All Activity

Dude, the A-10C II update has only been released 6 years ago... You need to be patient! Sorry for my cringe comment ED, but c'mon, really, six years for this feature??

Там пишет - "Curl error (52) Server returned nothing (no headers, no data)" Яндекс - "Ошибка Curl (52) Сервер ничего не вернул (ни заголовков, ни данных)". По русски - "Карл, ошибка! Сервер не хрена не видит на твоём компе!" У тебя там либо антивирь взбесился, либо троян резвится в системе активируя активность антивиря. Так ещё может быть из за модов которые игруля не переваривает и система определяет как вредоносное ПО.

Hp reverb

No, it's not. It takes less than one minute to recreate in the ME as you should know because you did it. All your specific questions are pointless because the answer to them is All. It's not a specific situation. One track file will not show that and people tend to dissect the specifics of a track file rather than looking at the base game issue that this one is. I'm also a little annoyed that something that was so obvious (Noticed in the very first post patch engagement) and prevalent was missed in testing and we are now stuck with it until ED decides to fix it. Which could mean a month or more where BVR lacks even a modicum of challenge. I already spent enough time testing the different aircraft, missiles and waypoint settings to waste more and go and turn track files back on and risk the return of the micro stutters that turning them off eliminated for me. I'm happy to help track down more obscure or difficult to recreate issues and have done so many times in the past. That isn't necessary here. Besides, some yahoo will always post a track for me when the problem is this easy to recreate.

Давно не обновлял. С ...17 на ...19 скачало-установило более 10 гигов. Обновление прошло успешно без сюрпризов.

For poops and giggles I tried the shader cache fix….. I’d don’t really help but at least I wasn’t getting insane stuttering in the game. for now I’m just going to leave hyperthreading disabled as that seems to be the only tried and true fix for all the symptoms described in this thread.

I thought so All good, everyone does late night word salad sometimes lol I had to add the 'f' word to my iphone dictionary so that would stop happening

Hello everyone. Good News (for me ). Thanks to Calvin and Cindy, the new headset arrived today. That was quick. And what can I say, everything is working as I expected so far. The main problems are all gone. The fans are whisper quiet. The displays don't get visibly darker or brighter when I look from bright to dark areas and vice versa, and I no longer have to move the headset to see sharp with my left eye. Thank you also for your support.

As far as i know you cant....

I've also been having issues with the game freezing and even totally locking my computer so that I have to do a hard reset but I think I've found the cause of the problem. For me it seems to be Beam Eye Tracker, after shutting it down the game runs fine.

Hope this will be fixed soon!, Really eager to use this on my missions, have already made my systems I have been playing around with this in MP (non dedicated) and seems that some field do not work yet, hope we can get these options too to make this fully integrated in the Scripting API! values extracted from warehouse file in any .miz (These seem to not work yet using coalition.addStaticObject) "unlimitedMunitions" "unlimitedAircrafts" "unlimitedFuel" The following do seem to work already for those that dont know yet : "allowHotStart" "dynamicSpawn" "dynamicCargo" So as of now you will need to manually put in all aircraft, weapons and fuel to make it so you can use the spawned helipad (As far as i know) Hope the team can do this!! @BIGNEWY

Using Pimax Play 140.4, QVFR, QV Companion @120% I get: Marianas mostly 90fps, low level over Guam 65-75 fps. (Ultra Shadows- Low might yeild 90) On the ground at Anderson 90 fps. Germany mostly 90 fps. Berlin low level 65 fps (side view awful). Sinai mostly 90 fps. Conclusion: despite some attractive features the latest Pimax Play is inferior to version 140.4 with QVFR & QVC in pure performance terms. Hopefully Pimax have some PP under development

@Rudel_chw I agree with you. I don't hold any grudges against anyone. I know they've started work on the J35 Draken, and now I'm patiently waiting. I've seen the posts on Discord and respect every decision the developers make. I personally follow the principle: family first, work, life, then everything else.

Although this problem is made worse by a wind over the deck or cross wind, that is totally moot as the problem still exists with no wind at all, sitting on a ramp at Nellis AFB on the NTTR map. The plane should be able to turn (with the tail wheel unlocked obviously) about the axis of the inside main landing gear with little more than the power required to taxi. It doesn't. In fact, it merely comes to a stop. This behavior is not realistic, not correct and very annoying. I really hope that M3 is able to fix this issue and I doubt very seriously that it has anything whatsoever to do with ED's new suspension system. The P-51 and the Jug have been able to do this since the first day they appeared in the game - years before "the new suspension" was adopted. The only progress towards solving this problem that I have seen is @Rudel posting on this thread acknowledging that it even exists. At least that is a start.

Hello, how about the HTS threat groups for the above? Thanks!

im sorry was late and wrong thinking, i mean something like attack, or suggest

Sorry have been doing some tests and still puts a smoke at 0 ASL I tested it with heliports where if i put in "Heliport" -> 0ASL "Heliports" -> 0AGL so still pretty sure this bug is something todo with the "category" field

Second option for official paid module skins...third option for unofficial mod skins.

Damgarten airfield shelters have trees inside: 45, 46, 47, 48, 54, 56, 58.

When using COM, the menu pops up shoing the name like ARC-210. It would help a lot to also show its currently tuned frequency. this makes it easier to distingushe the radio when not being familiar with the module and its radios.

Возможно ошибаюсь, но учитывая что могу предположить, что обнова упирается в свободное место на диске...

Plain and simple it doesn't work right. Certainly wasn't this way in "real life".. Basically there's always going to be some crosswind if not straight down a runway then blowing some cross ways from the parking spot on an airfield. If it was this bad in real life then the plane would not have been test flown from the start until it could taxi like any other plane.

Heyo did some checking myself and seems to be related to the "category" field if this is incorrect or nil it will put it at 0 ASL your "Effects" is invalid -> "Effect" Still presume this is a bug and should not behave like this..... For extra joy you can use the attached file listing all Unit typenames and as the "key" there respective "category" for double checking Typenames from DCS : "2.9.19.13478" Hope this helps TGFB_Unit_typenames_by_category.lua

Hello, I have been making observations on the landing gear retraction/extension times as compared to the only reference I have that gives the actual transit time. This reference is NAVAIR 01-F14A-1, 1 JUNE 1972, Page 1-173 under NORMAL OPERATIONS. In this chapter it states that the "The normal transition time for operation of the landing gear is 9 seconds.". This reference in NAVAIR 01-F14AAA-1 (15 MAY 1995) and NAVAIR 01-F14AAP-1 (1 AUG 2001) has been removed and replaced with the following CAUTION: "Unless attempting fast-cycle troubleshooting for gear that indicates unsafe nosegear down, transition light illuminated, wait for gear to completely transition (15 seconds with normal hydraulic pressure) before recycling the landing gear handle. When fast-cycling the gear handle, the pilot must immediately return gear handle to down position to avoid damaging the main landing gear doors and inducing a possible combined hydraulic or brake system failure.". The actual timed retraction/extension as taken from the cockpit indications are 16 seconds in both the A and B. The external modelling is 19-20 seconds for extension and 16 seconds for retraction. I get the impression that the CAUTION statement has been taken as the actual transit time. Looking at several videos of Tomcat departures, the gear is definitely retracted within the 9 seconds as stated in the first reference. In my aircraft maintenance experience, I see this caution as derived from operational experience and does not reflect the actual transition time. I feel that the 6 second buffer from the "The normal transition time for operation of the landing gear is 9 seconds." to the 15 second CAUTION statement, is there to prevent the aircrew from recycling the gear too soon. This isn't a show stopper except that the gear is very easy to overspeed on departures with the 16 second retraction time as currently modelled. Regards, John

It definitely would be a good choice. As you said: the early models saw combat in WW2, it was rather prominent in the Korean War and the later variants saw some action in Vietnam and Africa. You could say the rug really tied the room together.