Search this site

Skyward Flight Media is presenting a December 2023 event on our Fox 3 Managed Solutions Digital Combat Simulator server. A set of custom edits to the existing mission have been done in cooperation with The Black Aces VRChat aviation community, whom we often fly various flight games and simulators with in our private time. This will be the largest and longest public event we have run on our server thus far, running for three weekends in December 2023. HOW TO JOIN Please see this webpage for more information if you are interested in joining in on this event: If the above button does not work: https://www.skywardfm.com/2023-december-dcs-event About Pretense The base version of this mission is from one of Skyward’s favorite mission editors, Dzsek. They are the creator of the Foothold mission format we have written articles about in the past. Pretense can be considered the successor of Foothold. Here are words from Dzsek about this mission from the official Github user manual: “Pretense is my second attempt at a dynamic campaign in DCS. This mission came from all the things that Foothold failed to live up to in my mind. I wanted the focus to be on you, the player, as a mercenary pilot in the middle of this war unfolding around you. Your job is to choose from the available missions and complete them, while earning experience and climbing through the ranks. “In this mission, bases need resources to upgrade themselves and deploy defenses. Resources that they will now attempt to share with each other and push towards the frontline where they are needed. This time AI groups are truly dynamic, each base deciding what to build and where to send it. No waypoints for any of the AI are predetermined in the mission editor. Everything is decided in the moment. This time, the campaign was built with performance in mind. Activity is concentrated on the frontline, bases farther away will operate in a less active mode, but will still be there as functional parts of the economy.” “It took more than a year to make this. Burned myself out trying to balance it. I'm still not sure if it works exactly the way I wish it did. But here it is. Enjoy.” Our Thoughts on Pretense in General For this event, we are using the Caucasus version of Pretense to ensure player accessibility. Pretense is a rather astonishing example of a mission that somehow balances gameplay between all types of air units available to players, while adding extended options for mid-mission sub-missions. These sub-mission include performing suppression of enemy air defenses at specific locations, flying combat air patrols, flying recon missions, bombing runways, deep strikes against far away targets, combat search and rescue, etc. Finishing these missions grant players experience and promotions in rank. As ranks climb higher, they are able to call in off-map assets or other options that can assist BLUFOR. All progress in Pretense is saved as .json files, meaning players can jump into the mission at any time and have their progress reloaded. The gains in conquering the map and capturing enemy territory is also saved. The mission can be taken offline, then put back online days or weeks later with all progress retained, so long as the .json file is not deleted. This is an amazing option for long-term play sessions with large groups of players. Fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft are equally effective in combat. Their strengths can be utilized to their fullest without having to compromise the core gameplay of the mission. In fact, one could argue that helicopters have a larger role to play than meets the eye at first glance. It is hard to find a free to download mission that is this well-thought-out with a user manual to help mission editors understand how it works and how to further modify it if needed. Once again, our hat is off to Dzsek. Custom Edit Overview While the mission used in the October 2023 community event was an original mission from Skyward staff, our edits to Pretense are not meant to change the format of the mission. They are being made to augment the user experience to fit our needs. Here is a brief overview of edits made: Forcing Close Range Combat: At the request of The Black Aces, active homing radar missiles or “Fox Threes” have been removed from the mission to encourage more within visual range combat. The Skyward staff has taken this request to the next level and also removed air-to-ground glide weapons and air launched cruise missiles. So even combat against ground targets is done at a closer distance. Though, anti-radiation missiles are still allowed, as there are some far-reaching surface-to-air missile batteries that cannot realistically be destroyed by flying a few hundred nautical miles and dumb bombing them. Limited REDFOR PVP: A limited number of human players will have access to player vs player slots on the REDFOR side. The point of this mission is to be a player vs environment experience, but as we learned in the October 2023 event a certain amount of REDFOR PVP spices up the mission, but allowing too many players from BLUFOR to be REDFOR in a mission like this could grind progress in capturing territory to a halt. Potentially devolving the scenario into pure air-to-air PVP combat. This is outside the scope of the Pretense format. A balance is needed. Adding Mod Aircraft: Adding player controlled aircraft mods to this mission is easy enough, as they are simply client slots. The following mod aircraft are being added to the mission: A-4E Skyhawk, C-130 Hercules, UH-60L Blackhawk. Players will not be forced to fly these aircraft, however, Digital Combat Simulator servers require that all players download these aircraft on their PCs or else they cannot join the mission. Information on where to download these mods and how to install them is available here. Logistics One aspect of this mission that distinguishes it from the majority of sandbox missions is the importance of logistics in the mission. Both AI and players have the capability to affect the battlefield through sheer logistical prowess, enabling those that want to stay behind the enemy lines helping the team out. All transport-capable helicopters can work as logistical aircraft, which includes the UH-60L mod that can carry 12 troops into battle or a medium amount of supplies. There will be a single player-usable, fixed-wing logistics aircraft available for the mission: the C-130J mod. With the Hercules, you will be able to deploy up to 92 troops as paratroopers, as well as an insane amount of supplies. We hope to see some players use this feature to aid the team!

Usually when you think about the Dassault Mirage, what is the first thing that comes to mind? Delta wings? Beautiful curved fuselages? or just cool jets? In this case, this is still a Mirage but not a regular one as this is not a delta. After years of waiting we finally have our hands on the Mirage F1 module by Aerges Engineering. Consisting of several variants of this aircraft, all with different roles and purposes, this is one of the most complete modules to date. In this review we will be taking a look into several different parts of the module and evaluating if this cold war warrior is a fit for you. These points will be divided into several sections: External and internal 3D models Visual and sound effects Flight modelling Mission capability Armament Ease of use and learning curve Variants and Early Access Is this aircraft for you? This review will be constantly updated with the module, meaning that it will be updated with each major addition to it. This includes system changes, weapon additions and new variants. Whenever a new variant releases, it will get added as a new section. This is an Early Access module as of 7/23/2022. Review updated: 10/25/2023 EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL 3D MODELS Externally, this model is pretty good overall. The developers, Aerges, payed a lot of attention to detail when it comes down to certain aspects of this aircraft. From the complex gear and control surface animations to the internals of the engine, it is evident that they wanted to depict this aircraft as faithfully as possible. There are also some pretty neat details such as the fact that the pilot lays his helmet to the side of the canopy frame border when the canopy is open and the engine is off. At the same time, there are a couple of parts of the model that could use more love. This includes the big seam between the main gear doors and the fuselage. This seam does seem to have been present in the real airframes to a certain degree but the way that lighting works in DCS makes it look very unnatural. The other aspect that could be improved at some point are the textures. When compared to other modules around the same base price point (without any discount, this would be US$ 80) it does seem to be a bit behind when it comes down to weathering quality and the texel density of the model itself. The reflectivity does seem to be a bit too high, or maybe too metallic, which leads to some weird reflections sometimes. Added with the release of DCS 2.9, the Mirage F1BE variant is also now available as a flyable aircraft! With this addition, we went back to this bird and took a very close look at it, both externally and internally. Let's start with the external first, as this model was already available in-game as a non-flyable AI-only aircraft. It looks as accurate as the CE or EE models, and that includes both negatives and positives. but here, have a look! On the other hand, the cockpit model is absolutely brilliant. There are basically no flaws to speak of. From the way that light reflects on the bumpy texture of the dash to the absolutely impressive angle of attack (indicator) and its animations. To me, it is clear that Aerges had the piloting experience as a priority for this module, and it shows. Below are some pictures both in daytime and nighttime conditions, with and without the glare shield, so see it for yourself! This feeling of immersion extends to the new cockpit model made for the two-seater F1BE version of the Mirage. One aspect I particularly loved about it was the HUD repeater that is available for the backseater/instructor. It seems to render like a HUD in itself, but it emulates video feed from the front seat's HUD/gunsight. It works perfectly during the day, but it is practically unusable at night. Here are some shots of this new cockpit included with DCS 2.9: VISUAL AND SOUND EFFECTS Visually, it doesn't have any particularly unique effects, but overall it is a very pretty module. The afterburner effect is great and, on top of that, the over wing vapor when pulling high alpha maneuvers at high speed is present. For me, that is more than good enough. Additionally, the lighting seems to have been done pretty well, with the exception the the bleed-through that some of the lights have on the fuselage. My only complaint here would be that there are some annunciator and panel lights that are extremely bright, even during daytime. The weapon select buttons are the most evident example of this issue. It would be good if their brightness could be lowered somewhat, unless they can be, but I did not find an intuitive way to lower down their brightness by using the brightness knobs inside the cockpit. Sound-wise is where this module knew how to surprise me. Every button and switch in the cockpit resonates with a very realistic "clack" or "thonk". These sounds do seem to give some physicality to the virtual nature of a simulation, which is exactly why I am more than surprised by how well they were handled. All the alerts are, let's say, realistic. They will give you a slight heart attack if they catch you off guard. The engine sounds are excellent as well, specially the sound that it makes whenever the afterburner kicks in. There is also some high AoA rattling that can be heard whenever you pull high AoA maneuvers. Pretty neat! EXAMPLES: (General volume warning, you have been warned!) Engine start and canopy closing sequence: Full take-off roll: Starting with Idle --> Full Power --> Afterburner then rotation. (Volume warning due to Limits alarm) High AoA sounds and rattling (Volume warning due to high AoA alarm) Fly-by at 400kts, full afterburner: (Volume warning) FLIGHT MODELING DISCLAIMER: This is always a tough category, as like with any other aircraft, there is a lot to take into consideration other than just the feel of the flight model. This category is the most subjective one in this article as I do not have any real world experience with this craft. I will only base my opinion on practical experience and knowledge of practical aerodynamics and the theoretical behavior that a Mirage F1 should have under certain scenarios. That being said, I can now see why some people where really excited for this module. Aerges did an excellent job when it comes down to its flight model. It feels "alive", if you will. The best way I have to describe its behavior is as a more forgiving Tomcat. It will fight back when you push it beyond its limits, but I have found that at high speeds I could hold a higher AoA than I initially expected. As you lose speed, naturally, it will be harder for you to pull that nose up. It feels like a non-flight-by-wire (FBW) F-16, with less maneuverability and high alpha potential. It is not hard to fly, quite the opposite. It is an easy plane to fly, one that will not be hard to get used to but one that leaves room for you to master it. That will not stop it from being a worthy opponent to the aircraft of its era, and a relatively even match for all the soviet contemporaries that it would fight against. Personally, I enjoy it quite a bit. MISSION CAPABILITIES: MIRAGE F1CE This is the least capable variant of the entire roster. It is technically a multirole platform but, practically, it is best if you commit to either an air to ground loadout or an air to air one. Its avionics are simple yet very interesting for the time. Specifically the "HUD", which acts more like a very advanced sight rather than fully-fledged HUD. It does have some pretty neat features, such as a flight director mode for air to air intercepts and a basic velocity vector/flight path indicator when set to landing mode. Additionally, the aircraft lacks any kind of CCIP for bomb or rocket delivery, or even a radar adjusted gunsight for dogfighting. Its radar, the Cyrano IV, is not the best one. While it is more capable than the suite installed on F-5E-3s, including its ability to do some basic air to ground work, it is still a monopulse radar. This means that it is not really capable of reliable look-down-shoot-down capabilities. This variant is best used as an interceptor, an air to air fighter or a bomb truck against static targets, with the exception of attacks against lightly-armored targets. A perfect starting point for beginners or people used to contemporary aircraft (F-5E, MiG-21, etc). MIRAGE F1EE A direct upgrade from the CE, the Mirage F1EE offers and much more usable experience when compared with its predecesor. This includes both its new missiles and its upgraded avionics package, both of which make it a lethal aircraft in the right hands. The EE includes a new RWR with a western-style display. This means that you will be able to pick out individual emmitters by their type and direction, which will certainly boast your situational awareness quite a lot. It makes the old RWR look kind of Soviet as it works with the same way as those equipped on the MiG-21 and MiG-19. The easiest way to distinguish between the CE and the EE is by looking for the refueling probe as this is only present in the EE. With this refueling probe the EE can stay in the air almost indefinitely, as long as you have a tanker operatating near your area. Lastly, the main difference between these two variants is that the EE comes with a proper INS suite that will allow you to properly navigate with the use of waypoints! This, alongside the RWR, truly elevates the experience flying the EE to something that I would consider to be superior to even a couple of the early US fighters such as the F-5E MIRAGE F1BE This two-seater version of the Mirage F1CE lacks any of the "modern" amenties of the EE, but what it allows is for this bird to become a solid supersonic trainer that does not compromise its combat capabilities. In this category, it stands as the only aircraft capable of functioning like a proper trainer for an existing single-seat module. As any good trainer made from a single seat platform, the front seat is identical to that of the single seat variants. This facilitates transition to the single seat version once training is over, a feature that will make the BE variant quite the useful one for groups running the module or for those that want to introduce their friends to it without overwhelming them with a solo flight as soon as they purchase the aircraft. I personally love the fact that they went out of their way to offer a training platform for their own module, one that allows more players to put their hands on the control stick and have more fun, without compromising on its combat capabilities over the single-seat version. ARMAMENT TWIN DEFA 30mm CANNONS Good ol' DEFA cannons. It fires heavy-hitting but slower 30mm rounds which will wreck an enemy aircraft if contact is achieved. You have a total of 300 rounds, 150 per cannon. MATRA 550 "MAGIC 1" AND AIM-9 "SIDEWINDER" MISSILES These are your heat seeker missiles, the ones you will always have on your wingtips. Both the Matra 550 and most versions of the Sidewinder that you can carry are rear-aspect only, with the exception of the AIM-9JULI. This peculiar variant has the seeker and control units of a much more capable AIM-9L, which means that it is the only all-aspect IR missile in your inventory. All sidewinder variants available: AIM-9B (earliest model, least capable) AIM-9J (much more capable rear-aspect-only missile) AIM-9JULI (The most capable variant) MATRA R.530 This is, currently, your only "long range missile". Its performance is quite poor and the range is not long enough for BVR combat, which means you will have to get close and, usually, inside of the enemy's range to fire it. It is best used against bigger, less maneuverable aircraft. You have two versions: R.530EM (Semi-active radar guided variant) R.530IR (IR guided variant capable of self homing if lock is lost) SUPER 530F Included with the EE update, this missile is quite the upgrade from the old Matra 530 missiles. It is much faster, longer ranged and much more maneuverable than its predecesors. This, in my eyes, makes the radar-guided Matra 530 completely obsolete. The only reason why you would use the older missile would be to emulate certain historical events or timeframes. ROCKETS Fast and heavy hitting, these are the types of rockets that I like. They are absolutely devastating and easy to aim, the best combination! You can carry up to four pods of two sizes, with a plethora of warheads to choose for your 68mm rockets: MATRA F1: 36 Rockets MATRA F4: 18 Rockets UNGUIDED BOMBS There is quite a selection when it comes down to iron bombs. I don't have to explain what these do, don't I? SAMP series (400, 250 and 125Kg) BR series (500 and 250Kg) Mk.82 bombs (500lbs) Belouga (Cluster bomb with 151 submunitions) GUIDED BOMBS While you are unable to lase these weapons for yourself, you do have access to GBU-12, GBU-16 and GBU-10 laser guided bombs. You can carry a maximum of three of these, one per pylon (inner wings and fuselage) DURANDAL PENETRATOR BOMBS Rocket penetrators, what else can I say. You drop them like high-drag bombs, let them fall over a runway. They will rocket themselves and penetrate the runway, cratering it! You can carry a maximum of 8: 4 under the wings and 4 on the fuselage pylon. EASE OF USE AND LEARNING CURVE It is as easy as any other 3rd generation fighter. Its systems are not complex and lend themselves to a very straight-forward learning experience. You do not need to worry about any modern avionics, at least not for three of the variants that this model will bring. The only challenges of flying it are when it comes down to learning how to properly employ its weapons since you do not have any CCIP or computer aid for their delivery. It will require some getting used to if you come from modern aircraft where you do not need to worry about anything when it comes down to bombing or rocket delivery. Overall, it is a beginner friendly aircraft and one that, thanks to its simple systems, lends itself to be a wonderful starter aircraft for anyone interested in this era of combat. VARIANTS AND EARLY ACCESS This module uses the same approach that the C-101 did, which is only natural seeing as this is another project by the same devs which have found a home at Aerges. That means that we get different variants of the Mirage F1. This time, we will get 4 flyable variants (3 available as of time of writing) and way too many AI variants. I will patiently await for the rest of the flyable variants, as each of them will offer a unique experience separate from what other modules offer for this price. With the initial release they included 1 flyable variant and 21 AI-only units. While technically all of them are different "variants", the large majority of these are derived from the C. I do appreciate the though of having all of them be separate, but as a mission creator I see no point in including all these variants when functionally they are all the same with the exception of the ones that have the laser designator and the two seaters. I would have preferred to have all of the variants be assignable to a single unit, the flyable CE, since they are functionally the same. It would be less confusing for mission creators. IS THIS AIRCRAFT FOR YOU? If what you want in a module is: An amazing cold war experience. An excellent flight model that will fight back. A module that will include the equivalent of 4 modules down the road. A period-accurate flying experience that will have you at the center of the fight. If you don't mind: Not having advanced avionics (yet). The small imperfections of the external model. Having to adapt to a more analog experience. Not being able to fight well in BVR engagements. If all or some of the above is what you want, then Aerges Engineering's Mirage F1 is for you. About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

It is clear that DCS brings together people of all places, and of all ages. You can be on a server with a 15-year-old that's trying to understand how to start their F-15C at the same time that a 55-year-old Navy veteran with 200 carrier landings is reliving his past by flying a Legacy Hornet or even the A-4E. With such a diverse audience and wide age group, DCS stands in a place where not many games of its genre have stood before. The devs need to accommodate all age groups, both accessibility and gameplay-wise. This divide between eras can also be seen on the aircraft roster, as there are both ancient aircraft in the game (WW2-era) and very modern designs (JF-17 and newer) that have to live in the same platform, but aside from the WW2 aircraft they usually tend to be grouped under two categories: Cold War aircraft and Modern aircraft. I have been around long enough to witness the divide that exists between those that primarily fly Cold War and those that prefer modern aircraft, and I have always found it amusing. There have even been arguments where some players have demanded that the opposing side's aircraft development be ceased to focus on more modules for their side. This kind of behavior is typical of online discourse, especially when it comes to gaming-related topics, but there is a certain animosity present here that I find not only amusing, but also extremely unreasonable. DCS World is a sandbox, one in which nothing is forced upon you, and you have the freedom to choose the aircraft that you fly and where you fly them. I understand where this argument comes from, especially from the Cold War side. One proposition that I have heard is that of the perception that in the time to make one modern module, it would be possible to make two or more Cold War ones. Those that state this are unaware of the complexities of developing for DCS World and the work that goes into making a module for it. It is unbelievably hard to get anything done in DCS, even more when you want to recreate a real aircraft or system to perfection. Despite all that, I just do not understand how these two sides not comprehend that each era brings unique aspects to DCS, but also that they do not need to be exclusive to each other. They are extremely fun experiences that focus on different historical periods, periods in which pilots had different roles in combat. In a Cold War setting, pilots were more involved flying the aircraft themselves, as systems were either simpler to operate or were operated by a dedicated back seater that did most of the work that was not related to flying directly. Navigation was harder, and HUDs were either nonexistent or very limited in functionality, so pilots had to rely on their instruments and looking out the window to navigate. In a modern setting, pilots are less involved in flying, and they have become more of a systems operator than anything else. They have all the information they need at the tips of their fingers, be it on the HUD, screens or HMDs. Datalink also makes sure that what one pilot sees, the entire faction does as well. Coordination is key in this era, and navigating is much easier thanks to GPS and INS systems being installed on aircraft. There is a big overlap of these two eras thanks to the unique roster that DCS has, which includes "modern" aircraft like a relatively early F-15C, some pretty late versions of the upcoming F-4E Phantom module or even a late 90s version of the F-14B. Some of these aircraft used the same airbases for a short time, and flew in the same skies; which means that this line between "modern" and "Cold War" is pretty blurry. Now that you can see how these eras differ, I will pose you a question: Where do you fall on the compass? Do you prefer one era over the other, or do you just like these planes regardless of how old or new they are? About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

Feeling out the flight model in the Kickstarter Backer Beta The story of a band of seaplane delivery pilots has finally begun! Spreading their brews across the archipelago using brewing wit, business skill and a healthy amount of water gun combat, The Brew Barons has entered its Kickstarter backer beta. I have written a few pieces about it since I stumbled upon the game back in late 2021. The Brew Barons has been one of my most highly anticipated flight games in years. Something the developers of Lifetap Studios, Diccon Yamanaka and Rob Hartley, have almost constantly adjusted is the flight model this game uses. My time with its various demos has given me experience with past iterations. This in turn has given me enough insight, as a long-term tester, to discuss this in a bit more detail. Of course what I write here is based on the flight model that is still being adjusted during the Kickstarter beta, so it is possible what I write here now could be inaccurate in a few months. Mastering Low-Speed, Low Altitude The business management aspect of the game requires ingredients to be discovered, harvested, returned to the brewery, brewed, bottled and stocked for sale or flown for delivery to customers. The flight regime for these operations mainly happens at low airspeeds. Roaring along at over 100 knots while harvesting apples from trees or wheat from fields makes the time window to do this effectively very small. To maintain high speeds, vertical maneuvers at maximum engine power are the only reliable way to avoid obstacles and dive back down to harvest ingredients. But a series of Immelmann Turns, Split S maneuvers and similar aerobatics are rather risky for picking up some non-combat maneuvering potatoes. Flying between 60 and 80 knots while coordinating pitch, roll and yaw to make coordinated turns lessens the overall space needed to gather ingredients. This range of speed allows players to comfortably skim along treetops and rooftops with plenty of time to plan ingress and egress routes, using safe, controlled turns. Even with upgrades to engine output and overall maneuverability, becoming comfortable flying aircraft at low altitude and low speed is a vital skill for this game. Learning how the aircraft naturally regains airspeed at certain throttle settings and pitch attitudes, when rudder should be applied to avoid slipping into a stall while tightening a low speed turn and avoiding banking too much in a turn which results in the loss of altitude. Long Distance Travel There are many islands to travel to. In a propeller driven aircraft, it does take time to reach even the medium range islands, even at full throttle. Water Boost equipment attached to the aircraft utilizes water in the aircraft's storage bladders to provide sustained bursts of speed. Lifetap Studios designed the Water Boost specifically to avoid adding fast travel functions that would pull players out of the game. Instead, long range flying is encouraged. Fortunately, the most basic version of the Water Boost has a large capacity and can be used over extended periods of time. Refilling it is as easy as flying above the ocean's surface, making it an infinite resource that is always available. The aircraft buffets at high speeds, and some pilots do not handle long-term use of boosting well. Flying straight and level while at a safe altitude is recommended for traversing between islands. While flying at low level will allow for rapidly rotating between refilling water levels and immediately going back into boosting, low altitude flight greatly increases the chances for a catastrophic accident. Resource management and a bit of flight planning is needed to explore the outer islands. Even heavy use of Water Boost will not completely offset fuel use. The islands are not guaranteed to have any support facilities like shipyards to repair and refuel aircraft, the type of ingredients on the island may not be what you were hoping for or the presence of pirates in the airspace can lead to confrontation. Attempting to travel through the outer islands with half fuel and a moderately damaged aircraft can lead to disaster and loss of cargo. It is best to travel with purpose and choose your fights wisely. Upgrades More Impactful Compared to the previous demos, the upgrades that can be purchased in the hangar are noticeably more impactful. Of the dozens of aircraft parts and levels of upgrades they can receive, some may increase engine power, roll rate or augment other functions not related to how the aircraft flies, but stacking a certain set of upgrades could make aircraft harder to handle in unexpected ways. Each piece of equipment has pros and cons. Say, for example, a newly upgraded Supercharged engine increases overall engine power but loses boost near land masses, at the expense of increased fuel consumption. Pair this with maybe a different type of wings that focus on increased lift but reduced overall air speed. Flight characteristics may change in a way players were not expecting. This makes combining parts to see what the changes in aircraft handling are an interesting part of trying out new aircraft builds. I appreciate that it is not just as simple as buying the most expensive upgrades and winning just by having a large stack of money on hand. Water Landing and Takeoff This is one of the most important and somewhat touchy aspects of the game. Flying a seaplane, being able to consistently land and takeoff from the ocean is a vital skill. Besides pulling into bars and shipyards for business, landing in the ocean far from your headquarters is good for switching pilots, resting to recover from fatigue and other things. Takeoff from the ocean is pretty straight forward with little that can go wrong beyond pilots inputting too much rudder while at high speed on the water's surface or attempting to zoom climb right after takeoff causing a potential stall at low altitude. Landing on the ocean is a different beast. Landing incorrectly in this game has substantial punishments. The aircraft can be severely damaged resulting in repair costs and cargo in the aircraft can be damaged. Glassware full of product that needs to be delivered to customers can shatter, completely ruining the day's order. Even a landing that may barely cause damage to the fuselage could shatter some cargo onboard. That delivery of an exact quantity of whiskey or beer you just brewed could be ruined with the loss of two or three bottles, depending on how much of it the aircraft's inventory was stocked with. Meaning that you will need to fly the entire delivery route once again, or potentially brew the entire order over again. The most dangerous point of landing is during the last few seconds above the ocean's surface. Sustaining about a quarter throttle and descending onto the ocean with a stable rate of descent sounds easy enough, but the urge to do last second corrections can cause a dangerous event to occur. At low speeds, before landing, a sudden change in aircraft pitch and power can get the aircraft stuck in ground effect and transition into a stall. This brings the aircraft's nose upwards just a few meters above the water. The tail strike that occurs as the stall worsens can cause moderate to severe damage, costing large amounts of money to repair the aircraft, with all cargo lost. All of this can happen in 10 seconds or less, with just a small window of a few seconds for the pilot to possibly recover. The aircraft's pontoons are actually rather sturdy and can handle landing at speeds above minimum airspeed before stall. Rather than attempting to land at a steep rate of descent within a small patch of ocean, a shallow descent rate across a large strip of ocean while remaining above stall speed is the safest practice. Of course, in the event of emergency, attempting to power out of a stall during landing using Water Boost is possible, but this must be done before the aircraft's nose pitch up beyond 70 degrees or before the aircraft rolls, rotating the aircraft, so its wings strike the ocean. The last ditch zoom climb with Water Boost has absolutely saved my aircraft during my worst landings. Overall Thoughts I was concerned that feedback would cause the flight model to change so much the way aircraft are flown by players would matter less. Like the experience would be so overwhelmingly arcadey, it would be easy to throw the aircraft through the sky without a care in the world for weight, engine output and the like. However, it continues to be just realistic enough to make flight interesting, even when not in combat with the local pirates. With the aircraft somewhat harder to fly and its related maintenance and repair costs also being decided by the skill of their pilot(s), it does make the aircraft feel like an asset in a business rather than a vehicle purely made for fun. It lines up with the business management aspect of the game well. I sincerely hope that the flight model does not change too much from its current state, as I do think it will be one of The Brew Barons primary strengths in the long-term. Even with players that are more used to simulator like flight experiences. My next article about The Brew Barons will be something like a flight journal, describing my experience playing an early version of the full game experience. Look forward to it! About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

A reminder to check AI skill levels of older downloaded missions Over the past two and a half years, Digital Combat Simulator World (DCS) has received - for the lack of a better term - game changing updates. The additions of volumetric clouds, dynamic weather and the recent open beta testing of central processing unit multithreading have been huge draws for new players to give DCS a try, while improvements to specific aircraft, flight modeling and announcements for upcoming modules and maps continue to keep the current player base engaged. For many years, the within visual range (WVR) combat or "dogfighting" AI aircraft in DCS had been a known point of contention. Hostile aircraft set at low to medium skill settings were often underwhelming in close range combat. Their awkward, sluggish and sometimes ill-advised maneuvers could result in them giving up any advantage they had in a dogfight at the drop of a hat. Observant players could even spot a certain pattern in their maneuvers, making their actions somewhat predictable, which in turn could let savvy players take advantage of the AI's own predetermined actions. It wasn't exactly a "win button" but it was a way to take advantage of the AI to increase the likelihood of defeating them. As reflected by many user created and shared missions available in the User Files, a solution for years was setting the difficulty to "Ace", the highest skill level available for AI aircraft. It was one of the few consistent ways to get a challenge out of WVR combat against an AI. Aircraft set to anything besides Ace were decent at beyond visual range combat, but even semi-experienced DCS players could easily handle them in within visual range combat. This is why a trend in both user created single player missions and online player vs environment missions in the User Files can be seen. The volume of Ace pilots is high for the sake of more challenging dogfights. Though, those same enemies are known to abuse the flight model in ways human players cannot. Stories of Ace MiG-21s consistently out climbing and out turning F-15Cs to the point the superior thrust F-15C stalled first are common place. This is just a familiar example of the AI able to retain energy, pull unbelievable Gs and use a thrust to weight ratio human players simply cannot match. Even when flying the same aircraft with the same loadouts and fuel states. Despite this, the overall experience of dogfighting the more active, albeit sometimes broken, Ace level aircraft was a favorable improvement. Unexpectedly, it is the steady march to refine DCS itself that has now flipped this decent workaround on its head. The General Flight Model improvement in 2021 and the DCS AI BFM upgrade in 2022 have made meaningful changes to DCS world's AI in the air combat arena. It's something I noticed almost immediately. They're genuinely good more often than not. That's not to say it's ideal yet, but the quality of WVR combat against AI controlled aircraft has notably increased, even without them being set to Ace skill level. That being said, Ace level AI aircraft are even more formidable than before, with a bit less "questionable" abuse of certain flight physics. This is where the unintended problem comes in. User created missions from before these pivotal updates, often still have many, if not dozens of Ace pilots within the enemy roster. While some mission editors that upload these files have taken time to adjust their missions as needed, a majority of available missions do not receive the same treatment. When faced with entire flights of maximum difficulty aircraft for every sortie, the mission itself may be near impossible to complete. To be completely transparent, this article was inspired by a recent test of a mission file not flown in many months, which had a similar problem appear. This prompted me to revisit missions I had downloaded throughout my time with Digital Combat Simulator and laugh out loud at the sheer amount of Ace pilots large-scale missions from the User Files had. It wasn't a great time, to say the least. Mission editing can be time-consuming depending on how deeply involved you become, but changing difficultly of AI units is as easy as a few mouse clicks and saving the mission file when you're done. The updates have made the use of lower AI skill levels worthwhile, as the overall quality of their dogfighting ability has improved. Returning to a mix of skill levels that include Ace pilots is something I'd recommend to preserve a challenging but manageable gameplay, rather than a potentially overwhelming experience. Take this as a reminder to check those older missions before running them again in 2023! About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

Proactive changes to secure the future of this aviation platform While I haven't mentioned it here on Skyward Flight Media in quite some time, VRChat Aviation (VRCA) continues forward. Some of the highlights since we last discussed VRCA are worthy of their own article, suitable for a third year of VRCA overview article in the near future. Now, three years after the release of the universal Sacc Flight System, the landscape of this international community of flight enthusiasts continues to ebb and flow. Recently, a group of close friends and I visited Virtual Market 2023 Summer, a seasonal event that features both user created media and prominent real world brand presence from highly recognizable companies. Even at this event, VRCA was present to a certain degree. The Virtual Sky Service, an organization that offers a realistic aviation experience focusing mainly on commercial aircraft, had a commercial playing on a billboard in the market's Connect hub. The latest upcoming product from Shimotsuki Heavy Industries was on display with a cockpit attendees could sit in to preview their upcoming aircraft model based on the Northrop YF-23A. Seeing VRChat aviation at such an event compounded with a recent change that is occurring in a large part of the community right now is what inspired me to discuss today's topic. Non-Commercial Status Quo Since its launch on January 16th, 2014, VRChat has operated as an open-ended, easy to access, relatively easy to create for platform that has allowed users to utilize content from wherever they choose to import it from for personal use. The average social experience includes trips to worlds based on established intellectual properties (IP), users donning avatars of their favorite personalities and so on - for the sake of just having a good time. No form of currency is required. It is very no harm, no foul. This norm applies to all communities on the platform, including the VRCA community. A quick trip to a handful of worlds over the years show world creators utilizing aircraft models from known IPs with hands on work done to animate them and adjust their flight characteristics to match that aircraft's real world performance to varying degrees. As this has all been done in a noncommercial manner, it aligned with the status quo of this virtual social platform as a whole. Proactive Changes In the last week of June 2023, the VRC Black Aces - the most prominent community of VRChat aviation - announced that it would address the use of aircraft models from established IPs featured in worlds that creators affiliated with them have produced. Taking any potential claim of copyright or license infringement seriously, they have launched a large scale effort to ensure the stable future of VRChat aviation. As an example of how serious they are taking the situation, some of the most well known flight worlds were promptly made unavailable or updated with more appropriate aircraft models. Being that they are the leading organization within this genre of VRChat over time their actions will set a trend that naturally others will follow. In this case, emulation of their actions is a very positive thing. Within the past three weeks, many solutions have been found. They can be categorized into three avenues of approach. Securing Licensing A majority of the most beloved flight worlds use existing or retired military and civilian aircraft. Grumman F-14 Tomcats blasting off an aircraft carrier into sunset soaked skies, SAAB Drakens and Viggens darting at low altitudes across vast forests and well known fourth generation fighters in swirling air combat above the searing desert. While these models were often sourced from various IPs, many are now undergoing a two-step replacement process. First, comparable aircraft models are being secured from 3D asset stores, like Sketchfab or Booth. This purchase both supports creators outputting these models and secures proper licensing for legal protection in the future, rather than just relying on understanding and good will. Second, the creators still need to prepare the asset. Depending on the quality of asset purchased, there is still plenty of work to do before it, it is ready for public use. Flight surfaces will need to be animated, cockpit interiors remodeled or modified in some way to support SaccFlight standard control displays, flight values will need to be applied to the model then flight tested before use. There is a certain level of quality these creators hold themselves to, especially since their names are on this project and any user on VRChat can access their profile, see the worlds they've created and go there to see their work in action for themselves. It is good to know that the people that have taken up the mantle of supporting and expanding VRCA hold themselves to a certain level of quality, even after the conscious decision to now invest more time in creating aircraft models rather than focus on the volume of aircraft that could be produced in a certain time span. Existing VRCA Asset Manufacturers Contrary to the current situation, VRCA started with original aircraft designs. Even during the early testing phases in 2020. The now community iconic SF-1 fighter was followed by other original designs created by a designer using the umbrella name of Sagi Aerospace. Since then, there have been many solo designers and teams of designers creating all manner of assets specifically for VRChat aviation. The most prolific asset are of course aircraft of varying levels of sci-fi inspiration, Cold War inspiration and just recreation of existing aircraft for the sake of not using a model owned by a different IP. However, it is also possible to buy civilian aircraft, ground crew uniforms, helmets, aircraft carriers, flight instruments, missiles, etc. The names of these pseudo manufacturers include Eriohs Electric Industrial, Tububam Technologies, A-TEC Corp, Esnya Arsenal and Aircraft Laboratory, Laplus AAMTC, Studio Symphony, Nameko Heavy Industries, Akagu Heavy Industries and many others. Our own original aircarft design, The Dragonfly, being among them. These creators are now well ahead of the curve with this current situation. Reinvigorated Designers In a way, this need to now source or create aircraft models has also applied pressure to the now well established VRCA developers to use their skill sets to build aircraft in 3D computer software manipulation programs like Blender externally and internally, then animate them in Unity. While it is surely inconvinent for them in the short term, it is not as though they do not have the skill sets to surmount this hurdle. Rather, there has just not been a pressing need to do so because of the pre-established culture of the platform, as mentioned earlier in this article. I myself have seen creators that have modeled aircraft from scratch over a year ago but haven't done so since then, suddenly spend hours in Blender preparing entirely new designs or working on any of the aforementioned assets in reasonably short amounts of time to not delay upcoming events and keep VRCA worlds available for the general public. With their creativity now stoked back to 100% effort, it is possible that even more unique designs or recreations of unusual real world aircraft could appear by the end of the year. It is an interesting prospect. Seeing the VRChat aviation community now address what could potentially be a massive legal problem in the future is, in my eyes, a heartening event. Of course, I say this as an observer who does not need to put in hours of work myself, but I felt as though their new effort needed to be discussed as my own way to show support for their latest endeavor. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers.

A foray into a genre I hardly know A long time ago, in the ancient time known as the mid-2000s, I recall becoming amazingly burnt out on games in World War settings. That feeling seems to have stuck with me for quite a long time. Rarely do I find myself even trying a first-person shooter with a setting during those times in history. Only recently has my mind gradually changed. Partially because of my fiancée. She occasionally expresses to me how the "zero generation of aircraft" (World War I combat aircraft) deserve more recognition in the current era of aviation. That same sentiment extending to games and simulators. Just last week I decided to jump into my first virtual reality World War I flight combat experience knowing little to nothing about the title. None of my usual research into the game or developer. Not even viewing promotional video. Just jumping straight in! With barely over one hour of time with this game, I hesitate to call this a true first impression or review. So instead this is just a standard article about my experience so far. Warplanes: WW1 Fighters from Home Net Games is the first title I have tried from this developer. I have seen some random screenshots of their other titles. This purpose built virtual reality title strikes a good balance between the assumed World War I experience and enough arcade flight characteristics to ensure the whole thing works well with just a virtual reality headset and its touch controllers. Its five difficulty levels range from Leisure, which features auto aiming and a very simplified flight model to Real War which offers an advanced flight model, real engine power for the era, aircraft stalling, takeoff, landing and no heads up display user interface elements. Though even in the most realistic settings, the arcade controls are still mostly noticeable in takeoff and landing. This article was written using Simulation mode. It has all the features of Real War, but still maintains a bit of the UI. I wanted to get my footing a bit before going all in. While flying for either the Central Powers or Triple Entente, pilots are given a pretty impressive amount of customizations while at their home airfields. Upgrades include increasing aircraft performance, unlocking new aircraft and setting them as reserve aircraft or aircraft for wingmen. The color editor is rather detailed, with four locations for emblems and two slots for aircraft colors and paint patterns with different types of paint gloss. I spent way too much time with this feature. I thank the devs for letting me run circles around my customized aircraft for an hour or so. Haha! Besides gawking, squadron assignments, aircraft management, settings adjustments and mission selection are handled at the airfield. Even the between mission UI keeps players moving their hands and interacting with objects. Flight and combat is where I was pleasantly surprised. I knew things were going to be interesting when even the throw of the floor mounted flight stick was modeled well enough to force me to change the way I normally handle aircraft in virtual reality. Attempting to fly it as though it was a side stick aircraft for the sake of comfort was detrimental. With aircraft engine power of the late 1910s represented somewhat accurately, turning rate fights and vertical rate fights are less common. I did not have the benefit of jet engines that produce thousands of pounds of thrust to easily sustain prolonged turning fights. There were times when I simply could not maintain an ideal position to hunt down a 'bandit' because of low engine power. My options were to perform an energy beneficial maneuver or break off from pursuit to defend against lurking enemies. More often than not, snapshots at passing aircraft, well-timed maneuvers to catch enemies while they are at low energy states and knowing when to daringly cash in all airspeed for a momentary engagement window are the common ways aerial victory is achieved. In an odd way, I appreciated the feeling of vulnerability that could only be made up for with pure pilotage. I am not often in these situations. The damage model is not so detailed every part of an aircraft can be blown off, but accumulated damage in specific areas can affect flight performance. Rudders can be damaged to the point they are almost uncontrollable, fuel leaks can reduce flight time, shot up wings will reduce maneuverability - it is enough to make the game mechanic functional. Closing distance with the target before firing increases machine gun effectiveness, though long distance shots can be equally effective with good aim and patience. I ran a few tests where I intentionally flew very sloppy and uncoordinated to see what would happen. It often resulted in me getting shot down within a few seconds of a dogfight starting. The AI enemies do capitalize on mistakes in varying degrees. In the middle of a six aircraft dogfight, I was surprised when I suddenly exploded without warning. My attacker being far below me, but they chose to zoom climb and stall out just to put a long burst into me. This was not a cunning human player, this was the single player AI. While the aircraft can be flown with the thumbsticks and face buttons of VR touch controllers, the basic cockpit has enough interactive elements to make using your hands well worth it. The stick and throttle controls are presented well enough that even small adjustments are immediately evident. Letting the throttle go will have it return to its idle position, allow the player's free hand to interact with the cockpit, while their other hand continues to control the flight stick. There are some specific things with cockpit interaction I'd like to do a deeper dive into, but it may be too much to get into this early in. There is more to talk about, but I have yet to finish a full campaign, haven't tried a secondary game mode nor PVP, only have two aircraft unlocked... there is much more to do. Though I can say that I'm having a genuinely good time with this flight-sim lite and plan on writing more about it soon. This may be one of the games that helps me break through my log jam of World War setting games. Who knows? Maybe there is hope for me yet. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

I have been slowly getting back into playing DCS more regularly with my friends as of late, and I cannot deny that VSN's latest mod, the F-4B/C Phantom II, has been the reason why. The Phantom is one of my favorite aircraft, so I wondered: What kind of effort did the developers had to put in to deliver this aircraft free for everyone to use? We asked PeeJott, one of VSN's main developers, some question about the VSN as an organization, the effort it took to make it a reality and some details about their future plans! We sincerely thank him for letting us have this interview with us and for giving us pre-release access to the mod! So without further ado, let's get this one rolling. INITIALLY POSTED: 02/07/2023 MINOR ADJUSTMENTS: 11/11/2023 Q. Hello and thank you a lot for agreeing to have this interview with us! Let’s start with a simple one, could you introduce yourself and tell us a bit about what you do? A. Hi and thanks for this possibility. I go by the nickname of PeeJott and I am one of those guys that find pleasure in looking at formulas all day (well in my free time at least) since I do the systems-coding and EFM-coding for some VSN-Mods. I started this DCS-Modding journey just in the fall of 2020 with zero lua or C++ coding experience, so a lot of learning was involved . My first project with VSN was the F-104, where I made the SFM, SFM-engine model and EFM. Q. What is VSN and for how long has the team been active? What does this group do and who is part of it at the moment? A. Well, VSN is a group of guys who like to spend their time “enhancing” DCS World in different parts. The most obvious is flyable mods. I guess it is safe to say that CDPKobra is the main guy behind this branch. There are a lot of other guys [have been] with VSN [for a long time] or just joined recently. The good thing is, everybody is interested in different parts of modding. The other good thing is that you are not being looked at suspiciously when real life comes in the way and you need to take a break. Real life always comes first, but I think I can say that we really like to get the job at hand done in a certain amount of time. So those projects which seemingly last “forever” [are not that common]. That is one reason why VSN has a lot of FC3 mods, since you do not need to code stuff like an electric system which is neither fun nor will somebody flying the plane say: ”Holy molly, this electric system is really a work of art.” The F-4B is the exemption to that rule, I guess. Q. How did the Century Series came to be ? A. Well, honestly, I wanted to fly a F-104 in DCS. That was my goal when I set out to learn this stuff. There just was no [other Starfighter mods] except the VSN F-104, so I started with it. Since I wanted to help make it fly like a real F-104, it began the journey of learning, searching, extracting data and what else [it would take to] get a decent flight-model. Once we kind of finished the first version of the F-104, CDPKobra asked: And what do you want to do next? I said: well, I guess after 104 comes 105, and so we started that project. The Century-Series just has such cool planes. Real milestones of aviation, if you compare them e.g. to a F-84 or F-86. They are [a] totally different kind of planes and quite a “leap” in innovation for their time. That is a very big factor, they do look sexy and have that kind of “Why not?” attitude. After the 104 and 105 it felt kind of right to go down that road a bit more, so there are some “Century-Fighters” still to be made. Q. The F-4 Phantom has been a long-awaited aircraft by people who enjoy DCS world. Was the team keenly aware of some of the public pressure to represent the Phantom mod well? A. I don’t know if we were thinking a mod, let alone a mod that was made by VSN, would get such an audience. Of course, since we, by luck crossed our ways with J.P.Ferré while working on the 104 (cheers to you JP) we had a bit of an edge in the “Trailer and movie”-department. But we started out making the F-4B [as a] FC3 mod with an EFM and borrowed F-15C cockpit, since we initially did not have a custom 3d-cockpit. We wanted to go down the same road we already went down with the 104, but since I was working on the 104 standalone ;-) and had help from a few really fantastic guys, I thought I could try to make it our first standalone. [Two and a half] months after we started our F-4B project, Heatblur Simulations (HB) announced they were making one too, [so our attitude it was more of a] “well, we already got this far, we could as well go the rest of the way too.” Once it was clear that one of the best third-party devs for DCS was making a Phantom-II as well, we kind of said to ourselves that our mod will most probably not get such a hype and will not have to be the long awaited Phantom by everybody, since that one is right around the corner and delivered in the form of the F-4E by HB. That does not mean we took it as [an opportunity] to be lazy, but we gave ourselves the freedom to make it feel good but in the [sense] that we do not need to get everything 100% perfect and on the spot. Even cooler, that it came out like it did and we got a lot positive feedback. Q. How difficult was it working on such an early variant of the Phantom? A. Well, the good thing with less capability is, that it has less capability. Less capability means less coding work. So on that front the century-series is a lot more “coder-friendly” as an early F-16 or something like that. Astonishingly, the AeroData was already gathered in the NASA CR-2144 (Aircraft Handling Qualities Data) and delivered in a form we just needed to extract and could use in the EFM-Template made for the 104. Engines were almost the same (J79 as well, a later variant with more thrust) so we were pretty safe there as well. And regarding sources, we did find a lot of freely downloadable manuals and data-sheets, so that was not the big problem. And we got the help from the community, once the first F-4 did a good job regarding external model and EFM. So we got the rest we needed from those guys already interested in the Phantom. Q. How difficult was it working on the EFM for the Phantom? A. As I said above, we used the aero-data from the CR-2144. It had all the data I could wish for, so I just needed to extract it. Of course, that is just the beginning, since DCS simulates the world, but does behave differently here and there and there are 1000 ways to code an EFM, and the one way we went down might have some difficulties here and there. But in the end, it looked not too bad. Of course, since we are using a more simple approach to EFM-construction than others, a lot of special behaviours needed extra coding time. E.g. the wing-rock in pre-stall-flight-regime was a nightmare. Post-stall still is a “work-in-progress” since it is really hard to model uncontrolled flight correctly, so that it feels right, not to fast, not too slow. Then the F-4 had those “fuel-tank”-issues, that the CG really moved a lot from full-tanks to empty tanks. We could work on all that only thanks to our main test-pilot (shout out to Toby) who knew what he was talking about. So after the initial data-extraction and placement in our EFM-Template there was a lot of testing and tuning and retesting going on. Of course, sometimes you do hit a pretty hard spot and don’t really know how to get past that. For us that was a mix of 3d- and coding-problem. Our planes tended to fall through the cracks of the back-blast-walls of the supercarrier. Why? We really have no idea. So that took an extra amount of time to get to a “decent” level. It would be a bit, well weird, if our fleet-defender would not be able to safely take off from a carrier. Q. Were there any problems that you and the team faced while working on the clickable side of the cockpit? A. Well, we had not done clickables before, because we mainly used FC-3. So it was another journey to get that stuff done. Big Thank you’s are in order to all the guys in the DCS ModdingHubDiscord since they really helped a lot. Of course, the clickables held problems as well, since our switches and buttons refused to move, so we had to get creative again and kind of just played around that problem. Of course, more coding work if it had worked the right way around, but sometimes you can get so frustrated that you just say: “Well scr** it, I’ll make it the way I know it works, even if I have to code x-amount of functions more than I would need to.” Of course, making a two-seater plane opperatable by just one pilot was another “problem” so we could not get every switch and lever we would need for Radar operation, since we just wanted to make the front-seat cockpit. Multi-Crew really is a mystery to us and so everything needs to be manageable by just one person. So it is a clickable cockpit (or partly clickable) for the pilot, and he has to flick some switches via Key-Commands since there are just not the buttons to press in the front-cockpit. Q. Napalm is a weapon that does not appear on other aircraft in the simulator. How did the BIN-200 perform during internal testing? A. Well, we just got informed, that there was this BIN-200 available in DCS. Originally it came with one of those mainly “Trainer”-Planes, I do not know which one that was. But suddenly somebody in our discord wanted to make a NAPALM-custom weapon and somebody else said, wait a minute, it is already here, take this one. The Bin-200 is especially interesting with the “Fireball-Script” since without it, it will just act like a cluster-bomb. So for visuals you will need that fireball-script. The name does not disappoint. Q. Creating the AN/APQ-72 as a standalone radar for DCS is quite an accomplishment. How does the team feel about achieving this? Is the method used to create this radar now available for future aircraft mod projects to utilize? A. Well, honestly, it was not us who made that radar, it was NERO from the ModdingHubDiscord who made a Radar and RWR-Example which is usable by everyone, as long as it is used for a free mod, if I remember that right. That radar-example is pretty basic, but once you get to know how it works or at least manipulate the right variables, you can make it simulate a lot of different performing radars. The only thing is, that I think it can’t do TWS-locks, only single target track. That was no problem for us, since the F-4B only had the possibility to track one target at a time. Of course, as always with modding, you do need to take the time to understand the code to get an idea where you need to start tuning to get it to a state that is usable for your own project. But yes, it can be used for further projects as well, as far as I know. Q. How was modeling and texturing the aircraft like? How many people worked on it? A. Well, since we do not have that many Texture or 3D artists (the one really good 3d-Artist we’ve got now, only joined recently, the other one was pretty busy real life) we bought a license for the 3d-model, since F-4’s get modeled pretty often. The work on the liveries was in the hands of Urbi, who just always does a great job and has an eye for details.The cockpit we needed to order from an outside 3d-Artist as well, since at the time we just had nobody who could have made a full functional 3d-cockpit with good looking textures. So yes, we do spend our money and our time to release mods everybody can enjoy for free, since it gives us joy to work on the mods, make them better, develop them further and may be find a bit of time in between all that 3d-ing, coding, animating to fly a few sorties with those planes we just made. So, if you count everything together, the external 3d-model + textures was one guy, the cockpit + textures another one, skins another one and fitting everything together was another one. So basically 4 different people were working on the external and internal model of the F-4B. Q. With Heatblur’s F-4E on the horizon, what do you think this mod’s place in the game will be? A. I guess it will get good use as long as HB’s F-4E is not here. Once the F-4E enters the “DCS-Scene” it will be “second-fiddle” to it, which we are totally cool with. We do “know”, that the F-4E will be another remarkable Aircraft from HB with a depth that will just be pretty hard to beat. So I guess, since F-4E is not carrier capable, as long as HB does not deliver an F-4J, our mod will still have a place in the hearts of Phantom-Enthusiasts. Once that F-4J comes out, well I guess those guys who have to look onto the euro will still enjoy flying our mod and would not have bought the F-4E anyway, so it should not be in the way for HB’s F-4E. And may-be our F-4B will give HB the possibility to deliver another almost feature complete module, since the urge to “release it now” is not as big as without it. Who knows…. Q. Which other aircraft will VSN work on for the Century series after the Phantom is out? A. Ohhh, we do have some really nice aircrafts in store for the community and cold-war-airplane enthusiasts. If you take a look at the Century-Series fighters, there is still the 105 that needs a custom cockpit and an EFM. The 102/106 is still there to make and the 101. I guess you can expect at least one of those planes from us in the nearer future. The 104 will get a big update in the even nearer future and later on will get standalone-status with, I might add, really, really good looking systems. Everybody who says now, the F-15C-Style-Radar is to easy will bite his tongue once he sees our version of the NASARR-F15C radar…it is very interesting to operate…very, very interesting. There are some more planes that will get fixes, updates or overhauls, but I do not want to give away too much. Q. All VSN mods will be freely available for anyone, correct? A. Yes. Everybody can download them for free. The only downside is, that for the majority of planes the FC-3-Pack from ED is needed, since we just can’t make custom systems for every plane. That would just take too long. Q. That will be it, thank you a lot for answering our interview! Is there anything else you would like to add before we conclude? A. Thank you for finding an interest in those pretty cool cold-war-style-planes and having me answer your questions. I hope everybody can enjoy our mods and if she/he finds something that is not 100% as it is in reality, well, may be it can be generously overlooked with a little smile on the face knowing that there are people making those mods that do have a normal day-job which work during evenings or weekends to get you the possibility to fly those planes. And as much as we want to get everybody the best experience, we might and will fall short if measured against third-party devs or the reality. About the Interviewer Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000's leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010's. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and content manager ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy#9034

A hands-on experience with a pioneering era For someone that is comfortable flying a fourth generation all-weather naval strike fighter, it is amusing how a simple cockpit and reliance on eyesight can complicate things. Riding a wave of encouragement from my fiancée to continue talking about these foundational combat aircraft, I return to discuss Warplanes: WW1 Fighters (2021) by Home Net Games. In my previous article, I touched on how this virtual reality title handled the experience of flying these wooden wonders with your "own hands". It is time to delve deeper. You would assume a literal wooden crate with canvas wings would not have too much going for it. You would be surprised! Note that this article was primarily written flying the Fokker D.III and Fokker E.III in Simulation difficulty. The Notebook The notebook mounted above the left knee of the pilot is a rather sleek addition to the cockpit. I enjoy this method of combining multiple pieces of information into something that can be accessed without having to pause the action. When fully collapsed to a single page, the notebook only shows the cover page. This page has the objectives of the mission or instructions for the task at hand. Below it, a diagram of the aircraft shows where the player has taken battle damage and the status of the damaged areas. Certain parts that receive too much damage, like the engine or the wings, will have noticeably decreased performance. Flipping through the pages, players can find instructions for how to control the aircraft in various ways and using other interactive elements of the cockpit. Players flying in Simulation or Total War game modes have an added benefit of reading through the manual as needed before takeoff. Squadron Aircraft Selection An unusual function is above the pilot's right knee. This set of photos is a part of the squadron management system. While on the ground at the airfield, aircraft can be unlocked, upgraded, customized, assigned to squadron mates or set as the player's primary aircraft. While airborne, players can reach out and touch these photos, hotswapping from one aircraft in the flight to another. Early on in the game this function has somewhat limited use, but when a wider variety of aircraft are available it gets interesting. Starting off in a lightweight fighter then transitioning to a heavier hitting bomber to complete a ground attack mission is possible. Seeing a wing mate in danger could be solved by taking the controls of their aircraft yourself. Machine Gun Management For these rudimentary aircraft, their primary weapon system is machine guns. Either attached to swiveling mounts that players pivot towards their targets, mounted over the wing to avoid damaging the aircraft propeller or firing through the propeller utilizing synchronization gear. Besides squeezing the touch controller triggers to make their machine guns fire, players can use their hands to manually reload the machine guns mid-flight. Manually reloading them during lulls between the action is helpful in maintaining readiness. But expect to run out of ammo during a twisting and winding air battle at some point. I cannot tell you how many times the loud clack of an empty ammo belt has ruined the precious few seconds I needed to finish off a skilled foe. A reward for manually reloading is a temporarily increased rate of fire. Just for a few seconds. I feel as though they should have included a gun jam function for the machine guns in this game, but I admit it would somewhat endanger the gameplay. So long as it would be a jam that the pilot could reliably fix, it would work fine. But more serious mechanical failures that could only be repaired by the ground crew would be unreasonable. Takeoff and landing sequences are only available at the two highest difficulty levels. These also only occur at the start and end of each sortie. With no sensible way to address a severe gun jam mid-mission, it is understandable With takeoff and landing at airfields only done at the beginning and end of missions, it would be somewhat unreasonable for a mission to be failed because of a random equipment failure. Especially with no sensible way to address the jam mid-mission. Bombing By Hand An aspect of aerial warfare in World War 1 that I feel like is overlooked. Air-to-ground combat during this time has been defined by the strategic bombing campaigns by Zepplin airships and the first multi-engine heavy bombers. But what is somewhat forgotten, or hardly mentioned, is the initial tactical bombing efforts by smaller one-man or two-man aircraft. Ranging from standard infantry hand grenades to more purpose built 20 pound bombs with metal fins that attempt to stabilize these bombs as they fall through the air. With no dedicated bomb sights or devices used to compute impact areas, much of this done just by getting a rough idea of wind direction, taking a guess at an ideal bomb altitude and physically throwing bombs over the side of an aircraft toward ground targets. In Warplanes: WW1 Fighters, players can also deploy handheld explosive charges against ground forces. Depending on which aircraft they are flying, players reach into a bag full of explosives installed within the cockpit. Like the actual conflict, deploying these bombs is done purely by eyesight and taking a best guess. This can be made easier depending on the difficulty setting. At lower difficulties, a visual cue appears on the ground showing a general blast radius. While flying at low altitude makes this bomb delivery method easier to perform, it does expose the pilot to more danger. Flare Gun Flare Pistols or Flare Guns were prolific in the air, on the ground and at sea during World War 1. They were primarily used for illumination and communication between forces with specific patterns and colors. In this game, they have a more action movie approved use. The flare pistol is immensely useful against airships and barrage balloons. Able to set them ablaze with one or two direct hits. It usually takes dozens of bullets to destroy these resulting in multiple strafing passes needed to destroy them. As effective as these are, the player has very few of them available. Expect to have to still have to strafe some lighter-than-air objects to get the job done. The level of cockpit interaction is not to the same level of complexity of VTOL VR - which has become a standard measurement for virtual reality flight arcades or sim lites - though its unique offerings do make it memorable. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

This is a topic that has been living in my mind for quite a while now, ever since the Typhoon module was confirmed to be a collaboration between Heatblur and TrueGrit. That announcement meant that not only were we going to get a full-fidelity Typhoon; but that, somehow, the module I considered an impossibility for years was going to be a reality. As it stands now with what we as the public know, Heatblur's Typhoon and Razbam's F-15E Strike Eagle are the only two modern 4th Gen fighters that are currently being developed. The future of DCS modules seems to have gone in a very different direction, one that seems to be embracing a completely different era of historical warfare: the Cold War. This article was heavily inspired by Enigma's "Why Cold War is the Future of DCS" video, I highly suggest giving it a look as he goes into several other aspects that will not be talked about in my article. COLD WAR'S DEVELOPER-FRIENDLY ROSTER One of the biggest hurdles that developers have when it comes down to modeling aircraft, as far as I am aware, is acquiring documentation about an aircraft's systems. With modern aircraft, this issue is a lot more prevalent. The confidential nature of many of the systems used in modern day frontline fighters could prevent modern modules from being made or certain systems from being modeled, which has been the case already for certain systems that should be present in a couple of already developed modules. Modules more modern than the ones we currently have would require a significant release of system and flight data documentation would need to be released to the public, which is extremely unlikely in a world with rising tensions between countries. Other games, such as War Thunder, have had very severe issues with some of their users releasing confidential data about certain vehicles for have them implemented in-game. This is a problem that DCS does not need, seeing as we already have relatively modern versions of frontline fighters in-game. One way to avoid these issues is by developing aircraft which are no longer in service. This way there will be little to no problems with confidentiality, with the exception of some systems which some countries might still consider to be classified. But, even taking all those possibilities in consideration, aircraft from the Cold War (1946-1992 but specifically ones from the mid Cold-War period) have an advantage in this regard. One proof of this is the Community A-4E, a community project that has the same level of fidelity as an official module. It was created using publicly available information by extremely dedicated individuals, proofing that with the knowledge and proper documentation. MORE TO BE EXCITED FOR: UPCOMING DCS COLD WAR MODULES It seems like this tendency is not something only being talked about by the more enthusiast-side of the community, but also something that first and third party developers have been keeping their eyes on. There are two upcoming modules, soon to be released, that are from the Cold War: Aerges' Mirage F1 series (CE,EE,BB and M) and IndiaFoxtEcho's MB-339A/PAN. Expect our first impressions of the Mirage F1 next week, as that is when it will be released! Heatblur are famous for delivering quality modules that deliver unique experiences, it just so happens to be that all of their current projects (with the exception of the Typhoon) are also Cold War modules. I, for one, feel like their upcoming F-4E is going to bring us a great BLURFOR aircraft, and one that will be the perfect rival for RAZBAM's MiG-23MLA once that one gets released. Other developers such as Magnitude 3 and FlyingIron are also working on earlier cold war projects, with the F-8E and A-7E respectively. There is a lot to be excited about in the Cold War scene and I, for one, am excited to see whether all this hype will pay off. I sure hope it will as that would mean that my personal favorite side of DCS would be its more fleshed out for years to come. A BRIGHT FUTURE IN THE PAST AND PRESENT I love my modern modules. I am fond of the feeling of being in complete control over every system in my cockpit and the ability of, after trial and error, being able to become one with the systems. What was complex becomes simple and what was simple becomes second nature. That is the appeal of modern aircraft to me and there is nothing like it. At the same time, most of the fondest experiences that I have had in DCS World have been in Cold War servers. Flying low to try and avoid detection with my dear friend Hueman as my wingman going against enemy players. The feeling of having to get close to your target, that intimate level of combat, is what makes Cold War aircraft something unique. As Enigma put it in his video: "...with less emphasis on the systems, it puts more emphasis in a need to be proficient in flying and combat maneuvering" I share this point of view, particularly seeing as both eras complement each other. The modern era provides experiences that the other cannot. To enjoy DCS at its fullest, one will need to dip one's toes in both eras and learn how to balance this. Now, from an upcoming module perspective, DCS will be dominated by Cold Ware releases for a while. Which is a trend that I see no signs of stopping. About the author Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000's leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010's. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as a writer and the co-founder of Skyward ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

Just a few days before the beginning of Steam Next Fest 2023 (February 6th to February 13th, 2023), fans of the flight game genre have been given early access to the first demo for Nova Squadron. As someone who continuously checks in on this online indie gaming festival, there are usually very few flight games available per event. Seeing six demos in one festival could be considered a "big turnout" for the genre. After just a few days with this demo, it's safe to say that the genre will be well represented this time around. Nova Squadron has actually been in development since May 2020 by its developer Clara Gale. From its initial tweet that joked about planes "being complicated" to the release of alpha demo 0.1.0 on January 26th, 2023, Nova Squadron has covered a lot of ground in roughly over two years and eight months. After eagerly waiting for a chance to try it finally, I spent some quality time with the demo. Introduction For those that don't know, Nova Squadron is a still-in-development single-player arcade flight simulator. It utilizes a rougelite system as a part of its core gameplay. As players start new "Runs" (a.k.a. campaigns), their progress yields two types of currency that are used for temporary upgrades that reset after each Run is over or can be used for more permanent upgrades over time. The story so far takes place in the atmosphere of Jupiter in the year 2283. As a pilot of the overwhelmed Interplanetary Nations Defense Force, players lead Nova Squadron against a coalition of galactic nations and city-states attempting to invade Mars. Utilizing a map of Jupiter to show the order of battle between each side, Nova Squadron embarks on offensive and defensive missions to win the war. The enemies include frigate-class space warships, levitating military bases, and swarms of high-performance fighters. Here are a few things that jumped out on the initial playthroughs: User Interface (UI) This is something I want to highlight briefly. Not flight related, but this game easily has one of the cleanest user interfaces I've seen in a while. Even for more complicated functions related to customization and upgrades, the UI remains consistent and smooth. The tactical map shown before and after each sortie is fantastic. It is simple enough to understand at a glance, with clearly shown directions indicating what friendly and enemy forces are doing—enough info to inform but not overwhelm players. No Nonsense Tutorial Nova Squadron starts with the player flat spinning out of a high-altitude battle, needing to perform a flight system and weapon system check before re-engaging in combat. What made this tutorial stick out was how no-nonsense it was regarding what controls players could and could not use as the tutorial moved on. If the next maneuver was a standard roll, then pitch turn, the developer made it so focusing on that maneuver was the only thing you could do. There was no question as to whether or not it was the correct maneuver. There was only one option! It sounds restrictive, but it made the tutorial more concise. Flight Model and The Phoenix Just hearing this setup, I fully expected the flight model to be "cracked." That is to say, nearly unmanageable. With aircraft responsiveness being so sensitive, keeping track of close-range dogfights and making small control inputs would be almost impossible. I was fully prepared to start setting axis curves to dampen control inputs. I was completely wrong. The player-controlled fighter known as the Phoenix is not only easy to fly but is probably underperforming compared to expectations. That's not a complaint. The Phoenix can handle anything thrown at it from the beginning. Its speed, roll, pitch, and yaw rates are what you'd expect from the "starter" aircraft in a flight arcade game. The default controls are tuned enough to even allow for the precision firing of unguided ordinance. Alongside its onboard laser cannons, it can equip primary and secondary weapons. These include proximity fused cannons, various types of laser cannons, two types of homing missiles, a tesla coil type weapon (a personal favorite), and other futuristic options. Its initial stats favor speed more than anything else, with mobility being the second highest stat. From the start, it doesn't have the ability to perform wild airshow-style maneuvers while flying at high Mach speeds. At lower speeds, its reaction control system can temporarily boost its pitch rate, but it's not enough to wildly boost its maneuverability. However, the Phoenix's baseline performance being at this level further emphasizes all aspects of customization and upgrades possible in this game. Even the most minor performance change is noticeable, making any unlocked upgrade appreciated. After putting in some concentrated time to see how far I could improve the Phoenix, I found myself caring much more about every possible upgrade. It made me care more about what exactly I was trying to accomplish rather than haphazardly attaching parts just because they were available. I sincerely hope its baseline performance doesn't change much in the coming months or by the game's release in 2024. The way the Phoenix is presented in this game right now is a smart move. Customizations and Upgrades Nova Squadron has three layers of customization. At the squadron level, players can edit just about every aspect of their flight of five aircraft. The player can change the primary and secondary weapon systems per aircraft, change three layers of paint customization, and even the engine plume color. Players can customize the Nova Squadron to their preference in every mission if desired. While an option to apply a paint scheme to all aircraft in the flight would help reduce editing time and make it easier to coordinate liveries, there is little else a player could ask for. With a full-color palette available, this game is sure to have some eclectic screenshots in the near future. During a Run players receive Credits (CR) and Renown points after each mission. It's important to know when to spend and when to save for more successful future runs. Upgrades that are purchased with Credits are only in effect during the active run. These minor performance upgrades reset at the start of each run. So hoarding credits long-term doesn't have much value. New parts are unlocked after each mission in a Run, but they, too, are reset when a Run is over. Renown points are used for more permanent upgrades that carry over to all new Runs once they are bought and equipped to an aircraft. Parts unlocked with Renown points remain unlocked, giving players an immediate edge early in the game. General upgrades to aircraft speed, mobility, defense, and internal cannon are done with the Research Point option. These effectively act as building blocks for accessing more advanced builds faster in later playthroughs. Mission Restrictions In the demo, there are four types of missions available. They include dogfights, interception missions, and ground attack missions. Well, "ground". The focus in those missions is destroying bases levitating in the atmosphere. I mean, it's Jupiter. There's no land; what do you want? I liked that some of the mission restrictions varied between either destroying enough enemies to exceed a certain amount of points or destroying specific targets while still leaving time for players to rack up extra credits by shooting down other targets at will. Planned Updates to the Demo According to the demo's announcement post on Steam, it will receive updates over the next few months. These include new mission types, new enemies, a new ground attack focused aircraft for players to fly, and other features. With the demo being available long-term, it's a good chance for players to see how their developer will continue refining the game as a whole while updating a demo new and old players can refer to at any time. Recently, I've noticed a few still-in-development flight games taking this same path, and you can't help but appreciate how available these developers make themselves for suggestions, interactions, and edits directly from players. It's commendable. Nova Squadron alpha demo 0.1.0 is a strong, positive step forward for this indie game. I think it will perform well at Steam Next Fest, even with players brand new to the franchise, because of how approachable, easy to understand, and how rewarding time put into the game can be when the result is a custom aircraft tailored for their own use. I'll be sure to let everyone know when my peak high-speed interceptor build is complete! Be sure to check out the demo for yourselves during next week's Steam Next Fest. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

It has been quite a while since we last talked about the Falcon BMS Series, and since then a lot of changes and updates have been dropped, some of which have elevated the simulator to levels that I never thought possible. Let's take a look at the latest update, BMS 4.37! Initially released late last year, Falcon 4.37 provides an overwhelming amount of features and fixes that make 4.36 look like a small incremental update by comparison. Of all these, two stand out above the rest, so let's take a look at them! VR SUPPORT FOR FALCON BMS This is something I never in my life thought would happen, to the point that I did not believe it until I saw it in front of me. Somehow, the magician developers and coders that work in this project managed, in some unbelievable way, to add VR support to a game that has its roots in 1998, which means that it is as old as me! VR headsets and stereo rendering were not even a proper, tangible reality at the time of Falcon's initial release 24 years ago. It is impressive that they have managed to not only add support for this feature, but also that it has a much better integration with Steam VR than I thought it would have. Let me be clear, though: It is not a perfect implementation. It still lacks proper controller support, meaning that you will have to use your mouse to interact with the menus, cockpit and radios. This is less than desirable, but the developers are aware; which can only mean that they are actively working on improving this feature. The stereo rendering also does leave something to be desired. I do not know how to explain it in technical terms, but when you are in VR you do feel as if the image's distortion is not being properly set for the headset's optics, specially when it comes down to your peripheral vision. This expresses itself in the form of a somewhat flatter picture that does not convey proper depth in certain scenarios. Does this means that this feature is useless? No, absolutely not! Quite the opposite, it is the best addition that 4.37 brought to the simulator. I tested it in several scenarios, but the one that made me realize how much of a game changer VR is for BMS was during an AAR sortie (above picture) and it was an excellent experience! NEW UI, NEW STYLE AND THE F-15C EAGLE It might sound small or, but the second-biggest change for me in this update was the implementation of the new UI for the simulator. It made me feel as if I was playing a modern game with a more minimalistic and readable design, which is something that I had never felt while playing Falcon BMS in any of its previous iterations. These changes also extend to other submenus such as the campaign setup, the radio menus and other smaller elements that might seem inconsequential, but they add to the experience in a way that I never thought would amount to anything, but it did! Aside from these changes, the other major addition to the sim is the flyable F-15C Eagle! It is in its early stages of development and not WIP, but it is good enough to be used. Its avionics are mostly functional, and the flight model is fun; which to me are two of the essentials that any aircraft should have. It has many, many bugs, but I am sure that most of these will be addressed with the full release of this aircraft sometime in the future. The cockpit 3D model is at the same level as the Vipers, which is unexpected coming from the game that has the F-16 as its namesake. The external model is good as well, but it has some minor inaccuracies that, while not game breaking, are noticeable. That being said, it is evident that the team spent a considerable amount of time adding this aircraft to the game and I applaud them for the effort, even more when you consider that it came at the same price as Falcon BMS: completely FREE. THE FUTURE OF FALCON BMS AND THE FRANCHISE The Falcon franchise is now back in Microprose's hands, which means that the original publishers of the title can now work on new entries to the franchise. This opens a world of possibilities and, excitedly, makes my imagination go wild with ideas as to what could be done to bring Falcon back with a completely new title. The developers of BMS did share a sneak peek into what awaits us in Falcon BMS 4.3X, and it looks like we are getting a major graphics overhaul. It will come in the form of proper support for Physically Based Rendering (PBR) materials and textures, as well as a new terrain engine and many more features that will give this game a much-needed uplift. I am excited for BMS, for more dogfights, for more operational theaters, for better features and for a possible new entry to the Falcon franchise. Here's for Falcon 5.0! About the author: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as a writer and the co-founder of Skyward ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

In the past couple of days, we got a couple of surprises in regard to additions for VTOL VR, the VR-only flight simulator. The main one, aside from a pretty sizeable update, was the release of the T-55 Tyro, the first trainer and multicrew-capable fighter available for this game. Today we will take a look at some of the features that this small plane can offer and if it is a good fit for you and your play style! EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL 3D MODELS The modeling work is very much in line with the rest of models already present in VTOL VR. It looks sleek, yet the textures are very simple. This certainly aids in keeping the VRAM footprint low and the frames high, a crucial aspect for any VR game. This doesn't mean that the models are bad, quite the contrary. The T-55 is a very well-designed aircraft that, while being fictional, manages to keep a certain sense of realism and structure that only VTOL VR has. The cockpit feels believable, and its layout flows naturally, even in the heat of combat. Props to the devs for managing to keep this trainer classy. That being said, the T-55 does seem to be heavily inspired by the Korean FA-50 "Golden Eagle" supersonic trainer and light attack aircraft. Quite the choice, considering that this aircraft is very capable of performing both training and combat duties. ITS PLACE IN THE GAME: A TRAINER AND A FIGHTER In the VTOL VR "meta", the Tyro fills in a role that has not been filled yet either by a mod or any of the official aircraft: training. It excels greatly at allowing you, and your friends, to share a cockpit and delegate duties while in combat or in more relaxed scenarios. The concept of having a pilot and an instructor is nothing new, but in a game like VTOL VR, this concept shines in a different light. I flew with my friend Golfie for a while, accompanying him in the instructor seat. To say that we had a blast would be an understatement, it was some of the best fun I've had in a VR flight sim in quite a while. It was extremely refreshing to get on the backseat and manage the systems as a team instead of being task-saturated. Golfie focused on flying while I managed all the systems, meaning that we could both focus on our tasks a lot more as we just trusted each other. This allowed us to accomplish objectives meant for more capable aircraft in the T-55, which was something that took me by surprise. It is impressive to see how much teamwork can affect the experience in this game, something that we had already gotten a glimpse of last year with the AH-94 add-on. A COMPLETE PACKAGE While it really doesn't bring anything new to the table, it is fair to say that the Tyro is a very complete add-on. Aside from the aircraft, you also get access to a voice-acted campaign where you play the role of a rookie pilot flying for a small air force. You will face against a more capable adversary that will challenge you in every single way possible. This campaign's purpose is to show you what is capable with the T-55 and that, despite being a less maneuverable and capable than the rest of the aircraft in the game, it is still an extremely versatile and unique machine that could serve as your point of entry to VTOL VR and even combat flight sims as a whole! The aircraft also has an instructor controls override system that allows the backseater to take the controls from the "trainee" at the front, a feature that is extremely useful for training scenarios where the pilot does something that puts the aircraft in danger. In such cases, the instructor can forcefully take control away from the pilot to save the aircraft. I'll admit that I used this feature to have some fun. I took the controls away from Golfie to, well, have some fun. Not only that, but I would recommend just trusting your backseater. This aircraft is a fit for almost everyone that could be interested in VR flying, a fact that is only enhanced by its very competitive pricing and accessibility. About the Author Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000 leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as a writer and the co-founder of Skyward ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

Last night (10/13/2023) we hosted our first DCS World event, which we had been preparing for quite a while. I am happy to report that it was a resounding success, specially since we also did it in collaboration with the VRC Black Aces community! In terms of hosting missions on our own server, we have always used publicly-available community-made sandbox missions. These were mostly for our own private use with our password locked server; so yesterday's event was not only our first public event, but also an awesome way for us to test our mission creation skills. This event allowed Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza and Caio "Hueman" Barreto to create a very specialized mission, one that had to be both reliable and entertaining. Usually, these two concepts don't get along, as what makes a mission entertaining and dynamic usually makes it more unreliable. It was a challenge that I never expected Ribbon-Blue to take, but I can say that not only did he manage to achieve his goals but also surpassed my expectations in the process. Before the event, we had only tested the mission a couple of times and with a limited amount of players. This meant that, even though we had proved that the mission was stable in a multiplayer environment, we never stress tested it. Time was up, so we started the mission. EVENT DAY! When the event started, both Blue and I just kind of stood there watching it unfold before us. We opened the F10 tactical map and watched how more than 30 people immediately joined the mission and got their jets started. Watching that wall of aircraft fly right towards the frontline was a sight to behold for both of us. The initial stages of the missions were, understandably, chaotic. Everyone was still trying to figure out what the enemy composition was and how they would tackle different tasks. From those, it was clear that one task was very well covered: CAP. Constant CAP was established as soon as the first aircraft got in the air, with dogfights and engagements occurring soon after they got into their positions. One early engagement stood out from the rest, one between four pilots and a JF-17. These pilots not only struggled to engage the Jeff, but also managed to get two of the four pilots shot down in the process. This elusive JF-17, which was part of a 4-ship formation, managed to evade several missiles while establishing enough dominance to turn tighter than every other fighter in that furball. That one engagement lasted over 7 minutes, and ended with a single missile shot that came from a plane that wasn't even in the air by the time the dogfight started! SURPRISING ORGANIZATION One aspect that surprised me a lot was the amount of sporadic collaboration that happened during the event. People were self-assigning tasks and organizing waves of attacks to defeat the enemy. SEAD and DEAD missions, as well as preemptive strikes, were planned and sorties were made. This was extremely important because the mission has some deadly air defenses in place, as well as an established EWR network that feeds the AD units and interceptors alike. Fog of war is also a factor, which limits the amount of intel you can get from the tactical map. Seeing players use pre-planned weapons such as SLAM-ER and HARM was a sight to behold, I was not expecting to see anything but constant air-to-air for five hours straight. Instead, air to ground became a focus in the middle of the session, once air superiority was sort of established through their sheer amount of allied fighters running CAP. WE WILL RUN MORE EVENTS! What we learned yesterday, primarily, was that we now want to run even more events. Last night was an awesome experience. Seeing people having fun with the mission Blue spent countless hours creating was great, specially considering that this event was kind of improvised to begin with. We'll notify both on our and the Black Aces' discord servers, and Twitter/X pages, whenever we host another event. Be it a multi-day mission or a DCS night, stay tuned for those. About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

When most people think of DCS World they usually have in mind aircraft like the mighty Hornet or the Mi-24P Hind. But there is one aircraft out there that not only satisfies every single criteria to be considered an excellent module but also one that has been built over the years by a group of passionate developers whose sole purpose is giving the community a full-fidelity module for free: the A-4E-C Skyhawk! Today, we will be taking a look at the "Scooter" to see if it is a fit for you. As always, our review will be separated in several sections for ease of reading: External and internal 3D models Visual and sound effects Flight modelling Mission capability Armament Ease of use and learning curve By and for the Community Is this aircraft for you? OF NOTE: This is a free community-made mod. Not an official product. This review was prevoiusly made with 2.0, but we have now verified everything said applies to the most recent version (2.1.1), so we have renamed the article and updated certain parts to adjust. ORIGINALLY POSTED: 07/10/2021 EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL 3D MODELS The Skyhawk, despite having been made by a very small group of people, has nothing to envy from official modules as the external model has received quite the uplift from the previous versions. It now has normalmaps and improved roughmets. Both of these have made the model look as sharp as it has ever looked. Does this mean it is perfect? No, of course not. If one wants to be nitpicky you could point out at the unwrapping in the nose and on other surfaces, but this has not once detracted from how 99% of the model looks. Here, have a look for yourself! To me, the biggest difference between versions would be the look of the cockpit and the internal 3D model as a whole. Just like the external model, the cockpit has also received updated textures, normalmaps and roughmets. The changes might look subtle at first, but they start coming into their own when you spend time in the cockpit. From the wear on the throttle and stick to the stitches on the cockpit walls and the amazing-looking gunsight, Plusline's attention to detail has made the Scooter's office into a pleasant one! Once again, have a look! I have included day and night pictures as well as some other examples: VISUAL AND SOUND EFFECTS One of the most noticeable changes that v2.0 brings to the mod is its audio in addition to some very welcome visual effects. There might be some slight changes here and there between now and the final release, but let's have a look at the almost finished product. Under high and sustained G scenarios, visible vapor can be seen over the wings. This is an effect which is impressive, even on official modules. This, to me, is one of the best implementations of wing vapor on a community-made mod. It looks really good. Other noteworthy visual effects would be the cockpit shake when the aircraft is under stress and the navigation lights at night! When it comes to sound, the mod has received a complete overhaul of both external and internal sounds. Which means that you will no longer hear the very noticeable Su-25T sounds (or at least you will not under most circumstances). Everything from start-up to the haunting noises of your old radar warning receiver, the noise of passing wind, airframe stress and even pneumatic actuator sounds. The best part, to me, is that now the aircraft has the most crucial part of a module: auditory feedback for engine and maneuvering. When you start pulling Gs, you can hear the aircraft react to it. You hear your slats deploying with a very noticeable "THUMP" noise that helps in understanding in which part of the envelope you are. Saying that what the audio and 2D artist, plusline, has made is great would be an understatement. Here are some extracts from the mod so you can hear it and judge it for yourself: EXAMPLES: Full start-up sequence sounds. Notice the turbine spooling up, then the ignition sparks go and after that, the full spool-up to idle. Amazing detail. Aborted take-off. Engine spools up to 100%, then the slats come up with their thump sound, after that the wind noise starts ramping up. Then, engine goes back to idle. Fly-by at 360kts. Engine was at 100%. Notice how the engine changes from front to back. VOLUME WARNING. FLIGHT MODELING Just like with any of my reviews, I will disclaim here that I will not judge realism or accuracy as I have never piloted a real A-4, so my opinion does not hold any value in that regard. But with that being said, this has got to be one of the most realistic-feeling flight models on any mod I have ever tried. It is also one of the most accurate, if one guides itself with performance charts. I have had the privilege of being one of the dedicated quality assurance (QA) testers for the EFM for almost a year now. While I will go over a bit more detail of my experience as a tester later, I will say that the EFM has come a long way ever since I first tested it. From being able to go over Mach 3 when I first flew it to it being recognized as an excellent recreation by an ex-Argentinian Air Force A-4M pilot who helped the project as a subject matter expert (SME). This aircraft feels good and grounded, from the first moment you take it into the air to the heat of dogfighting. It is easy to fly but hard to master, as your AFCS (Automatic Flight Control System) is very rudimentary and basic. It still aids a lot in flight stability, primarily with the Stability Augmentation (STAB AUG) switch on, which will dampen down your flight controls and apply necessary corrections to increase stability. JNelson and Farlander, the developers responsible for the EFM (External Flight Model), have done a fantastic job in bringing the A-4E-C to new heights. The slats now react accordingly, changing the way the aircraft behaves as they deploy. You can feel them deploying and sense how they modify the way the air interacts with the wing. Slats also deploy realistically, this means that it is the force of the wind that keeps them in the wings, only deploying when the force from the slats themselves overcomes the wind force. She can also defend herself pretty well in a dogfight, but you will have to manage your energy very well so that you do not lose it all by trying to pilot her as you would a F-86 Sabre or a F-5E Tiger II. She requires that you fly her with attention, and that your are hands on the stick at all times. Overall, I think that this mod has one of the best-feeling FMs in the sim. MISSION CAPABILITIES If you set your mind to it, this aircraft can do pretty much about anything. You will need to plan your attacks accordingly but, if you plan well, you could destroy an entire fleet with Skyhawks. It can carry an absurd amount of weaponry for its size, as well as some pretty unique weapons that allow for some very interesting scenarios. Additionally, this mod is one of the only ones in which air to air refueling is possible! Thanks to a couple of discoveries which we will discuss with JNelson in our upcoming interview with him, radio communications are now a part of the Skyhawk. This means that you will be able to communicate with tankers, AWACS and any other support unit. Pretty damn neat! Remember, you are a ground pounder by nature but that does not mean that you do not have fangs to attack and defend yourself from enemy aircraft. You are also able to do SEAD missions thanks to the AGM-45 Shrike, a missile that is unique to the A-4E in the simulator as of the time of writing this review. I will go more in-depth into weaponry on the next section. You also have your ground radar, which is due to receive an update on v2.1 of the mod. It is a rather simple radar that is mostly used for navigation purposes and for terrain avoidance at low altitude under low visibility conditions. Last but not least, you have the CP-741/A Bombing Computer. This radar-based computer calculates the ballistics of your drop when a point is designated with the radar with it enabled. After designation, you will have to pull up gently and steadily until you hear a release tone. If everything went well, your bombs should be on target! With all of these tools at your disposal, you have a very capable 3rd Gen fighter bomber! ARMAMENT COLT MK.12 CANNONS Your internal cannons. These 20mm cannons can be pretty effective, providing that your aim is true. Thankfully, you will not suffer from the defects for which this cannon was infamous, like stoppages and jams after hard maneuvering. MK.4 HIGH PERFORMACE EXTERNAL GUN (HIPEG) PODS I would not suggest that you carry more than one of these, or that you be like me and equip all three because "It would look cool". These puppies pack as much recoil as you think a external 20mm cannon would. They are a lot of fun, though. AIM-9 SIDEWINDER The well known IR seeking missile. You can carry up to four of these. The most modern variant of this missile that you can carry is the AIM-9P-5. UNGUIDED ROCKETS You have two varieties to choose from. Either you go with ZUNI rockets or FFAR rockets; with their respective pods, of course. They can be really effective or very disappointing, but I blame that on the DCS damage model. UNGUIDED BOMBS AND CLUSTER MUNITIONS You have all the unguided bombs that you want, your limit is your maximum take-off weight. Seriously, check out the weapon list: Mk.81, 82, 83 and 84. Basically, the entire Mk.80 series with all the variants. AN-M30, AN-M57, AN-M64 and AN-M65. WWII munitions, they still go boom. CBU-1 and CBU-2 Bomblet Dispensers. Mk.20 Rockeyes. Using Mk.82s as our example: MER racks up to six bombs on the centerline. MER racks up to two on the inner pylons. And one bomb on the outers. That would be over 6,000lbs worth of Mk.82 bombs. Impressive for such a tiny bird. AGM-45 SHRIKE This missile is quite impressive. It is an early anti-radiation missile, which makes its operation surprisingly easy. You can imagine it a a gigantic sidewinder that searches for radar emitters instead of heat. Launching it is as simple as pointing it to target, waiting for tone and letting it fly! But here is where its age catches up with it, as it is quite inaccurate. The devs have taken care into making it realistically inaccurate, so good luck! COUNTERMEASURES AND RADAR WARNING RECEIVER Normally, I would not talk about systems like these. But seeing as they are a bit interesting in their implementation for the Skyhawk, I felt that they deserved attention. For decoys, you have 30 chaff and 30 flares. They are separated in buckets which salvos can only be programmed on the ground by groundcrew. They are not automatic and you will have to have your Mk.1 Eyeballs out and pay attention to your RWR to know when to deploy them. The AN/APR-23 Radar Warning Receiver. It is audio-only so here is how it is interpreted: 0-5 secs is how it sounds when nothing is happening 5-10 secs is how it sounds when something is searching 10-15 secs is how it sounds when you are locked 15-20 secs is how it sounds when you are being fired upon Pretty neat, huh! I love this archaic system to bits. It is unique and it has been implemented wonderfully. You can imagine the terror of the pilots over Vietnam having this piece of junk as their only way to tell if they were being shot at by a SA-2! EASE OF USE AND LEARNING CURVE This aircraft is just good. It has a relatively shallow learning curve, if I am being honest. It is easy to learn all of its systems, despite how analog some of them can be. I think that it is an excellent aircraft if you want to learn how to fly an aircraft that lacks fly-by-wire (FBW). You will be able to get a sense for manual trim, unassisted flight controls, with the exception of the STAB AUG and hands-on landing and approaches. With v2.0, the nose wheel steering system has be removed as it was found to be anachronistic to the A-4E variant. Now, ground steering will be done through differential braking which can be a bit daunting for newcomers. In practice, I have found that, after some tweaks were made to the way the nose wheel casters, differential braking is neither hard nor complex. It is just a matter of getting used to it. Additionally, the devs have implemented an assisted mod that uses an axis, usually the rotary Z axis on a stick, to determine steering direction to apply breaks accordingly. It is still a beginner friendly aircraft, one that I recommend to everyone looking for some excitement or for those searching to learn how to properly fly an aircraft of this era. BY AND FOR THE COMMUNITY Sometimes it is hard for me to believe that such a good module is available for everyone to enjoy, for free. And even more surprisingly, it is also one that has kept its source code open for everyone to see and learn from it. But one has to understand where and how this project started to comprehend the purpose of it. It was always meant to be volunteer-made, money was never on the table. Plenty of people have contributed to the module over the years in different levels. Coders, modelers, texture artists, testers, etc. It was a project that was born out of the DCS Community. And one of the only one that has delivered and thrived like no others have done before. I am glad that I have been able to do a very small part in helping the project grow by being a dedicated QA tester for the EFM. Even if all I did was through rocks at the cockpit until something broke or fly the aircraft around like a manic so that I could find holes on the flight envelope. It is very rare to see a project like this, but when it happens, it leaves a mark. IS THIS AIRCRAFT FOR YOU? If what you want in a module is: An amazing combat experience. An excellent flight model made by dedicated developers. To be able to do carrier operations like back in 'Nam. To carry as many bombs as a heavy bomber from WW2. A lovingly crafted community creation. If you don't mind: The fact that you are not spending ANY money. The lack of modern systems. If you are a technowizard, this one will matter. The fact that it not officially supported by ED, not like that matters. Having your eyes on the pit all the time, as you do. If all or some of the above is what you want, then the Community A-4E is for you! About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000's leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010's. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as a writer and content manager ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

The perspective of a creator and a pilot for one of the largest consecutive airshow events in VRChat Aviation The World Creator Perspective Written by Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos To say that September Showcase is stressful for everyone involved would be an understatement, but it is the world creators who suffer the most. Not only does everything need to be ready with very tight deadlines, but also optimized for two different platforms with very different requirements and limitations. That being said, I suffered from a very particular set of challenges due to what I wanted to showcase for the audience. Currently, I am one of the few world creators in the Black Aces that makes their own aircraft models from scratch. This meant that not only did I have to polish a world, but make a realistic-looking, game-ready aircraft in a short amount of time. This year's original plane was the SW-210 "Colibrí", a two seat trainer designed by our very own Caio D. "Hueman" Barreto. We also had another creator with us during my week, Reason2Die4, who designed a heavy fighter, the F/A-27G "So-Ur", which I also textured. This made my world itself quite challenging, as it was also a collaborative effort. Working on the Colibrí was some of the most challenging 3D work I've done so far, mainly because there were parts I had to design myself. The best example of this independent design work was the landing gear. This was one of the few parts where I had no references other than the placement of the wheels when deployed, so I busted out my 3D skills and went to work making one in around than two day, with animations included. UV unwrapping was an absolute nightmare, as always. Getting the textures compacted and done in such short notice made me worry about the quality I would be able to deliver, but I managed to muster every ounce of effort I had in my soul to finish it on time and even make two separate liveries for the showcase! Working with Unity was relatively easy, thanks to all the other world creators such as VTail being there to help answer any doubts that could arise. It took me quite a bit to get my world done. Getting all the systems working was a bit difficult, but at the end of the day it was the Quest version which gave me the most issues. Meta's Quest 2 platform makes creating worlds an unbelievable hassle. Worlds need to be below 100MB, with a reduced number of assets and limited use of shaders due to the lack of shadows and a depth buffer. Thankfully, I had prepared everything in advanced to be as easy to port as possible, so I had a bit of an easier time with it as I would have otherwise. The world needed to be up one week before the show because the pilots needed that time to figure out the aircraft, their physics and which maneuvers they would do. This was achieved with my planes, both the Dragonfly and the Colibrí, but the So-Ur got delayed by a couple of days due to some issues we were having with its integration. We solved said issues, and we were able to mount one hell of a show. For world creators, September Showcase is the most stressing event one can participate in. It feels sort of like a gamejam, an effort against the clock. This year, we had to create 5 different showcase worlds and around 17 new aircraft. It is incredible to see that we are able to pull something like that off, specially when you consider that some world creators hadn't even touched Unity in months; and one, Pilot, had never touched it as his showcase world was his first one ever. I love this event, but I am glad I will have my free time back now that it is over. I will get to work on the Colibrí's world at my own pace now, see you there! The Pilot Perspective Written by Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza This is something that was mentioned in a past interview with leadership of The Black Aces Stunt Team, but it is hard to not overstate it. As someone that has experience with various types of flight games and simulators, what keeps me coming back to these showcase events is the unique and challenging type of flying it is. It is not something that can be replicated on platforms outside VRChat's aviation community. Even high level Digital Combat Simulator virtual flight teams do not deal with this type of situation. Let me put it in perspective using September Showcase 2023. This year, five world creators affiliated with the Black Aces VRChat aviation group designed a set of aircraft to be shown off in front of live VR crowds. Normally these showcases - airshows that unveil new aircraft to be released for the public to enjoy - are a bi-monthly events. The pilots that fly these aircraft have weeks to learn their intricacies, spread out their practice sessions and get new routines ready. With there usually being two or more types of aircraft available, transitions between each routine also include deciding on directions of departure and approach and timing between music. For each aircraft, they must learn a degree of control from the edge of stall through consecutive aerobatic maneuvers; well enough to consistently perform those maneuvers before the public sees them. However, during September Showcase, the time to prepare and get everything right is reduced to less than six days per week. For five weeks straight. For the pilots, this time crunch presents a real challenge. Even for a group of 13 pilots of varying levels of readiness. Even rotating teams of pilots per showcase only lessens the workload somewhat. This year, they were tasked with mastering an array of aircraft from radial piston legends to fictional, but believable designs all flew with varying degrees of realism depending on the intention of the world creator. We flew the following aircraft: A7M2 Reppu Dassault Mirage 2000 Dassault Rafale-M B-17 Flying Fortress B-24 Liberator B-29A Super Fortress F-14A Tomcat F-84F Thunderstreak F-86F Sabre F/A-27G So-UR JAS-39C Gripen MiG-15Bis Fagot MiG-23MLA Flogger P-47D-22 Thunderbolt SW-201 Dragonfly SW-210 Colibrí The nerves and stress can run high during this time, with a lot of "try it and see what happens" maneuvers during practice. Many of them result in spectacular explosions and laughter. But even after the hardest performance in front of crowds so large, pilots lose frames per second while flying formation, the immediate feedback from a live audience is such a rush. Leaving the cockpit of an aircraft then being met by dozens of spectators and an almost guaranteed after party, it reinforces the feeling of it truly being a live event. During these times, the mixture of relief that everything went well, comments from the audience and comradery from fellow pilots really wraps up the experience. It has been well over one year since I started airshow flying with the Black Aces stunt team, and the allure of high-flying performances in front of a "live" virtual audience continues to dazzle me to this day... I just thank goodness every month isn't September. Haha!

No longer satisfied with occasionally roaming around on the website, I recently made the plunge and purchased a PICO-8 "fantasy game console." My first serious interaction with this software was in September 2022. The surprise of finding flight games and simulators on this platform led me to write the article "Curious Case of PICO-8 Flying". With the official virtual console now in my collection and a newfound interest in trying games created by users worldwide, I once again dove into what other flight titles were available or in development. The most useful feature of the PICO-8 software is the Splore function. It primarily acts as the search function for games made for the platform with extended functions like saving them to a favorites list, accessing game jam collections, seeing recently featured games, and similar helpful features. Recently I was engrossed with Combat Helicopter, created by Mot (Twitter, Itch.io). I cracked a smile reading the game description about being the pilot of the P8 64K Apachi armored attack helicopter tasked with a series of missions in enemy territory. The initial visuals of the game reminded me of LHX Attack Chopper, which I enjoyed the Sega Genesis port of in the 1990s. The moment I slowly increased the collective and felt distinguishable weight behind the controls, I figured there was more going on than I was expecting. This wasn't just another flight arcade game where I could set the engine power to near max and barrel roll the helicopter whenever I wanted to. I looked up the game cartridge's webpage for detailed information developers occasionally add that the Splore function doesn't present. The warning note from Mot tells users up front that the game emulates 8-bit flight simulators from the 1980s and 1990s. It isn't a straightforward arcade helicopter shooter game like the Strike series, but firmly more of a combat helicopter flight simulator. It can be played in a web browser or on the PICO-8 software for free using a keyboard and mouse or a USB gamepad. Even though advanced flight controllers aren't supported, the game's flight model was detailed enough to be noticeable within seconds of starting a mission. Managing the output of the collective lever, limiting bank angles, battle damage that decreases engine output, flying nap of the earth to avoid search and tracking radars, and similar tactics you'd expect to use in a more modern flight simulator. Having played Apache Air Assault somewhat frequently as of late, I found myself applying the same tactics in Combat Copter while noticing that this smaller indie game is less forgiving. Cockpit diagrams by Mot, developer of Combat Chopper. Everything you'd expect from a game of the era portraying attack helicopters is there. 30mm chain gun, unguided rockets, and anti-tank missiles are available in amounts realistic to the real-world AH-64 Apache. A limited supply of countermeasures are selected and deployed manually by the player. There is also an option to switch to no weapon selected - effectively "Master Arm Off". Enemies include main battle tanks, outposts, bases, surface-to-air missiles, AA guns, ships, and armored personnel carriers. When a potential friend or foe is within weapon range, they are displayed in the aircraft's camera display. The unit, distance from the target, and status as friend or foe are shown. A blue or red box is projected around the target for quick visual reference. A simple threat detector represented by two lights beneath the altimeter shows when the helicopter is being tracked by enemy radar (IR) and when a missile has been launched and is following the helicopter (S). Besides using flares, flying behind terrain, or last ditch effort, high-energy maneuvers may defeat missiles and other anti-aircraft fire. Navigation is based on coordinates that must be cross-referenced on the moving map display. The mission objective is shown on top of the instrument panel, it's important to take note of the coordinates of the home base. Normally only mission objective's coordinates are shown with the takeoff coordinates appearing after mission completion. But landing at base mid-mission rearms and repairs the helicopter. Both running in chain gun blazing and a slower pace of engaging targets from distance and returning for are supported. My first few playthroughs admittedly ended in failure, mainly because I was underestimating such a simple-looking game. After taking it seriously and approaching it at a slower pace with more planning in mind, I was slipping behind mountains and more surgically choosing my targets with a higher success rate. It was satisfying to get into the flow of the game. The path to victory wasn't destroying half an army in a day, but meaningfully choosing where to cross the frontline, which targets to prioritize and when to leave to re-attack from a different direction. After my experience with Tiny Sim, a PICO-8 civilian flight simulator for the Cessna 172R Skyhawk, I had thought there wouldn't be other full-flight games available. Combat Copter has been a fun homage to flight simulators I vaguely remember from my childhood. I strongly recommend it to anyone interested in combat helicopter games and sims. It seems like I'm bound to dig deeper into this faux retro gaming platform, look forward to a future piece about what else is out there. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

There are only a few things in this world that fascinate me more than space. It is a place of greatness filled with emptiness and potential that one day might be exploited by our civilization. It is in one of these futures that Flight of Nova takes place. Flight of Nova is a space sim developed by David Lloyd (Aerovery Lab) in which you play the role of a pilot who operates in what seems to be a distant mining colony world. Let's take a look at this new entry in the space sim genre and what it has to offer for us. YOUR SHIP, A PLANET AND A MISSION Flight of Nova is a space flight simulator in which you, as a spacecraft pilot, have the opportunity to fly a SSTO to and from the orbit while accomplishing missions. This loop is very simple but surprisingly addicting for reasons I will explain in the next section. The planet in question is to scale with 12,700Km in diameter, putting almost 1:1 with Earth. This aspect alone is pretty impressive, even more considering that the game does not have any kind of faster than light travel available for the player to use. This means that travel times will be long, so do not coming expecting an experience similar to ED in this regard. Missions are mostly about transport and search, with more types coming to the game at a later point in development. They are simple but easy to follow. There is a very important distinction between ED and Flight of Nova, a deliberate omission: Flight of Nova does not have a single trace of combat. To be completely fair, what intrigued me when I booted up this game was the prospect of a true space sim-lite that allowed me to fly through space in an uninterrupted way. This omission of combat, to me, is a net possitive. FLIGHT DYNAMICS AND SIMULATION This is, usually, what makes or breaks a space for me. Thankfully, this is where Flight of Nova truly shines, as it is the area in which the developer has spent of their time and it shows. The flight dynamics here are some of the best I have seen in an indie space sim, and have nothing to envy from the AAA titles. Your craft, be it the Freighter or the SSTO, has mass and it feels real. The main thrusters feel like how they should: unstoppable. It is impressive what proper-feeling physics can do for the sensation of flight. Zero-G maneuvering is a challenge and you will need to learn how to manage your moment of inertia in a 3D space in which you have 6 degrees of movement. Docking with a ring is absolutely nerve-racking and one of the experiences that made me appreciate the work that the developer has put into the physics. I found myself making the smallest of movements to correct my own mistakes, activating my reaction control system (RCS) for fractions of a second to control my craft as I approached the ring. The closer you get, the more the tension rises. You look at your HUD, your points of reference, the current status of your alignment. You fight your instincts to over-correct, trying your hardest not to ruin your approach. This feeling, one that some might call "the zone", is what made me fall in love with this game. Hardly does a game make me map almost every single axes I have available, yet, here we are. I even found myself mapping RCS up and down to my toe brakes for improved control. It can totally be flown with simpler hardware, but; if you have the capability, I highly recommend going for a full set-up with HOTAS/HOSAS and pedals. It is a brilliant approach between true precision space-flight dynamics and forgiveness. A balance rarely seen in more mainstream titles. To be honest, it reminds me of Kerbal Space Program in this sense. A masterpiece of accessibility that will have you wondering at the physical forces involved in these movements. Although, despite being the highlight of this game, there is still one important aspect I have not talked about: atmospheric simulation. This game has a stupendous implementation of a realistic atmosphere, one that will burn you if you attempt entering it at the wrong angle. You will have to plan your approach and point your heatshields towards the entry vector to survive. Here is what happens if you get greedy and decide to enter at the wrong angle: TUTORIALS, STORY, FREE MODE AND CAMPAIGNS At the moment, the game does not have a proper story. One has been hinted and confirmed to be in development by the developer, meaning that we will see it a later point in this game's development cycle. But what it has are tutorial missions and simple campaigns. It is evident that tutorials were a necessity and for the most part they serve both as learning tools and to showcase the different facets of this game's gameplay loop. This is always a net positive for any game, so having them here is great. The current campaign implementation is simple yet gives me more excuses to fly in atmosphere, forcing me to learn how to hover properly with VTOL mode and to learn how each of the two different spacecraft handle flight. That being said, I have spent most of my time in "Free Mode". Free Mode is exactly what it says on the tin. You select a station or base, then, you are let loose. You are free to do whatever you want. It might sound boring, but this game's emphasis on in-depth flight dynamics, both in and out of atmosphere is the real drive of the game. I could go and fly for hours, despite the lack of fuel that both spacecraft suffer from. CONCLUSIONS Flight of Nova is a title with a lot of promise, one where you can see and feel the amount of passion that the developer has poured into it. It has a long road ahead, for sure, but I am fairly certain that this developer will continue to put love and care into this wonderfully-crafted game. Its in-depth realistic mechanics make it feel alive, making you always come back for a short flight every once in a while. I am sure that once more missions and features are implemented, such as interplanetary travel and headtracking, that this game will find its place among stablished and fondly-remembered space sims of old. About the author Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000's leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010's. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

Much like bomb damage assessments, hindsight is 2020. And, to be blunt, looking back at the hot takes about Tiny Combat Arena (TCA) from the 2020s makes me wonder why so many of its early supporters had such a harsh reaction. The early access version of the full game doesn't seem like the absolutely massive, semi-open world they had dreamed of, but the core of what they fell in love with is more stable and ready for expansion than ever. If my many articles about this game haven't given it away by now, I am openly a long-time, passionate supporter of this flight sim lite. To the point that I requested a different writer of Skyward Flight Media play our pre-release press copy of TCA and write our first impression piece about it without my potential bias. It has been roughly two months since the early access release of Tiny Combat Arena in February 2022, but just as notable is that it has been about two years since its developer announced a significant change. In April 2020, Why485, the solo developer of TCA, posted an announcement that energized and disappointed sections of his fanbase. In the future, the development would focus on producing a complete game with a more narrow scope than its years of tech demonstrators and the most popular iteration of its demos. Many took critical points like de-emphasis on the Arena mode and reduced pilotable aircraft roster as a declaration that the final product would do away with what the pre-release player base wanted. From 2020 through 2021, worries and unwarranted negative comments about how the upcoming game would essentially be gutted of its core content were prolific. Videos showing the outdated demos were also presented as though they were new content without mentioning the announced change in development. All of this was just as prominent as the new core game development that the developer was pouring himself into. Even after its 2022 early access release, that underlying feeling of disappointment and confusion semi-frequently arises, with some of the more colorful comments stating that the pinned FAQ felt more like a list of removed features. The somewhat cold responses from the developer and the blunt FAQ are frequently stated to be a way to "manage expectations." Now more than ever, it is easy to see why that is necessary. Especially with some so apparently disheartened, they went back to playing the 2019 and 2020 demos, now known as Tiny Combat Legacy. As though they are somehow paying respects to the spirit of "true" TCA or something... Just about every element of what gave TCA its core identity is alive and well. Better than ever in most cases. The game mechanics, extended options and framework for a stable future release are either in place or on their way to be completed. In the frequently revered TCA demo from mid-2019, the model viewer and settings menus were inoperable. The current early access aircraft loadout screen offers pre-set loadouts, with the loadout system being actively developed to create an even more advanced version. More weapon options are available now than before for both the player and non-player-controlled units. Ground forces are a more significant part of TCA than just a few wandering vehicles. Support for head tracking, adjustments for realism settings, and full customization of keybinds and movement axis for gamepads, keyboard mouse, and flight sticks. The Quick Mission Builder further expands TCA's overall content by adding a second game mode that generates dogfights, ground strikes, or combined arms missions within minutes. The mourning over the loss of a handful of aircraft with arcade-y flight models for a single well-modeled AV-8B and the groundwork for adding other aircraft seems a bit much. I miss flying the SEPECAT Jaguar and VJ 101 from the demos too, but the assumption that Tiny Combat Arena essentially became low poly Combat Air Patrol 2 is quite the stretch. There are certain weapons and aircraft models already in-game with notable player-related information in the model viewer, coupled with some statements in the FAQ that hint at a future expanded aircraft roster. But again, expectations are being actively managed by the developer during early access. Finally, the beloved Arena Mode, the headline feature of the game, is in its best iteration. Capturing bases is more in-depth with massive ground battles, the ability to render locations unusable through airstrikes, and supporting ground forces throughout the process of capturing bases. Landing, repairing, and rearming while the battle rages on is more time pressing and exciting. The demo's version of shooting down a few defender aircraft and landing at an undefended airfield to capture it with the player's aircraft pales in comparison. It only seems smaller because the Arena demo has a map restricted to one island, for now. But with the development of a much larger map and refinement of the existing archipelago map, it's clear that the next major update for TCA is going to meet and exceed the landmass expectations that people's assumptions require. In my opinion, this is all a classic case of user-generated hype meeting game development reality, compounded by a lack of following updates as they are posted in real-time and equating the size of a play space as an indicator of the quality of a game that is still in development. All while curiously clinging onto outdated, more technically limited demos and dismissing two years worth of concentrated game development to create a full-fledged game. When compared to the demos that experienced many gameplay changes, one would assume that a stable release with refinement over time would be a more reliable product to support. For those that want to be in the know, Why485's Twitter timeline, Steam news page and Trello are open for anyone to see. About the Author Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

It has already been a couple of years since RAZBAM introduced their second-generation soviet fighter, the MiG-19P "Farmer-B". This module opened a new era of aviation for DCS and, at the same time, gave the redfor players another clickable aircraft to use. This is something that DCS desperately needed, and still does to a certain degree. Despite falling into a niche, it is clear that the Farmer is a module that has only become more important as time passes; especially after announcements such as the upcoming F-100 Super Sabre by Grinnelli Designs, Heatblur's F-4E Phantom II and even the A-7E Corsair II by FlyingIron Simulations. These aircraft being included in the game give the MiG-19 an ecosystem to live amongst, which gives it purpose. Today, let's take a look at this soviet deathtrap and all of its quirks and features to see if it is a fit for you and your playstyle. As per usual, I will be separating this review in several parts: External and internal 3D models Visual effects and sound design Flight modeling Mission capability Armament Its Place in the DCS Ecosystem Is this aircraft for you? EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL 3D MODELS Visually, the external model and its mesh seem to still hold up to current DCS standards, but just barely. With new quality standards being set by Heatblur and even RAZBAM themselves, the MiG-19P starts looking a bit old, but not in a bad way. In my opinion, as someone that also works as a 3D modeler and texture artist, it is clear that this look is a product of the ever-changing shaders and lighting of DCS World's graphical engine: EDGE. This model was made in 2019, and the textures were adjusted for the functionality and features of EDGE at the time. A slight overhaul of the normalmaps, and some tweaks to the diffuses and roughmets, would be enough to get it to look much better with DCS' current lighting and lighting environment. As for the cockpit, this module feels more dated than it should, but I cannot figure out exactly why. It could be the excessive weathering on some surfaces, the way that the weathering was done, or even the roughmets and the way that they affect the exaggerated color of the instruments themselves. I would also like to emphasize something: this cockpit is still an amazing piece of work. It looks accurate to the few pictures I've seen of the Farmer's office. The module also includes translated versions of its cockpit textures for ease of use. If you struggle with Russian labels, then just switch the cockpit textures to the English one! VISUAL EFFECTS AND SOUND DESIGN This is an area in which this module seems to be severely lacking. There is a noticeable absence of special effects under high-AoA or high-G scenarios, at least as much as I have been able to see during my time with the module. The afterburner effect looks as awesome as any other module's, but I cannot help to notice that the mach diamonds appear to be too clean for what I've seen of soviet engines of the era. The flame should look dirtier and messy, since these are some of the first mass-produced engines to ever have afterburners installed to them. This is an effect that is much more evident on Magnitude 3's MiG-21Bis module , as its flame is much more wild and erratic. Sound-wise, this module has a unique environment inside the cockpit itself. The engine whine is evident going from idle to full power, but the afterburners have little to no sound effects to indicate their status. In other modules, engaging the afterburners has a significant aural signature for the pilot, which lets them know the state of their engines. Audio replaces a lot of the feedback that you would normally have while flying a real plane, making it one of, if not the most important aspect of a module for the pilot. I think that RAZBAM could overhaul the sound to improve the piloting experience. FLIGHT MODELING DISCLAIMER: This is always a tough category, as like with any other aircraft, there is a lot to take into consideration other than just the feel of the flight model. This category is the most subjective one in this article, as I do not have any real world experience with this craft. I will only base my opinion on practical experience and knowledge of practical aerodynamics and the theoretical behavior that a MiG-19P should have under certain scenarios. With that out of the way, the best way I have to describe the feel of flying a MiG-19 is that it flies how it looks. It feels like a heavier, faster and more unstable MiG-15, which means that it can be a deadly fighter when flown by a skilled pilot. That is this what I will emphasize, the Farmer does not feel like a rookie-friendly fighter. It is something that became more and more apparent the more I flew it. It is an aircraft that will demand a bit more from the pilot, specially at lower speeds and high AoA scenarios. The high angle wing sweep of this aircraft makes it a bit of a handful, but that only adds to the experience of feeling like you are strapped to a soviet deathtrap. Dogfighting with this machine is a great experience, specially if you know how to handle your speed. It will not beat any modern aircraft in a 1v1 scenario, but you stand a chance against older foes if those pilots make a mistake or two. You are still an early supersonic jet, after all, your wings are a compromise from a time in which supersonic flight was not well understood. MISSION CAPABILITIES You will not be able to do any multirole in this airframe, at least not in the modern understanding of the word. This aircraft is primarily a fighter, through and through, with its air to ground role being more of an afterthought than anything else. This aircraft was also one of the primary interceptors for the Soviet Union when it became operational, something that reflects a lot in its all-weather capabilities. It is technically capable of all-weather, day-and-night interception of bombers, but that is only with the help of GCI (Ground Control Intercept) and by relying on its weak radar. This was typical of fighters of the era, be them Soviet or American. Just do not expect this to be a MiG-21, and you will be pleasantly surprised. ARMAMENT 2X NR-30 30MM AUTOCANNON This is your primary armament for both air-to-air and air-to-ground. With 75 rounds per wing, for a total of 150 rounds, you will need to make your shots count! 2X R-3S AIR TO AIR MISSILES These missiles are the Soviet reverse engineered version of the original AIM-9B. They are useful against non-maneuvering targets, but if you try using them at anything pulling any minimal amount of Gs you will not hit them. ROCKETS These rocket pods equipped with S-5 rockets feel a bit weak. As I said earlier, the air to ground capability feels tacked-in as an afterthought. They will still destroy lightly armored targets, so yeah, use them only for that. BOMBS With only a couple of types of bombs available and no way to properly guide them on target, you should only do this if the mission mandates it and you are the only aircraft available! ITS PLACE IN THE DCS ECOSYSTEM The MiG-19P falls on a very weird place in DCS, at least at the time of writing. It has no counterpart and, aside from its use in historical scenarios or Cold War servers such as Enigma's, this module seems to lack a purpose for its existence. Many of its historical rivals are not currently in the game, but many of them are being developed. As stated during the introduction, the Farmer stood alone at the time of its release. It felt like a cowboy living in the city, a fish out of water that kind of fit, but not as smoothly as one would have hoped. As time passes and more aircraft get added, it is evident that the times of the Farmer not having a home are long gone. The F-4E's release is fast approaching, and work continues on the F-100. These two modules alone give the MiG-19 more than enough competition in the skies, making it a module worthy for any redfor player. IS THIS AIRCRAFT FOR YOU? If what you want in a module is: Feeling like you are strapped to a flying coffin. Having a blast destroying early NATO fighters Having to toggle your afterburner manually Experiencing early Soviet designs. If you don't mind: Having to toggle your afterburner manually. Not having any BVR weaponry. A less than desirable radar. Very limited air to ground weaponry. If all or some of the above is what you want, then the MiG-19P by RAZBAM Simulations is for you! About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord : Cubeboy

I have been playing Strike Fighters 2 for the best part of a decade now and, if I can be completely honest, there are only a couple of reasons that keep me coming back to it. It is not the prettiest game nor is it one that has received any significant update in many years; but, at the moment it has a key feature that no other flight simulator has: its Custom Campaigns. They might not be the most technically impressive, or the most dynamic, but they are extremely unique. The only way I would have to explain its uniqueness would be by asking you this question: "Did you ever want to defend a fictional kingdom by participating in the largest air war in history as a mercenary?" If you answered with a yes, then you would love these scenarios. The part that I like the most about them, even more than flying, is the fact that my actions do have consequences. Whether I accomplish my missions or not, the frontline will be affected. A successful mission means that you side will gain territory, be it a city or a runway, and failing it means your enemy will gain it. There also also other missions that are run by AI that happen at the same time as yours which means that they can win or fail too. A ramification of the way that missions are tracked is that the game tracks the combat statistics of every pilot, including the AI. After getting more than 5 aerial victories, any pilot will be considered an ace. You will see both allied and enemy aces in your tactical map as named units. What happens to them during combat matters, too. If they get shot down and die, they are gone for good; but, if they manage to eject, they will return! On the other hand, these campaigns are the only way to play campaigns with modded aircraft. Mods are an integral part of Strike Fighters, so being able to play campaigns with them is great. I usually just fly them as a mercenary, since it makes sense for many of the aircraft that I modded. Not like there would be any other way you could justify a Mirage F1 flying for the Israelis during the Yom Kippur conflict. I wished more people actually knew about this possibility. The Custom Campaign DLC is one that is very much inaccessible. You need to install in a VERY specific order, or it could break. Aside from the plethora of issues you could have during installation, the biggest problem this DLC has it that it has mostly been forgotten by the community. This mode has brought me a lot of enjoyment while playing SF2, and I would like to bring a bit of attention to it. If you have SF2, make sure you try it out. About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000's leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010's. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

That's not a fluke, that's a feature. Since the beginning of the genre, combat flight simulators of all difficulties and complexity have consistently taught us one thing: evade the incoming missiles. There are different methods to achieve this. Use advanced electronic countermeasures, deploy a panacea-like cloud of chaff and flare, or expertly maneuver to physically evade them. Even for daredevils that can deftly slide and backflip past incoming missiles with only a few feet to spare, they go in with a plan for how to get out of harm's way. There are plenty of examples of Non-Player Character allies and enemies with the ability to intercept missiles. Defensive units like Close-in Weapons Systems (CIWS) are the most common with other surface-to-air missile units capable of launching interceptor missiles to strike down incoming guided missiles. This makes sense, they were specifically designed in the real world to fulfill this role. The more uncommon, story plot-driven examples center on highly advanced technologies capable of deflecting even bullets or an opposing pilot being so skilled they are capable of shooting missiles out of the sky themselves. But that's typical "plot armor" advantage. What are we human players going to do? Shoot the missiles down ourselves? ...well... In Battle Fairy Yukikaze: Fairies Dancing in the Sky (2002, Xbox Original, Personal Computer), any aircraft can shoot down missiles with the onboard aircraft cannon or underwing gun pods. The important addition that makes this possible is how missiles launched by allies and enemies are visually represented on the aircraft's Heads Up Display (HUD) with their own specific symbology. With missiles being tracked through this method, being able to visually discern a missile's location is possible. With the incoming missile on the HUD, players come head-to-head with the threat to put their cannon on target. As soon as it is in gun range, there are only a few seconds left to complete the intercept. A single, well-placed burst can then be fired to destroy the missile before it impacts the aircraft. Any hit on the missile results in it immediately exploding. Though if the player misses their shot, the result in extensive damage to the their aircraft with a guaranteed loss of flight ability or systems - if not instantly exploding. A firm understanding of the characteristics of the internal cannon of each aircraft is required. Knowing the cannon's maximum range, the attitude the gun is fired at, the rate of closure between the aircraft and the incoming missile is necessary. There are minor discrepancies in the firing angle of these cannons, which vary between aircraft. Some have an attacker style gun, which fires at a slight downward angle in comparison to the nose. Unfortunately, the aircraft gunsight in the HUD is not always completely accurate for each aircraft, so firing while visually tracking the tracers that leave the cannon is the one way to understand its actual trajectory. This "do it yourself" CIWS isn't explained in tutorials, so you may be wondering how I can say this with confidence. It began during a poor personal choice to commit to a pair of JAM aircraft attempting to chase me down. Rather than accelerate and escape, I turned to fight and found myself just a few seconds away from meeting a missile face first. I panic fired the gun while fumbling to cycle to my active radar homing medium range missiles, hoping I could at least throw a missile to force the bandit to also go defensive. Instead of my aircraft exploding, the enemy missile disappeared in a fireball with my own missile eventually shooting down my pursuer. I then went out of my way to test this in various game modes with every aircraft available. The success rate was high enough to confirm it was a reliably reoccurring result. That's not a fluke, that's a feature. Still, this working in game doesn't justify its existence. Why did Aqua System - the developers of a few other Japan-only civilian and RC flight simulators - add this in? Looking at other combat flight sims available on PC and game consoles in 2002 and years before that, it's a rather unusual addition. The reason for its inclusion may be in the story itself. In both the Yukikaze novels and animated series, there is a high profile incident where one of the most advanced aircraft in the series, an FFR-31MR/D Super Sylph, shoots down a "JAM "anti-air missile" with its internal cannon. Though it is done by the artificial intelligence within the aircraft and not its human crew, this seems to be the origin of this game mechanic. In this game, aircraft have a decent supply of countermeasures against guided missiles. Between 6 to 10 countermeasure volleys can be deployed depending on aircraft. With skilled flying, some of this supply can be retained. Players using energy management and generating good angles against threats can force the close range merge with enemies to deny them advantageous BVR engagements. Allowing the players to save their limited chaff and flare supply so quickly. But with the aircraft cannon and gun pods now a factor, the risky third option is on the table. Sniping missiles from the sky can be used to handle the JAM in Single Player or surprise friends in split-screen versus, but it is an absolute necessity in Extra Mode. In Extra Mode, the player enters an arcade survival style scenario against multiple waves of enemies. Each enemy destroyed counts as points that are tallied up by the end of the player's playthrough. During a playthrough gun ammo, missile ammo, health and damage do not replenish. A solid run in Extra mode could net decent points, but seeing the high scores set by the generic CPU players make you realize the math doesn't add up. Even if every missile the player fires destroyed an enemy, they would be hard-pressed to get anywhere near the top three scores. But it's a lot easier if you use the gun to shoot down missiles, which do award points for their destruction and help reserve countermeasures for impossible to outmaneuver attacks. With aircraft worth 100 points and missiles worth 300 points, breaking into the top of the scoreboard is much easier. In no place does Extra Mode explain this to the player, so consider this an inside tip. In Battle Fairy Yukikaze: Fairies Dancing in the Sky the path to success looks like a lone aircraft going nose-to-nose with a supersonic missile. For more information on this game, see our review of its Xbox Original port. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

Updated: October 18th, 2022 / Originally published: April 22nd, 2022 Digital Combat Simulator World has an often forgotten munition amid its glide bombs, anti-radiation missiles, jammer pods, and cruise missiles. An unguided, subsonic, non-lethal glide vehicle that can enhance the effectiveness and survivability of missions requiring aircraft to challenge formidable air defenses directly. The ADM-141A Tactical Air Launched Decoy (TALD) is purpose-built to deceive radars and surface-to-air missiles, but it's hardly ever seen in DCS World's multiplayer environment. There are valid reasons for it being so uncommon, but I feel the TALD offers so much when used correctly. Consider this an article advocating for increased use of this munition. The Role of the TALD The ADM-141A TALD is a reliable addition to the suppression and destruction of enemy air defenses (SEAD/DEAD) missions and anti-ship attacks against warships. As a decoy, it deceives hostile air defenses and tricks them into activating their radars by appearing as incoming aircraft. With the hostile radars operational, allied aircraft are alerted to their presence. Allies can then begin targeting or defending against the radars guiding anti-aircraft defenses. Ideally, the TALDs will also draw hostile surface-to-air missiles (SAM) to themselves while allied aircraft carry out their attacks. Example of Use One of my most memorable sorties in DCS World was part of an online multiplayer Liberation campaign with High Beat Industries, led by Triplication (virtual aviator, video content creator). As the primary flight of High Beat pilots conducted their close air support and counter-air missions at the front lines in the east, I flew escort for a carrier-borne SEAD mission launching in the west. As a part of that escort, I deployed TALDs during the mission's final phase. Upon nearing the firing range of an opposing S-300 (SA-10), multiple missiles were launched at the TALDs, which were positioned in front of a wall of AGM-88 HARM anti-radiation missiles. The air-launched decoys helped oversaturate the air defense's ability to defend against the incoming HARMs. Some of the decoys were destroyed, and some HARMs were intercepted, but the remaining missiles effectively disabled the fearsome SAM site by destroying its distracted radar emitters. This summarizes the practical usefulness of the ADM-141A even in a high-threat environment. It is not an electronic countermeasure that can blind fire control radar, nor can it guarantee that every weapon launched will reach its target. But when used correctly, they can significantly increase the chances of a successful coordinated strike against air defenses that can defend themselves while counterattacking. Performance Restrictions While there were many real-world variants of the ADM-141 with capabilities like countermeasures, navigation systems, and their own propulsion, DCS World offers the basic unguided, gliding version: the ADM-141A. As you may have guessed immediately, with no engine of its own, the decoy relies heavily on the speed, altitude, and direction of the aircraft carrying it. As a general rule of thumb, releasing a TALD at a high altitude and high speed enables it to travel even farther. Though launch parameters may need to change depending on the detection and engagement ranges of the air defense system, they are up against. If the known target is a short-range missile system with a low altitude ceiling, launching the TALD higher than the threat can detect the decoy will have no effect. Once the launch aircraft lines up at the intended speed, bearing, and altitude, the TALD is released. The decoy continues traveling on the bearing it was released on with no further inputs from human-crewed aircraft, gradually losing altitude and speed as it glides. These are not restrictions but occasional notable bugs. TALDs can sometimes physically pass through terrain once they reach low altitudes. They sometimes continue flying thousands of feet below the earth. This is a behavior I've witnessed semi-frequently on various DCS World maps. Also, the wings of the TALDs occasionally do not animate, making it look like the wings do not swing outward, but this does not affect their flight profile in any way. F-14 Tomcat: Difficult Loadout Decisions The Heatblur Simulations F-14 Tomcat is one of the most well-done aircraft available in the simulator. This iconic swing-wing symbol of American naval fighter superiority is best known for documentaries extolling its long-range missile engagement abilities and one of the most memorable Hollywood military aviation movies ever. The praise for the Tomcat is further punctuated by the B model's better engines and solid air-to-ground capabilities compared to the A model. The Tomcat's sheer aircraft performance makes it an effective TALD platform. The F-14 can quickly accelerate past Mach 1 and zoom climb up to high altitudes, giving the decoys ideal launch parameters. However, this comes at the cost of the Tomcat giving up weapon stations that can mount laser-guided bombs or its famous AIM-54 Phoenix missile. That's a difficult choice. Do note that a lone Tomcat can provide itself with coverage. ADM-141s could distract air defenses while the F-14 attempts a low-altitude attack to strike the distracted SAM site. Using the aircraft's raw speed to get within the minimum launch range of a SAM, the Tomcat would then attack with bombs, rockets, or its cannon at close range. That's a daring way to live, but it is possible! F/A-18C Hornet: Ideal TALD Platform Until June 2022, the F-14 Tomcat was the only aircraft in DCS World that could deploy TALDs, albeit with a severe sacrifice of its attack capability. Even though it took many years for the once-teased TALDs to be added to the Eagle Dynamics F/A-18C Hornet, this already capable DEAD/SEAD platform is further elevated with these decoys. The Hornet flies plenty fast enough to deploy TALDs effectively and achieve their maximum performance with the benefit of being able to carry many of them while attacking still from safer distances. The F/A-18C can carry one to twelve TALDs. An example of an ideal loadout includes two to six TALDs split between two weapon stations, with the other two stations equipped with anti-radiation missiles or standoff glide bombs. Launching the decoys while inter-mixing weapons can be accomplished by a single aircraft. Going full "TALD Truck," carrying the maximum amount of ADM-141s and no standoff weaponry, is reserved for special occasions like supporting multi-aircraft attacks on IADS or fleets. The Hornet's mid-4th generation fighter sensors and systems benefit TALD deployment greatly. With an expanded electronic warfare display, known SAM engagement ranges shown on the situational awareness display, and radar warning receiver cues projected on the helmet-mounted display, TALDs remain effective even against unexpected pop-up threats. Reliance on Allies and Coordination The ADM-141A TALD is designed to enable the success of other aircraft. Coordination is needed. The decoys arriving too late make them ineffective in providing cover. Having them arrive too early gives the defenders more time to destroy or identify the TALDs and then refocus on the actual attack. More complex attacks will need to factor in aircraft spacing, altitudes, speeds, TALD glide speed, the speed of incoming allied weapons, staggering launches, the direction of launches, and so many other factors; there's a reason real-world mission planning takes dedicated teams days of planning. The reward for pre-mission planning and good communication is a higher mission success rate while increasing the survivability of allies, even against the most formidable intergraded air defenses. But again, if you're flying solo or with little to no communication with others in multiplayer, the chances of getting everything to line up correctly are low. In any combat-oriented flight title, non-offensive munitions and gadgets are underused or go without praise. Some of them are understandably overlooked. You won't see me singing praises about travel pods, ACMI pods, and spotting flare dispensers any time soon, but something like the ADM-141A TALD deserves a closer look. Start your research! About the Author Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

The story's second act plays out on the galactic stage Story driven single player flight games often close with a climactic, permanent ending. The day is saved, the enemy vanquished, and peace returns. Frontiers Reach from Blind Alien Productions takes a different approach. The ending of its story mode is actually the beginning of something now on a much larger scale. The Warmap game mode of Frontiers Reach has intrigued me since I first interacted with this game. Normally, a game mode that greatly expands content is something completely separate from the main story. The Conflicts mode of Comanche and Conquest mode of Project Wingman come to mind. But everything related to the Warmap comes after the events of the single player campaign. The single player campaign focuses on building the cast of characters, explaining the setting, the intricacies of the major powers at play and story driven missions to gather allies to escape the coming conflict. The Warmap mode focuses purely on fighting the galactic war, with the player now turned key leader of the group. It is possible to make a new pilot profile using a "Veteran" starting point, skipping the first part of the single player and going straight to the conflict in Warmap. Entering the holotable and seeing how far reaching the war is for the first time brings the size of the galaxy into perspective. With 35+ locations players travel across the galaxy taking on missions as the front lines shift on their own. These places include exotic planets, deep space stations, asteroid fields and other unusual places. With planets having their own unique atmospheres, air combat in one mission may feel noticably different elsewhere. Locations under attack are labelled with a defense readiness condition (DEFCON) status. The DEFCON status changes depending on the intensity of fighting. Locations with a "stand down" status are not experiencing combat and are not a priority. In a way, it somewhat reminds me of the Galactic Conquest game mode from Star Wars Battlefront II on the Sony PlayStation 2. Even as players watch the map without adding any input, green progress update bars gradually fill above locations where armed conflict is happening. Monitoring the balance of power at each node, represented by red and blue vertical bars, is important for making decisions on when to intervene. Once these bars fill, an update to the status of that location is given. A planet in the midst of conflict can suddenly have the battles there settled by local forces without players ever firing a shot. There is a degree of indirect support that can be given to each node by using Salvage points to purchase varying degrees of support. These contributions include repairs to local military forces, hiring mercenaries to raid enemy positions, or help civilian evacuation crews relocate the local population. At locations that are closely contested, waiting for the right moment to send support can tip the location into the control of the player's faction. While effective, this can also be a costly way to wage a war. Especially at the onset of the conflict where players may not have enough points. These contributions cost between 1500 and 3000 credits per use. Depending on how intense contested points are, it may take multiple contributions to tip the scales. There is a cheaper, more hands on way to do this, of course. The standard way to fight this war is for players to get themselves and their wingmen directly into the action! What I enjoy about the missions the Warmap offers is their diversity when compared to the single player campaign. When at a node that has combat going on, a mission list pops up on the bottom-right. The missions range from quick hitters like fuel depot raids, large-scale dogfights and bomber interceptions to more drawn out battles like providing close air support for ground troops and battles to take over an entire sector by defeating capital ships and their escorts. I've even seen a few recon missions, deep strikes against communication networks and extractions of intelligence agents from behind enemy lines. Ultimately, completion of the objective is all that matters. No matter how much time has passed or how many hostiles remain, once the player completes their objective, they can return to their capital ship to end the mission. Some missions do allow for mid-mission resupply as well. No longer needing to wipe every enemy from the map or wait for a story related plot point to occur, the option to dash in and complete the mission or linger to destroy enemies and gather points for later use is up to the player. I can think of more than one time I thought I was ready for an epic battle, only to soak up a missile or two, leaving me in a poor state. Outrunning the enemy to quickly wipe out an unarmored fuel depot was my only chance at survival. I have yet to complete a full play through of the Warmap, but plan on doing so, utilizing official Track IR headtracking and a set of rudder pedals and flight sticks its Flight Sim Mode now supports. I'll be sure to report on my exploits and what has been happening with Frontiers Reach when that time comes. In the meantime, the lead developer of the game has been playing through Frontiers Reach and uploading their experience on YouTube. Check it out! About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

Even before joining the development team in late August, 2021; I had already set my eyes on this community-made module. It was that feeling that pushed me to offer myself as aid for the project as a 2D artist, which has been quite the interesting experience so far. I would like to thank both Kinkkujuustovoileipa (Kinkku) and Jonas for letting me be a part of this project. The following article is meant to be a showcase of what will be seen at launch. This is not a review, just a showcase. Additionally, my opinion might be biased seeing as I have spent hundreds of hours working on this mod to make it as good as my abilities would allow me, so please do try the mod out and judge it for yourself. I will also provide some insight as to my side of the development, which was creating most 2D assets. EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL MODELS The UH-60L has a custom, almost fully-clickable cockpit. This UH-60L cockpit layout is accurate to Lima models from around 2009, which is the version we decided to replicate due to the accessibility we had to its documentation. The texture work was mostly made by me. I aimed for a somewhat weathered look, without going overboard. Instruments should be accurate to the ones installed in these birds. We used schematics and reference sheets when able, as that would ensure proper calibration of the instruments. It is not perfect nor is it the most realistic cockpit out there, but I am proud of what we accomplished here. I really like how they look when viewed from certain angles: Night lighting required a lot of work to get right as well. So please make sure to fly this beast at night, it is quite the experience. Here is a recent shot of the lighting in action: We also took the time to model the rest of the cabin with its seats, did all the animations for switches and buttons, implemented the displays, etc. I hope you like what we did here. Now onto the external 3D model. The one we have now is quite a new addition to the project, in fact. But it was the piece that allowed us to finally take the final steps towards a public release. Its unwrapping could improve in some areas but what we have is good enough for an initial release. It is fairly detailed and animated but we did have to re-rivet it and detail it further with normalmaps inside of Substance Painter, which gives it a better look overall. We added the capability of installing/uninstalling the External Stores Support System (ESSS) alongside its drop tanks. It also has all of its external lights, which even change depending if you have the ESSS installed or not! It will ship with 12 liveries at launch: 6 U.S. military birds, 2 foreign operators (camo), 2 search and rescue birds and 2 fictional liveries. Here are all of them in one picture: SYSTEMS AND FLIGHT MODEL This is the part where Kinkku did most of the work, alongside contributors such as Dorian. It is still not feature complete but all critical systems have been modeled, as well as many of the secondary systems. Here is a short list of systems what is implemented at the moment: Functional radio Fuel systems Partial electrical systems Air to Air Refueling Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Command Instrument System Panel Advisories and caution lights connected to aircraft system Doppler GPS Navigation ILS Navigation VOR Navigation ADF Navigation Radar Altimeter LC-6 Chronometer AN/AVS-7 Helmet Mounted Display All of these systems are fully functional and will be available at launch. At the same time, what I personally consider to be the most impressive aspect of this mod is its custom external flight model (EFM). We used the open source AH-6 EFM by Nibbylot as a base, but most of this has been rewritten and tuned to accurately represent a UH-60L as per based on performance charts, studies and subject-matter expert (SME) feedback. The Stability Augmentation System makes flying it a breeze. Here is an extract from our quick start guide as to how it works: The Automatic Flight Control System is comprised of four main subsystems - the stabilator, SAS, trim and FPS systems. The Stability Augmentation System (SAS) provides improved stability and damping in all axes. The Boost system provides electromechanical assistance to the pilot inputs. The Trim & FPS system provides control positioning and basic autopilot function It is a pretty complex system but, as a pilot, it is incredibly useful. It eases the workload a lot, making the Black Hawk one of the easiest helicopters to fly in-game, at least to me. INITIAL LAUNCH, FUTURE AHEAD This is only the initial release version of the mod, as there are still aspects that we want to improve and work on, as well as features left to implement. I personally hope that you enjoy this mod as much as I have enjoyed being one of its developers so far. It is quite the project, with many moving parts, but I am happy that I was one of the cogs that kept it moving along this far. Fly it and enjoy it, it is free. About the Author Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000's leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010's. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as a writer and the co-founder of Skyward ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

DCS has changed a lot in the past few years, specifically, the way that mods have now become a staple of the simulation's experience. There are very high quality community-made modules out there such as the A-4E, A-29B, T-45C, UH-60L, etc. Recently we noticed that another extremely high quality module was fast-approaching, one developed by members of the Virtual Team 60 : The Saab Sk60B, a Swedish jet trainer/light attack aircraft. Just like last time, we contacted the leader of the Virtual Team 60, Fredrik "Breadmaker", and asked him everything about the Saab Sk.60 project, what the process of developing it has been and a lot about its quirks and features. I personally extend my thanks to Fredrik for allowing us to have this interview with us. This is part two of two of this interview set. Taking on the task of creating a full-fidelity mod for DCS World is quite the undertaking. What led you to start this project? Indeed it is! It actually started out as just a fun idea. We had a (very basic) 3D model of the SK60 and managed to put that over the MB-339 flight model and avionics. At the time it was just for fun, but soon after that the amazing Na1ve_Noob (yes that’s his nickname) contacted me and asked if I wanted help to make it a standalone mod. That was simply an offer I couldn’t refuse and the rest, as they say, is history. Video of very early mod test Who in Team60 is actively developing the module? Are there any other members from other communities collaborating in this project? In Team 60 it’s mainly just me that’s doing the development. My area is the 3D modelling and the texturing as well as “team management”. My co-worker in the dev-team is Na1ve, as mentioned above. He’s doing all the coding and “under the hood” stuff that I don’t understand. Other than that we have some testers and SMEs. The Virtual Team 60 are part of the tester group. We figured that having an aerobatic team to test out the flight characteristics would be a good idea. It turns out we were right. 😊 But we have also got some former Swedish Airforce pilots and engineers who do some testing which helps a great deal. AND, what’s maybe the biggest benefit in terms of testing, fact checking and reference gathering is the fact that we’re collaborating with the Swedish Airforce Flight School. They get to use our mod in their VR training stations and we get feedback and information from them. That’s what I call a win-win situation. How in-depth will the systems be in the Sk.60? Is there any system that required special attention? As in-depth and realistic as we can make it given the tools we have without the third-party SDK from ED. We’re doing a highly accurate flight model, electrical systems, failures, damage model, weapons systems, radios, GPS, etc. The goal is to provide the most authentic SK60 experience we can. That’s a very important goal for us, especially since the real aircraft is going out of service in a few years. Has the team run into any limitations due to not having the SDK? If so, how has the team dealt with them? Well… We’ve run into some challenges, but not many limitations. The Saab 105 is a fairly basic aircraft which doesn’t have many complex systems. It has no guided weapons and stuff like that. That means that we, so far, have been able to make all the functions we want. Almost 100% of that is due to Na1ve’s incredible talent with coding. It would for sure not be possible without him. Will the mod have an External Flight Model (EFM)? If so, what can we expect in terms of the flight characteristics? Yes. You can expect it to behave as close to the real aircraft as we can get it. It’s based on both performance measurements from Flight School and also aerodynamical calculations. It’s AWESOME to fly. The mod will have multicrew, which is awesome for training purposes. Will the pilot and instructor cockpits be sync-able or will it work like other DCS mods in which cockpits are not synchronized between the crew? We’re working on it. As it is with other mods, doing synced multicrew is a challenge which is hard to tackle. But we have an ambition to allow for a second pilot to sit in the right seat. That would make the trainer role complete - to be able to put a new pilot and an experienced pilot side by side in the same cockpit so the more experienced guy can give some hands on directions as how to do stuff like landing patterns, formation flying and so on. It would also be a possible task for the right seat guy to be a navigator when doing light-attack missions. In terms of systems I noticed one peculiar system: the NS430 GPS navigational unit. Will this system be completely standalone or will users need to own the official GNS430 module to use it? Haha that’s a good observation of you. 😉 We’re making it completely standalone so you don’t need to have the GNS430 module. I’m not entirely sure we can promise that it will include exactly all of the functionality that are in the real unit, but it will have a moving map and some basic navigation features at least. If I’m not mistaken I think it’s also going to be interacting with the EHSI so you’ll be able to see directions to next waypoint on that. The module will also have the capabilities to carry out light attack mission, correct? Which weapons will be available with the mod? Yes it does! The real Saab105 aircraft has carried a bunch of different weapons depending on which version it is. We’re doing the SK60B that is used in Sweden. It has 6 hardpoints, but it actually doesn’t have that many weapons. Only four, actually. There are: 30mm AKAN gun pod (it’s the same gun pod that the AJS37 uses, but we’re making our own version. The SK60 can carry 2 of these) 13,5cm SRAK (HE rockets. You can have up to 12 of these. Two on each pylon) 14,5cm PSRAK (HEAT rockets. You can have up to 6 of these. One on each pylon) 7,5cm TRAK (Practice rockets with no explosive warhead. You can have up to 6 of these. I also noticed that both the external and internal 3D models and textures look fantastic. How difficult was it to create an accurate representation of the Sk60? Thanks! It’s been very time consuming but fun! This is actually the first “real” 3D model I’ve ever done so I’ve needed to learn a whole lot along the way. I think the current version of the model is maybe iteration 5 or 6 since I’ve realized multiple times that it was better to start over and do it right than to try to polish the pile of dirt that was the first version.. The Flight School has provided a whole bunch of great reference images, measurements and blueprints for us that we’ve been able to use when doing the model. I can’t promise that everything is exactly 100% correct down to every single millimeter, but it’s pretty close. Of course we’ve had to take some creative liberty at some parts to make it reasonable for a game, but if I don’t tell you which parts those are I’d bet you probably won’t even notice. The programs I’ve used for the 3D modelling is Blender while the texturing was done in Adobe Substance Painter and Photoshop. One thing I’d like to say here is that ANYONE of you can do a model at this level if you put your mind to it. Like I said, this is the first model I’ve made and as long as you’re willing and ready to fail and learn along the way there’s nothing stopping you from doing an amazing model in the end. The mod will be freely available for anyone that wants it once it is out, correct? Yes it will! We want as many people as possible to be able to enjoy it and look forward to seeing people's reactions! That will be it, thank you a lot for answering our interview! Is there anything else you would like to add before we conclude? Thanks! It’s been a blast to answer the questions! I’d like to emphasize what I said before. Doing a mod isn’t impossible as long as you have passion, patience and a learning attitude. We started this project in December 2020 and are now almost done. “Just do it!” as they say. 😊 About the Interviewer Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and one of the main writers. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

It was not that long ago that we had to wait years to get news on new aircraft coming to DCS World, something that was both a blessing and a curse. I used to get extremely excited for new module announcements because of their rarity, but in their absence the sim felt extremely void and empty as if it were in a dark room only to be illuminated every year or so by the light one got from the news themselves That era is long gone, since new module announcements have become an almost bi-weekly routine. In these exciting times, it is also easy to get a bit overwhelmed by the amount of news and updates coming to the game. With these many aircraft coming to the platform, of which most are unique flight experiences that cater to a certain era or task, how can you know what's good for you. Since modules can be pretty expensive, I wanted to run through the process I go through to choose the aircraft I want to visit and which ones I want to pass on. MARKETING AND ANALYZING TIME COMMITMENTS With all the promotional material and trailers that now come as a part of the product release cycle for any gaming product, it is easy to sometimes get swept up by the hype train and up purchasing something just because it looked cool in the trailers. Some of these modules have trailers that rival short films in directing and visual quality, making their modules look their best when it matters the most. These trailers are enticing and very well done, to the point that I've been dragged by them to revisit aircraft or even acquire new ones for content production here! The problem lies in two factors: money and time. Do you have the money to buy the aircraft? Will you have to sacrifice something in order to acquire it? If you said yes, then I pose you the following question: Do you have the time to learn this new aircraft? Additionally, there is something else that might affect your decision: mission capability. Do the aircraft that you already own fulfill all the missions you want to fly in DCS? If so, then getting a new aircraft will only give you new ways to do what you already do. If you are interested in the aircraft itself, that is a different case, but when it comes down to pure gameplay, then you might already have everything you need without realizing it. This is something I always take into consideration when I write my reviews. I know it will take some self-restraint, but you will have to realize that DCS is a very time-consuming and complicated game that will demand proper study from its players. This time can either be watching YouTube videos to understand certain systems, reading the manual, or playing the provided training missions that come with each module. Having considered all of this, ask yourself this: Do you have any aircraft that you have purchased already that you have not touched? For a couple of my friends, all of whom know who they are, this is a reality. CHECK YOUR BACKLOG! While some of these new modules might be really appealing, you might still have one or two modules that are just collecting dust in your virtual hangar. I know that is the case for a couple of my modules, some of which need more love and attention. It is interesting that, at least to me, most of my friends are in the same situation. We end up maining one or two aircraft, and we master them, but that comes at the cost of our diversity. Personally, I think that taste lies in variety, so coming back to some of those modules has improved my experience in many ways. I have been able to experience Cold War scenarios the proper way, Gulf War-era missions and modern ones without compromising! To explore different eras, you will need to have proficiency and skill with these old and new aircraft. So go out there and get training, these aircraft that you might already own need to get a good dusting off and some flights on their checkbooks. Does this mean you shouldn't buy new modules as they come out? No, of course not! The devs need support during the launch period, and initial sales are important; but do you need to feel bad if you can't buy a module on launch? No! Go fly your planes and helos, the ones you already own! Enjoy DCS at your pace. About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and one of the main writers. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

Using the hail of incoming fire against the adversary Skycadia by Studio Nisse has been a game I've played from time to time when I want to have some fun but also relax. I'm even willing to admit that I have played it during very long-range flights in DCS World and Microsoft Flight Simulator. Released on December 7th, 2020, Skycadia is a very easy to jump into, cartoonish flight game that evokes memories of Star Fox and Skygunner, being inspired by Devil Daggers (of all things!). It is available on Nintendo Switch, Steam and Xbox One X|S. On July 6th, 2023, the Steam version of Skycadia was updated to 2.0. I prefer the Nintendo Switch version, but it is technically outdated. Let's jump into the newest Steam version for now. Being fully transparent, I was absolutely obliterated coming back to this game after being away for so long. If there is one thing Skycadia has always been known for, it is the absolute bullet hell the swarms of bug enemies fire at the player. These groups of enemies can form within a matter of minutes if larger enemies that spawn them are not dealt with quickly. With literally dozens of enemies in pursuit, it is possible for players to have their health melted in just a few seconds. Even with its easy to learn controls, pure arcade flight characteristics, and aircraft with different specs, this happens regularly. Not even the all mighty Barrel Roll is a guaranteed success. When smaller enemy fighters are in low numbers, they can be defeated with basic fighter maneuvers; outmaneuvering them at low speeds, knocking them down one by one. Quick bursts of maximum thrust can also be used to get out of tight spots. However, when there are so many bullets and aircraft in the air it blocks your vision, a change in mindset is needed. Rather than try to shoot down every fighter one-by-one, it is best to keep in mind that at the end of the day the only thing that matter is money. That's right! Credits. You play as a bounty hunter, after all. When enemies are defeated, they drop large clouds of paper money used for unlocking new characters, weapons and aircraft to be used in Arcade Survival, Story Adventure and Crusin' (free flight) modes. Health items are also dropped. Skycadia does not stop the enemies from shooting one another down as they wildly spray at the player. As sheets of bullets wizz past the players, they can and will hit other hostiles in the airspace. Because of this, flying defensively while focusing on turns to force the incoming bullets to strike other hostiles can yield a large amount of credits fast, while preserving the player's health. Utilizing slashing attacks against boss enemies and singling out the slower support enemies is a good practice, while letting the hoard gradually thin itself out is the best practice. Performing maneuvers that work in tight spaces, like the Split-S or Immelmann Turn near especially tough boss level enemies can even shred their armor. They become so weakened, they can be shot down in one or two of the player's strafing runs. It is important for the player to shoot down enemies when able for the sake of filling up their bounty book, but remember that at the end of the day, credits are the real prize. If stacking up tens of thousands of credits can be done by letting the enemy defeat themselves, why stop them? Rake in that money, buy upgrades and push even harder next time! About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. [Profile]

ORIGINAL PUBLICATION DATE: 04/13/2020 -- SMALL ADJUSTMENTS: 08/16/2023 It’s arguable that there is no more intriguing fictional aircraft in the Ace Combat series than the X-02 Wyvern. Appearing as the lone “bonus” aircraft in Ace Combat 04 (2001), the X-02 positions itself well into the game’s more serious and professional tone than the installments preceding and following it. The X-02 derives clear inspiration from several types of real-world fighter aircraft. Under slung engine nacelles and vertical ventral fins from the Su-27 Flanker, chined edges and ruddervators reminiscent of the YF-23, and fuselage shaping not unlike a hybrid between the F-14 Tomcat and the F/A-18E Super Hornet. To even an amateur eye, the X-02 seems atypically well designed. Compared to the mecha-influenced fictional aircraft before it like the XFA-27 and ADF-01, the X-02 “feels” real. There was quite a bit of thought and professional detail placed into the design of the aircraft by Ace Combat 04’s development team. This intuition is not unjustified. A more detailed look on the aircraft can reveal that the design seems to have come with an engineer’s influence. Everything from the center-of-lift and gravity to the internal dimensions of the aircraft has reason applied to it. That is perhaps a great deal of the appeal of its design. But it is, of course, the novelty of the aircraft’s signature—the “switchblade” wing—that gives the X-02 its dauntless allure. So, beyond what you see in the game model, what exactly is a switchblade wing? Let’s break it down further. The removal of the switchblade feature alone actually reveals an equally novel wing configuration: the “W”-wing. A “W”-wing planform is self-demonstrating. The wing itself forms an oblique W shape in its design. This planform remains generally untested and theoretical, appearing only in old NACA research papers dated 1950 and 1953, respectively. It also appears to have been considered by Nazi German aircraft manufacturer Blohm and Voss for their P.188 design during the final stages of World War II (Dan Sharp, Luftwaffe: Secret Bombers of the Third Reich, Mortons 2016, Pages 84-85.) In the case of the P.188, the goal of the wing was to mitigate a known flaw in early swept-wing designs: a tendency for the aircraft to enter an ever-increasing pitch-up attitude as the outboard part of the wing stalls, eventually resulting in a loss of control of the aircraft as rudder surfaces became obscured by the wing and fuselage of the aircraft. The result is blocked airflow to these surfaces and, ultimately, a hull loss incident. The P.188 was passed up in favor of more conventional designs, but the wing configuration was not totally abandoned. NACA revisited this design and fitted it to cheaply made rockets, which gave them the opportunity to study the resulting flight parameters of the wing, including its overall drag coefficient, the center of lift, and the results of aeroelastic flutter. Despite this, the wing was never applied in any realistic manner. The initial advantages of it—the ability to resist pitch-up—was no longer a concern with delta and swept wings by the 1960s, as designs had been produced to reduce or eliminate this danger entirely. But the application of the W-wing in Ace Combat 04’s X-02 doesn’t concern itself with something so fundamental, or so technical. The W-wing on the X-02 is a representation of a single game mechanic: aircraft maneuverability. At first glance, this makes perfect sense. Like the Su-47 (in Ace Combat 04 carrying it’s Sukhoi DB project name of S-37), the swept-forward part of its design implies a real-world analogous feature of high maneuverability, and the X-02’s in-game mechanics exploits this, making the X-02 the most maneuverable aircraft available to the player. The W-wing configuration does theoretically grant this, and may, in fact, be more suited for this statistic in reality over the simple swept-forward design due to the ability to increase structural integrity and reduce aeroelastic divergence - the tendency of the wing to want to bend upwards when force is applied, which risks structural failure. The swept-forward wing—and by extension the W-wing—take advantage of the ability of the inboard, rather than the outboard, portion of the wing stalling out first. The outboard, near-tip portion of the wing usually hosts the aircraft’s ailerons. So long as the ailerons receive clean airflow, they can allow the aircraft to maintain roll control. This permits the aircraft resistance to departure of controlled flight at high angles-of-attack. And an aircraft that can maintain these high AOA’s can inherently also achieve a tighter instantaneous turning radius, as it can present a greater surface area to the incoming air, increasing the force applied to the fuselage and wings. Additionally, due to the way that the air flows along the wings surface, it also lowers drag from the wingtips, theoretically granting sharper sustained turning rates with a well-engineered design. So now we know what makes the W-wing itself special, but it’s the X-02’s “switchblade” function that really captures the eye. But is this where feasibility starts to fall apart for the X-02? The short answer is “Yes.” But let’s instead entertain the long answer: “It depends.” The “switchblade” design is not entirely original. There is evidence of its study in 1999 by Northrop Grumman, as demonstrated in patents for an aircraft design. Some might recognize this design as one that inspired the AI-controlled aircraft from the 2005 movie Stealth. But the X-02 precedes that design by over four years and is probably a more realistic application of the mechanics. This is where the W-wing makes significant sense for the X-02 design—the inboard swept part of the wing works to conceal the forward-swept outboard portion in high-speed flight, quickly pivoting the wings inboard through a set of doors where there may traditionally be leading-edge slats on a swept-wing fighter. This does something that the Northrop Switchblade doesn’t: it eliminates an entire flight surface of the aircraft. In theory, this would not only provide structural integrity to the inboard wing but would also drop parasitic and wave drag considerably, enabling the X-02 to reach speeds that would not be possible with its higher aspect-ratio swept forward configuration. It is what grants the X-02 it’s seemingly contradictory statistics: it can pull double duty as a first-rate turning fighter while being able to also dash at high speeds limited by surplus engine thrust rather than drag. But what does this configuration mean in the real-world? Let’s break-down the X-02’s wing-sweep procedure and see if we can pinpoint where physics rears its unwelcome head and puts the X-02 back into the realm of science fiction: Between 0-450 knots the X-02’s wings remain locked in the long aspect ratio, swept forward position. This is a good configuration for this speed, granting low stall speeds and high maneuverability. The W-wing configuration mitigates the aeroelastic load on the aircraft, though the empty space in the inboard sweep does sacrifice some structural integrity but is bulked with an intelligent spar system. Between 450-455 knots the wing configuration becomes a hindrance and needs to be changed, so a rapid series of adjustments start. The wing uses large servos to pivot the outboard wing inward. This lowers drag but puts stress on the wing’s aeroelasticity limits. At 460 knots the outboard wing has its tips facing straight onto the airflow. The aircraft enters a light pitch-up due to the rapid change in center-of-lift and— The wing shears off the aircraft. What’s happening here? Well, by step two we’re already looking at undeniable stress on the wing. Coupled with the hollow inner wing, heavy center machinery, increasing airspeed, and resulting airflow, the wing encounters a structural limit. The force of the air on the ventral surface of the wing must obey Newton’s third law, and eventually the wing cannot sustain this force any longer. A subscale example of this failure is similar to what happens to a fixed, straight-wing aircraft like a Cessna 172 going into overspeed. The aircraft’s weakest points must yield to the forces applied to it, and the wing must either disintegrate or detach from the fuselage. It is at this point that the X-02S Wyvern cements itself into the virtual world. But can this be fixed? With what we currently know about aerodynamics and materials science, it’s unlikely. Stronger materials and more intelligent engineering might help, but there are fundamental forces at play that consistently produce damaging effects. This provides justification for the wing design of many modern aircraft such as the F-22, Su-57, and J-20, which stick with tuned, traditional trapezoidal wings. Ultimately, they provide acceptable performance while maintaining robust structural integrity. This is why swept-forward wings stay in the realm of technology demonstrator: the forces applied to the wing accelerate the stress on the weakest points of the wings attachment points on the fuselage, resulting in a higher need for structural maintenance and greater risk of catastrophic failure. But despite this inherent flaw, do not discount the ideas presented by Ace Combat 04’s premier air supremacy fighter. It is certainly within the realm of plausibility that the aircraft’s designers constructed the aircraft knowing these flaws. But that doesn’t make the design any less impressive. The fact that they identified the possibility alone demonstrates a keen, intelligent rationale for the X-02’s addition to Ace Combat lore. Perhaps the designers of the fighter didn’t think that their fantasy idea would inspire such curiosity about its feasibility, but their approach did just that. The X-02 will continue to spark questions for people discovering this series for the very first time and though just a thought experiment its design has the potential to inspire knowledge and discussion about the real-world physics at play, hopefully stoking the fires of people not just interested in Ace Combat, but perhaps delving into an interest in aviation as a whole. About the Writer T.J. "Millie" Archer A Life-long realist and aviation enthusiast. Once the co-founding Administrator of the Electrosphere.info English Ace Combat Database. In the present day he is freelance, roving the internet in search of the latest aviation news and entertainment. Read Staff Profile.

An unexpected use of purpose built assets Working with our primary Digital Combat Simulator World mission editor, Caio D. "Hueman" Barreto, this article is the beginning of a new series here on Skyward Flight Media. Our goal is to provide suggestions for DCS mission features that are not often seen in multiplayer servers. Using our experience and experimentation, we hope to introduce new concepts to diversify the missions people create and play. Let us start with today's subject. Mobile Air Defense Convoys Attacking and capturing air bases are the most common way players have interacted with most surface-to-air missile (SAM) threats. In multiplayer servers, these threats need to be deadly enough to engage multiple players at once while protecting a wide area. Because of this, S-300 SAM sites, Hawk batteries, and Patriot missile batteries are plentiful. Short Range Air Defense (SHORAD) systems are often placed very close to the larger SAM threats. Parked in static positions, never moving. Making them predictable and easier to destroy. One of my go-to mission additions is mobile air defense convoys. Similar to regular convoys of vehicles driving the roads, these convoys act like mobile aircraft hunter-killer teams. Editors wanting to add hard to track, pop up threats to a mission can route these air defense convoys through areas they think players may use. This adds a degree of randomization to the mission. The constant movement of these convoys also changes their engagement ranges. While the first encounter may have been advantageous to the convoy, the second engagement may be better for the players. The terrain the convoy is driving through may be worse for them the second time around. This gives players the option to either bypass the pop-up threat or plan a new mission to search and destroy the convoy. Mission Editor Setup For basic setup, little is needed to add these groups to a mission. They do not require specific trigger zones or custom .lua scripts. They can be tasked to drive along roads or across fields with standard waypoint placement, AI tasking does not have to be edited, and they can constantly drive the desired path by adding task "Switch Waypoint" to the first waypoint of its route to create a constant patrol route. Here is a list of what a basic route repeating patrol route looks like in the mission editor: Basic Setup Waypoint 0: On Road Waypoint 1: On Road Waypoint 2: On Road, Switch Waypoint 0 An optional AI tasking to Disperse Under Fire can be added to the group on Waypoint 0. This lets players use various types of weapons to force the group to disperse and come to a stop. This opens small windows of opportunities for other aircraft in the flight to identify their location and use unguided weapons on them, with a higher chance of success. Advanced setup of these convoys is mostly focused on AI tasking orders. To increase how hard to detect these groups are while making them even more realistic, there are specific tasking orders that can be applied. For example, while in transit these groups may be set to "ALARM State GREEN" setting their radar and anti-aircraft weapons off. This makes it easier for them to drive to unexpected areas undetected. Along their route, the groups can be made to park in fields and turn on their radars for certain amounts of time to search for and engage aircraft. This is done by combining an Off Road waypoint, AI task "Hold" for 15 minutes and ALARM State RED or AUTO to activate the convoy. Once the Hold time expires, the group's next waypoint can bring them back to the nearest road set back to ALARM State GREEN as they leave the area undetected. Advanced Setup Waypoint 0: On Road, Disperse Under Fire=180s (seconds), ALARM STATE=GREEN Waypoint 1: On Road Waypoint 2: Off Road, Hold (Stop Condition DUR (Duration) 15 Minutes), ALARM STATE=RED Waypoint 3: On Road, ALARM STATE=GREEN Waypoint 4: On Road Waypoint 5: Off Road, Hold (Stop Condition DUR (Duration) 15 Minutes), ALARM STATE=RED Waypoint 6: On Road, ALARM STATE=GREEN, Switch Waypoint 0 Mobile Attack This is the basic version of the groups I use. With a Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Artillery (SPAAA) as the lead vehicle (Gepard, ZSU-23-4 Shilka, Vulcan M163, etc), a self-propelled surface-to-air missile unit (SA-8, HQ-7, Roland, etc) and two transport trucks which supply all units in the convoy with ammo and fuel as needed. The Mobile Attack convoy format is best used to patrol areas near other ground forces or in hard to reach areas far outside the expected areas of air defense. Group List one Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Artillery (SPAAA) (lead vehicle) one Self Propelled Surface to Air Missile Unit two Transport/Supply Truck (tail vehicle) Mobile Point Defense This type of convoy can patrol areas near large SAM sites and important facilities like air bases or supply bases. But rather than remain static and easy to identify, they are mobile and still able to intercept missiles. It is important that units capable of intercepting missiles are within this group (SA-15 Tor, HQ-7 Red Banner, etc.) It is important that their ALARM STATE is set to AUTO or RED. This will allow them to can scan the skies for incoming missiles and enemy aircraft while they drive. For players this means targeting missile interceptor units becomes harder, but by monitoring their movements, it is possible the facilities they are defending may fall on the far edge of their coverage. Smart players can monitor their potential route, and increase the likelihood of a successful strike. Group List one missile interception capable SAM unit (lead vehicle) two transport/supply Truck (tail vehicle) Mobile Area Denial A specialized version of the convoy concept that combines the previously discussed topics with an SA-6 Gainful SAM site. The SA-6 was purpose built to follow ground forces and provide air defense for their area of operations. In DCS, the SA-6 will stop to deploy its launchers if it detects enemy aircraft while in transit. This process takes 10 to 15 minutes, however. The SA-6 may also attempt to deploy in an area that is very poor for its abilities. Instead, a mobile area denial group made up of an SA-6, SPAAA units, short range SAM units and supply trucks transport themselves to a designated area while ALARM State is set to GREEN. This gives the group a chance to drive itself to an ideal area and deploy undetected. For players, this is also a chance to potentially spot this highly dangerous convoy and knock it out before deployment. Mission editors can use this type of convoy to suddenly deploy a respectably dangerous SAM battery well beyond the expected threat area. Group List one ZSU-23-4 Shilka (lead vehicle) one SA-6 Straight Flush STR two SA-6 TEL two Transport/Supply Truck one SA-15 Tor one ZSU-23-4 Shilka (tail vehicle) I hope this concept for Digital Combat Simulator World mission editing will be helpful for improving the quality, randomization and replayability for your missions. We will have more interesting ideas to share in the near future, so look out for it. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. [Profile]

Four analog axes, fifteen buttons, sixty-seven programming slots The value of modern game console flight sticks and yokes is their versatility and ongoing support from their manufacturers. Depending on the company, the external design of these advanced controllers may not change much, but every model includes more and more features. Specialized software, extensive button mapping, new buttons for extended functionality, and even personal computer compatibility. The purchase of a decent game console flight controller could potentially cover most flight games and flight simulators its buyer owns. The time-tested Thrustmaster T.Flight series and the recent Turtle Beach VelocityOne come to mind. Things weren't always this sweet. They didn't have widely available and high-quality flight sticks with guaranteed compatibility in the 1990s. Anyone from back in the day can tell you that a serious flight enthusiast would end up with at least half a dozen flight controllers made by first-party and third-party companies for a single game console, depending on which one it was. The Sony PlayStation 1 is a perfect example of this. Names like the PlayStation Analog Joystick, Mad Catz Flight Stick, Optech Mach 1, and even the one-of-a-kind NeGcon come to mind. But these controllers only work on a handful of specific games programmed to support them with predetermined button layouts set by the game developer. This is where the PS1 flight stick of childhood dreams must be introduced: the InterAct PS Flight Force Pro. The true Hands On Throttle And Stick controller experience. It originally came bundled with a proposed game console port of the PC combat flight simulator, TFX: Tactical Fighter eXperiment. This title was released for personal computers (MS-DOS) and the Commodore Amiga by Ocean Software Ltd. and Digital Image Design in 1995. This was a no-joke simulator with over three million square miles of terrain in the game using official map data, multi-function display management, realistic weapons engagement envelopes, and even variable temperature, wind, and weather conditions. All while offering realism settings that can be turned off to allow for a more flight arcade-style experience when desired. In preparation for a PlayStation 1 port of TFX, Imagineer Co. Ltd developed a HOTAS with official PlayStation branding. This HOTAS was named the ImageGun Dual Flight Controller (SLPH-0021). It was offered as a standalone unit and in the "Flight Maniac Set" (SLPS-00510) with the PS1 port of TFX. There was also the "Military Goods Present Campaign" that Imagineer ran. It included a pilot flight suit, aviator sunglasses, a pilot watch, and the HOTAS. TFX received its PlayStation port in Japan, but that game version was never released outside the country. Video game peripheral manufacturer InterAct produced the controller under a different name and without official PlayStation branding. The Interact PS Flight Force Pro (SV-1106​) had the same design and functions as the original controller. The PS Flight Force Pro has four pre-programmed settings that can be selected mid-game by pressing the mode selection buttons on the throttle. These modes emulate various analog, digital and unusual control types of particular games on that platform. Its most prized function is the ability to remap all buttons. The PS Flight Force Pro provides four analog axes, fifteen buttons, and a maximum of sixty-seven programming slots. Besides standard button remapping, elaborate multi-button macros can be programmed even with idle periods (pauses between inputs). The remapping process is a simple four-step process assisted by audible beeps to let the user know when their selected button is ready to be remapped to a different button. With so many options available, remapping can take a long time, depending on how detailed the user wants to be. Hardware-wise, the controller itself is very comfortable, even for adult-sized hands. The button placement on the throttle is good. Their positions align with many other current HOTAS systems, making the controller easy to understand and adjust. The Triangle buttons just beneath the Cross and Circle buttons on the stick are problematic because of their shape and the very firm press needed to get them to operate. The thumb stick on the throttle does feel somewhat fragile but functional. The throttle has detents for engine output from off to idle and from military power to afterburner with sliders to adjust throttle resistance and joystick Z-axis input. The flight stick moves easily and quickly snaps back to the neutral position with a deadzone much smaller than expected. It outperforms other flight controllers from the PlayStation 1 easily, but the lack of instructions on how to properly set it up is the highest hurdle for people using it in 2022. These units are usually found in used condition on online shopping markets, and they rarely include the manual. My overall positive experience was possible because I had the manual and could find the correct settings if something did not work well with specific titles. The immense functionality of the InterAct PS Flight Force Pro makes it a rare example of a non-USB game console flight controller that can adapt to just about any flight title in the entire Sony PlayStation 1 library. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

It was not so long ago where I did not have a powerful enough PC to run the newest titles that the flight simulation genre had to offer. I had a computer that, by modern standards, was surpassed by some smartphones and even some fridges. But that did not mean that I missed out on one of the greatest flight simulator experiences that is out there. That old PC was able to run Falcon BMS, a free community-made overhaul for Microprose's 1998 title: Falcon 4. Despite its old age and the fate of the original company that made it back when they had not made their comeback, a group of dedicated individuals at Benchmark Simulations have spent the last 18 or so years polishing and improving this sim to the point where it is unrecognizable. And then released every update free for everyone to use! Disclaimer: This article will not go in-depth into every single aspect of Falcon BMS as that would require a full-on documentary. So if I miss something, please let me know and I'll try and add it in a timely manner if I consider it critical for the article. FALCON 4 AND ITS LEGACY Falcon 4 was one of the last titles that Microprose published prior to its demise and fall from grace back in the early 2000's. The game was, according to people who I have talked to which had it at release, a bit of a buggy mess. Some features were broken at launch, and some were absent. But despite all that it was, undeniably, the most ambitious flight simulator of its era. From a large variety of scenarios to what at the time was the best simulation of the iconic F-16 Fighting Falcon. This simulation had a lot going for it including the legendary Dynamic Campaign Generator, a feature which I will touch upon later in this article. That sparkled interest and created a dedicated fanbase that can still be seen today. It is this fanbase that took it upon itself to fix and improve the title once its creators had moved on. And from those groups that tried and fix it, one stood the test of time: Benchmark Simulations. This group is the one responsible for Falcon BMS (BenchMark Simulations) and all its versions. It is hard to express how much these people have done to improve the game. From adding core functionality, 3D cockpits and fledging out the Viper to make one of the best if not the best representation of the F-16 to date, system-wise at least. It is genuinely impressive. Let's delve a bit into what makes BMS, BMS. THE GOOD: THE VIPER, ITS SYSTEMS, THE DYNAMIC CAMPAIGN GENERATOR AND THE PRICE The representation of the F-16 and all of its variants inside Falcon BMS has nothing to envy from Digital Combat Simulator (DCS) from Eagle Dynamics. It is genuinely an impressive recreation, one that is much deeper than what you would see in many simulators nowadays. To operate it you will have to get used to reading tons and tons of documents to figure out your systems and the way that they interact with each other. Thankfully, BMS comes with every document you will need. It has some features which, when I see, wonder why they are not in other sims. One of these is the capability of customizing your Data Cartridge with personalized countermeasure programs, MFD pre-sets, radio frequencies per UHF and HVF radio and even IFF codes! Why isn't something like this in DCS? That's beyond me. I sincerely hope that it will be added later on to aircraft that have data cartridges. Additionally, there is also the fact that the ATC and AWACS systems inside of Falcon BMS are excellent even by modern standards. The ATC will cue up incoming and outgoing flights into patterns to avoid collisions. You are also required to go through the different radio frequencies for ATC (ground, tower and departure) for each stage of your flight. That's just awesome in my eyes. AWACS will also require you to report-in and out of the AoA to get reports, which is awesome. All of these aspects, while great by themselves, would not be anything without the glue that holds them up together: the Dynamic Campaign generator. This is the defining feature of Falcon BMS and Falcon 4.0 prior to it. This tool allows the simulator to feel like an actual battlefield. The entire area of operations is filled to the brim with enemy and allied aircraft doing their own missions, which makes the entire experience fill much more alive. It also means that each campaign run will be its own unique experience, unlike no other. On one run you could be assigned SEAD and DEAD missions while on others you could be assigned to do escort or fighter sweeps. All with variation depending on the values you set at the start of the campaign. This is what some modern sims are missing. A mode in which you feel like a part of the battlefield, not its hero. When it comes to the F-16, this sim does it like no other. The 3D cockpit is mostly clickable and nice looking with each button doing what you expect it to do. You have the entirety of the Viper's deadly arsenal to your disposal as well, including some weapons which are unique to later variants of the F-16C, such as the Small Diameter Bombs (SDB) and even Harpoon support! All of these are fully implemented, nothing on beta. Here is a video of me doing some basic air to air against North Korean fighters. THE BAD: KIND-OF OUT DATED GRAPHICS AND UI DESIGN One thing that sets a lot of people back on Falcon BMS are its graphics and kind-of outdated user interface (UI) design. Both of which are completely valid point, and both are a result of the age of this game. 1998 was a long time ago and the fact that the guys over at Benchmark have managed to have it look like it does is an achievement on its own. If I were to compare it to some other modern sims, it would look much more like XPlane 11 or Prepar3D than Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020) or DCS. It lacks much of the polished look and tech that makes something like DCS look the way it does, which is more than understandable when you take context into consideration. I personally do not dislike the looks, it has this retro-esque aesthetic that makes me a bit nostalgic. Its UI is also clunky and unintuitive to the point that many players run an alternative launcher just so that they can set their controls outside of the game's horrendous set-up manager. WHAT FALCON BMS MEANS TO ME This is a sim out of its era, one that only been kept alive by its most dedicated fans. Some would even say that this game has no reason for existing seeing as there are titles such as DCS where realism exudes out of its pores. Then why do I keep coming back to this old yet strange flight simulator? Simple. This is a flight simulator where the single player experience reigns supreme. There is no other flight simulator like this out there now. DCS is due to receive a dynamic campaign generator at some point, but all the signs point to that being in the not later rather than sooner. Also, the entirety of BMS cost me 5$ and that is because you have to have a legit copy of Falcon 4.0 to install it. This has got to be the best 5$ I have ever spent, seeing as this sim just keeps on giving with each update. And I have not even talked about the secondary aircraft that you can use, the multiplayer scene, the community-made maps, the tutorials, etc. I have much more to say about Falcon BMS and I can't wait to write about it again. About the author: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000's leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010's. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as a writer and the co-founder of Skyward ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

SMALL EDITS: 08/02/2023 In my view, the closing missions of Ace Combat 7: Skies Unknown continue to be some of the most memorable missions in the series as far as gameplay is concerned. That's a strong statement but hear me out. Even in other combat flight simulators, the so-called "Ace Combat vision" is a soft jab at the all-seeing situational awareness (SA). Every ally and enemy unit is displayed on the player's radar and extended radar views. Even just visually scanning the horizon will show where all units on the battlefield are. With positions known, players can freely employ every weapon onboard their aircraft without second guessing. This level of SA has been in place since the series first launched in 1995. Ace Combat 7, Mission 15, "Battle for Fabanti," would have been the mission any conventional flight arcade or flight sim campaign ended. The climax of a war that spanned an entire continent is book ended by allied forces storming the capital city of the opposing force. Invading by land, sea, and air, allied forces routed the defenders can close in on the military headquarters building. Typically, victory would be secured, and epilogue cutscenes would roll, but this battle doesn't end that way. Instead, military satellites from both sides are destroyed while in orbit. Their debris scatters and knocks out countless other satellites in the process. A textbook case of the Kessler Syndrome. Reliable long-range communication is lost and datalink is disrupted. The big "final battle" ends in favor of the allied forces, but with confusion spreading, the war continues in a new uncoordinated fashion - the fog of war is implemented in a way it has never been before in the Ace Combat series. With no orders from their chain of commands and the location of allies and enemies unknown, all military units in the conflict make decisions based on best guesses, rumors, old intelligence reports, new intel gained from meeting with allied units, and the essential need to secure supplies by force for their survival. In gameplay, this is presented in a way that maintains the level of SA expected in the Ace Combat series while still incorporating the consequences of the loss of information. As cutscenes and narrative radio chatter explain, allies and enemies are no longer automatically identified because of the loss of the satellites and the data they provided. Players are forced to close within a relatively short distance to unknown units to make their combat identification. While the units are still unknown, they will attack the player no matter which side they are on - they too cannot identify the player's affiliation. Friendly fire incidents do happen during this time. This is especially dangerous for players. With their aircraft carrying dozens of powerful weapons able to decimate multiple units at once, heavy losses can be inflicted on friendly forces within seconds. Being patient, holding fire, and flying defensively while closing distance is the only way to prevent friendly fire incidents. As friendlies and enemies are sorted, the local airborne warning and control system (AWACS) passes that information to allied forces. This reduced situational awareness appears in varying degrees during the last missions of the game, but mission 16, "Lost Hope" is one of the best examples: This interpretation of the fog of war negates the ability to reliably attack from a maximum distance and brings players closer to possible threats. This makes high level threats that are usually attacked from long distance now even more deadly because players have to get as close as possible to them. Using long-ranged weaponry under these conditions is still possible by identifying a target(s), flying out, then re-attacking. This new condition that should be fulfilled before attacking breaks up the usual gameplay experience enough to make it more challenging without forgoing the gameplay experience players are already used to. I believe this implementation of the fog of war in Ace Combat 7 was a great example of a curveball in the series' tried and true formula. Further refinement could add more tactical complexity to future Ace Combat installments. A more refined version of this could allow for constantly changing conditions in campaign mode, add more options to change the usual multiplayer environment of the series, or somewhat control how players fly in the game to set them up for unexpected scenarios. It's sincerely something I hope appears again, not only in Ace Combat but in other flight arcade games currently in development. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

As time passes, it is clear that the current state of DCS is one where official modules and community-made mods are in complete unison. This is even more evident now that some big servers have now included some mods to their roster of aircraft, one of these servers being Enigma's Cold War server with its inclusion of the A-4E not that long ago. This made me realize that despite my small and short involvement in the project, I hadn't flown the Skyhawk in a long time. Join me as I revisit this old friend of mine and take it out for a couple of sorties, it will be fun! The first thing I noticed when I booted up the Scooter is that I felt at home. This mod's textures and models have a very particular style thanks to the way that Plusnine made them. They are not photorealistic, but they feel lived in; especially in the cockpit. It feels like it has a soul. Another aspect that immediately caught my eye was the visible cockpit shake from the slats deploying due to my current AoA. This is the work of JNelson and Farlander, both of them being the EFM developers of this project and the ones that brought the Scooter out from the SFM hell that it used to be in. Speaking of EFM, this is the third aspect that immediately jumped at me: the feeling of flying the Scooter is as amazing as I remember it. It is not a difficult aircraft to fly, in the slightest, but it does not shy away from showing you who is really in control if you treat it wrong. It is a true pilot's aircraft that doesn't limit your ability to pull and turn as hard as you can, as long as you can manage some of its negative characteristics at high AoA, slow speeds, etc. The Scooter's weapon deployment capabilities are also robust, for an aircraft of this era and size. You can use everything from the simplest iron bombs to AGM-45 Shrikes, which makes this mod one of the most capable ones out there at the moment. It has been this way ever since its release, and I do not see that going away any time soon. Revisiting this mod has made me realize how well it has faired against the test of time. While other mods come and go, their teams disbanded or simply moved on from their projects, the Skyhawk's well-designed and future-proof nature has kept it from falling under the same fate. About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

There are only a couple of places in DCS world that have changed the way that I think and play in DCS World, but the most recent one caught me by surprise. It is one that has made me find myself in situations which I never thought possible inside this simulator, some of which have taken root deep in my mind. Let's cut to the chase: Enigma's Cold War server has finally allowed me to use the Sabre competitively in a public PvP scenario for DCS World, which is a sentence I never thought I would write. I found myself in the sky fighting alongside Mirage F1s, A-10s and F-5s, all of which are much more capable than the Sabre; at least in modern scenarios. Despite this, I was as capable or maybe even more than some of these supersonic fighters due to the nature in which Enigma's server functions and the restrictions that they have put in place. Allow me to explain. As of the time of my last flight in Enigma, which was somewhere in the past couple of weeks, the server was running one of the final iterations of the 1.0 version of their dynamic mission. In said mission, there's REDFOR and BLUEFOR aircraft which fight for control over the battlefield by directly influencing both air and ground with their actions. In this war, everything is pretty balanced between the belligerents, down to the missiles that are allowed to be equipped. The best missile that any BLUEFOR fighter could equip, at the time, was the AIM-9B. This missile is so bad it could be spooked just by looking at it. It does not turn, it eats flares and loves getting distracted by the "forbidden heat signature", or the Sun for those that are not into those types of memes. But that does not mean it is useless, far from it; it is one hell of a missile for intercepting bombers or those players that just don't know you are there. That brings me to my main point. Despite having more advanced supersonic aircraft, we all have access to the exact same missile. That means that even in the humble F-86F, you still have the same amount and same type of missile as those who are flying their fancy 1970s supersonic jets. To make this even better, most engagements in this server tend to develop into close-range dogfights, where maneuverability and pilot skill play a much larger role than avionics or sensors. If you don't believe me, here is an example: I was playing with my buddy Kosmos, we did some sorties in the F-5E and everything was going well for the first couple of engagements. I shot down a couple of MiGs, then proceeded to run out of fuel and land right next to an enemy FARP; typical DCS stuff. That is when I decided to test my luck with the Sabre and, boy, was I in for a surprise. I took off from Maykop and followed the bearing that the human GCI told me to follow to intercept a MiG-19. I flew at extremely low level (pictured above in a recreation) and proceeded to slowly but steadily close the distance with my target. As I got closer, the GCI told me that the Farmer was high-up at twelve thousand feet. I started climbing and, unbeknownst to me, the fight has already started. The Farmer had already overflown me and was turning around while a Fishbed was positioning itself to shoot a missile at me. At this point, my eyes were focused on this unknown contact flying at me. This contact turned out to be a Fishbed that had not even realized that I was there: a perfect target for one of my AIM-9Bs. As I merge with him, I turn towards him while he was still flying straight; but I was still unaware that a missile had been shot at me. Turns out that I accidentally had spoofed the missile with my relatively sharp turn! As I turn, I position myself behind the first Fishbed. I turn on my missile seeker and wait for tone. As soon as I get tone, I let the missile fly off the rail. I keep the lock with the second one while this first missile flies towards the target. Thankfully, I didn't have to fire off my second missile as my trusty Sidewinder had found its mark and hit the enemy, downing him. That is the first kill of the sortie. With only a second to react, I look behind me as I turn away from the engagement and spot another Fishbed. The funny part is that it was not even Lemonjuice, who was still trying to get into a firing position behind me, but Choman. I try to position me behind him as he is turning left, then shoot what has to be the worst AIM-9B shot in history. It wasn't only short-ranged but, surprisingly, I forgot that these missiles love following the Sun. That meant that I had just wasted my last missile, forcing me to rely on guns for the rest of the fight. This fishbed was getting pretty slow as to force an overshoot, this forced me to do a couple of high yo-yos to avoid that from happening. Keep in mind that Lemonjuice has been on my six o'clock this entire time, now followed by a MiG-19 and a friendly Sabre! After a couple of turns, the dogfight gets drawn down to the deck. It is at this moment that I managed to get some solid shots on Choman's Fishbed, leading him to his inevitable fate, as he was destined to meet the ground right after trying to get me off his six. Having shot me a couple of times while I was dogfighting, Choman and I enter a weird engagement. He shoots an R-3 at me while I was pulling out of my dive. They are very slow, so I just climb away, turn around and get set up very firmly on their tail. This is where the infuriating part begins, as I learn of the lack of power that .50 cal rounds have in DCS World. As I pepper them with hundreds of rounds, not even smoke comes out of his plane. There wasn't even any visible signs of damage, either; they just keep tanking my rounds, even after a couple of bursts where I hit them right on the wing root and just behind the cockpit. It is at this point that I run out of ammo. I panic and let myself get caught in the chaos of this furball that had been developing right behind me. I see a Sabre chasing a Fishbed that was trying to engage me, as I get buzzed by another Fishbed. In the distance, a Tiger is trying to defend himself from the attacks. I get drawn into a rolling scissor with Lemonjuice and the new Fishbed that had just shown up out of nowhere. This is when I decide to cut my losses. I search for a chance to get out of that area, one which I found right after that scissors maneuver. I extend from his turn and go as low as physically possible, I was even able to see my shadow reflect off of the blades of grass beneath me. It seems like the Fishbeds had bigger fish to fry and gave up on trying to kill me. As I continue my exit, I take a quick glance at my fuel gauge and, in horror, see that I have less than 700lbs left. I go cold and ask the GCI to vector me to homeplate. This was nerve wracking because I know that this plane can be pretty fuel inefficient at low altitudes. I take the conscious decision to not glance at the fuel gauge again until I am close to my turn to final approach near Maykop. As I get close, I call out on the radio that I am extremely low on fuel and I need the runway, no matter what. I land at Maykop with less than 1% fuel, which is equivalent to around 40 pounds left. The gauge already marked empty by the time I was setting up for landing, so I was not surprised by any of this. I shut down my Sabre and got out of that slot. My fight was finally over. A DOGFIGHTER TO FEAR It was this sortie that taught me how fearsome a Sabre can be even when facing more advanced opponents in Enigma's Cold War server, all thanks to the very restricting yet interesting rules that govern that server's gameplay. I will be revisiting this concept, but hopefully from the REDFOR perspective, at some point. I'll see you in the skies! About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

We started this year with a bang thanks to the release of the F-4B/C Phantom II mod by VSN and their Century Series of mods. It has been quite a while since then, over a half a year as a matter of fact. In that time, a couple of updates have been released for this fantastic mod, but none are as big as this upcoming version. I have been given access to a preview of this new version, so let's take a look at some of the features that will be included with it! COCKPIT ADJUSTMENTS The first change you will notice, even if you are not into the little details, is the difference in the cockpit's positioning and seat placement. Previously, on older versions, the pilot was sitting at around shoulder height of the proper sitting position. It will take you some time to adjust, but once you have, you will appreciate the clearer sight lines and viewing angles. Personally, the most difficult aspect to get adjusted to was the new gunsight position, which can make some tasks a bit more difficult, specially with weapons like rockets. The gun pod is zeroed to 55deg of depression with this new position, which means that the pipper will be clearly visible for ground attack operations. Additionally, the A/A mode sets the proper depression automatically, so you won't have to worry there. NEW RADAR MECHANICS AND IFF This update also brings a revised radar that now includes closure circles and even IFF functionality. This means that now you will know, depending on your weapon, when you are inside that optimal engagement zone. It also goes hand in hand with the new IFF system that is simple to use and allows you to stop that blue on blue action that we all hate. The radar is still pretty simple mechanic-wise, specially compared to official modules, yet what it is, it's clear that we do not need any of that complexity to have fun. It might not be the most complex or the most accurate, but I find it exciting when I have to deal with jamming to the level that locking or even spotting the target through the clutter is impossible. I think that it is awesome to have a standalone air-to-air radar in a mod like this, no matter the compromises. TACAN NAVIGATION, REVISED WEAPON RELEASE ORDERS AND NEW SUU-23 MODEL The VSN devs, with the help of what was learned during the development of the A-4E-C by the Scooter devs such as JNelson and Farlander, have finally managed to add TACAN beacon navigation to the module as well as steer point navigation! This opens up an entire world of semi-imprecise navigation for the Phantom! Another change that will come with the update is a new SUU-23 20mm gun pod model! It is much more accurate than the one that was previously used, and I helped with the textures! The textures used by the new pod were made by me with the aid of Substance Painter and Blender, which helped me make them look better than they would have without said tools. It will include four different textures, so pick the one you like the most for your liveries. Last but not least, many of the problems with the ripple, pair and even single bomb modes have been solved. This means that the racks will eject the ordnance in the correct order, leading to some clipping issues and ejection issues being corrected. It might not sound like much, but it is important for the mod to be consistent to these subjects. About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

When I was much younger in the mid 2000s, I used to spend countless hours in front of my CRT playing with my PS2. It was a simpler and much easier time, as it was for many during our childhoods. I look back at those moments with fondness and I cherish those memories dearly. Adult life is one that does not let you just spend time like that, but I have found something that does allow me to maximize my game time and to be able to explore old classics in a completely different way: The Steam Deck. This small console-like PC by Valve has drastically changed the way that I look at games, but lately I have been using it to go back and replay Ace Combat Zero: The Belkan War (ACZ). This, to me, has been a mind-blowing experience to be able to play what is essentially a portable PC with PS4-ish capabilities that is able to emulate everything from the NES all the way to the Nintendo Switch, with everything in between. I used EmuDeck to install all the emulators and, after setting them up, I immediately booted PCSX2 to check out how well it ran ACZ, and I was amazed by the results. The game ran at a solid 60 frames per second at three times the native resolution, regardless of how crowded the situation was in-game. Running it a 3X resolution will give you the best image quality, but you will take a hit on battery life; which is the reason why I ran it at 2X resolution for most of my playthrough. The game still looks much better than if it were to have no upscaling at all, which would leave it to run at a very small resolution of 480p! That being said, I wanted to talk more about how much my experience changed thanks to being able to run it on the go. To me, this was basically a childhood dream: to be able to take my home console with me to play wherever and whenever I wanted. I can only imagine what 7-year-old me would think if I told him that in his mid 20s, he would be able to get that exact console he always wanted, specially one that would let him play with his new PS2 anywhere he wanted, including his favorite game. Seeing Galm's intro flash in front of me, late at night after a long day of working on projects, studying for university and doing some freelance work, was an experience that brought me back a decade and a half. I felt like a kid again while playing through Glacial Skies, with my Draken and Pixy on my left wing. It put a dumb smile on my face. Over the next few days, I kept playing ACZ and managed to finish the entire game with no problem, all with an average of 6:30 to 7 hours per battery charge, which meant that the Steam Deck not only was able to run it smoothly, but efficiently to boot! I found next to zero problems during my run, with the only noticeable graphical glitch being the MPBM explosions during the last mission, which didn't affect my experience at all. If you own a Steam Deck, or any other hand-held PC like the ASUS' ROG Ally, then I would highly recommend giving ACZ a try. It is one of the best arcade flight games ever made and one that left a mark on me and many others. Now, you will be able to take that experience on the go without breaking the bank, all thanks to the PC handheld revolution and the excellent team at PCSX2 that maintain and develop this wonderful emulator for us to use! About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

We have had this livery in our repertoire for a long time, as it was one of the earliest liveries made by Cubeboy for Skyward. This livery was initially made some years go, but it was never released to the public properly. We hope you enjoy this livery and make sure to share the screenshots you take with it! AV-8B Harrier II Skyward Bare Metal Designer : Cubeboy Release Date : 7/1/2023

Addressing one of flight simulation's well known hurdles It has been three days since the amazing events of Flight Sim Expo 2023 ended. Skyward's coverage of this event will be split into multiple articles over the next few weeks, but one of the most heartening announcements of all came from the next iteration of Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 (MSFS2024). A decent amount of the initial reaction to the "next generation" of this simulator was met with questions as to why this couldn't be some sort of midlife upgrade or downloadable content. With Microsoft Flight Simulator X (2006) able to operate for over a decade, questions as to why a new version of MSFS would be enough to validate an entirely new title were pretty valid. During Microsoft's keynote presentation at Flight Sim Expo 2023 in Houston, there were three main points referred to as "Focuses". Described by Jorg Neumann, head of Microsoft Flight Simulator, the first focus was the "Aviation Activity System". With information from the video above and the live presentation, pilots in MSFS 2024 will be able to choose aviation careers based on real world careers. The known careers at this time include: Aerial construction Aerial firefighting Agricultural aviation Air ambulance Air racing Airship tours Crop dusting Executive transport service Experimental flight Glider piloting Helicopter cargo transport Hot air balloon trips Industrial cargo transport Low altitude training Mountain rescue Remote cargo ops Scientific research Search and rescue Skydive aviation VIP charter service. Airline operations are notably absent, but Jorg Nuemann made it a point to say that there is much more to come on that subject in the future. While at the expo watching the presentation, the gravity of that part of the announcement hit me immediately. As someone that has more experience with military related flight games and simulators than anything else, one of the biggest hurdles people like me have when switching to civilian flight simulators is the lack of direction. Or at least what seems like a lack of direction from our point of view. Being able to fly dozens of fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft anywhere on the planet is an impressive capability, but sightseeing and aimlessly wandering can be something that causes users to gradually fade out from the simulator. Third party services like the expansive VATSIM network for air traffic controlled journeys and Parallel 42's job focused The Skypark were created to fill this potential void. Assuming the Aviation Activity System of MSFS 2024 is a part of the base simulator, the exposure to more task based aviation will be something both new simmers and simmers that long for more defined aviation will benefit heavily from. While some careers will naturally be more designed for solo aircraft operations, others have the potential to be as coordination heavy and teamwork reliant as they are in the real world. The scientific study of extreme weather phenomena by teams of aircraft. Search and rescue teams trying to locate lost hikers as the window of rescue narrows. An array of fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft working together to stop a raging wildfire. These more dangerous careers are not to supersede skydiving aviation, aerial construction or cargo transport, but honestly these types of experiences are usually absent from flight simulation. This was a smart move for Microsoft and Asobo Studio. It could've been derailed by adding arcade game like tasks like flying through rings or similar gimmicks. Instead, immediately providing opportunities to experience real world aviation jobs as a part of the standard simulation experience increases the chances to retain simmers long term. And as I mentioned earlier, people who are used to more task driven aviation are more likely to stay engaged. As I begin my earnest effort to get more familiar with civilian flight simulation, I am seriously looking at the next generation of Microsoft Flight Simulator with more intrigue. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers.

I have noticed something interesting that has been happening to the flight sim genre of games over the past decade or so. It is not a problem nor a particularly worrying issue, just an interesting movement made by developers that I did not expect at all back in the day. What I've noticed is that there are almost no single-player sim-lite games anymore; at least none that I am aware of. One of the last prominent ones being Strike Fighters 2. All screenshots in this article were taken by my great friend, Hueman. Kudos to him! Article originally posted on 05/18/2021. Minor revision published: 08/02/2022 The sim-lite market seems to have been replaced by a now famous (or infamous depending on who you ask) game made by Gaijin Entertainment: War Thunder. Thousands upon thousands of players go into the game everyday to grind for more vehicles or to just have fun, although some of my friends who play the game almost religiously would describe it as a second job or "suffering". But as someone that does not like paying for a game with my time, I don't particularly like games such as War Thunder. I would much prefer having that same sim-lite experience offline and that is exactly what Strike Fighters 2 provides. It might be old and it might not be the most beautiful game out there, but it sure provides certain experiences that are not available anywhere anymore. One of the best examples of one such experiences would be SF2's initial and centric experience: The Vietnam War. Having the capability to fly from both sides of the conflict and take control of almost any airframe that fought during the conflict is something that almost no game lets you do. Let alone flying Soviet-made MiGs against the US, as such side of the war is usually unavailable to the player. Strike Fighters 2 has always had that uniqueness to it, which can be seen in its official and unofficial expansions. From post-WW2 middle east conflicts to what-if scenarios such as a Soviet invasion through the Fulda Gap in Germany or even more recent but not that well known real conflicts such as the Lebanon War. Variety is the key. Additionally, Strike Fighters has one of the most expansive libraries of mods that I know of. If it flew or was meant to be flown, even in paper, then someone probably made it flyable in SF2. I have seen everything from the Wright Flyer to Ultra Sabers and more. It's just amazing how mod friendly this title is sometimes, particularly when you look at mods such as Operation Darius that take the game and add a completely new expansion-sized chunk to it. The great thing, for some people, is that you can fly most of these aircraft with almost zero previous experience. It is more game than simulator, hence why I refer to it as a sim-lite game. Sincerely, this is a game genre that I miss dearly. I love simulators such as DCS where I have to read and educate myself on each aircraft's systems in order to operate them, but, sometimes I just do not have the mood to get in and fly sims that day. Sometimes all I want is to fly the aircraft that I love without some of the "hassle" that comes with full fidelity sims. Sadly, acquiring SF2 nowadays is only possible through Thirdwire's website. No discounts at all despite that it was last updated in 2013 with a Windows 10 compatibility patch. This means that getting this sim-lite experience is a bit hard and with no other competitors around aside from the Flaming Cliffs 3 (FC3) module for DCS, the genre's not in its best moment. There is a bit of light leaking at the end of the tunnel, though. This comes in the form of Modern Air Combat, or MAC for short. Made by Eagle Dynamics, this new game should be a true successor to FC3 that will allow more people to easily access flight sims by being a sort of getaway drug that will give players a taste of air combat without some of the minutia. Some part of me still wants Thirdwire to continue development on the Strike Fighters franchise, but it seems as if they have moved on past it. All we can do is hope that ED's MAC will be what I and many other people want out of the sim-lite genre. About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000's leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010's. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder of SkywardFM, a writer and content manager ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

A reasonable representation of real world combat systems This is going to sound crazy, but there once was a time War Thunder did not exist. Gaijin Entertainment wasn't always the purveyor of free-to-play, 2000+ vehicle tech tree, combined arms combat. The developer created three combat flight simulators four years before the introduction of War Thunder. Of them, Apache: Air Assault was their only modern-day combat title. It focused on the Boeing AH-64D Apache Longbow and provided a reasonable portrayal of the aircraft and believable scenarios in which an attack helicopter would operate. The AH-64D is built on the Apache's already ground-breaking performance and innovation, with its centerpiece being the AN/APG-78 Longbow Radar. With the ability to track up to 128 targets and fire upon sixteen at once, now paired with its already formidable Target Acquisition and Designation Sights (TADS), the Apache Longbow became even more formidable. In Apache: Air Assault, this aircraft's ranged attack capabilities are displayed in a simplified but well-represented way. The game is firmly a flight arcade title, but not to the extent of its fixed-wing fighter-based contemporaries. One or two well-placed MANPADS or unguided rockets can bring the player's aircraft down. Harder difficulties remove beginner-friendly flight restrictions, resupplying mid-mission at forward arming and refueling points is more important, and a minimal Heads Up Display (HUD) user interface notably increases the quality of gameplay for experienced flight simmers. But most importantly for this article, the onboard loadouts and weapon capabilities were grounded in reality. Whether it's a more standard load of a few dozen rockets, eight Hellfires, and chain gun or a full missile-slinging loadout of sixteen air-to-ground missiles, the number of weapons onboard is nothing like the 80+ missiles found in other games. UAV Teaming In-game, the Apache can connect to unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The UAVs provide limited real-time camera feeds. They provide top-down views of a target being tracked by the attack helicopter. While the UAVs cannot be used to find yet-to-be-identified targets, their camera feeds can assist in pre-planning attacks. Seeing that an emplaced target may be surrounded by obstructions or still unseen defenders could prompt the helicopter to reposition before attacking. There is a limited ability to swivel the UAV cameras and zoom in, but nothing beyond that. Longbow Radar Supported Engagements While flying in third person, pilot view, gunner view, or HUD camera views, players can cycle through the ground, naval and airborne vehicles using their Longbow Radar. The targets can be tracked either individually, or up to sixteen static or moving targets can be designated for a simultaneous blow. Even with automatic midair weapon resupply available in easier difficulties, dumping all missiles onto a cluster of lower-threat targets results in either a flight back to the nearest FARP or waiting many minutes for resupply. Players instinctually begin reserving Hellfires for higher threat targets like armored vehicles, air defenses, or even speed boats toting MANPADS. Any Hellfire launched using this method is essentially fire-and-forget, with the radar guiding the missile. Direct View Optics and FLIR The most well-known camera to anyone familiar with combat aviation. While players fly the aircraft, the 30mm M230 chain gun is controlled by the AI gunner as they automatically scan and engage threats at short range. Longer distance engagements must be done by the player taking manual control of it with Direct View Optics (DVO). DVO consists of a black-and-white daytime camera and white hot Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR). Optics can gradually zoom with decreasing image clarity the more it zooms in. Getting familiar with the shapes of common weapons and vehicles helps greatly. Furthermore, frequently using FLIR to scan the terrain or areas hostile forces may inhabit can help spot ambushes or targets of opportunity before they detect the player. When firing from a distance or while the AH-64D has any movement, players must manually lead targets, correct for the aircraft's flight path, and cannon shell drop over distance. While using DVO, players can enable an automatic hovering mode or manually fly the aircraft. However, flying while in DVO does not give aircraft altitude, attitude, or bearing indicators like targeting pods carried by fixed-wing combat aircraft. Flying the aircraft like this greatly increases the chance of a controlled flight into terrain. Practicing small control inputs and remembering the aircraft's flight path before entering DVO is necessary if firing while on the move. Hellfire missiles are launched with laser guidance while in DVO. The crosshair of the chain gun acts as the crosshair of the guidance laser for the missiles. The Hellfires loft shortly after leaving the Apache with a time until impact displayed. When fully zoomed out, the missile can be seen in flight. The benefit of launching with manual guidance is the ability to hit clusters of soft targets like infantry or groups of light vehicles. What the Gaijin Entertainment of long ago gave us in Apache: Air Assault isn't anywhere near the full fidelity AH-64 brought to Digital Combat Simulator, but it's a noteworthy representation that captures a bit of the "real thing" in a genre that prides itself on the rule of cool trumping any inkling of simulation. While the game will inevitably draw you into multiple action packed close ranged engagements, patiently using FLIR, zoom optics, radar and Hellfires in combination can thin out even the toughest groups of hostiles before the rolling gun battle begins. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

The first considerable update to a game that reappeared from obscurity The reception of At Skies' Edge was unexpected, even by its current solo developer, Marckel Sky. As mentioned in our previous article, this flight arcade game appeared from years of unknown obscurity with a sudden launch on May 1st, 2023. And now, what felt like a potentially transient release for the sake of releasing the project just to get it out there, has received a considerable update. However, the developer continues to make it clear that their real world obligations and minimal experience with 3D modelling is a factor going forward. ASE version 0.002 was released on June 12th, 2023 with a seemingly short list of new additions. They may not seem like much to the average player, but these are very important updates that make up the core of any flight arcade game. The first mission, now known as "Operation Argus", is focused on air-to-air combat. There are no notable changes to this mission. It is also important to note that there are no significant changes to the flight model, which I had nothing but praise for last month. The speed and maneuvering system which separates the flight model into three speed regimes, while being augmented by an optional super maneuverability technically has two new speeds. Taxi and takeoff. The newest mission of ASE has a basic, minimally textured airfield to demonstrate this new ability. Speed is limited in the apron of the air base, stopping players from attempting taxiway takeoffs. Upon reaching the runway, the limiter is released and players can rocket into the air, hitting a toggle to raise their landing gear. The runway zone that unlocks the taxi speed limiter definitely needs some work, but it is functional. Players can also land mid-mission if they wish. The second mission, "Operation Desert Fury", is the new mission that introduces the bulk of the notable additions to At Skies' Edge. This mission focuses on air-to-ground combat, with multiple ground based unit types introduced to the game. These include tents, supply containers, armored personnel carriers, main battle tanks and watch towers. The most important units are self-propelled anti-aircraft guns (SPAAG) and surface-to-air missile launchers (SAM). The SAMs have a relatively long range when comparing them to the standard missiles and cannon carried by the air superiority focused aircraft, the MD-15C. In version 0.002 these are the only two original weapons capable of hitting ground targets. Fortunately, a new air-to-ground missile was added for players. Known as the PR-78H, this stand-off land attack munition is able to strike land forces from long range. Even outside the range of the new SAM units. While it is not terrain following, meaning it will run into obstacles if any are in its flight path, the missile does strike targets in a top-attack profile to clear smaller obstacles in the immediate vicinity of the target area. Its heavy fragmentation warhead allows it to destroy clusters of enemies with ease. Taking time to maintain distance and let the PR-78 lock onto targets at maximum range doesn't always pay off, as the missile occasionally cannot fly as far as the aircraft's radar can achieve lock. This missile can also be launched without lock. By lining up the HUD whiskey mark and the velocity vector icon at the desired target, the PR-78H becomes a heavily destructive unguided rocket. The current SPAAGs in At Skies' Edge are somewhat slow firing anti-aircraft units, but surprisingly are able to intercept missiles. They do not actively target the missiles like a close in weapon system does. The SPAAGs are actually targeting the launch aircraft, but if a missile flies into the anti-aircraft barrage it has a high chance of being intercepted. This threat can be minimized by the aircraft that launched the missile changing course sharply. This drags anti-aircraft fire away from the missile, giving it a higher chance to succeed. I strongly support this game mechanic because it forces players to be a bit more tactical even with the high volume of weapons they can carry. ASE 0.002a is an incremental update, which is big for this particular title, but may seem small in the grand scheme of things. As always Marckel Sky, its openly honest developer, hasn't promised much in the near future but has said the next update may include dialogue, a better mission structuring system and an overhaul of the current weapon system to allow for new weapons like bombs and rockets. On a personal note, I do hope a solution to the inaccurate gun reticle for the aircraft cannon is also found. My interest in At Skies' Edge continues as this unknown title from years ago now etches out its own space in the current indie flight game scene. It is an unusual story I look forward to seeing progress. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers.

It is incredible to me that it has been over a year since the UH-60L got released. Working on that project alongside Kinkku, Bailey and Jonas was an amazing experience and getting to see it used in videos, screenshots and more is very humbling. It is this community that surrounds the Black Hawk that made the entire project worth the amount of time we spent making it, which leads me to today's article. A couple of members of the community that grew around the Black Hawk have taken it upon themselves to evolve the UH-60L and develop some variants of the aircraft, something that shows just how dedicated and passionate they are about this project. ANDR0ID made the Armed Black Hawk mod, which is self-explanatory, Xag made the SH-60B mod based on the Spanish Navy birds and, today's focus, Tanuki44 made the MH-60R Sea Hawk mod! EXTERNAL 3D MODEL AND TEXTURES Tanuki's work, is pretty amazing as it brings a series of "firsts" to the simulator, but before we get to that I would like to talk about the models and show off some of the new textures that I helped make for the mod, as you will be staring at them for most of your experience. The developer used the UH-60L as a base for the 3D model, so it will not be a 1:1 replica of the real Sea Hawk, but it is pretty good for it being a mod of a mod. The rear landing gear is fully modeled and animated, the folding mechanism for the tail works just as expected, including the folding main rotor blades. All of its pylons and even the crew have been implemented, textured and animated, which is awesome. The external tanks, side gunner station, sensor suites and even the sonobuoy racks are modeled, including the cover that goes over the launchers when they are not in use! As for the cockpit, it still uses the model from the UH-60L with some minor differences to accommodate the new systems. NEW GAMEPLAY POTENTIAL, ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE AND FEATURES As for features, this mod has some of the most interesting and unique ones of any mod out there. It innovates in several aspects, too, in particular when it comes down to mission sets and new options for gameplay. Its sonobuoys are not just for show. Thanks to a simple script that Tanuki developed, anti-submarine warfare (ASW) is now a reality in DCS World. You are capable of taking off with a pair of torpedoes and, with the aid of your buoys, you will be able to hunt submarines like fish in a barrel. It is an awesome experience and I would highly recommend it for people that have experience with helicopters but need that added challenge to have some fun. To make ASW work, Tanuki also made it so that both the Torpedoes and Hellfires work! I hope this short overview made you a bit interested in the MH-60R. If you want to download it, you can visit the official H-60 Project Discord server! About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord : Cubeboy

To say that this module has the biggest and longest running hype train of any other DCS module would be an understatement. Everyone wanted to get their hands on this module for years, and now it's the time; we finally got our hands on the F-15E Strike Eagle module. Released yesterday (06/22/2023) in an extremely unexpected manner, this module rapidly climbed in popularity as thousands of DCS players rushed to buy it and download it. We did not get media access to this module, therefore our review will consist of a first impressions approach to all the aspects of this module from a pilot-oriented perspective. This review will be updated with every content addition that RAZBAM releases for the Mudhen, which means that some of our opinions might change in the future as the module evolves, but with that out of the way; let's get started! EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL 3D MODELS I was kind of speechless when I first saw the modeling work that was put into making these models. The attention to detail put by its creator, Metal2Mesh, is absolutely amazing. Everything from the rivets, the small dents in the panels, the grime and oil in the seams between panel lines and the excellent use of weathering is absolutely mind-boggling. I have not been able to find any faults in the model like I did with Aerges' Mirage F1 module. In fact, in my search for any glaring mistakes, I managed to find some hidden details that made me appreciate this models even more. Small details such as the cable connector inside the Sidewinder rails (above gallery, 5th image) or the signature from the paint shop where some of the liveries got painted, all livery and airframe dependent. This attention to detail is not limited to the textures themselves, but also bleeds into the unwrapping. This model is +90% compatible with the old AI-only F-15E, which means that liveries that were made for that model will be easy to port to this module; which is something that I appreciate as a livery creator. The same level of quality as the external model can also be appreciated in the cockpit model. It feels like a weathered bird that has seen some action. It does not look as weathered as the F-14A/B cockpit from Heatblur, but it still has some personality. Some of the panels are more weathered and even slightly polished from the friction of being constantly used, there are scratches and imperfections in areas where you would expect them. Both the pilot and weapon system officer (WSO) are amazingly detailed and textured, which to me, somehow explains at least one of the reasons behind the delays. These models are excellent and make me regain some trust in RAZBAM's products. VISUAL AND SOUND EFFECTS In terms of visual effects, the Mudhen is on-par with some of the best in the simulator. It utilizes a range of audio sources to immerse the player in the experience, which is quite challenging since it is extremely easy to over do it in this regard. Thankfully, some of the best elements utilized here have been used by RAZBAM before in previous releases; which usually means that they have somewhat mastered their implementation. This involves effects such as over wing vapor, which to me really makes the model shine even more and sells the movement of the aircraft through the air. G and AoA dependent vapor effects are always great, as you can see in the image above. Aside from the main wing vapor, there are smaller vortexes that are created along the intake ramps and even the elevator tips. As for audio design, this aspect of the module has been extremely well done. Everything from buffeting, engine feedback, and even the cockpit switches and alerts are implemented well. One effect that I liked quite a bit was the famous pneumatic activator sound that the nozzles make when pushing from idle power. I captured this sound here along with the amazing engine nozzle animations, so let's hear it: FLIGHT MODELING DISCLAIMER: This is always a tough category, as like with any other aircraft, there is a lot to take into consideration other than just the feel of the flight model. This category is the most subjective one in this article, as I do not have any real world experience with this craft. I will only base my opinion on practical experience and knowledge of practical aerodynamics and the theoretical behavior that an F-15E should have under certain scenarios. With the disclaimer out of the way, I think that RAZBAM outdid themselves with the flight model. The aircraft feels heavy yet powerful and carries some very palpable inertia with it when you maneuver. It is a feeling that I had sorely missed from other flight models that have come out recently, and one that I can not help but to appreciate. You can feel the thrust coming out of those engines and, believe it or not, it is that feeling that has made my experience with this aircraft such a delightful one. I can load this aircraft up with a full combat load, full fuel and I can barely feel it! Coming from a Hornet or even the Viper, this aircraft feels like it is in a league of its own, at least in terms of thrust. Something that impressed me is that the wings have plastic deformation if brought to its structural limits, which means that if you pull too hard and at high speeds, you will permanently deform the wings which will affect the way your aircraft performs in a very negative way. It is also possible to completely rip your wings off if you fly it like you stole it, which is a very nice touch. This will make players more conscious of their maneuvers and the limits of the aircraft itself. Here's a picture of the deformation, look at the wingtips and how they are bent upwards. MISSION CAPABILITIES As of release, the mission capabilities of the Mudhen are limited to the weapons and systems that were implemented into the initial build. With the current weapons and systems, the F-15E is capable of performing all weather, day and night missions in both air-to-air and air to ground role, which would put it at the same capability level as the Hornet or Viper at release. Night operations are made easy by the implementation of the LANTIRN TGP and NVP systems, both of which allow for all weather and night operations by using FLIR imagery. Additionally, both the Air-to-Air and Air-to-Ground radars are implemented to a high level of accuracy, which means that you will be able to use them to target and map targets at incredible distances. We are still missing many of the sensors, modes and weapons that are needed to put the aircraft at the same level as the current versions of the Hornet and Viper that we have in game. Specially, as of the writing of this article, there are no true smart weapons implemented in the game; which is a bit of a let-down, but it is something that the developers had made clear since they announced which features would be available with it at launch. With the addition of smart weapons and improved sensors such as the Sniper XR pod, this aircraft will be a mainstay of DCS multiplayer missions, with thousands of players that will specialize in mastering its numerous quirks and features. ARMAMENT M61 VULCAN 20MM CANNON 510 round of reliable 20 mm destruction at a variable refresh rate of 4000 or 6000RPM. AIR TO AIR MISSILES Since it is based on the original Eagle, the Mudhen is still an extremely formidable air-to-air platform. To do this job properly, it has access to a pretty decent arsenal: The AIM-9 family of missiles with many variants: L/M/P/P5 The AIM-7 family of missiles: M/MH The AIM-120 family of missiles: B/C UNGUIDED BOMBS, CLUSTER MUNITIONS AND RUNWAY PENETRATORS You can carry an unbelievable amount of unguided bombs that would any WW2 aircraft blush: Mk.82 500lb bombs in both low and high drag x 14. Mk.84 2000lb bombs in both low and high drag x 6 CBU-87/97 Cluster munitions x 14 Mk.20 Rockeye Cluster munitions x 14 BLU-107 Durandal Runway penetrators x 12 LASER GUIDED MUNITIONS The most advanced bombs currently available, they come in several flavors: GBU-12 500lbs x 10 GBU-10 2000lbs x 7 GBU-24 2000lb "Bunker Buster" x 5 EASE OF USE AND LEARNING CURVE There is no way to sugarcoat this, but this is a complex module that will require some time and dedication to properly learn how to use its systems. This is in-line with any other 4th generation fighter, regardless of which country it comes from. Its complexity lies, mainly, in the unintuitive controls and the insane amount of buttons that need mapping in order to operate it at the same level as other American 4th gens. To explain how complex it can be: I ran out of buttons while trying to map all the essential controls that are required to use the plane's systems. I was surprised since I do have 4 different hat-switches and plenty of buttons. Yet, despite that, I had to create two levels of modifiers for my throttle to have all the functions I needed handy. You will need to be clever in order to map all these buttons to a simpler controller, something akin to an Xbox controller or, alternatively, you will need to have a beefy set-up to map everything you will need to operate this jet as a solo pilot. IS THIS AIRCRAFT FOR YOU? If what you want in a module is: An incredible flying experience. An air-to-air beast with a powerful radar that can also map the ground. A platform that will continue to grow with time, just like the Hornet and Viper did. An all weather platform that conquers the day and rules the night. If you don't mind: That it is an Early Access (EA) product. The lack of smart weaponry at launch. Dealing with all the control bindings. Not having more advanced sensor suites at launch. If all or some of the above is what you want, then the F-15E Strike Eagle by Razbam Simulations is for you! About the writer: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000s, leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities, but only started being active around the mid 2010s. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as the co-founder and writer ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy

Low Situational Awareness Laser Guided Bomb Delivery The smarts in smart weapons don't mean much if the pilot flying the aircraft is having a "helmet fire." The air combat arena has been complex since the first observation aircraft met over the battlefields of World War I. As technology moved forward and combat aircraft became more capable, pilots' physical and mental workload has only multiplied. Even in the most capable 4th generation of combat aircraft, having the knowledge to operate them correctly, manage communications, and evade threats from the land, sea, and air can be a tall order. Especially when you're being shot at. Task saturation, misprioritization, reduced situational awareness, and tunnel vision is a dangerous mix when flying. Even the most experienced pilots can get lost in the information buzz. This combination of factors is a commonly cited reason for mishaps and missed targets. During a combat mission, a member of the flight being "tumbleweed" or dealing with a full-on "helmet fire" makes them wholly ineffective and dangerous to a degree. Besides talk-ons, bullseye calls, and other methods to give the confused wingman information, there is an unusual technique that can be used in Digital Combat Simulator World and similar combat flight simulators. "Buddy Bombing" is a technique that works best with laser-guided bombs deployed from higher altitudes. While it is similar to "Buddy Lasing" that a forward air controller airborne (FAC-A) would provide, there is a noticeable difference. Buddy Lasing calls for allied aircraft to approach a known target in an identifiable area illuminated by a laser from another ally. The attacking aircraft engage the target from any briefed or verbally agreed upon direction and altitude. "Buddy Bombing" calls for a member of the flight to fly on the wing of an allied aircraft equipped with a targeting pod to work together to deliver a laser-guided weapon on target. In our example with the confused pilot, they are called to rejoin the targeting pod-equipped aircraft. Upon rejoining formation, the confused pilot only has to match their flight lead's airspeed, altitude, and direction. This minimizes the amount of information they have to manage, resets their mental workload, and simplifies their immediate task. All they need to do is fly on the wing of their flight lead as the flight lead maneuvers them onto the target. The flight lead can talk their wingman onto the target, give visual references, sensor-based references, and even a description of the target they can visually identify. Both aircraft coordinate matching laser codes for weapon guidance, and the flight lead gives a countdown for the wingman to drop their weapon. After weapon release, the wingman can leave the flight leader with now rebuilt situational awareness or remain with the leader to set up for a second attack. While the wingman doesn't have to fly close formation throughout the rejoin and turn onto the target, flying close formation will be required for the run-up to the target. This is needed to send the weapon in the right direction with enough energy behind it for the flight lead's laser designator to guide it onto the target. If the aircraft deploying the laser guided bomb releases it far off target, it will be hard or impossible for the bomb to maneuver itself while tracking the targeting laser to hit the target. If the bomb is released at the same speed, altitude and vector as the aircraft illuminating the target, the deviation is negligible . Buddy Bombing isn't a go-to tactic. It can be somewhat time consuming to set up while in the middle of a mission. All aircraft maintaining SA and attack targets from varying directions and altitudes makes it harder for the defenders to fight back. However, when faced with the possibility of a mission failing and a confused wingman being ineffective or potentially shot down, reducing their workload to maintaining formation and releasing a weapon at the end of a countdown is a great alternative. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

Besiege Flight Machinima Creator Those enamored by flight will pursue it wherever it can be found. It's the type of passion that drives people to look up when they hear an aircraft overhead during their everyday lives. In the virtual world, that same passion drives people to bring flight to places where it was never intended to be. Our first interview for Creator Highlight Month 2022 is with Shadé, a machinima maker creating aviation-focused content on a rather unexpected platform: Besiege. For many years now, Shadé (pronounced zah-day) has created aircraft to fly in the medieval skies of Bisege and made elaborate videos of fictional and non-fictional aircraft in a wide variety of settings and situations. After years of being curious about how this was possible, we got an opportunity to discuss this subject at length with Shadé. There is a lot we do not know about this subject, so it is great having an expert here. Pleased to meet you. Hello! My name is Pascalis Sadewa, but the community knows me more by the name Shadé. I’m from Yogyakarta, Indonesia but now I have moved to Bali to pursue my dream of developing video games. I’m the one behind a YouTube channel called Dawn-Shade where I upload machinimas (animated films using video and computer games videos) using a game called Besiege. I’ve seen videos of your work for years without completely understanding what is happening. Let’s start from the top. What is Besiege? When I first played Besiege in 2015, just a couple of months after it launched as early access on Steam, I thought it was just a fun silly medieval destruction-building game at first. Besiege is a physics-based builder game in which you build medieval siege engines to solve puzzles, destroy opposing armies and structures. You start with a single 1x1 block, then you place more blocks connected to said starting block. Each block type can have its own function: Wheels can rotate, springs can contract, hinges can bend, blades cut, armor protects, etc. For example, if you want to make the most basic car, you start by making a chassis from wooden blocks, then you place two steering hinges at the front, then add four wheels. If you bind the wheel to Arrow Up, then steer left/right to Arrow Left/Right, you can get a basic working car. You then make machines this way giving them whatever functions you can think of to complete the objectives, solve puzzles, and finish the campaign. Does the base version of the game have a single player campaign or multiplayer? What is the goal in those game modes? Besiege has a single player campaign spanning four chapters. The first chapter is more like a basic tutorial, acquainting players with what each block does. Some levels have how-to-build guides that players can follow. Each subsequent chapter introduces new challenges and gradually makes it harder. Not every stage has destruction as its main objective, some need you to take and deliver a certain object into a specified place, some have a Zelda-like puzzle. If you’re more keen on just building creatively, there’s a Sandbox mode where you have a flat, vast area to test and play your machine. This mode is where the majority of players spend their time in Besiege, building machines and sharing it to the world via the Steam Workshop. Besiege also has a level editor where you can design your own levels or combine them into a campaign of your own. The levels you have created can then be used for multiplayer mode. Besiege multiplayer mode is where players can create a lobby and other players can join directly, playing custom levels with their machines. You can do racing, tank combat, just hang around, simulating battlebots, or PVP dogfights, with the last one being very popular in Besiege’s Japanese Community. Because of the medieval setting, machines like trebuchets and battering rams were probably was was expected by the Besiege developers. Users can build machines with various types of building blocks. Is flight as simple as placing a single flying block? Fun fact, the developer actually never expected that players could achieve flight like we did. There is only one flying-based level in the campaign. You’re supposed to make a flying machine to hit target balloons, but in actuality it can even be completed without flight, by simply shooting the targets from the starting point. In the early days of Besiege, planes were an elusive technique that only a handful of players understood. It’s surprisingly easy to get something into the air, however getting it to fly will require some basic knowledge of how planes work in the real world. Most players default to a quadcopter design, because it’s one of the easiest ways (and cooler than simply making balloon airships) to make a controllable flying machine. It took awhile for players to realize that the Wing Block and the Wing Panel the developer provided is not a good block to build the wing part of the plane. Turns out, building wing parts with the Propeller Block make things fly so well that now it has become the standard. You can dissect someone else’s machine they uploaded in the Steam Workshop to see how they work. But copying the mechanism without understanding how aircraft works will lead you nowhere. Aircraft that work in real life can work in Besiege, so knowing how real aircraft works helps. Small bit of trivia, on my earliest attempt at building a plane in Besiege, I put elevator control on the main wing. My brain thought aircraft gain altitude that way. I learned a lot about aircraft after that. After I’m confident enough to know about flight and the easiest way to build one in Besiege, I then created and uploaded a tutorial video on how to make a plane in Besiege. It’s a very basic plane that works well enough, but still covers a lot of knowledge of mechanisms needed to build your own. And the most important part, this should be possible even for players without any mods installed. Are mods to enhance or alter the game needed to create aircraft? Creating aircraft never strictly requires mods. Some mods that add handy tools can speed up players' build and can increase the detail on their machines, but after the developer added an update that contained Advanced Building Tools, players now can make detailed planes even in base game. The Besiege Japanese Community in particular are very fond of this tool. So much that the mainstream players are all about making powerful planes in vanilla and duel them together in PVP fashion. My old F-104 Starfighter was one of the first realistic planes that could break the sound barrier in the early days. At that time it was very challenging. From making an engine that doesn’t spontaneously burst at high rpm, then building a fuselage that can withstand that amount of Gs, and even making control surfaces that still work at high-speed. But now Japanese players say that 1000km/h is the bare minimum if you want to PVP. Initially they were strictly going vanilla, but as they discovered more techniques, vanilla Besiege cannons were considered underpowered. Now they use vanilla fighter + Weapon Block Mod. There are various other types of mods. Weapon Block mod is the type that can add custom blocks to the game. This mod adds fun real life modern armament you can place as blocks on your aircraft. I like these because they are useful for making action scenes more fun. But if you share something that contains modded blocks, you have to keep in mind that whenever other players that don't install the mod try to load it, that block would be missing. Before sharing you have to make sure with the block missing, the machine should still work. Other mods add many various things, like adding custom HUD similar to what Ace Combat has for that game’s camera, or add ocean to the game to test out ships or seaplanes, or allows you to write Lua to a machine you build, or change the game’s physics calculation speed, making things very accurate and laggy, or very wonky but smooth. The Ace Combat HUD mod is a mod I co-developed with another modder from the community. Besiege is a physics-based builder. Does this mean that aircraft design matters in this game? Can designs that are too heavy, unbalanced or just too unconventional still fly? Very much physics still matters. If an aircraft is too heavy, it won’t take off. If it’s unbalanced, it will require constant correction because it won’t fly straight. Wing aspect ratio too wide? Your plane will glide easily but rolling would be very sluggish, You make your wings anhedral? It will react to movement quicker at the cost of being more unstable. But with the Besiege, some limitations of the world don't apply, like airflow. When the design can’t take off, you can solve them with various things like increase the lift by adding more aerodynamic blocks, or increase the engine power. You can even reduce the weight by strategically adding strong hidden balloons inside. People who have full knowledge of what things affect the flying physics and what doesn’t affect can make anything fly. Examples are this CCC-166 Gharial Attack Helicopter which is an Attack Helicopter shaped like a tank based on a meme; or this majestic Swan ‘Boat’ that’s a boat but can fly and it comes with its own passenger; or a flying Ricardo Milos. You mentioned key bindings in your basic car example earlier in the interview. Can aircraft be controlled with gamepads? Have other types of controllers been tried? The developers said not to expect official analog support. Besiege uses Unity Engine so it should read XInput just fine, but currently you can only use gamepad buttons. When remapping key bindings, the inputs from analog or trigger won’t be detected, so all input you can use is digital. There was a mod that added controller support into older versions of Besiege. This is why on some of my uploaded planes, it has a control scheme for controllers written on its page. It’s quite powerful, you can even utilize the sensitivity of the analog or trigger to control, for example how fast the Wheel turns, or how much the angle a Steering Block turns. You can even use HOTAS to control the movement. Sadly it has never been updated to work on the current version of Besiege. The aircraft you’ve assembled in your Steam workshop collection, “Shadé’s Skycruisers”, covers a wide array of aircraft. From World War I biplanes, to modern day jets and helicopters to fictional aircraft from various other games. In your opinion, what are some of your best works? That is a very hard question! Each new upload I always strive for something new like trying different tech or try to not have weaknesses previous aircraft had. If I decide based on the stats alone, I don’t think the Gypsy Danger video counts because my helicopter there only has a supporting role. So then the Su-25TM “Frogfoot" with the most popular showcase video is the best. I like that I managed to design bombs with satisfying explosions and fit plenty on that plane. If based on the most subscribed on Steam, it’s the Aurora Alpha Bomber. The Aurora bomber has this one downside where it was really laggy, particularly because it was made from the period where I don’t know that a certain block is more laggy than other blocks. If I can redo it I would rebuild it without the block. Maybe my personal favorite is the F-4E Phantom II. It’s my go-to plane for testing new levels I designed. Something on it’s engine design makes the flight the smoothest, it has sufficient armament to destroy targets, and it’s agile enough to evade obstacles. If I remember correctly, at a certain point it also became one of my most reuploaded planes. Some of them asked for my permission first, which I always agreed to as long as they mention that it was originally made by me, but often others just stole it and reuploaded it to the Steam Workshop without any credit whatsoever. Steam Workshop's ability to easily share user-made machines is a powerful tool. What are some of the most complex or unexpected aircraft you’ve seen made in Besiege? There are few, the latest one is this Fully Mechanical Supermarine Spitfire. On the surface it just looks like a regular Spitfire, but on the inside it’s mechanical. Every control surface is connected to the cockpit where using the pilot camera you can see it moving. It does fly wonky thanks to a lot of the added weight of the internal mechanism but it’s still very impressive. There is also this almost perfect replica of the F-22 Raptor. This aircraft has everything you could possibly need in a plane: accurate missiles in the missile bays, accurate gear doors, very good agility, missiles are using sensor blocks so you can just fire-and-forget, and it looks fantastic complete with a canopy you can open and close. This one is called The Skycrawler, a giant ship using a rare method of propulsion called cyclo-gyro. It uses a horizontal-axis cyclorotor as a rotor wing to provide lift, propulsion and control. I still can’t explain it if someone asks me how it can fly. There is also this monstrosity called Balaculus with more than 10,000 total blocks that apparently can fly in addition to melting anyone’s PC. For at least 6 years now your machinimas have included one-off combat missions and recreations of scenarios from Ace Combat and Battlefield, for example. Can you give us a general idea about the filming process? The spirit of these videos I made is always sharing a new build uploaded on the workshop, either by myself or by other members of the community. So naturally I decided the scenarios based on what build will be shared next. Most animators are taught to create a storyboard first, before doing the actual take. I never actually draw those storyboards. Most of my storyboarding process is by pure visualization in my mind while listening to the music many times. I visualize what should I start with, what would happen at this part of music, when the climax occurs, and what would be the ending. Making a recreation of a scenario is generally easier because I already know what the sequence is. I simply insert dialogues from the scenario to the music then listen to it several times so I can get a good grasp on what part I should use, and what part I should omit. So deciding the music is usually one of the first things to do. When I make recreations of existing scenarios, the music is just what the original used. When it’s not, I pick various music from either free music library, shows, or from other games I’ve played. Next, I list all extra machines I need and scour the Steam Workshop to find which machines have been built. If some machines are not available, I’ll find some alternatives. But if the type of the machine is very important to the scenario, I’ll ask several other community members and they are usually more than happy to help me build one. When everything is assembled, it’s time to start recording. There are several ways to record multiple machines at the same time in Besiege. The old way is additive load another machine with a mod, so that both can appear at the same time within a world. When the machine is loaded this way, I control both machines using one keyboard. I sometimes need to remap the machine buttons so that their movement does not overlap. I fly the first machine with my left hand, and the second machine with the right hand while keeping the machines in frame (I often wish I had a third hand to control the camera with the mouse). Imagine it’s like you drive a car but instead of looking at the road, you look at the driver’s seat from the outside, while also making sure the other car behind it is still driving straight. When the Multiplayer update came out, recording scenes just became a lot easier. I can ask other community members to fly a machine or two for me, while I focus on the camera work. I often arrange a recording session on the weekends where most people are online and there sure are many good pilots from the community. This is where my camerawork quality gets better because now I don’t have to worry about where my plane’s nose is headed. I can ask them to do certain actions over and over again for each camera angle. A downside of this is that we need to be online at the same time. I often have to stay awake after midnight because the other person is in the European time zone. After the Replay Mod came out, my scenes can now keep their quality without having to rely on other people too much. With it, I just need to do a successful run with the machines once, then hit the replay button. The machines will accurately follow my previous path so I can just set up my camera on every angle I want without having to do the run multiple times. Simulation in Besiege is very CPU heavy, I don’t think there's a consumer computer capable of running more than 1000 blocks at 100% speed, not to mention OBS on top of that. People have been joking that my computer must be from NASA but I only have a laptop. So then how could my mere laptop do that? It’s because I always record everything in slow motion, at max 25%, down to 5% if there’s so much going on, then speed up in the editor. The advantage is that even if my laptop renders Besiege laggy as low as 15 FPS, in editor it will be sped up 4x which means I will have a sweet 60 FPS for the final video. This poses several challenges. For starters, everything is very slow. A 40 seconds footage is only worth max 10 seconds, usually less. Second, camera movement also needs to be very slow. You move the Camera in Besiege by dragging it with the mouse. To mimic the handheld shaking, you have to shake it with the mouse but do it very-very-very slowly. This is why in my early videos, the camera movement is not that good. This was solved with the addition of the cinematic camera the developer added in an update. In the early days I was the one responsible for making the aircraft for my videos, some time passed and I see the number of Besiege plane builders has grown a lot. So when the Level Editor update was released, I delegated the aircraft build to other community members so I can focus on other things I am passionate about, designing levels. This is why at the end of 2017 most of my videos become showcases of levels developed by me with additional supporting aircraft provided by the community. That's an ingenious video recording solution! Your videos have multiple machines and landscapes. This makes me wonder what the stage/world/level limitations of Besiege are and how you worked around those to create your videos? In the early days of Besiege, I can only use the campaign levels. It’s very limited, but planes are usually high in the sky so it doesn’t matter much. Then a mod came in and one of its features was adding a custom scene with terrain you can customize the texture. I used it for a long time until one day the Level Editor update came out. The Level Editor in Besiege is very powerful. The levels are created with various Objects that you can place and edit in the world. The object includes destructible structure, trees, NPCs, basic shapes, and even environmental effects. You can set every object’s coordinates, rotation, scale, and its specific parameters. The only hard limit is what the game can run, and that depends on the PC of whoever wants to play the levels. The official levels have about 10-100 objects, while the player made levels averages at being around 1000 objects. Some extreme examples reach 15,000 objects, like the Tyrie Continent or the Illushor Air Base. The Level Editor has a logic system that is used to make things happen in the level you create. Basically, players can script in-game events without any code or programming knowledge. You can make simple things like when a player destroys a building, a certain door moves to reveal the exit, or complex things like where you can make several rocket-shaped-objects with sets of Triggers that can track and chase the players, or even this Level Fighter, which is a playable fighter plane achieved only with logic and not physics. I have always had a passion for making or designing games. After Besiege released the Level Editor, I went from full plane builder into full level designer. I have made several racing levels, puzzle levels, but the community mostly knows my Ace Combat missions recreated as Besiege levels. They all have mostly accurate albeit simpler, objectives and win condition you can play with Besiege machines and Besiege physics. None of them are playable with standard medieval catapult Besiege are intended, so I often provided the level with preloaded aircraft you can just pick. A very limiting factor is that Besiege Level Editor world boundaries are very small, at 1980 m x 1980 m x 1780 m. This is more than enough for ground based machines, but for planes, it is just really limiting. Keep in mind that most aircraft made in Besiege are not 1:1, they are much bigger. Several missions from Ace Combat simply can’t be recreated because of this reason. You can mod the game to remove the world boundaries, but then you have to make sure anyone trying to play your level must also have removed the world boundaries or the level just won’t work. I’d rather have more people to enjoy my levels so I always make sure my levels are within Besiege limits. One other thing that is hard to implement is AI for the enemies. There are some other community members that have achieved AI aircraft that have convincing flight and fire homing missiles at you, but the logic needed for just one enemy is just so complicated, having more than one will severely lag the game. This is why most of my levels are ground attack or obstacle runs, where you don’t need a lot of resistance from the opponent. Still if you wish for some dogfight action, you can simply invite a friend to play as the enemy. Has your work with Besiege increased your passion about game development? Honestly, I don’t feel it caused any significant increase. I have been passionate about game development since I was a child, starting from making custom levels/scenarios, creating mods, to making small games with friends in college. I actually think that it was Besiege that has increased my interest in aircraft. Before Besiege, I knew fighter jets were rad, flying is cool and that’s it. Since I started creating an aircraft in Besiege, I've been using a lot of references from articles, photos, blueprints, video footage, and even 3D models to create an accurate representation of the aircraft in Besiege. This is where I learned a lot of things like how aircraft uses combination of aileron and elevator or sometimes elevon to turn, how aircraft airbrake work, how angling your thrust when turning grants supermaneuvrability, why helicopters must have an even number of rotor but not planes, and how different wing configurations affect flight characteristics. If possible, could you talk about your current game dev project(s)? I’m currently working with Engram Interactive studio, developing Fractured Core. It’s a classic JRPG with cyberpunk for it’s main theme using isometric 2D pixel art for the visual. You play as a mercenary undertaking various missions in a futuristic Germany. You can expect a standard turn-based mechanic for its battle system with plenty of customization for the magic available for each of the main characters. My responsibilities are directing its animation for the combat and cutscenes. The combat will mostly have hand drawn animation. I am also designing the layout and gameplay for the later dungeons. The dungeons will have random enemy encounters that you can turn off or on, and some will require you to solve puzzles to progress. There won’t be any aircraft or flight mechanic involved in the game though. There is a demo available on Steam that you can download. Our Discord is always open, feel free to join in and have a chat with me. Thank you so much for this interview. I must admit that I am somewhat in awe after learning so much about flight in Besiege. I feel like I have to give it a try myself now. This has been fascinating. Thank you for this rare opportunity. I would also like to thank my friends from the Besiege community: Brammer, daichi, and dagriefaa for giving me some valuable feedback when I was writing this. Several people heard about me first before Besiege, and they first played Besiege with the intention of creating planes and tried to follow my plane tutorial without any understanding of the basic tool nor the characteristics of each block, and thus can’t really follow my tutorial. So for readers who are also interested about learning flight in Besiege, try to at least complete the first campaign first and I’ll be happy to assist any difficulties. Just mention me, Shadé, in the Official Besiege Discord with the trouble you are facing, or you can also message me via Facebook. About the Interviewer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers. Read Staff Profile.

A recent update broke most of the Skyward liveries and their dynamic bort numbers, we've resolved the issues! You can download them directly from the Download tab on our front page, or just click the button below, which will bring you right to it!

Because of circumstances beyond my understanding, I have found myself flying a type of mission I never expected to fly in DCS: Logistical supply runs. I have learned a couple of lessons while trying to survive in these scenarios, so let's talk about them! THE RECENT EMERGENCE OF PLAYER DRIVEN LOGISTICS In missions like the many variants of Foothold, a relatively popular mission that many servers run nowadays, player driven logistics are key for the proper function of the mission. Up until now I had only seen smaller-scale implementations of these functions in-game, specially on multiplayer-focused content. The way that has been implemented is that if an airbase is "liberated", either a player or an AI logistics aircraft will need to unload supplies on it to capture it and reinforce it. To do this properly, it is essential that at least one of the players playing the mission takes the role as the AI is not the best at its job. That is where I come in, as I am one of the only ones in my group that actively flies helos in the sim. STAYING LOW AND FAST TO SURVIVE Just like we have seen in the recent Russo-Ukrainian war, helicopter survivability rates go up as they get low to avoid both visual and radar detection. The same applies to DCS. To run some of these logistic runs, I have had to go so low that all I see is my shadow reflected on the grass as I speed towards the objective. Doing this with cargo is a bit tricky, as the load you are carrying is worth more to the team than you are. Distance becomes a bit of a problem too, specially in maps like the Persian Gulf and Syria. I have done logistic runs that have lasted well over two hours due to the fact that the distance between the objectives and our bases grew and grew as my buddies kept capturing areas non-stop. It was a very fun experience and a very refreshing one for me. I depended on my friend's escort throughout the runs as the enemy did try to intercept my flights many times. It was a team effort to get me to the objective, which was somewhat of a challenge when coordinating with your friends over a Discord call. But we managed. THINGS TO COME: THE FUTURE OF LOGISTICS IN DCS If we have this level of logistics and non-combat flying in DCS right now, I can only speculate how much it will change once the official C-130 module releases. It would be the first fixed wing logistics aircraft in the game with the ability to be extremely flexible as to how that cargo or those troops get delivered. I love DCS for its combat aspect but I really enjoy this side of it. A side that does not hurt the enemy by directly engaging with it, but by facilitating the fight with the delivery of every tool necessary to bring the fight to them. About the author: Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Longtime aviation fanatic with particular preference towards military aviation and its history. Said interests date back to the early 2000's leading into his livelong dive into civil and combat flight simulators. He has been involved in a few communities but only started being active around the mid 2010's. Joined as a Spanish to English translator in 2017, he has been active as a writer and the co-founder of Skyward ever since. Twitter | Discord: Cubeboy #9034

A Silent Release From a Long Forgotten Project Is a game developed by someone feeling the hype of Top Gun: Maverick technically a Top Gun game? Jokes aside, I was passed a link to a game by another Skyward staff member on May 1st, 2023 that I had never heard of. In fact, the demo for the game had come out just hours before I was made aware of it. At first glance, the most engaging part of the product page was the rather stylish illustrated poster by Monty. But after just a few minutes of gameplay, I can say there are some interesting details that should not be overlooked here. At Skies' Edge is an indie arcade flight action game led by Mackerel Sky. The developer themselves has expressed interest in further working on the project, but states that they need time to learn 3D modeling while balancing work and other commitments. As it is now, this is somewhat of a passion project / proof of concept utilizing premade 3D assets for aircraft and weapons with a customized version of the Operation Maverick/Operation Zero base arcade flight model created by Lunetis. Development of this project from something like a tech demo to a full game is not guaranteed. I'm not stating all of this to talk down to this game, but to be clear about its current status. Unexpected Roots This title was first mentioned as a project in June 2017. At one time it was known as "Project Sandwall" with its primary draw being a proprietary game engine being created using OpenGL 4, OpenAL, LuaBind, GLFW and Asio in C++. Its now defunct website mentions future goals for a co-op/multiplayer focused experience. Over time staff left the project, and it fell into obscurity from an already relatively unknown state. Mackerel Sky was a member of the original team as its Creative Director, and seems to have pursued the project on their own in silence after some time. That being said, a public game randomly appearing after 6 years is surprising. With no attempt to advertise it ahead of release, this is an actual bolt from the blue. Screenshots from the previous project (2017-2018). The May 2023 demo should not be held to expectations from the old project. There are non-working features and errors in the game demo that Mackerel Sky openly addresses on the Itchi.io page. Though, there are two things that caught my eye while playing. Weapon Loadout Decision Any fan of this genre knows the struggle of secondary weapons - optional high performance weapons that augment the onboard cannon and missiles. It is a fine balance between providing too many options and not making them impactful enough to break gameplay. At Skies' Edge chooses a more realistic option while still maintaining an arcade appropriate volume of missiles. For example, the M/D-15C (F-15C Eagle) has 10 weapon stations. Depending on their position, certain missiles are not compatible with the station. Stations 7 through 10 can only hold medium ranged multi lock missiles (based on the AIM-120 AMRAAM), which are the positions real world F-15s normally store such missiles. But on stations 1 through 6 a mixture of short-range infrared missiles or more multi-lock missiles can be carried. The more weapons that are added to stations, the more of them that can be fired at once. Wanting to become a SPAMRAAM bus? They've got you. As of the time of this writing, there are only three weapon options, but the potential flexibility created just by sticking to realism a bit is quite nice. Air Speed and Turn Rates These days, when I think of maneuverability in arcade flight games, my mind thinks of reasonable brief periods of super maneuverability like in Nova Squadron or Frontiers Reach depending on starting air speed. More extreme examples like Ace Combat and Project Wingman also come to mind. Holding two buttons at the right speeds can allow players particularly adept at manipulating the controls to perform unbelievable feats. Outside of that, the standard turning battles in air combat are dependent on the base stats of an aircraft and augmentations provided by in-game parts. But generally, altering between maximum and minimum engine output is the optimum way to find the best turn radius. What I enjoy about At Skies' Edge is that while it does have a super maneuverability mode, air speed management without using this mode feels great gameplay wise. Throttle setting remains where players set it at. This reduces the need to constantly adjust throttle setting, especially when coupled with the nifty minor addition to the Heads Up Display. The HUD speed indicator comes with text that lets the player know if their speed is optimal for Cruise (high speed) or Air Combat Maneuvering (dogfighting). The aircraft handles much better at its ACM speed, encouraging and rewarding players that fly the aircraft properly rather than rely on brute force thrust and liberal use of the air brake to solve all problems. Against more maneuverable enemies that appear later in the game, getting into close range turn rate battles adds positively to the experience. The use of rudder at just the right moment to snap the nose of the aircraft onto the harder to defeat enemies is often the best way to acquire a missile lock. With the missiles in this game not instantaneously achieving lock at all times, keeping the target in front of the aircraft for long enough to achieve a lock makes control over the aircraft all that more important. I don't have high hopes that At Skies' Edge will become the next break-out arcade flight game of 2023, but that's not to say that I am not interested in seeing it succeed. Its sudden reappearance makes me wonder where it will go from here. About the Writer Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza Co-founder of Skyward Flight Media. After founding Electrosphere.info, the first English Ace Combat database, he has been involved in creating flight game-related websites, communities, and events since 2005. He explores past and present flight games and simulators with his extensive collection of game consoles and computers.

The Strike Eagle by Razbam Simulations is fast approaching to our DCS World hangars, so why don't we take a step back and analyze what we know about it, its capabilities and what we will be able to do at launch judging from publicly available information. Both Aaron Mendoza and Santiago Cuberos will each give their thoughts on certain aspects of the module and talk about what interests them the most, or, which aspects they think that people need to know before they take a step into the Mudhen's cockpit. “THE NEW HORNET” Anyone that has been around Digital Combat Simulator long enough knows exactly what this phrase means. For years, the Eagle Dynamics F/A-18C Hornet Lot 20 was and arguably still is the most prolific module in the simulator. There are many reasons for this. From a development standpoint, the Hornet had the benefit of receiving much development attention throughout the years - even when compared to its highly advanced counterpart, the Eagle Dynamics F-16C Viper. The Hornet was arguably a more “complete” aircraft for the longest time. Capability wise, the Hornet can simply carry multiple weapons for every situation imaginable while still retaining respectable aircraft performance. Furthermore, as one of the most modern aircraft available in the simulator, its systems and sensors are easier to learn, highly capable and represent a capability baseline for every fourth and fifth generation aircraft that came after it. In the simulator, this resulted in what seemed like every aspiring DCS newcomer to purchase the Hornet, then primarily stick to that aircraft for years to come. In the experience of many others in multiplayer servers, the newly minted Hornet enthusiasts caused just as much trouble for their allies as they did their enemies. As such, the F/A-18C gained this unofficial status. Not every new module that comes to DCS World is guaranteed to see an explosion of use like the Hornet did - certainly there are no highly popular public servers packed full of players constantly flying MB-339s and Mirage F1s. The RAZBAM F-15E Strike Eagle is the first 4th generation multirole aircraft released for Digital Combat Simulator in quite some time. The last one was back in 2019 with the Deka Ironworks JF-17 Thunder, which has capabilities on the same level as the F-16C and F/A-18C. The Strike Eagle is perfectly positioned to fall into the same easy to access, easy to deploy and single choice preference, which is highly likely to see an explosion of sustained users over years to come. Which naturally comes with a population of users willing to learn the aircraft from top to bottom, and others more interested in learning the bare-bones basics for quick action (and potential trouble making). EARLY ACCESS PATIENCE While the “Year of the Strike Eagle” social media campaign has been on point, presenting the F-15E’s release as a major milestone for the public’s perception of Digital Combat Simulator, the public’s perception may also be a little muddled by the hype. That’s not to say that Razbam Simulations has been disingenuous, but the sheer excitement over the release of this module should be paired with the reality of the Early Access module experience. The day this module reaches its most potent Second CTU, which represents a circa 2015 F-15E, is most likely many months if not years away. This holds true not only for the development timelines of the F-16C and F/A-18C, as we mentioned earlier, but also for other aircraft developed by Razbam and other module development teams. The fact is that creating high fidelity and study level simulated aircraft takes a lot of time and refinement before they can truly be considered complete. The F-15E Strike Eagle that will be available at launch is a Suite4E+ representative of a mid-2000s version of the aircraft. A list of features has been posted by our buddies over in the Stormbirds blog, but the systems and weapons available make it more of a Desert Storm era aircraft; to put it simply. It will primarily be carrying its internal cannon, laser guided munitions, infrared short-range missiles, semi-active radar guided missiles and active radar homing missiles. No GPS guided weapons, air-to-ground missiles or stand-off munitions have been announced for release as of the time of this writing. While its powerful air-to-ground radar functionality will be available, only the first of the three announced targeting pods, the AN/AAQ-14 LANTIRN will accompany its release. The more capable AN/AAQ-28 Litening II and AN/AAQ-33 Sniper XR targeting pods won’t be released until much later. Keeping in mind the role and capabilities of the Strike Eagle at launch is important. Its initial early access form is that of a deep strike / air interdiction attacker with powerful air-to-ground radar that primarily relies on laser guided munitions for precision attacks. It will not easily fulfill the role of anti-ship, destruction or suppression of enemy air defenses or stand-off engagements without support from other aircraft within the simulator that have systems, hardware and munitions purpose built for these roles. The air-to-air capabilities of the F-15C Eagle are present, but certain additions like its conformal fuel tanks do affect its performance to a degree in basic fighter maneuvers. Furthermore, while the Strike Eagle can carry an impressive amount of air-to-ground ordnance, expecting a bomb laden F-15E to perform maneuvers expected from an F-15C during air combat is rather unreasonable. Despite the sheer power of the Strike Eagle’s power plants and its high maximum payload weight, considerations for maneuverability and speed in combat shouldn’t be forgone for the sake of carrying enough bombs to make a B-17 blush. MUDHEN, VIPER AND HORNET: THE 4TH GEN TRIO Another very compelling aspect that the Mudhen has is its partial system similarity with all the current 4th Gen American aircraft in the sim. Imagine this: it is launch day, and you want to get your brand new F-15E in the air, and a sudden realization fills your mind: everything feels familiar. That is not by coincidence, as you should already have noticed certain similarities between the F-15E and, say, the Hornet. The stick layout is similar, as well as some panels that should also look familiar. That is to be expected, since both aircraft were manufactured by the same company. Are they different enough to make it impossible to move from one to the other without training from scratch? Sure, they are, but at the same time there is an inherent familiarity between these aircraft that will aid you a lot in terms of learning its systems. If you have learned and mastered the Viper, the Hornet or even the Harrier, then you will have an easier time learning the Mudhen. The HUD is also pretty much a western standard design, with some aspects unique to the aircraft, specially when it comes down to weapon employment symbology and unique systems that the Mudhen has such as its NAVFLIR. The systems are not the same, if they were, it wouldn't be a Mudhen; but they utilize the same building blocks that people can easily recognize and learn. You have your UFC, you have your MFDs with a regular amount of buttons, unlike with the JF-17. All of those basic skills and flows will transfer better to the F-15E than they would to earlier generation western aircraft or even eastern fighters. This familiarity is what will make the F-15E many people's favorite aircraft to fly in DCS. No more need to relearn how to read gauges or retrain yourself on how to instinctively read your HUD or some other systems at a glance. A 4TH GENERATION TRAINING WORKHORSE: MULTICREW Have you ever been in a situation in which your friend has now just gotten into DCS, and they have no clue what they are doing? In a situation like that, it would be useful to have a way to get them familiarized with the systems of a 4th generation fighter without having to get them knees deep into flight mechanics and training. In such a case, I think that the Mudhen will bring something that no other aircraft has brought to the table just yet: joint training on a modern western fighter. If used like this, then the F-15E will not only be an asset for offensive operations, but also for groups that wish to have an extremely advanced trainer for those that need to train on system management and individual system operations. This would make it much easier for those who wish to instruct someone on how certain basic systems work or even on how to best employ certain weapons, as you have complete control over the training circumstances and the aircraft. Your trainee will have fewer variables to manage, leading to more attention being put into learning the systems and, if the multicrew implementation allows, even train as a Weapons System Officer (WSO) to play with their friends and have a great time in the Strike Eagle. Speaking of multicrew, we now know that the implementation will not be complete by the time we get our hands on the module. This is a bit of a disappointment, but one that I very much expected. We will be able to do all the basics, but I cannot wait until we have a fledged out system in which we will be able to do everything I described before to take full advantage of the wonders of the Strike Eagle. We cannot wait to get our hands on the Strike Eagle as, well, it is one of the most anticipated modules in DCS World's history. It has been in the works for over half a decade now, but it seems like there is not much time left until we have our hands on this module. Expect our first impressions article shortly after the release! About the writers: Aaron "Ribbon-Blue" Mendoza & Santiago "Cubeboy" Cuberos Co-founders of Skyward Flight Media and long time aviation aficionados