Europe theatre would be nice. And It would be nice also If it wouldn’t have a 128x128 limitation and this way we can use the whole Europe land. Everybody can use it same time . Most of the virtual squadrons would have its own airfield and they could visiting each other also like in the real world. Relocation for missions or trainings support.

I don’t know what did you take in but put down now.
The BMS is getting better and better all the time, the installing process more easier than it was.
Maybe You would like to flight an arcad game and that is why don’t like any more the newer BMS, because the weapons are not 100% deadly anymore.
The BMS the most stable system than it was this before the ERA of SP, FF and OF .
Even the AMRAAM either.
And we are standing the door of the new era . The long waiting graphical update and VR , new terrains etc.

And that is why lots of ppl want to come back from DCS , because here are true dynamic campaign, ATC and living airspace.

Yes there are many things which will be fixing later on when the PC hardware and software allowed to do so or just come up the priority list.

If it not related for the terrain then my Wishlist :

• list item new sound engine for the doppler effect echoes, and more source and range
• list itemPBR material support
• list itemMore dynamic light and shadows support (maybe raytracing)
• list itembetter physics for the damage
• list itemmore particle system support (flame, smoke, water, snow)
• list itemmore assets support (buildings , trees, none military traffic)
• list itemmore cities and streets from real area
• list itemopportunity to blow up only one building like a target according the scenario.
• list itemmore visible infantry to see the battle from above and help them
• list itemUp to date SDK for modder or tutorials
• list itemupgrade ejection system
• list itemnew clouds and weather system
• list itemone world map

@radium said in BMS 4.35 Screenshots:

Very low poly Mig-35 debut !

didn’t you said that these models will be only static? or some of them will be convert for flyable by AI?

I sat a couple times in F16 cockpit and my shin almost touch the MFD lower edge, so I never see my feet like this video or as in game on the pedals. OR at least there is always black.

compare the real size:

The knee is closer for the engine gauges than the stick. the stick and the throttle is almost close to the hip joint.
https://defenceforumindia.com/attachments/195f4a7b31c89dcf38df8888138c73ac-jpg.184185/

Good to see the new forum, but it seems to me a little bit chaotic for a first time.
And what is the other surprise which you mentioned before that this not just a new forum ,more than this?
I can’t see anything else .

<p><a href=“https://forum.hobbycomponents.com/viewtopic.php?f=105&t=1967&p=4804#p4804” target=“_blank”>https://forum.hobbycomponents.com/viewtopic.php?f=105&t=1967&p=4804#p4804</a><br /><br />it is the ED tracker, it has 6DOF support and almost no latency and 1000FPS refresh rate. There is no disturbance from light and any other source. You don’t need webcam for it and it doesn’t care that how big the FOV and resolution of the camera. </p>

@seifer
Hi, First thank you the dev’s that they are doing good job for make the game better.
I think most of the player who doesn’t fly a lot with in the virtual squadron they can’t report or find some bugs because it is very hard to determine that it is bug or feature or just no prioritise to fix yet. Except when it is obvious like a CTD or repeatable game function which is causing serious malfunction.
But they are very few.

The small bugs just those are able to determine, who fly a lot and use the problematic area often. But maybe more people can help to find these if they get more precise guidance.
I mean, the change log just say YX was fixed and sometime we don’t know what was the initiated problem and ,how we can check it that there is no more problem with it or some still occur by some of them. For this would be nice to be a forum topic to discuss or give some comment for the changelog .
That is why there is a good initiative to make this bugtracker site:
third-party-bms-bugtracker
I hope it will be general to use everyone. Or at least in the forum should be divided more subforum within the technical topic to be easier find the type of bug to report like it is graphical, AI, hardver, sound etc…

The same to find the bugs for the Dev, we should know that what is the main area what they already know to need fix. We can concentrate there to give to you more detailed information about the problems.
Or some subjective area Like the AI behaviour or tactics we need to know what the devs intention for it to avoid the misunderstandings to report that something wrong with the AI and you say this is not bug because they wanted to do this way.

I happy to see some change about the communication, it become more two-way and for you ,seifer to give us some information from behind the scene and we are not blind anymore to say something and sometime don’t get back any reaction about the question or report .

Yes I know , devs doing this in free and their free time, but if they let the users to sacrifice his free time too to give back some useful to the devs and not just enjoying the product. That would be more beneficial for everyone.

@maxwaldorf said in Welcome to our new home!:

@repvez said in Welcome to our new home!:

And what is the other surprise which you mentioned before that this not just a new forum ,more than this?
I can’t see anything else .

Always, looking for more…
Not enough?

No offensive. I just expect that it will be another thing too.
Just quote from you in the old forum:

*Quote Originally Posted by vAiCon View Post
Now they know to anticipate a surprise,
So its going to be “almost” a surprise
You know the forum is just the tip of the iceberg

Quote Originally Posted by vfp View Post
are you going to change the forum’s look? mazor update to the forum not elsewhere i suppose lol if the opposite would happened that would have been a suprise
Answer in 2+ weeks*

So everybody know that there will be an design change if the old forum is gone, and if the forum change just the tip of the iceberg so that is why I thought there will be another things too. The forum usually is part of the webpage so there was obviously to change it also.
And there was design change in the past too, but there was nothing big hype for it.

But I say again, not offensive and I’m happy that the game and the community is still living and improve. Just the communication was a little mis meaning.

@molnibalage said in Central Europe Theater:

@MaxWaldorf Will it have the SA-5 site?

I don’t think that this is the biggest /first concern or problem with the theatre or campaign buildings what they need to resolve and taking care of.

thank you for the detail answer about the next update. Can somebody explain what the BML is? I can’t find any info about it. I would like to prepare in advance for it .when the V2 will be out with the direct 3dsMAx export tool ,I will have been some knowledge for it. Which specification need to be reach on the 3d model. name , data structure ,texture size and number etc…

@Seifer
Thank you for this dev update always good to read it. Can you explain a little bit more detail what does the LOD to BML mean. Is it change the whole 3d model import process ? I mean if somebody want to make a new or upgrade model in 3dsmax , how can we turn into BML format instead of LOD? there will be a newer tool for that? Or any change to update the old one to work in newer 3dsmax version or Blender ?
Or IS it totally different from the modelling?

I am very sad to hear this decision .could we know what cause this fast change to leave the whole bms ? you mentioned earlier you have a lot of plan to do in the near future .

that is why I asked to determine the exact height and distance for the pilot’s head in the cockpit.
This one seems the head located somewhere in the middle of the pilot’s chest

these two are almost the same POV only the bigger FOV cause the different , but some strange thing s are there for me.
The first maybe due to the bigger FOV the camera distortion the glare shield is stretched in left more than the right size . I know the perspective view but in this distance it shouldn’t have to be so big different.
The second is that the pilot look right side but we see the HUD and ICP frame left inner side which is strange for me .
And both cases I feel the distance far from the head to ICP that IRL I wouldn’t never reache it by hand.
And both of them look 2Dish compare the last pic, because I can see everything in front and no cover each other than the last case.
Although every cases the POV is almost the saent. me only the FOV and the distance of the head from the ICP are the differ

@Razor161
Yes you are right, but I am speaking about the pitch angle because it is influencing the visibility .

@Razor161 said in Pilot POV:

@repvez
During final approach you would have ~10° - 11° AOA on a 3° glide slope down to the TDZ which result is a ~8° - 9° pitch angle.
So according to your picture the pilot is able to see and aim at the desired touch down point.
If we now take into account that the head position in your picture might be a bit too low then we easily see that there’s no issue at all.
The visual representation of what the BMS pilot sees is in VR is exactly the same as without VR (I can tell that because I’m faily new to VR ).

That is why I would like to figure out what going on the POV, because I saw video and yes the pilot see the runway, but according tha trigonometry calculation, the distance is bigger than expected.
But I don’t think the glide slope is reduce the AOA degrees. Even the slope is 4 degrees the AOA could be 12.
Maybe the default AOA set up on F-16 is 4 degrees between of the fuselage and the wings.
So if the AOA is 12 degrees the Jet centerline only 8 degrees and only the wing have 12 degrees AOA.
https://forum.dcs.world/uploads/monthly_2021_09/1058828260_AoADisplay-F-16C-D-Flight-Manual.gif.125fa07032f38acc28060d5c450f5c60.gif
According this the optimal AOA is 13ish .

And also for me the pilot POV is too low in game too, because most of the case when I see a video or pics about the cockpit it looks like the pilot’s head is equal height with ICP or HUD, but IRL it is way above. so the pilot looks down always on it .

I only would like to discuss abou the pilot pov.

According to the picture. The F16 landing config set the 13 degrees of AOA. And the pilot eye line is the same if he want to look down. because the below side is blocked by cockpit instruments.
So everything in front of the pilot below the horizont is missing. Thus the pilot can’t see the runway at all.
in a higher altitude the blocked area is bigger. in 500m altitude the blocked distance aprox 9km with 10 degrees AOA. So according the calculation there is no chance to see the runway from 7km from the cockpit
Even if the plane on the ground the pilot can see the full view only farther more than 8m.
What do you thik about this mesurment int he game?
An the other thought about the POV. the pilot default view is lean back full ont he head rest and straight ahead or compensate the seat leaning?
Because if not then the default center line (blue line int he picture)is pointing up and the instruments are in periferial vision of the pilot vertical POV . So from this we can mesure the visible picture of the screen.
I don’t know the BMS is calcualte the different resolution for FOV or just counting the FOV degrees. like this
I don’t know what is the different between VR and the 2D version .
Because in VR should be see aprox 90 deg in vertical and 110deg in horizontal like a real , but in 2d only limited the FOV.

The third thought. in the games if the pilot turn around to see the six. it feels like the pilot head turn and move front of the cockpit until the ICP or more. But in the real life there is very limited moving to can do

. For to see the head rest and so big portion of the sky .The pilot can see the headrest with only the very limit of his vision.
This is not only in BMS it is almost every sim has this kind of issu. at 3:18

@6WELT_JankeS
I also saw in RL in working state the Gripen HUD but it was surprisingly big . I mean when I looked trough the HUD the symbology was projected far from the Gripen nose and its size was almost 2m wide . So I don’t know how the HUD look like in VR but it should be projected to bigger than the real HUD dimension.

Thanks for the new update.
I only have a small problem with it, maybe someone can help me out .
If I click the updater in the launcher it says that please download the downloader application.
But I already did it last time . So why not recognize the downloader application or why not start download the new update straight the updater ?