Leaderboard

Мы на своем сервере специально изучали и тренировали боевое применение с использованием Х-25МЛ, в том числе и с внешним подсветом. Методика следующая: на вертолете-целеуказателе переключатель ЛД-ЛДП устанавливается в положение ЛДП. Рамку "Шквала" наводим на цель, нажимаем АЗ - включается подсвет. После этого на ударном вертолете выбираем внешние подвески (Y). Кольцо на ИЛС пару раз мигнет, затем устанавливается на цель (должен быть двойной кружок), при наличии разрешения на пуск ("С") пускаем ракету. После пуска ударный вертолет может сразу же выполнять отворот, для него ракета пускается в режиме "пустил-забыл". Целеуказатель должен подсвечивать цель до попадания ракеты. Важные моменты: 1. галетник "ЛИТ КАПК" на целеуказателе и ударном вертолете должен находится в одинаковом положении - ГСН ракеты видит только подсвет от лазера с такой же литерой как на носителе. Если в районе боевых действий работают другие вертолеты, то желательно паре "целеуказатель-ударник" устанавливать литеру на "2" или "3" дабы не было "левых" подсветов от других бортов. 2. При использовании телеавтомата весьма вероятны промахи - ракета проходит выше цели, поэтому лучше не захватывать цель, а подсвечивать её в режиме ТГ, при этом рамку "Шквала" наводить под низ цели. 3. ГСН ракеты видит подсвет лазера независимо от положения переключателя ЛД-ЛДП, но в режиме ЛД лазер включается на короткое время (до 8 секунд) и ракета может не успеть долететь до цели за это время, а в положении ЛДП лазер включается секунд на 40 (в зависимости от расстояния до цели).

Собственно по названию темы все понятно, джойстики новые, заказываю через друга из Америки. Моя аська 379-649-766.:joystick:

So, its been a while since I made an update. This is because I have had to make some big decisions about the project that were hard for me to make. During the time between my previous update and now, the team has been hard at work collecting data and reworking almost every aspect of the project. Here are some screenshots that I took earlier today during some testing. As you will see, the terrain is being reworked from scratch. This decision was made for two reasons. First off, myself along with others, were not satisfied with the quality of old textures and mesh. Now, if you are still reading this and havent skipped to the screenshots, you might be wondering why not simply just rework the current terrain? That brings us to the second point. The old original .max files for the terrain were lost and there was no other option but to redo it. Hopefully you guys will see a difference between these screenshots and the old terrain that you might have seen.

The 1.0.1 patch will clock in around 600MB, fixing probably a total of over 200 bugs and problems as well as adding a number of gameplay features, many of which were specifically requested by the community. You will have to excuse some of us if we find it a bit inappopriate that this effort is labeled "rubbish" or "a joke." We have been very clear on the forum about issues like collidable trees, development of ground AI and ME mapping difficulties. In particular, that all of these issues are systemic in nature and require develoment effort that is beyond the scope of a patch. We had not been shy to concede that the simulation is not perfect and the above shortcomings exist and are among the areas that could use further improvement. It is ED's intent to pursue these improvements as DCS code is developed. However, we also feel it's a worthwhile exercise to point out that no flight sim has achieved perfection in all of its core content areas and this is not a "cop out." It is a statement that points to the complexity of this type of software. We hope it helps the user, who may not have the benefit of a developer's point of view, understand that development of such software is measured in years and that some compromises are ineviatble for any combat simulator that aims for high standards of realism. IMHO, the 1.0.1 patch is a good step forward to an already good product. Further and larger steps are in development. It clearly does not address every shortcoming of the simulation, but it would be unreasonable to assume it would do so, especially in regard to the deeper engine-related issues like collidable trees or a satellite view in the editor. In case you didn't already realize this yourself, we have been making an effort to communicate this ahead of time on the forum.

As far as I'm concerned, [TFC/ED] are doing a lot of work to bring something to everyone, even some unexpected work on LockOn:FC. This patch may not 'fix' all of the issues we have, but nevertheless we are assured they are doing they're best to put collidable trees and better AI into the DCS sim. I remember words to this effect; "take your frustration, multiply by ten, and you'll be close to how [TFC/ED] feels!" I'm pretty sure it's been said that the limitations of the current engine are the reason for the trees being only shaders, correct me if I'm wrong. In the new DCS:Warthog engine, will we not see collidable trees?? Anyway, they brought us DCS:BlackShark in a condition a little less than perfect, with the promise of patches and a new engine down the road...and we knew all this before we purchased our copy! The patch is more or less on-track; so is DCS:Warthog. We can be patient, positive, and supportive..... ...or we can act like unsupervised children on a Halo forum, and act superior to one another, argue, and be downright negative. Your choice... I say, :thumbup: Bravo TFS/ED, cant wait for the new patch/fixes, and bring on DCS:Warthog!!

Salut, J'ai un x52Pro et pas de problème de ce genre. Désinstalle tes drivers saitek, reboot, ne branche pas ton X52Pro,télécharges ceux à jour et seulement quand il le demande, rebranche le X52Pro. Pilotes à jour : (WinXP 32Bits - drivers) ftp://ftp.saitek.com/pub/software/full/Saitek_X52Pro_Flight_Controller_SD6_32.exe (WinXP 32Bits - Software) ftp://ftp.saitek.com/pub/software/full/SST_Software_32_6_6_6_9.exe Installes les deux. A savoir aussi c'est que si ton windows ne voit plus le X52, le jeu le verra pas non plus. Assures-toi également de brancher le X52pro sur un port USB unique, et pas un hub USB, c'est peut-être un pb d'alimentation. Au delà de ça, si avec tout ça ton X52Pro reviens pas à la vie sous Windows, c'est que le système (OS) en lui même à un problème... donne nous de tes nouvelles

Release Weapons Keypress = [RAlt - Space] as opposed to Cannon Fire [space]. Ensure you have it correctly mapped to your Flightstick.

Longbow had no trees at all. Comanche 3 / 4 was rather a great looking helo-game than a simulation. EECH has large green blocks with a forestgreen texture. You had to aim very good for the few trees besides that. EE2 had more trees, granted, but the engine couldn't deal with the additional load of calculating the collision boxes so trees and collision-boxes were not aligned. Gunship! was one of the few games that had collideable vegetation (even massive forests, bushes, etc) and quite good AI, but it was hardly a simulation either. @ ruprecht: You always have to make compromises, when you're honest. If you want to make a 100% perfect project in ALL ASPECTS, you'd never sell anything because you'd never finish it. That's true for all sorts of business to my experience. @ Innerloop: And where do you draw the line? DCS is not opensource. It's a product released by a company and you have to draw a line in legal terms to ensure that your hard work will make enough money to feed your family. So you cannot just give away the source-code to the public and say "here you go, make something of it, but please don't sell it as yours". You can open certain aspects, release tools how to make certain parts available for modding and creating addons, etc. and be open for ideas and valid concepts. But that is exactly what ED is doing, so you're running in open doors here, IMHO. And hiring more people, hell, if ED would make money from DCS like Blizzard does from WoW, I bet the team would have 10 times more people working on it. ;)

Белым по чёрному сказано же: две недели :D

The question is did ED achieve the goals they set out for themselves? I'd argue they did - and did it extremely well. And the difference here is that they didn't write software to the specs of the customer - they wrote it to their specs and released it as a general rollout, as is. You didn't commission them to release software to your specs. If that were the case, then you have every right to complain about 'critical' features missing. ED didn't fail or miss a critical feature, they only failed to your expectations - which, unfortunately, doesn't mean much.

Actually I'm an enterprise software architect and I know exactly how hard it is. If my customers told me that my product was great but lacked a a critical feature, my response would not be "waaah, you think it's so easy, you do it". I also know a defensive response to an obviously sore point when I see it. So I'll stop prodding you. Peace

It amuses me that your legitimate complaint is something that hasn't been done before. So I'll say it again: If you think it's so easy, go ahead and show people how to do it. Eagle has made it clear that they will keep improving things; it's just too bad that certain people lacking specific knowledge want it all now and think it CAN all be done right now. There's no cop out, there's just people who don't have a clue how hard it is how to do all this. Eagle offered a very good explanation regarding the trees; it also announced that work on the AI would slowly proceed. What are you complaining about, then? That you don't have it all, NOW? Do you really enjoy beating dead horses so much?

Dear all, Eagle is aware of the situation and it is currently being discussed internally. As soon as we have an official position on this we'll be sure to let you know. However, please do not expect anything until after the weekend. Thanks

Falcon F-16 Hotas Logic on X52 Dear comrads of russian language ..i dont speak russian :( (even not after 1L vodka) but i can understand the interest of this post. Therefore here a capitalistic-free "help-info" :lol: I realized, that often newcomers - and sometimes even vets - have difficulties understanding the HOTAS-Logic of the F-16 itself, and this results often in personal fantasised joystick-layouts. Nothing against it, but once the principles understood, life can be way easier. The F-16 (so in AF) has its ownz efficient layout, or should is say smart logic functionality! (the OSB 2 button is my personal choice due to the fact, that we cant use FCC-Submodes in AF on the HOTAS...but its very usefull to switch gun-modes or doing "funkey stuff" in HSD or A-G modes.. TMS left we also dont have in AF in proper usability, but we can use TMS-left as "RADAR A2A" - function to clycle between VRS, LRS, RWS modes ....) Since we also dont have a 3rd Hat-Switch on x52 to simulate the EWS or Countermeasure Switch on F-16 Hotas, i placed EWS under Mode 3, but to make it also quickly accessable i placed it on the Thrutlle Hat-Switch - PINKY RIGHT-LEFT = CHANGE PROG - just RIGHT = is CM Program RUN (release chaff-flare preset program - whatever qantities and intervals were set) there is still Thruttle-Hatswitch left free, which can be used as Idle-Detend or IFF, whatever suits best.... Note: never use (Wpn A-A) or (Wpn A-G) in AF...>> ALWAYS use ICP A-A and ICP A-G You really dont need more, because you can access everything in right ways at right time, very efficient and quickly depending in which Master- or Sub- or Override-mode or situation you are. Other things, what do not belong to the HOTAS, do just not belong to the HOTAS, even if it can be made as game-options, but my philosophy is minimized efficiency and realism, and rest can be klicked in cockpit ( what has "Gear" to do on stick? for example) and using a keyboard infront of your nose is easier then reaching for switches in a real cockpit, me thinks. As an comparsion to the real HOTAS, here a simplified and explaining pic of the real things.....showing, what functions are on which places.. This is the most to realism closest (positions and functions regarding) and most simple and efficient layout in respect to AFs limitations and aspects...i could came up with after trying MOST OF excistings Profiles out there. NONE made sense to me....and ALL where different..till i started approching this in my own way, IN RESPECT to real jet HOTAS and most efficiency to AF given functionalities. (The real F-16 HOTAS is complexer and has more features like TAB button or HOLD button etc etc) I know many have problems getting started with Falcon already here, therefore....enjoy...have fun. How you convert this into your SST Profiler (x52 or x52pro).....its up to you

Well... to be honest im a little dissapointed. The listed improvements to the ME are pretty limited and havent removed the labour intensive nature of making half decent missions. Theres been no attempt to improve ground ai behaviour (lets face it there is no ai behaviour unless the mission author goes to the extravagent lengths to manually 'script' it with thousands of triggers, even then many vital trigger logics are missing still ) Things like branching waypoints, waypoint actions, trigger rules such as group % alive, % dead, side % alive/dead, group sees enemy etc are all still missing and these are just the bare essentials to make the ME acceptable. One can only hope the editor gets its own patch at some point, and soon, because it is the crux of sim content and replayability. And i won't even speak of the possibility of dynamic campaigns given the aenemic results of this patch.

http://www.virtual-jabog32.de/forum/ Why not try making a post (link above) on the jabog32 forum? Their forums are not exactly busy, but you are more likely to catch someone who worked on the ATC Utility and knows about it. Their forums are split into several chunks - 1st bit is black shark, 2nd bit is Lockon, so make sure you post in the Lockon section. They are real friendly folks, they even have a sticky post that says - Welcome international visitors, feel free to post in English. How nice is that?

Это все - действительно мои объявления и эккаунты. Скрывать нечего. Обращайтесь. А то, что зовут меня Андрей - ну, так назвали, за что родителям - спасибо. Да... Вы еще забыли эти: http://forum.il2.com.ua/forum/showthread.php?t=2404 http://www.vsi.org.ua/forum/viewtopic.php?t=724

Мда, занимательная ветка, прочитал за один присест, как детектив. Главное, чтобы молодой человек правильные выводы из этого сделал. ИМХО, неправильный вывод - надо лучше шифроваться, чтобы не нашли, правильный вывод - брать чужое - нехорошо, можно потом долго лечить лицо и репутацию, или долго и нудно объяснять дяденькам милиционерам, что, типа, "больше так не буду" и "я ещё маленький". Ну, хоть то, что товарищу стыдно (думаю, здесь не врёт), в какой то мере указывает, что не всё ещё потеряно.

*взял большую пачку попкорна и придвинул кресло поближе к монитору

Интересный поворот событий... Джой это орган №1 в организме вирпила :) Товарищ поступает крайне некрасиво..

т.е. одно и тоже лицо под двумя никами BT=923=Andrey, а че аська одна и та же? а на последней картинке два друга рядом или "Я и Я" :)

А я тут причем? гы? Все Андреи с Киева воры чтоли? Тот кому я предлогал Хотас, так он в Киев приедит, и мы из рук в руки обмен делаем вообще-то. А Графвадим, извини конечно, но на таких как ты и зарабатывают люди в интернете, сделаем для себя заметку. А за такое что ты наговариваеш можно и в пятак получить

Чем кончилось-то? Кто кого? Ща начнет ему про детей втирать...

Ну и где джой?