All Activity

Well, this is odd, and the usual backup file which is made every time DCS updates to a new version does not contain the textures, only my modified .LUA file…! Also, including my clean cockpit in: C:\Users\XXX\Saved Games\DCS\Mods\aircraft\F4U-1D\Liveries\Cockpit_F4U-1D\default Or: C:\Users\XXX\Saved Games\DCS\Mods\aircraft\F4U-1D\Liveries\Cockpit_F4U-1D\AC Is to no avail. Only option is putting ALL my cockpit files in: D:\Games\DCS World\Mods\aircraft\F4U-1D\Liveries\Cockpit_F4U-1D\default So it works. Though again, very odd thing, if other cockpits than my “AC” are selected, they don’t appear, in any case only my clean cockpit appears. Go figure… In any case, do backup it in case, though alternatively, you can still re-download it. Cheers.

I don't fly the F-16 but the HARM is designed to remember the location of the emitting radar if it goes off. That was a feature added to real world HARMs due to experience with the Vietnam War when SAM radar operators turned off their radars due to a Shrike or Standard ARM attack and confuse the missile. If I'm reading right then that's intended behavior.

Loose Lips Sink Ships. Even if ED was 100% the bad guy *(assuming, just to play devils advocate)*, RB and Associates contract breaches don't help their cause, nor the proceedings, nor the litigation, nor the resolution. It's like trying to end a fight with your spouse for driving your car, you say fine honey, lets settle this, and she/he brings up random events from 2 months ago, not applicable to the current fight, then calls you a broke deadbeat because you wont give him/her your debit card so they can goto the mall and buy things and you want him/her to pay for their own gas.

@BJ55 This does not look normal at all. I'll try this resolution right away. Can you please send me your options.lua ? (from Saved Games/DCS/Config)

No, I don't notice anything bottlenecking. Sitting on the ground with my friend as WSO, my CPU and RAM were both in total at around 60% and my GPU at 30%. DCS was using 40-50% of my CPU and 3 GB of my RAM. Today it was more playable and I could actually use the Jester UI with some lag. Tuning down my graphics settings to low didn't change anything noticable. My ping to him is roughly 60 ms

Because at night you can't even see the elevation light. It's been brought up numerous times. I even suggested this overlay idea as well. Tankers in general need a rework but only a small percent of users touch the tankers so it's barely even a priority to get fixed.

Have you removed the springs from your pedals yet?

Apologies, but I don't understand why you cannot do this stuff before the mission, and then load the results in the kneeboard.

Where are those? [emoji848] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Out of words... Incredible!!!

Wag should mention the option in the AA refueling training videos

I didnt forget that. But is something not helping to the resoluition. Also ED , IMO, is not helping, but this is my own subjective oppinion.

In this era of rampant wars, I really doubt if I can live to see that day.

You invade it of course! Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Так он и выбирается, там есть только тонкий момент с контейнером. ТГП должен быть не просто SOI, он должен находиться в режиме сопровождения area или point, иначе в DED выберется HUD.

Yup, they have said that. To be honest, I say a hard NO! We're in 2025. Jester/George/Petrovich and whatver PC were to call their's deserve voice commands! VAICOM has proven this with Jester, but the F-4 Jester is locked down. Just have a look what guys have achieved with VoiceAttack/VAICOM using other means to get better recognition without the Windows Speech Recognition.

It took Razbam more than 10 years to make those 4 airplanes. Sure, you could argue than a more focused and competent developer, already familiar with DCS, could make them a bit faster, but who's available? ED barely makes one aircraft a year, more like 1,5 years to early access. Heatblur takes even longer. Hope we'll all live long enough to actually see those "replacements".

You missed out the part where Razbam, or parties thereof have already on at least 3 occasions in recent months breached the confidentiality clause that was allegedly part of said agreement, twice by Ron Zambrano himself. Personally I don't wish to see Razbam go out of business, but can they afford to write off what's owed to them by ED? Both parties need to be sat at a table and force fed shyt sandwiches by their customers until both agree to end this situation and get back to making great modules

I'd like to know which varaint they were looking at? Knowing how things often work, the default is to go for the most advanced variant you can get documents for. The AV-8 we have may be the closest to the RAF bird Ideally if you have the originals you should at least get a deep discount to make up for the mess

Reciprocal for 300 is 120. Yes, this is how it works in FC aircraft. You don't use ILS for go around. Just do 180, fly to read 5nm range and do 180 again. In FF modules or RL you have to set your ILS frequency so you won't get any conflicting signals. It does that when your last waypoint is set for landing. You can enter ILSN mode any time by pressing "1" and by default you will have your landing point set on HSI. Cycle the airports with next waypoint bind.

All it means that the EU legislature has to respond to it, which in itself is huge, since they have huge legitimacy problems. So if there is an initiative that actually comes from the populace, instead of the lobbyists or the elite, they have a chance to show that they are not 100% anti-democratic.

1. Loadouts on MiG-31 should not include R-40RD. A/B variant never seen with those in rl. Also possible loudouts in flight manual dont mention them just R-40TD. 2. Loadout on MiG-25PD should have R-40TD only for inner pylons. 3. Loadouts on MiG-25RBT should exclude R60. Never seen carrying those in rl. No sight in cockpit either. Thank you for the attention to this matter.

You mean pay twice? Did customers cause all those troubles?

Well follow this logical sequence: ED and RB signed and agreement RB is asking for a payment. ED is asking for a file sharing policy ED STATES the agreement is not implmented yet ant THEY-ED are hoping to BE ABLE to implement that agreement So no money has been provided, they are hoping to be able to do so in his words. Also that situation induce to think RB didnt shared the files yet. I dont know about that Is a logical deduction that i think is reasonable. I dont know how the payments must be done, in steps, one payment, the files shared also all together, by stpes. But we know the agreement has been signed, and is not yet implemented. If one side had fullfiled his part the other should be commited to do so under threat of breaking the agreement. Because ED STILL HOPES to be able to implemented and OFFICIALY the agreement is not cancelled, the logical assumption is the money and the files didnt moved to the escrow yet. I´ve read also RB had retired his support to the agreement, a statement made by Ron himself, but this is not official yet here in ED house, so we should keep waiting.