Military Assets for DCS by Currenthill

[Abburo]

4 minutes ago, Zahnatom said:

is it possible to add these to the HTS/HAD as well?

You might need to merge CH RWR with this one in here: DCS RWR Symbology (digitalcombatsimulator.com)

[Chap2012]

Hey @currenthill. Again, I try to stay away from making recommendations as you get a ton on this feed. However, I realized another hole in the current ED assets. When you do the UK pack, you should look into the Centurion. We have all the other UK tanks, but not one of the most important. Excited to see what's in store for the US pack. Have a good one. 

[charles1030]

CRAM from both DCS and Currenthill and CH's LAV- SPAAGM are not spawning when placed on editor.

Amazing work Current Hill!

[OrdinaryPilot]

On 2/27/2024 at 9:13 AM, McFly29 said:

After some investigation this afternoon, an old CH MiG29MU2 (version 1.3.0) was causing a conflict. This was rectified by updating my assets to the combined Ukraine Assets Pack (thank you CH!).

 

I also had a conflict causing this issue with an older version of the Codename Flanker SU-30MK_SFM v2.0B. I'm yet to download a different version to see if this causes any issues. But these were what were causing my issues. I'd recommend checking these off.

 

Nope, still happening over here! Got any ideas what else it might be?

Or did the latest update just break a whole bunch of stuff at once?

[McFly29]

19 hours ago, OrdinaryPilot said:

Nope, still happening over here! Got any ideas what else it might be?

Or did the latest update just break a whole bunch of stuff at once?

The JAS 39C Gripen mod also caused issues. I don't know if the most recent iteration is the same though, I downloaded mine several months ago

[BIGNEWY]

folks treat each other with respect and stay on topic. 

posts deleted

thank you 

[currenthill]

[HighMaintenanceB]

11 minutes ago, currenthill said:

Thank you very much for bringing us the USS Constellation - It appears that you bought the 3D model here. https://free3d.com/3d-model/ffgx-next-generation-frigate-4274.html 

I want to point a few things out, however.  Firstly, as far as I know, hull number 56 doesn't go on a Constellation-class frigate, although a quick workaround could be to swap the numbers to make 65.   Secondly, the NSM launchers fitted amidships should be angled inward instead of outward - I believe this is to prevent wear and tear from rocket booster exhaust blasting into the ship every time they launch a missile.  Lastly, it could be the camera angle, but the superstructure and mast appear tall compared to official US Navy images and renders.  I know I shouldn't be so critical and judgmental, but I'm here to provide insight and feedback based on my observations.  

Thanks again as always for your brilliant contributions - I think I'm getting a bit too pedantic now so I'll let others speak. 

[Gundamator]

2 hours ago, currenthill said:

Thank you so much CH!!!!

[FuryNZ1781]

Looks great, but dont we already have the constellation? believe it was admirals mod?

[OrdinaryPilot]

1 hour ago, FuryNZ1781 said:

Looks great, but dont we already have the constellation? believe it was admirals mod?

I thought so as well lol

[currenthill]

On 2/28/2024 at 8:03 PM, OrdinaryPilot said:

Nope, still happening over here! Got any ideas what else it might be?

Or did the latest update just break a whole bunch of stuff at once?

On a general note. I test all my 170 assets simultaneous to make sure they don't conflict. If someone experience disappearing units or CTD it's most likely the case of having old versions of my assets installed, or other makers mods that conflict. In both these scenarios the solution is to be found on the user end. 

7 hours ago, HighMaintenanceB said:

Thank you very much for bringing us the USS Constellation - It appears that you bought the 3D model here. https://free3d.com/3d-model/ffgx-next-generation-frigate-4274.html 

I want to point a few things out, however.  Firstly, as far as I know, hull number 56 doesn't go on a Constellation-class frigate, although a quick workaround could be to swap the numbers to make 65.   Secondly, the NSM launchers fitted amidships should be angled inward instead of outward - I believe this is to prevent wear and tear from rocket booster exhaust blasting into the ship every time they launch a missile.  Lastly, it could be the camera angle, but the superstructure and mast appear tall compared to official US Navy images and renders.  I know I shouldn't be so critical and judgmental, but I'm here to provide insight and feedback based on my observations.  

Thanks again as always for your brilliant contributions - I think I'm getting a bit too pedantic now so I'll let others speak. 

Thanks! I agree, the model isn't perfect, but we have yet to see it in real life also. You are totally correct on the NSM launchers, I forgot to think, haha. They're even pointed inwards on the reference pictures I'm using, as external launchers usually are.

3 hours ago, FuryNZ1781 said:

Looks great, but dont we already have the constellation? believe it was admirals mod?

The Admiral is a great guy and we chat a lot. But we make the assets we want, the way we want. We don't have a joint venture or anything like that.

[Tomhaitin]

I would love to have an Israeli assets pack with the German/ Israeli ships, and all the Israeli ground units like the panther troop transport and Namer ifv for example and maybe even some Israeli uavs 

[tripod3]

Hi all! Screenshot from other product, non-DCS, for inspiration... Hope CH will add UMPK in future.

 

Edited March 1, 2024 by tripod3

[Chris22]

Can you make A-50U 

[X-Ray]

Tupolev's livery packs almost done...

[OrdinaryPilot]

I'm working on an updated Admiral Kuznetsov CVE and Admiral Nakhimov BCG featuring the new, modern weapons systems, but I've ran into a stumbling block...

 

I can't seem to find any information regarding how many 3M55M (P-800 "Oniks") AShMs can fit inside of the modernized UKSC-M vertical launch system cells.

 

Originally, the Kuznetsov carried 12x P-700 "Granit" and the Nakhimov 20 of the P-700 - but the new, modernized 3S14 UKSC-M VLS will make space for 3 of the new Zircon cruise missiles (which are about the same size as the Kalibr family cruise missiles, so likely the same amount of those) for each P-700 missile originally carried (leading most experts to estimate that the two refitted ships would each be able to carry a maximum of 36x and 60x anti-ship missiles of various types, respectively). However, while the Zircon and Kalibr missiles are more-or-less the same size and hence should be practically interchangeable (at least for the purposes of a universal VLS like the new 3S14 UKSC-M)... the P-800 is actually quite a bit bigger (around 50% or so larger diameter, roughly the same size as the P-700s that are being replaced) and I cannot find any conclusive evidence that proves the P-800 can comfortably fit inside of the exact same smaller, more numerous UKSC-M VLS cells that the Zircon and Kalibr missiles are being mounted inside of. If it does fit, that must mean the new cells are about the same size as the old cells the P-700 used to be launched from... which begs the question, how did they manage to free up so much space on the ship that they could somehow TRIPLE the amount of giant VLS cells without stripping everything else off the ship? Were the old 3S14 cells unnecessarily bulky? I just don't see how the ship could fit three times as many launchers of the same size all of a sudden unless there was a major design flaw with the old VLS that wasted lots of space for no good reason.

 

I hope someone can shed some more light on this!

Edited March 1, 2024 by OrdinaryPilot

[currenthill]

An updated version, with the NSM launchers pointing where they should, lowered superstructure and mast and pennant number 62. Launching a SM2-MR IIIC.

Edited March 1, 2024 by currenthill

[HighMaintenanceB]

1 hour ago, currenthill said:

An updated version, with the NSM launchers pointing where they should, lowered superstructure and mast and pennant number 62. Launching a SM2-MR IIIC.

 

Much appreciated! Best of luck, we look forward to seeing more of your works. 

[EA-18G_BlockII]

11 hours ago, X-Ray said:

Tupolev's livery packs almost done...

they should use new RUAF star emblem no?

[PhoenixRing]

Guys, really need your help. I choose in settings of mission "pilot can control units", but when I choose the unit in mission as a master or comandeer, I can't do anything. What should be done?

 

[Hawkmoon]

34 minutes ago, PhoenixRing said:

Guys, really need your help. I choose in settings of mission "pilot can control units", but when I choose the unit in mission as a master or comandeer, I can't do anything. What should be done?

 

ch units aren't really made with Combined arms in mind so don't expect them to work as intended with manual control

[de_Lutz]

Hi

 

i have installed the Packs and the RWR ID´s but the Pantsirs are not showing up on HAD or HARM Page, did i make something wrong?

[flanker1]

On 3/1/2024 at 3:12 PM, X-Ray said:

Tupolev's livery packs almost done...

Amazing!!! Thank you very much for your hard work! Could you please also do cold war era soviet skins without the VKS ROSSII / RF  markings and also without the plane´s names?

[X-Ray]

On 3/2/2024 at 3:01 AM, EA-18G_BlockII said:

they should use new RUAF star emblem no?

Nope! I've thought the same, but looking at current photos for all TU's they carry the old red star

15 hours ago, flanker1 said:

Amazing!!! Thank you very much for your hard work! Could you please also do cold war era soviet skins without the VKS ROSSII / RF  markings and also without the plane´s names?

Yep