Patch notes discussion May 2025

[Qcumber]

8 minutes ago, Ghost79 said:

haha good one, didn't see that one coming 

Seriously though if this is the first time you have tried DLSS4 it's a massive improvement. I've not tested yet to see if there is any significant difference with the optimisation. 

[Gunfreak]

19 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

Seriously though if this is the first time you have tried DLSS4 it's a massive improvement. I've not tested yet to see if there is any significant difference with the optimisation. 

But they've updated to DLSS 310.2.1.0 not DLSS4?

[BluesRocket]

19 minutes ago, Qcumber said:

Seriously though if this is the first time you have tried DLSS4 it's a massive improvement. I've not tested yet to see if there is any significant difference with the optimisation. 

I have had DLSS "OFF" in the settings for both 2D and VR. Is this both selecting it in the game AND making changes somewhere outside the game (perhaps in the NVidia app)?

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

If you have unclassified evidence that is different feel free to DM me

The "2G rule" is well documented for the AIM-9B and every single pilot interview that talks about the missile says the exact same thing: you shouldn't fire when you're pulling more than 2G.
I'll send you a link to NAVWEPS OP 2309 Vol. 1 third revision:

AIM-9B GUIDED MISSILE (FORMERLY SIDEWINDER 1A)

DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION (U)

Appendix B talks about the 2G rule. It says: "The rule was developed when the firing envelopes for this missile were determined (see NAVWEPS OD 12663)".

[Kang]

12 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

The "2G rule" is well documented for the AIM-9B and every single pilot interview that talks about the missile says the exact same thing: you shouldn't fire when you're pulling more than 2G.
I'll send you a link to NAVWEPS OP 2309 Vol. 1 third revision:

AIM-9B GUIDED MISSILE (FORMERLY SIDEWINDER 1A)

DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION (U)

Appendix B talks about the 2G rule. It says: "The rule was developed when the firing envelopes for this missile were determined (see NAVWEPS OD 12663)".

Without doubting the validity of this one bit, because I think you are right, just a thought:

Does this patch note perhaps imply it can be fired below 6G technically, but the missile won't actually work properly unless within 2G?

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

1 minute ago, Kang said:

Does this patch note perhaps imply it can be fired below 6G technically, but the missile won't actually work properly unless within 2G?

That's the question, isn't it? Personally I'd love to see early heatseakers behave more like they did in reality, though. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's been hit in the face by an R-3S while I'm manoeuvring and pumping flares in my F-4 - and that's just preposterous.

[Qcumber]

52 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:

But they've updated to DLSS 310.2.1.0 not DLSS4?

DLSS 310.2.1.0 is DLSS 4. I know it does not appear to make sense. You would expect DLSS4 the begin with a 4 but this is the most recent version of DLSS.

54 minutes ago, BluesRocket said:

I have had DLSS "OFF" in the settings for both 2D and VR. Is this both selecting it in the game AND making changes somewhere outside the game (perhaps in the NVidia app)?

You still need to select DLSS in DCS. Now DLSS in DCS will default to the latest version. 

[Gunfreak]

1 minute ago, Qcumber said:

DLSS 310.2.1.0 is DLSS 4. I know it does not appear to make sense. You would expect DLSS4 the begin with a 4 but this is the most recent version of DLSS.

Then that is good news. No more DLSS swapping 

[Qcumber]

@BIGNEWY What is the default preset now for the least DLSS version? 

1 minute ago, Gunfreak said:

Then that is good news. No more DLSS swapping 

Maybe there is now a better performance optimization in DCS!? I need to do some tests but haven't had chance yet.

BTW: The latest version of NVIDIA profile inspector allows you to automatically select the latest version of DLSS and choose which preset version. 

[Biggus]

I hope one day to see an update to FSR.

[Dragon1-1]

51 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

That's the question, isn't it? Personally I'd love to see early heatseakers behave more like they did in reality, though. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's been hit in the face by an R-3S while I'm manoeuvring and pumping flares in my F-4 - and that's just preposterous.

I think it should be something like if you pull more than 2G, the AIM-9B won't track, and if you pickle either version when pulling more than 6G, it won't even come off the rail and will probably break (unless there's a safety interlock).

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

1 minute ago, Dragon1-1 said:

I think it should be something like if you pull more than 2G, the AIM-9B won't track, and if you pickle either version when pulling more than 6G, it won't even come off the rail and will probably break (unless there's a safety interlock).

Yes it’s not an absolute limit, but the documents say you need at least a few seconds for the missile seeker to lock on to the target, which should be done from 6 o’clock low within 30 degrees angles-off-tail. And it says that if you fire while pulling more than 2G this implies that you’re likely not in the envelope for the seeker to have obtained a valid lock. So you could technically fire the missile at higher G, it will most likely not guide.
The question is if DCS keeps all that into account. I doubt it, since IRL the seeker got confused by reflections from the ground for example - IR seeker modelling in DCS seems extremely simplistic to me.

 

There are other documents that have pictures of the launch envelopes in them. I just picked a declassified source that specifically talks about the 2G-rule.

[ShinyMikey]

2 hours ago, Blinde said:

No Currenthill assets?

I was also really looking forward those, I expected they would be in this month's patch

[Red_Camarada]

hey everyone, has anyone figured out how to attach the pl8/5/12 to the GD20?

[Hotdognz]

Nice update and thanks, but after 4 months of no new stuff for the Chinook except fix's, the 2 added features don't add up to much happing in that space and it certainly feels like its been moved off a priority list.

 

• Added: Liveries for Spain, Iran, South Korea and Royal Canadian Air Force
• Added: Collective position added to the Controls indicator

Edited 11 hours ago by Hotdognz

[draconus]

8 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

But they've updated to DLSS 310.2.1.0 not DLSS4?

310.2.1.0 is just the nvngx_dlss.dll file version. It supports all DLSS generations 1-4, depending on the game implementation and your GPU. More clear now?

10 hours ago, Blinde said:

No Currenthill assets?

From FAQ:

Q15: When will the first batch of core assets release?
A15: Soon^TM.

[jack333]

Ohhhh, no sniper pod for F-16

[Weasel]

vor 59 Minuten schrieb jack333:

Ohhhh, no sniper pod for F-16

If all goes right, the sniper pod should be comming in June

[BIGNEWY]

8 minutes ago, Weasel said:

If all goes right, the sniper pod should be comming in June

It all depends on testing results, but the team are working hard on it. 

thanks 

[PawlaczGMD]

It's not in the notes, but after this patch the F-16 TWS finally started to work correctly for me. Before, I could not make system tracks with TMS up. TMS up would lock the non-system track under the cursor, and TMS right would lock a random(?) track, often friendly nowhere near the cursor. Now it seems to work as intended. Thanks anyway.

[kotor633]

A really decent package of patches. Unfortunately, there's still no manual for the Mi-24P...