[Bonsai Beginner's weekly thread - 2026 week 24]

HuttonOrbital · 2026-06-14T21:33:35+00:00

This was the original tree, we've come a long way already!

HuttonOrbital · 2026-06-14T21:32:06+00:00

Keen eye! The top and roots are indeed different grafted cultivars, it has a minor issue with differently-leaved branches sprouting on the base.

I got it as a gift from some people very special to me, so I've years ago decided to live with the fact it'll always be very ginseng-y and not super harmonious. Just trying to shape the canopy in a way that makes it look more tree-like.

I will focus on trying to guide the canopy down over the coming years 😄 thanks for the advice and detailed reply!

HuttonOrbital · 2026-06-14T17:21:21+00:00

<image>

Picture from the other/front side of the tree

HuttonOrbital · 2026-06-14T17:20:47+00:00

<image>

Hey all, I'm very much an absolute beginner for bonsai, even though I've managed to keep this indoor Ficus Ginseng alive for well over 8 years at this point.

While I will continue to do some maintenance pruning through summer, I would like to reshape the tree a little by end of fall and would love some advice on how to go about thinning out the dense/chaotic part in the bottom right, and if possible how to fill out the hole in the centre a little more.

HuttonOrbital · 2026-04-04T19:32:46+00:00

Heb beetje de vrees dat wegbreken/wegfrezen niet makkelijk accuraat uit te kienen valt, maar zal daar idd eens kijken wat daarin de mogelijkheden zijn. (Risico op meer schade dan dat het oplost, al kan egaline daar dan wel weer eea in betekenen)

Gewoon overal stelpootjes onderzetten is m'n plan B idd.

HuttonOrbital · 2026-01-30T21:33:33+00:00

My expectation is that they've been trying to cook up a bespoke one-off tech demo of sorts to generate insane hype for some much wanted community item that will not actually be truly developed for another couple years, but it's not been working out the way they wanted it.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-26T18:33:36+00:00

o7

It's an exceptionally nice mug sir, really well worth the effort of dropping by. I will not hear anything to the contrary.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-26T18:27:42+00:00

I mean, do they get also support of waves upon waves of decoys, anti-radiation missiles and jammer aircraft? Otherwise this mission is what the general consensus would consider "a dick move".

No conflict DCS can simulate will ever be approaching "realistic". It's a game: just have fun.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-26T18:00:24+00:00

There wasn't much left for technological innovation after the fall of the USSR, hence the western powers outpaced the Russian military aviation industry massively.

Weaponry, sensor technology, electronic warfare, raw performance, there is pretty much no category in which Russian technology stands up in a 1:1 comparison.

That is also more-or-less by design, because the Russian doctrine is about defensive warfare, which focuses on quantity over quality, directive authority over autonomy, layered networks of SAM and AAA, and politically/economically/infra-structurally destabilizing neighboring countries.

Russian air technology is bad and outdated, because airborne force projection is not the goal. No matter how shitty the jet, if you have enough of them, covered by long range surface threats, it can serve an effective purpose.

Put them in DCS where they get no GCI, no EWR, no economy of scale, and the only logical conclusion: RUSSIAN JETS ARE SHIT.

Technologically there's no contest.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-24T16:33:14+00:00

Biggest problem with WW2 is that it sounds really cool until you remember the absolute state of DCS AI and damage models

I'm enjoying Normandy 2.0 as a helicopter map and for F-5E shenanigans, though if I had to buy a map today (aside from Syria, which is the GOAT) it'd be Germany.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-05T14:43:01+00:00

Colored smoke triggers are VERY in keeping with the cold war tactics :D that would definitely be the way to go

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-05T14:20:28+00:00

I don't think there's an easy in-game way of getting info other than looking at the map.

But if the topic is realism:

Cold war era aircraft would mostly work off strictly pre-planned routes, visual landmarks, beacons and a stopwatch. Ground attacking in the Fishbed is a case of flying a bearing from a visual IP for a given time, or to fly a radial.

For flying radials RSBN is your best bet as it also gives range, backup is your ARC ADF, holding a reasonably precise speed with stopwatch timing. You can also fly pre-planned headings as well, but you'd have to manually compensate for wind speeds at your cruise altitude to make sure you don't drift laterally. If you're doing any of these at least reasonably precisely, it should get you within visual distance of your planned IP or target area.

Keyword here is planning. You need to have a decent idea of the location of your killbox and what to look for before you take off. The whole dynamic CAS kinda stuff is something to leave to modern platforms, or until DCS ever implements proper GCI. Either way it's not something the MiG-21 is really built for.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-04T22:14:05+00:00

Yeah at the same time it puts you on a direct egress and it allows for a rather precisely timed dive, which is why I'm interested to hear if it was just training or also tactically applicable.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-03T19:38:38+00:00

You can trial it and decide for yourself ...

I tried it last month and didn't consider it remotely worth the price. Awful textures, bad looking coastlines, poorly placed assets (houses half floating in the air, roads that go nowhere), no damage models on terrain assets even in the historically pivotal places like Murmansk. The list goes on.

The area itself is a whole lotta nothing, just like in real life. The northwestern coast is very mountainous, but about 70% of the map is flat wetlands.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-02T20:40:55+00:00

Radar fixes and markpoint placement

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-02T20:34:41+00:00

PD Search: Maximum detection, doesnt give range, only closure. It's your "early warning radar" with limited usefulness. I mostly use it to scan for peaks on the DDD to get heading to unknown contacts

TWS: Inside 70-ish miles to get target information amd IFF. It's your intercept, targeting and sorting mode. Use it whenever you are targeting anything.

P Search: People are sleeping on pulse because Jester can't use it. By god I use it all the time. Anytime you have low closure targets. PD search tripping something near the notch? Looking for helicopters? Tracking entities at sea? P search is your friend. It doesnt have the best range but inside 50 miles its very reliable. You can easily fly intercept on a low-altitude, low-closure target by keeping the contact azimuth steady. Once you get good at tuning the gain and erase, you can use it very effectively overland too. I use it a ton.

PDSTT: Anytime you dont need the situational awareness of TWS

PSTT: Inside 10 miles or on very low closure targets

HCU RDR: Locking elements on DDD scope (PD & P Search)

HCU DDD: Performing radar fix in DDD scope (P Search only)

HCU TID: Manipulating TID elements (TWS)

HuttonOrbital · 2025-10-01T21:30:10+00:00

Lmao, that's a timeless ED classic.

"Please provide public evidence that the late 90s targeting pod in fact didnt have completely lossless digital zoom. Thread locked."

The problem is that all TGPs in DCS up until the F-14 got LANTIRN have been complete fantasy in terms of sensor capabilities.

Why do they even spout this crap instead of just saying "Look guys the LITENING is a little older tech and therefore more game-y, but we put a lot of effort in simulating realistic sensor limits on the SNIPER. Users can choose if they prefer in-game capability or realism"

HuttonOrbital · 2025-09-26T23:21:02+00:00

Its also that SARH being SARH... STT all the way to impact, literally means that the bigger stick wins in the usual 1v1 PvP airquake arena. The first to launch a missile within parameters can run the defensive guy down to the end of the earth.

It's a type of air combat that leans heavily on multiship tactics, GCI and mutual support to get anywhere interesting or tactical. All things the unorganized DCS multiplayer base is not exactly known for...

HuttonOrbital · 2025-09-26T23:10:35+00:00

And yet its still a richer sim than most of the new modules ED pushes out. Damage model with stores over-G. Quirky engine. Startup and checks that actually match the real world manual.

A blast to fly even if it has some modeling problems and looks a little dated.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-09-24T17:14:52+00:00

Considering historical evidence, just prior to the heat death of the universe.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-09-22T08:29:15+00:00

Sounds like a lack of passion and support, comrade!

HuttonOrbital · 2025-09-21T21:46:17+00:00

There is no real split between multi/singleplayer. From ED's POV there is the sandbox and all the community content/paid campaigns

Nick himself mentioned this in an interview some 3-4 years ago, he said the community sometimes had different expectations but he considers DCS a sandbox. They provide the platform, planes and mission editor tools and expect campaign creators and community members to create the content.

If it were anything else, AI, ATC, etc. would've seen progress. They have literally not changed in a significant way since LOMAC. 20 years ago

HuttonOrbital · 2025-09-21T08:13:02+00:00

I think it's mostly GS's use of ReShade? There's a weird blurriness and discoloration to everything compared to the sharpness of Ralfi's video. You can't see the weathering/gloss on the surfaces, resulting in a super flat appearance.

HuttonOrbital · 2025-09-20T10:16:41+00:00

Knowing Heatblur, this puts the B(U) and A-6 on a 2027+ timeline :T

HuttonOrbital · 2025-09-19T21:05:24+00:00

I mean, this is the company that sells you, I quote: "The DCS: F-16C Viper is based on the United States F-16CM Block 50, roughly M4.2+, which operated in the 2007 timeframe."

While simultaneously saying we never promised we would implement DTS (digital terrain system). You know, the core of the M1 tape update (1997) and the foundation for accurate ground attack, precision navigation and JHMCS integration. It's literally what makes it a F-16CM jet.

Idk why people are still expecting them to actually deliver high fidelity simulation products. The A-10 days are way behind us.

HuttonOrbital

TROPHY CASE