images are examples of 1 ATGM being carried on each side, the top image is in Syria and the bottom image is in Afghanistan (i have many more images and you can find many more with a simple search, in the image above you can see a Mi-24P (i think) with out PZU's, looks lame doesn't it. in the above image you can see a Mi-8 with the blade tip lights turned on (i couldn't find a pic of the Mi-24 with the incandescent), instead of being short separate 5 lights the lights should be a solid disk in the above image we can see a Mi-24 armed with P-50T's in the above image you can see the CPG fan conflicting with the window glass and the gunsight. in the above images we can see PKV door guns on the hind, these would be a lovely addition especially if we can get one on each side allowing us to fly through afghan valley's and shoot out of booth sides at insurgents at the same time, also it would allow us to carry a larger number of bullets so we would have longer durations of fire from the door guns making them more effective even if the rounds have lower/no explosive mass and less range in final, i think that is all, i might have forgot something, if you want more evidence of Mi-24's carrying one ATGM each side i have many photos and some videos ill happily provide in comment's, and if any one wants and extra detail about anything ill be happy to help, right, now off to fly the Mi-24 with a friend (an honourable mention, the L-166V, adlest having an option to show the physical thing with the cover over it for those sweet sweet soviet-afghan and UN screenshots and Missions)

As we see more and more multicrew modules become available, it is becoming apparent that there is a gap in the DCS API that does not allow individual players (in a multicrew aircraft) to interact with the game. I would like to propose a SLOT based commands. The purpose of this is so it would allow an individual player to have various aspects of the user interaction experience with DCS be customizable to that specific user. I propose a variant for the following DCS Mission Scripting Environment API commands: Adds a command to the "F10 Other" radio menu allowing players to run specified scripting functions for a specific player missionCommands.addCommandForSlot(number slotId , string name , table/nil path , function functionToRun , any anyArguement) missionCommands.addSubMenuForSlot(number slotId , string name , table path) missionCommands.removeItemForSlot(number slotId , table/nil path ) add / remove OtherCommandForSlot would allow specific players to interact and customize the game or request information specific to them. trigger.action.addOtherCommandForSlot(number slotId , string name , string userFlagName , number userFlagValue ) trigger.action.removeOtherCommandForSlot(number slotId , string name ) outTextForSlot would be amazingly useful to allow specific players to receive information from the game and not interrupt other members of the crew. trigger.action.outTextForSlot(number slotId , string text , number displayTime , boolean clearview) outSoundForSlot would be very handy, if a member of a crew wanted to get notifications for something that other crew members would not be interested in. trigger.action.outSoundForSlot(number slotId , string soundfile ) markToSlot would allow for marks specific to a player be available. trigger.action.markToSlot(number id , string text , table vec3 , number slotId , boolean readOnly, string message)

Hi, I am not sure that has anyone asked to have the group power and air supply unit for F-14 while starting up? I saw F-4 has one from Youtube. Thanks.

Please consider updating the Shkval graphics. Currently, with the contrast and brightness settings as they are, it is very difficult to spot targets. They barely stand out from the background, and everything just looks white. Frequently, the sun glare just makes it completely unreadable. I think a lot of these issues come from DCS core being updated, while the Su-25 T was not. I know that the sensor's capability is limited as it's just a TV, but the Skhval on the Ka-50 is so much better in that regard. Would it be possible to copy the way it looks there, or at least change the default brightness/contrast settings to match the Ka-50 default? Or add the option to change these settings?

Hello, the last couple of weeks ive flowen the UH 1 a lot... and i noticed that the graphics are not up to date and the crew could be substantially overhauled. I thought about crew coms when the door gunner pick something up etc... And i still want to see the flechette rockets with the orange smoke when they explode. The Uh1 would definitely benefit from new Graphics Lightning and shadows... Hope this catches EDs eyes and they work on that... Thanks

Hello stormtroopers, Watching videos how virtual pilots honor the fuel economy and how ofthen are returning to the base after the missions, followign plane would be ideal to add to the game... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yokosuka_MXY-7_Ohka

Hey Everyone and ED, I have not found this request before, so I'm setting a new topic for it. I would love to see a public tracker showing aircraft that have been wish listed and what their interest level has been. A change to the wishlist functionality was deployed previously - it was for us users to Rate a wish listed item to show interest (the bubbles or stars in the upper right of a topic). Is there a way to turn this into an automated graph with a count of ratings? For Example - one row would be the P38 Lighting on the wishlist. This would have a bar showing the amount of ratings given by us users. This count of ratings would identity it's level of interest and how high/low the interest is in comparison to other wish listed aircraft. Further - it can help us provide more specific data when wish-listing an AC, for example requesting a Fixed Wing AC vs a Rotorcraft; providing more specific conditions to narrow the report. That would allow us to identify what planes vs helo's people are interested in. I'm asking for this to see if we can get a visual representation of what AC have a lot of public interest. This would require clean up as modules that may be on that list are deployed to production or chosen for recreation. I don't have all the answers, but I'm assuming this forum already has some version of tracking this information for the developers on the back end. And the graph wouldn't need to be all encompassing - maybe just the top 10 items. Thoughts? Opinions? I'm just really interested in a single, automated if possible, visual representation of what people are interested in the most. Right now, I can mark an item as interested - but how does it stack up to say - the B25 wishlisted item? Or the H60 wishlisted item? This may be a heavy lift, and I understand if that's a no go right now, but I still want to get the request out there.

POLL

i suggest ED add option to edit kneeboard ( typing ) in kneeboard during game play atleast make last page editable or available to write notes on it . it will be very handful to write important notes specially for old planes ex. Mig-21

No seriously, can we please have falling snow again in DCS 2.7 please? I love snow. I think if you're going to fight wars in Georgia or frankly anywhere in the Russian sphere of influence you should be prepared to fly and fight thru the snow. We had snow as an option at least on 23 May on open beta as per below:

One day i'd like to see some better wingtip vortices. I would like to compare how they are in DCS now and how they are IRL. Observation: DCS wingtip vortices are always happening at the same parameters. My guess is when pulling a sertain amount of G's. I know it would be a big request to replicate vortices in DCS like they would be irl. But in my oppinion they could be a bit more dynamic. Like you see in the video above, they can be; -Wing indipendant -Remain stationary for a brief moment after coming out of a pull -Wrinkle factor I think, improving this. And having overwing vape effect, LEX, and soon to come mach cone, will truly help improve immersion even more! Sincerely, DCS enjoyer.

Which of these helicopters would you like to be considered as the next module to be developed? I've put in the list modules with only attack capacity or poor transport capacity. I'm curious to know what you think. Or maybe you feel more the need of a beautiful transport helicopter?

Ok, so I am a HUGE fan of the P-61 Black Widow that Northrop developed during the Second World War, for lots of reasons. Despite being introduced late in the war due to some production issues on Northrops end, it was fairly successful despite existing in a very target deficient environment, and was well loved by the crews that operated in her. It was used both as an interceptor, and ground pounder. Despite having a post war reputation for being sluggish, this was not the opinion at the time among those who flew her. In one instance it famously out ran an RAF Mosquito in a friendly competition. This is to say despite its size, it was a very capable aircraft in the heavy fighter/nightfighter roll. Unfortunately the early A models were plagued with issues that limited their ability and applicability. Thankfully, later A models, and especially the B/C models fixed most of the issues it had that often are only revealed with combat data. This is a long winded way to arrive at why I believe it's a perfect fit for DCS. With the upcoming release of the infamous de Havilland Mosquito, the precedent for heavy fighters is officially established. Obviously I wouldn't expect the P-61 to be the next heavy fighter in the game, as there are other more influential heavy fighters from other nations that should be implemented. Both the Japanese and Germans fielded large fleets of diverse heavy fighters for a variety of mission types. But, the P-61 should in my opinion be seriously considered because... It offers several unique gameplay opportunities. The first being aerial radar. It was the first plane specifically designed to take advantage of radar. It also had a gunner who sat aft of the cockpit. Both the gunner and the radio/radar operator could aim and control the dorsal 360° turret, that had 90° elevation. They could aim it with swiveling posts attached to their seats that had gyroscopic collimator sight assemblies, and the triggers. The pilot also had the option to lock the turret forward for more forward fire power. Needless to say both the radar/radio operator and the gunner would provide fairly unique gameplay opportunities compared to other WW2 planes, especially among fighters/heavy fighters. Imagine you and your buddies are dispatched at night to intercept a flight of bombers. You take off and climb to altitude. Your buddy on the radar guides you to your target, then you dive down on your surprised foe as you and the gunner open up on them with your 4 20 mm cannons and 4 .50 browing machine guns. Or, its day time and you are dispatched with a few thousand lbs of bombs to raid enemy supply lines and support allied efforts on the front. The team dynamics, and the mission types you could run present unique gameplay loops and I believe that would be only a good thing for the game. This is all to say that the P-61 is an incredibly beautiful, and unique aircraft that would bring its own flavor to a game that seems to have been designed to implement it. Its unfortunate production issues prevented it from being implemented earlier in the war, as I believe like the Mosquito it would have proved to be a versatile platform, and would have a similar lasting mythology associated with it. Build this aircraft for the game, and I think you would have a lot of new fans of one of the coolest planes ever built. I know I for one would spend a irresponsible amount of money for the chance to sit in her cockpit.

The most recent update to Normandy was well received: DCS 2.7.4.9632 Open Beta - 21.07.2021 Would Ugra Media Consider adding the GTM: Normandy Texture enhancements by Barthek in the next update to the map? Suggestion 1: - Fall Season with trees would be nice Suggestion 2: - Winter Textures similar to Normandy Winter Textures by Revi possible to add in future as well?

Below are a few items I think would add a huge benefit to gamepad users (and even other types of controller users) in DCS: Add Mouse Movement Binding Options to Axis Commands (along with sensitivity sliders). This adds two major benefits: Considering we already have the ability to bind Left and Right Mouse Click, also adding Mouse X/Y control with a gamepad axis would enhance this further by allowing the player to interact with the majority of cockpit controls. A "free" by-product of this is the introduction of Relative Camera controls when used in conjunction with "Force Cursor On/Off". Toggling Cursor On/Off would allow the player to switch between Cursor control and Relative Camera movement. Currently only Absolute Camera movement is possible. Allow UI Layer Actions to Double Bind with Modifier Assignments. Since modifiers by themselves don't actually do anything, it should be safe to allow them to also function as Left/Right Mouse Click as desired, especially when used in conjunction with "Force Cursor On/Off". This can be a confusing topic, so feel free to reach out to me for clarification. Example: Left Bumper set to Mouse Right Click, UI Layer modifier, and module modifier all at the same time. Allow Mouse Scroll Up and Down to be Bound to an Axis (along with sensitivity sliders). This should cover missing cockpit intractability when trying to click and drag items like the Hornet's Radar Altimeter knob or the Viper's Backup ADI knob. With the above additions, gamepad users will be able to fully utilize even full fidelity aircraft. For more details on why this is beneficial, see the below video I put together for this very same wishlist: DCS definitely is not "meant" or designed to be played with a console mindset; however, despite that I've found ways to make a gamepad completely viable. As a result I was able to, ironically, eliminate one of the major barriers of entry for this free-to-play game: cost. In my opinion, no one should have to invest hundreds of dollars into flying-themed gaming controllers just to even play DCS. What if they find out they don't like DCS after all? It's not like they'll be able to play racing games, fighting games, or first person shooters with a low-to-mid level HOTAS at $169.59 USD. At least they can still use that gamepad they have lying around; or alternatively, maybe one day they'll find they love DCS so much that they're willing to purchase a high-end HOTAS. Just so they can play DCS the way it's intended. My goal is to open up DCS to as many people as possible. The more people that play DCS, the more potential there is for money flowing into DCS, which results in more development towards DCS by Eagle Dynamics and 3rd Parties. Heck, even HOTAS makers would benefit from a larger player pool. People just need to be shown that DCS is accessible in the first place. It's hard, sure, but at least accessible. ___________________________________________________________________ See the below link for my album of Xbox Controller Layouts: https://imgur.com/a/0y4YsYp

I wish we had a wishlist FAQ or FAWI (Frequently Asked Wishlist Items). Let me help you with obvious ones, based on already given answers by devs: Q: Why don't we have Modern Redfor aircraft modeled fully? A: Short answer: not enough technical documentation available and no agreement from Redfor governments (no, it doesn't matter that some NATO country has them). The newest in current development is Mig-23MLA by Razbam. The most modern ED is considering for the moment is early Mig-29. Q: Can we have X aircraft modeled? A: It depends first and foremost on profitability and then on thorough technical documentation available. Only then devs can even think about it and try to get a manufacturer license. No plans currently to make any heavy or civilian. Q: Can DCS use other company's engine to get whole world map or high-res satellite imagery and terraing data to generate any map? A: No, it's not feasible. DCS is very different in that regard that it needs for every building, tree and vehicle possibility for collision and destruction. Q: Can we have more FC3 type aircraft? A: Not in DCS. There is MAC (Modern Air Combat) coming for that type of modeling. Q: Can we have any of the FC3 aircraft made Full fidelity modules? A: There are currently no plans for this. Q: What is currently in the development? A: Here is unofficial roadmap. Q: Can ED implement X renedering engine or new GPU supported effects? A: ED is currently implementing Vulkan API but it's still a very long way to go. It's generally a bad idea to implement any hardware supported effects that come from only one GPU vendor. Please add yours. Maybe we will get something eventually stickied. I can edit or add some links. Please don't add your wishes here or discuss the already given answers as it's not a place for that. Let the stuff rephrase it however they wish.

Ability to set "Landing" and "Landing & Refueling" waypoints on FARPs, in the Mission Editor, and making sure that the AI can use these waypoints for AI only flights.

see those terrains? we can have some snow mountains less like the "heavy creamed" in black sea, and we can both have the Blu and Red territory, it was quite a hot zone in the cold war era. What do you think guys?

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.

I made a mission for my Squadron (Arrorian Imperial Navy) and I made some neutral aircraft client. When the mission loaded no one could select neutral, only red or blue. It's not a big deal, as it was our server so we could just fight one another if we wanted. (It's was a private dogfight practice) But I wondered if there was a way around this. If not, I'd like to request that ED make it possible to fly as neutral in multi-player. (No, I have have no idea how complicated or simple this might be, I'm just making the request.) Thanks, and see you in the skies

(Feb 28, 2022) RG2021 With the DH.98 Mosquito FB MkVI being released last year, the plausibility of a twin-engined, multicrew aircraft is no longer a question, so, my proposal for the next twin-engined WW2 aircraft, if not simply the next WW2 aircraft, is the P-61 Black Widow. Reasons for this suggestion are plentiful, so, without further ado, here are my reasons why a P-61B Black Widow would make for a revolutionary and impressive module. 1.) Versatility. Some may think the P-61 is simply a night-fighter, and that couldn’t be further from the truth. In reality, the Black Widow was fielded as a multirole aircraft, capable of attacking ground targets and air targets with equal means of authority. For ground attack, the P-61 could carry approximately 4,000lbs of bombs and up to 6x 5” HVAR rockets. And, of course, 4x 20mm Hispano cannons and 4x .50cal heavy machine guns. 2.) Radar. DCS is yet to include a radar-equipped WW2 aircraft. What better to start with than the very first aircraft designed from the ground up to include radar? Equipped with the SCR-720 radar with a range of approximately 5 miles, the P-61 is certainly capable of delivering its venomous bite with precision, despite complete darkness. 3.) P-61B Restoration! Since 1991, the Mid-Atlantic Air Museum has been restoring a P-61B to flightworthy condition. Once the restoration is complete, that would make it so 1 of 4 known P-61s to exist. This would be the perfect opportunity to bring such an iconic yet under-loved aircraft to DCS! Was the P-61 the best fighter of the war? No. Did it have an astonishing kill count? Nope. Is it the most important or influential aircraft of the war? Nah. But it makes up for this with its sheer innovative design and cool factor. I think a P-61 of any model, but especially a B or C, would make for a fantastic DCS module, and would bring a whole new experience to the greatest flight sim to ever have been developed. Imagine this: you set up an EWR in the Mission Editor, then you and your radar-operating buddy take to the skies in the middle of darkness. The EWR you set up finds and relays the position of an enemy aircraft. Once you get close enough, your buddy manages to pick up the aircraft on your radar. He guides you in to the target. The enemy aircraft has entered the Black Widow’s web, and there is no escape. You unleash her four Hispanos and .50cals, ripping apart your victim. Splash! Thank you for your time and I hope this is taken into account when choosing what WW2 aircraft to bring next, or at least what twin-engined aircraft to bring next. Though I do know Mr. Grey loves the F6F… -RG2021 (Rhys)

We know, in the 2022 & Beyond video there is a coordinate that contains a lot of meaning, Of course we don't know exactly what the coordinates mean other than ED. But when we hope it's allowed, right? I made some theater map lists that might be new theaters or references to Dev. Afghanistan Map, Reference , Why? Of course there is possible Apache & Hind scenarios. Bosnia Map, Reference, Why? There is some scenario that can be recreate and also the vegetation and environment is different. I think it's including Balkans ofc Indonesia Map, Reference, Why? because DCS asset are possible to recreate several conflict in Indonesia. Vietnam Map, Reference, Why? with upcoming F-4 and A-6, it's possible to create several scenarios there, also we've Huey too! Additionally from me, Indonesia and Vietnam are quite potential with DCS modules and assets that currently exist. This is it! What do you think guys? Feel free to comment below!

Can you please make it so that "moving zones" can be combined with "missile inside" or "bomb inside" to create a "Missile/Bomb Inside Moving Zone" condition. Also, can you make it so that bullets are included in the conditions; ie: "Bullets (30 mm) inside moving zone". This would be very useful to help us identify which aircraft has fired off the rounds when creating voiceovers and not using the native speech sounds in the game (i.e. when aircraft are set to silent mode).

Direct storage has not yet been implemented by any games as this is a new feature being developed by windows but it essentially enables the GPU to communicate directly with storage in order to slash graphical loading times. Could this be something that may be implemented in DCS one day? I’m by no means a subject matter expert in this field but I would really like to learn more about how this could potentially be implemented in DCS from those who know much more about this subject than I do.