All Activity

non so se e' il posto giusto per questa discussione mi scuso in anticipo, nella missione 3 di mountain breeze non riesco a fare il rifornimento di carburante perche' il mio compagno d' ala non si avvicina alla cisterna nonostante io mi sia messo sull' ala sinistra della petroliera ho provato di tutto anche con i video in rete ma non riesco a risolvere, eseguo tutte le manovre correttamente

Maybe the next time you see someone with a MAGA hat on, you can ask them to pay the tax. They voted for it.

Tacview is unreliable for offline as well. In fact, the error margin exceeds 100% and is morel like 400%. E.g., 6g in game was reported as 1.5g in Tacview(use google translate): I can only say that these small changes made a big difference Even beyond the simple climb tests, in actual combat, the difference is even more apparent - AI can no longer rely on spiral climbs against player's Mig-15 with equal fuel load. See the attachment I'm attaching the test missions as well I've posted videos of my (admittedly imperfect climb tests) Default: Curly's mod : MiG-15 AI Curly mod.zip AI_test_climb_Mig15.miz

Was that in a video or did he post we‘ll get the UH-60L? Just curious! Would be happy with either Lima or Mike as long we get a Black Hawk.

Ограничения это самое интересное что есть в системах, они показывают как система работает. Другое дело что ЕД подогревает онлайнщиков тем что стремиться одной стороне прорабатывать ограничения а другой крипить фичи. СПО это в принципе не инструмент для построения противоракетных маневров, даже самая новая цифровая, потому что физика это физика а лепестки радаров и АРГСН это не лазеры. Если реализовать ботов боевого управления и авакса как они работают в жизни, а не просто отчет где что, СПО будет глубоко вторичной системой даже на F-35. Чтобы реализм онлайн миссии дотягивал до реализма реализации аппаратов в DCS нужен человек-командир стороны, а миссия должна быть objective driven.

I probably expressed myself badly, I actually appear on the bridge and I am not managed by the crew. By deactivating the bridge crew, I can take off but 2 of my wingmen remain stuck on the bridge.

Are you using Meta Link?

Yes, it‘s the AI calculations. You benefit more the more AI units you have in your mission. If you’d just fly around on an empty map you‘d most probably don‘t notice a benefit

Well, maybe post examples here what doesn't work so they can check?

Will you include any interface to allow us to do FFTs on the incoming waveforms?

То есть когда в тундре посылают в дкс - это логично?

Hello Max, thx for your response. Yes i set the axis up as sliders and i inverted them. But it didnt. work. I tried it again with the f18 and with it i see a visuel confirmation at the pedals im cockpit if i hit the break

Hi folks, we have no new information to share. Once the dispute is resolved we will know more, until then we have to continue to wait. thank you

... unless it's a (IMHO rather lame) attempt at influencing the proceedings. Looking at the US's current administration it seems a very common (if clumsy and ineffective) attempt at bargaining. Anyone can change their mind, and 'never' can turn 'now' in a heartbeat. I've seen this happen in my own negotiations often enough. It's annoying, and it can tarnish the reputation of the people involved, but it hasn't stopped people from trying this approach.

Just for speculations... After the F15C is done, ED could take on the F15E. Maybe they got some part in their initial contract, that they can use whatever they can salvage from the already done parts on RAZBAMS model, while already having/developing a bunch of stuff from the F15C. Also they have experience with multicrew airframes (AH64, MI24). So maybe the Mudhen will come after all. @cfrag An "official" statement is probably something coming from both parts as one statement. But I see it like Dragon1-1: If the CEO of a company tells on official/public channels that something is over, then I don't see how that's gonna change...

I will ask Wags, it could be the video is incorrect.

Летают. Только там есть очень и очень ошеломляющие эффекты, такие как автоматическое «приведение в горизонт», как только джойстик окажется в нейтральном положении. То есть, игра сама решает, когда летательный аппарат надо отбирать у игрока и проводить к горизонту. И это, насколько я понял, не отключается. Не говоря уже о тонких материях отклика на управление и поведения в воздухе. Примерно год назад пробовал, мне потребовалось нескорое время для психологической реабилитации после проб.

Yup, this is the new reality for everything Chinese in the US. Tariffs are ultimately paid by the consumer, this is what you're seeing.

Hi @KodiakVFA143 I’m sorry but there is nothing I can do. It is only they that can resolve it. I will send them a note but you should report again. So the problem is the laser is not visible in the NVG and FLIR in the Quest3 but visible on the monitor? Is that correct.

It's from the RAZBAM CEO, so if he says he's given up on resolving the matter, I'm afraid we can expect very little from anyone else. If he won't play ball, then I just don't see how anyone else can do anything about it. What I'd like to know is what ED is planning to do with it going forward. I would actually prefer if the Mudhen was done by Heatblur, full as their plate is, since it's a multicrew aircraft and despite the fact the pilot can do everything the WSO can, the backseater is nonetheless a very important part of operating it. Too bad that the Harrier is probably too niche and weird for anyone else to make it, but hey, maybe the MiG-19 could go to the Red Star people, their -17 is shaping up nicely.

I wonder what ED's "Dynamically spawned FARPs via script" looks like.

Although an "official statement" in a sense that this is a statement uttered from one of the principals, and it was done in a "public forum", it does not represent what I would accept as an "official announcement" for this matter. That would be either a common statement from both parties, or a statement from a common arbiter (e.g. judge) of both parties. Anything else has the bad aftertaste of someone trying to sway the court of public opinion and being wholly self-serving (especially if a communique is phrased as badly and amateurishly (intentionally?) inflammatory as the one in question). I recommend that we disregard anything unilateral and wait for a "real" communication that can be taken serious.

Good question, however I think yes.