All Activity

Could you elaborate on your statement? I'm curious what you're writing about.

Havent flown it yet. I am curious, was the FM changed to accomodate standard hardware, or was it actually improved? I have a long throw center stick and good rudders, and concerned the model may be less accurate now but more palatable to most short throw sticks. If thats the case I would hope they would just have an option in SPECIAL to accomodate either. OR... has the accuracy and quality of the FM actually been improved, even for those of us running physical setups better matched to warbirds?

same problem and complete reinstall not fixing it. Frustrating.

Except for DCS then the base product is free. Nor is it likely the case that any/every other DLC will work with DCS 3.0 without any change. The problem is that the platform is moving on and the only DLC that absolutely can't move with it is the Razbam stuff because no one who can is currently willing to change it to keep up. I used to jokingly refer to Windows 7 as Vista Service Pack 2 (I didn't think Vista was actually as bad as the press it got once 3rd party driver support actually caught up with it).

How many RB modules do you own ?

Tell that to fintech, their AS/400 mainframes and the associated software. Well-written software shouldn't have a shelf life, if it does its job adequately, replacing it just because a new thing exists is stupid. Updates should have a clear purpose, if the new version doesn't offer any actual improvements (be it for security, functionality or scalability), there's no need to spend thousands of dollars on the new shiny thing. In enterprise software, when talking software that costs $100k apiece, "full clean start" is often simply not on the cards, and even if you do, good luck convincing the customers to spend that much for "works the same as before, but we made the source prettier". Also, when you're doing office work in a word processor, fancy new graphics tech is useless, and in fact MS Office had been steadily getting worse since the 2003 version or so. The only compelling reason to update is if you need to connect a given PC to the internet, and even that is mostly the result of both TCP-IP and Unix being used as if they were serious designs and not hacked together experiments. It's actually possible (if slow and expensive) to write a computer system that can be mathematically proven to be unhackable. Such systems are rare, but they do exist. Indeed, those hardware/software combinations tend to be in use for a very long time. Tell that to people who make 8-bit pixellated throwbacks. Flight sims need fancy visuals because they actually affect things like spotting, and because they aim for realism by definition. For other genres, it's a choice, and "as good as possible" is far from the only one. CMO, for instance, does perfectly well with entirely unimpressive graphics, they do exactly what they need and nothing more.

hello. "child failed to connect... timeout period expired" this means your connection to update server failed. have you edited your HOST file? C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc also check that you DNS is resolving api.digitalcombatsimulator.com by checking in NSLOOKUP. also restart home network equipment and retry.

It's pretty simple, really. If it's being sold as a new product, it's justified. DLCs are not separate from the base, and as long as it works, so should they. They also shouldn't interfere with one another. I do mind when things go in the other direction, that is, a largely incremental new version being peddled as a fresh product. MS, incidentally, is very guilty of that. Flight sims aside, look at Windows Vista and 7, and at 8, 10 and 11. In fact, going by the internal version numbers, we're still on a really souped-up Vista.

Thats not great for situational awareness though? And you would be able to 'padlock' your view in real life to a missile or threat aircraft. Its more for convenience and control rather for defeating realism. Also, another reason for using the map (and I tend to agree with you on the part of realism) is because it is sometimes just too difficult to spot an airfield, even when you are close by.

Hello, everyone About a month ago I posted this bug report about CCIP Errors in this forum section: A few days ago I came across this Note in the "DCS F-16C Early Access Guide EN" PDF file which made me think of a possible cause of my experience of CCIP Errors (Page 157 - "NAV STATUS DED Page") When I Checked My custom mission neither of the two conditions of a good GPS availability was mat (“USA is one of the countries assigned to the player’s coalition" Or "Unrestricted SATNAV is enabled"): When one of them is true the Viper CCIP is accurate once again - which marks the solution! Another clue is the difference between the info in the "NAV STATUS DED Page" of the two the missions settings versions Degraded GPS precision mission settings - Note the floating TD (Target Designator) Box above the actual target = red smoke base line: Good GPS precision mission settings: I hope my discovery helps anyone who stumbles with this CCIP problem & (@BIGNEWY) prevent ED team wasting their precious time investing this issue!

Have fun building! I recently built a new PC for myself with the exact same motherboard

Just waiting for the Ram to turn up now.

I did that couple times and nothing changed. Here is the log. dcs.log

Thanks, its late here but we will check it out in my morning.

took a bit of time but here's the track, it's a bit longer than most bug tracks but it's the first engagement anyway so I think it should work for you. I think I found the culpirt anyway: in this case the missile exploded exactly as the lateral distance was 15 meters, the total distance was higher however as the missile was offset also vertically (and above the stated proximity fuze limit). Let me know if you need another track but I'm pretty sure this is the issue. I've been able to routinely perform this maneuver in both the flanker and the mig-29, you just need some rudder input to increase the roll rate. aim120_proximity_fuze_range_bug.trk

I found there to be no need in the F-16, since you're in reduced gain already if you have the refuelling door open. The hardest part is actually throttle control because of the lack of physics (interaction between the boom and your aircraft). When I learned aerial refuelling only the M-2000 was available and yes initially I reduced axis sensitivity until I got more used to my setup.

And quite a few got royally bitten on the backside for continuing to use it. The UK NHS for example (who were also paying a substantial sum for some level of continuing support after it was originally retired by Microsoft).

It definitely is, and what works for one person might annoy another. As I said you have my thanks for giving me an excuse for spending many hours in my beloved Mi-24 (I liked the mission length btw). The idea behind the missions was great and the objectives made sense. I wouldn't mind buying Petrovich a beer so he could give/borrow me a cassette with his playlist

thank you for confirming

The virtual 1./JG71 "Richthofen" in action again:

Haha ive been close to shooting her down with frustration. Do you set the hotas axis up at all to calm movement down? I wantbthe jet to be snappy and reactive but tjats not what ypu want whem refueling Show off lol

Hornet has really nice SP mode. It also has SLAM(-ER)s, JSOW AGM-154C, Harpoons, better radar, more information in JHMCS and no AoA limiter. I like both. Both are great planes.

Practice makes perfect :). Here you have it while turning and at night. That's a challenge

Century old locomotives that are basically a labour of love and rely on armies of volunteers and donations to be kept running for the most part. There is very good reason that those locomotives are now all on heritage railways or running the occasional enthusiast mainline day trip and not in day to day use. What Aapje describes is pretty much spot on. Software often can and does eventually become uneconomic to maintain and/or unsupportable through a multitude of reasons. Sometimes sustainability is throwing something in the bin after you've come with a more efficient replacement.

Thanks. It's nice to read about the pros and cons. As for VR, I'm actually flying in VR only too (from few years, I hate 2D now ), so it's a matter of taste. I remember that your cockpit seems to be designed that you can see the keyboard from a distance, so this can sometimes be a problem in campaigns (sometimes you have to operate the radio yourself, by pressing the spacebar, or something else). It's a matter of personal preference. Thank you for your feedback, and congratulations on completing the campaign!