Leaderboard

I have been an adamant follower of the computer flight sim community for many years and it is absolutely amazing to me how quickly, regardless of the product, some among us become our own worst enemies. Remember the Jane's series? The Falcon series and others? One of the reasons that they are no longer supported by their original companies is because the flight sim community eats it's young, there are constant complaints about the product, due mostly to the 9 million different compatibility issues each of us have with our computers set up, and the producers just throw up their hands and put all their development into arcade X-box games because in this business, you truly can't please everyone all the time. Part of the problem is that we have now become an "instant" society. We want everything yesterday and can't BELIEVE that ANYONE would dare make us wait for ANYTHING!!!! I think this Youtube video says it best - In the mean time, I would like to remind everyone that Black Shark is one of the most intricate and intensive study sims this community has seen for years and one of it's GREATEST accomplishments is that it has been delivered to this community with the fewest glitches and problems of any simulation that I can ever remember. Just think back to the unplayable crash happy state that Falcon 4 was released in to realize what I mean. In the mean time, thanks to all who's hard work on Black Shark have given this community a true simulation which many of us thought we would never see again, in a playable (bug free) state that boggles the imagination for the detail that Black Shark provides. Give them a minute to get it done and if you can't enjoy what you already have, you need to seriously consider that your anxiety is a product of your own doing. ron

With all the talk about multi-monitors I realised that anyone with a single big widescreen can improve their use of the Shkval/ABRIS (at the expense of losing their lower corners). If you go into HUD only view you'll see them overlayed on either side of your screen. This is great but is often disabled in multiplayer servers. Well by creating a new LUA file in (root)\Config\MonitorSetup\ you can acheive the same effect in the cockpit view. here's the contents of the new file (called WidescreenCamera+Shkval+ABRIS.lua): -- WidescreenCamera+Shkval+ABRIS.lua Description = 'Full Camera, Shkval in botton left corner, and ABRIS in the bottom right' Viewports = { Center = { x = 0; y = 0; width = screen.width; height = screen.height; viewDx = 0; viewDy = 0; } } Shkval = { width = screen.width / 5; height = screen.height / 4; x = 0; y = screen.height * 3 /4 ; } ABRIS = { width = screen.width / 6; height = screen.height *2 / 5; x = screen.width * 5 / 6; y = screen.height * 3/5 ; }

i wonder where the patch is that was suppose to come out in march? havent been hearing much about the new mods that suppose to come out in a couple a months either... anyone got any news, or is dcs slowly dying already? well i hope they hurry, i am seriously starting to lose interest and i doubt dcs will be so appealing after the first mod will come out in 2012+ i bet there is better stuff by then...

well etherealN, luckily for us swedes there is always the "internet" ;)

First of all - the new model of turbulence is for AFM and HAI FM. As SFM historically uses the older model we could not implement the new model into it. The "turbulence" you can experience flying old SFM is not due to the athmospere wind vector stochastic additions but directly stochastic process added to the movement equations FOR FLYABLE aircarft. That's the point. I really have no idea why we refused to "noise" AI. Maybe it caused problems at early stages of control equations development and was switched off. And nobody remembered to switch it back. I think it could be main the reason that the old way of "turbulence" does not support correlation for the planes in tight formation and it was rejected because of ridiculous behavior of the plane in the formation. Surely the model is SFM. Try AIs in the same flight with different weights and look at the different AoAs or even at the problems they have holding tight formation, try dogfight for aircraft of the same type but with different weights. There are many signs that it is really SFM :). But in generally SFM is not the holy cow we want to keep. If we have spare time of course we will try to get rid of it and make something like HAI FM.

Now you've gone and done it. I hear tinfoil hats flying around already! :D I'll make sure to come up with some glaring deficiency in my TrackIR in time for the next TrackIR thread, just to make sure. The only one I can come up with right now is that they are a pita to get hold of here in sweden. :P But yeah, product as good as TrackIR you don't really need any seeders to get a precense. Happy customers will "seed" for you. Cheers. ;)

Hogwash...You get what you pay for. Worth every penny. Out

Damn straight, well said +1

И что сказал?)

Можно и на реальном... но с тем же соотношением разбитых при освоении этих кувырков бортов и МакЛаудов-пилотов. :) А бочки... первое, что стал проверять летчик-испытатель на нашей Акуле - это БОЧКУ... Вот так.

The engine throttles in the sim (and in the real aircraft) are the two yellow levers at the bottom of the left rear panel. They move through a range, but they have detents to stop them at certain positions. These position correspond to: IDLE (full down), some intermediate posotion whose use still mystifies me, AUTO (used for all dual-engine flight operations), and EMERGENCY (for single-engine flight operations). The throttle levers on the Ka-50 are commonly referred to (on Western aircraft) as ECLs (engine condition levers) or PCL's (power condition levers). During all modes of dual-engine flight, the throttles should be placed in the AUTO position. In this position, engine power is adjusted automatically in order to keep the rotor speed at its nominal setting. If you increase the collective for example, the rotor will try to slow down, which will cause the engines to automatically produce more power in order to prevent this slowdown (called rotor droop). Nearly all modern helicopters now have some form of automatic throttle control in order to increase safety, reduce pilot workload, and increase efficiency. When you say that you are geting an "engine over rev. warning", I assume that you are referring to the "power limit" warnings. This warning occurs because you are asking the engines for too much power, and the engine electronic governor system is automatically limiting further power output in order to prevent damage to the engines. Placing the throttle levers in the EMERGENCY (full up) position will provide you with more power, at the expense of engine duty life. In practice, the use of the EMERGENCY throttle setting is limited to OEI (one engine inoperative) flight. In other words, if you had an engine failure in-flight, you would increase the throttle level of the operating engine to EMERGENCY. Also, it's important to note that operating the engines at their power limit will cause the engines to fail if you stay at that power setting for too long. You can see your power setting by looking at the EPR (engine pressure ratio) gauge at the forward end of the right panel (above the battery switches). The red arrows in the middle indicate which power setting you're in, while the yellow arrows indicate the power level for each engine. For prolonged flight (more than 6 minutes) you want those yellow markers *below* the "K" marker (cruise power setting) in order to prevent eventual damage to the engine. I hope this helps, but please feel free to continue asking questions if anything I wrote didn't make any sense.

Serbian Gazelle doing cool stuff :)

new f-22 paint:

Issue: Product is too expensive. ;)

Works already, I am using it... go to StarForce website and download driver update, as simple as that :smilewink:

Not to stir the pot, but I have never "seeded" a forum, and usually only post to help a customer with a question they have, or to help with any issues they might have. ;)

It probably won't happen again - producer learned its mistakes in past.

We are aware of that. We want the aircraft that are in the game to be modelled correctly and in detail, not their latest modifications that will further unbalance the gameplay. I think the picture Mustang provided is of an early F-15`s MFD - the one thats in the game.

In case of modelling AN/APG-70 there should be http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=23751

One mode that i wish was correctly modelled in LO :music_whistling:

Извените,что "втыкаюсь" в умный разговор...В СССР были спецзоны,да я думаю и сейчас остались для отработки пусков управляемых ракет по мишеням. Я работал на трех -на Сахалине,в Марах и на севере Германии а Дамгартене. Мишени были нескольких видов-не буду вдаваться в подробности,но были и управляемые мишени,которые меняли высоту,скорость,выполняли маневры..Отработка шла в такой последовательности-ДРБ,БРБ,атака с применением пушки. Наш полк в Марах тогда получил "отлично" Но это было в ТОЙ ЖИЗНИ! Удачи вам ребята

Guys, jeez, can we keep this on an adult level. Let's not start a flame war. I'm sure the free products are fine for those wanting to save money. I'll let you know if I think the TIR is worth it when it arrives. Just because ED recommends something does not means they are in cahoots with them or if they are, that they are pushing a bad product. I think all the pos. reviews on this thread along says that TIR, to many people, is invaluble.

Прошел попытки с пятой. До этого либо медленно, либо хвостом в опоры въезажл. :doh: Итого время от начала миссии до финальных ЛТЦ - 2 минуты 20 секунд. Один нюанс. Так увлекся, что прошел лишние опоры. Это не бубет поводом для дисквалификации? bridgefromOmny.zip

You didnt set the correct service up. serice 1 is acme global, which is an example. Set it to 2, 3, or #4 service.

- вставить(открыть) в GlovePie - использовать через PPjoy

Helibase Mod by Serj_3D Финальная версия мода. Установка вручную (если кто сделает для модмена будем только рады). Файлы в архиве расположены в папках соответствующих аналогичным папкам в папке с игрой ) Выражаем благодарность пользователю FreemanRU за помощь в разработке конфигурационной части мода) Ссылки на скачивание: http://ifolder.ru/10299082 http://letitbit.net/download/b21fc9224161/Helibase.rar.html Скриншоты: Вид из редактора: Вид снаружи: Подлетаем, садимся и рулим внутри: Поворачиваем направо и рулим к ангару с вертикальными взлетно-посадочными колодцами:

Yep, expanding modder capabilities is at the head of a big wish list for me. An application toolkit for adding flyables, the community seems happy and capable of rendering accurate models, cockpits and doubtlessly undertaking performance modelling. The same feature could be used to modify existing modelling to reflect real world data which may have not been either deeply enough researched or available when the sim was originally made. My biggest gripe is the Foxbat and Foxhound modelling, which in no way reflect their actual performance on paper or according to pilot account, but are arcade game generic enemy vehicles with those aircraft skins slapped on them. The same problem seems to occur frequently with all combat flight sims, in that strict accuracy is sacrificed in order to make a computer program which falls somewhere between a flight simulator and an arcade "shoot 'em up" game in terms of the real world performance of various types. I believe too much effort is spent on the marketing aspect of generating a well balanced gaming platform for mass media, instead of addressing the marketing aspect of catering to the target audience. Certainly a smaller base of enthusiasts are prepared to pay the ridiculous contemporary price of a new computer program for an extended period, than the circa 3-month lifespan of most mass media gaming platforms at the release price, followed by a marked disinterest by all but the small batch enthusiast market (who then need to set about a modding regime to make the game a bit more of a sim). I believe game balance can be safely excised completely whilst accurate performance modelling is introduced, and thus real world balance reintroduced through actual doctrines and model differences. It doesn't matter if a MiG-29 can outdo an F-16 in dogfight any day of the week because it doesn't stand a chance at BVR and overall low-medium altitude performance is pretty similar. A MiG-25 doesn't need to be downgraded and exaggerated so it's more like a player's F-15 because it isn't even supersonic at low altitude and the turbojets need a bit of momentum and about 30,000 feet to wind up. The balance comes in that once they do the F-15 has a pretty limited engagement opportunity, the Foxbats can enter or leave combat at will. Foxbats in game are far more like Foxhound performers on paper, but with much worse acceleration and power-weight (in which the Foxhound is also lacking, presumably the same performance modelling is being used between the two aircraft types which is way, way off). So yeah, my big wish list is for simulator level accuracy, whether by modders introduction or an extensive game patching commitment. At the very least a patch should be provided to facilitate extensive modding. I mean it seems so odd. The CFS programs on the market, for simulator level modding interests have an arcade style user interface, whilst for simulator style user interface use locked, hardcoded arcade modelling. It's a conspiracy, isn't it? I mean are we all worried about black cars and silent helicopters following us around or something, should somebody render an accurate combat flight sim one day? Schoolkids are going to start hijacking Raptors from airbases after playing it? Ze Germans will discover our secretive, widely published and easily deciphered technologies?

РОШ является абсолютной осью и назначение на нее колеса мыши невозможно.