Leaderboard

Well it looks like we know who wanted ED to make the change then :D

Just to expand on GG's post, training (or inert) weapons (not just AMRAAMs) will be either marked with a blue band or wholly or partially painted blue. In the case of missiles, each section of the weapon (such as rocket motor, warhead) will have the appropriate marking, blue for inert or yellow for live. This can be seen in GG's photo, notice the three blue lines, on separate sections of the missile. Inert weapons can be nothing more than lumps of metal with the same weight and aerodynamic characteristics as the live weapon, or as GG suggested be a live seeker/guidance section with inert warhead and motor, the latter being most common. In terms of weight inert ordnance is as close as possible to the live ordnance, usually within a few pounds. It's also not really a case of removing live rocket motors or warheads, inert training ordnance is purchased as exactly that in most cases as it requires less maintenance than live versions of the same weapon, therefore allowing it to be flown almost indefinitely. In comparison live ordnance has a very limited number of available flight hours before it must be disposed of (either by being used, or scrapped), due to the limited life of the explosive warhead and rocket motor. In most cases weapons used for live fire training are weapons close to being life expired.

here is a fantastic video for this discussion: mig-23 walk around!

Hey guys. I`ve decided to create a JASDF skin for Gys` F-15. It will be based mainly on board number 82-8091 (one of my favourite :)). It will not be 100% identical due to the fact that the original is a two-seater F-15DJ and also because of the lack of close up high quality photos from all aspects. Make no mistake, it will be very close to the real one but some marks, stickers, etc. will be missing. The progress with the skin you can check on the screens below. I`m going to edit this post to replace old screens with new ones. It will take me probably about a week or more to finish it. It will be in a .zip file installable with ModMan (replacing one of the skins included with Gys`model). Thanks to Gys and Valery for the inspiration :thumbup: Edit: screens updated Edit2: As you can see from the new screenshots I`m making the black-white skin too. Several people already asked me about it so here it is. :) There are several aircraft in JASDF with this kind of cammo. The ones that I know about are: 92-8906, 82-8904, 22-8936, 32-8081, and probably there are others too. These aircraft have similar looking black-white pattern cammo, with some slight differences. The skin I`m making is based on board number 32-8081. The black-green skin will be released first as it is almost ready and the black-white will be released shortly after. Edit3: The board number 82-8091 based skin is ready. Below are several download links and I`ll upload it to lockonfiles too. Some notes: The Modman package does not replace an existing skin it adds a new skin slot. A lot of thanks to Michelange for his help with the new skin slot creation. Without him I couldn`t have done it. A note about the marks. You`ll see the aircraft is all covered with them. This is how the real one is and I had to use numerous pics not only of 82-8091 but others too to reproduce them. A small amount of marks are not present because of the lack of close up pictures. For the most common mark type (I guess it`s a number of service lid) which count is over 100 I used the same number except around the intakes of which area I have pretty good photos. The reason is similar as the above stated - I don`t have close up high res photos of every inch of the aircraft and even if I did I would have needed a manual for the exact position and number of each of these 100-200 smallest marks, not to speak about the amount of time needed to do and place them. The other way to do it was to blur the mark so no number is visible. I don`t like blurry marks so what I could find in high res I put in on my skin even though the resolution of the skin 2048x2048 doesn`t allow a lot of the marks to be readable. That`s it for now, I`m working on the next skin (32-8081) but no promises for release date. The whole upper part is colored already. Download link for skin 82-8091: http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php?/files/file/1644-gys-f-15-jasdf-skin-1-v2/ Edit4: new screens (32-8081) added Edit5: Skin #2 finished. Download link below. Notes: As I`ve already said the skin is based on board number 32-8081. I chose this one over the other similar black-white colored eagles in JASDF because of the more colorfully painted underside of the wings, the other ones are kind of... predominantly grey, and of course because of the higher quality pics of 32-8081 that I was able to find. Download link for skin 32-8081: http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php?/files/file/1643-gys-f-15-jasdf-skin-2-v2 Edit6: Skin #3 finished. It is based on the standard JASDF light-dark grey camo. Board number 22-8932 from the 304th Hikotai (squadron). Further improvement of the marks in this skin. Next are 2 Aggressors skins, #4 (52-8088) and #5 (92-8095). Download link for skin 22-8932: http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php?/files/file/1629-fc2-gys-f-15-jasdf-skin-3/ Edit7: Skin #4 finished. It is based on another aircraft from JASDF Aggressors squadron - 52-8088. Download link for skin #4 (52-8088 ): http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php?/files/file/1635-fc2-gys-f-15-jasdf-skin-4/ Edit8(24.08.2010): Version 2.0 of skins #1(82-8091) and #2(32-8081) have been released. Skins #3 and #4 had better detail, more marks, etc. This required the update of the first two skins. In v2.0 some marks have been improved, as well as the emblems, new marks added, some minor coloring inaccuracies have been fixed. With the number of marks reaching more than 500 for each skin they now have almost all the marks I wanted them to have and probably there won`t be any more updates of these 4 skins. Edit9 (24.11.2010): Skin #5 completed. Based on the paint scheme of 92-8095 from JASDF Aggressors squadron. Download link: http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php?/files/file/1681-fc2-gys-f-15-jasdf-skin-5/ Edit10 (11.01.2011): Skin#6 completed. Based on the paint scheme of 02-8071 from JASDF Hiko Kyodotai (Agressor squadron): Download link: http://www.lockonfiles.com/index.php/files/file/1714-fc2-gys-f-15-jasdf-skin-6/

Здравия желаю товарищи вирпилы!!! Хочу поделиться с вами своими впечатлениями от использования сенсорного монитора в авиасимуляторе Ка-50 в частности... и в целом:D Все началось с того что увидел как то ролик в инете, где демонстировалась данная технология на примере Черной Акулы ... я тогда подумал еще, что мол это что-то заоблачное. Однако, как-то чисто случайно набрел на сайт, где в продажу предлагались сенсорные насадки на монитор. Меня это естесвенно сразу заинтересовало, и по мере "пробивания" этой темы, я узнал что уже многие вирпилы используют подобные устройства в авиасимуляторах. Единсвтенное что меня смущало, это вот это пункт Короче говоря я боялся, что изображение будет темнее... и если для всяких офисных приложений это не особо принципиально, то для авиасимулятора это будет не в лучшую сторону. В общем на время я отказался от этой затеи. Однако, в силу своей натуры и неугомоннгости :D, у меня тут же возникла затея другая. :cry: Под натиском вышеуказанных мыслей, я взял листок бумаги и стал рисовать на нем свой будущий "джой"..., ..представляя где будет какая панель, сколько тумблеров, рычагов и т.д. Потом посмотрел на все это художество:doh: и пошел в магазин покупать сенсорный монитор Acer T230H. Теперь собсвенно о сенсорном мониторе и симуляторах.:book: Мои опасения насчет поглащения света и менее яркой картинки оказались напрасными. Никакого ухуджения яркости и цветопредачи замечено не было. Сенсонрный монитор слева, обычный - справа. Как видно на фото, изображение на сеносорном мониторе оказалось даже ярче чем на обычном. да и по другим характеристикам он оказался лучше. Я далее не буду описывать возможности данного монитора как монитора (потому что совершенно не разбираюсь в этом:)),но добавлю лишь то, что, например если на старом ЖК-мониторе samsung 960 BF в авиасимуляторе Ил-2, если смотреть на облака через пропеллер -заметно было своебразное "расслоение" текстур облаков. В случае же с Acer T230H такого "косяка" не замечено. Изображение четкое, без каких либо "расслоений". Теперь собсвенно работа сенсорной части монитора. :) результаты полетов смотреть здесь В общем что можно сказать...?! Удовольствие это -из разряда "чем бы дитя не тешилось - лишь бы не плакало" :D Сенсорный тач скрин (резистивный) - работет честно (погрешность попадания 2-3 мм). Т.е. тупо - куда нажал пальцем там и сработает. Естесвенно предварительно необходимы танцы с бубном пока разбрешся с настройками. Экран очень чувствительный, -срабатывает даже если просто провести пальцем на минимальном расстоянии не касаясь экрана. Честно говоря это даже немного напрягает. По привычке пытаешся не коснуться, а именно ткнуть пальцем на экране, в результате чего виртуальная кнопка либо не срабатывет, либо срабатывает два раза... В общем нужно немного попрактикваться, прежде чем понять специфику работы с сенсорным "тач скрином" Еще одни побочный эффект - это ТРЕК ИР . Когда камера в кабине постоянно перемещается, то и кнопака совершает небольшие перемещения относительно пальца. Поэтому порой просто не получается с первого раза папасть по кнопке. т.к. она все время норовит уплыть куда-то. Тот же эффект, только в более острой форме проявялется в случае вибрации (напрмер при повреждении) - поймать кнопку пратически нереально. Поэтому в аварийных ситуациях лучше использовать мышку (хотя и ей в подобных условиях работать трудно) В остальном сенсорный ввод вполне удобен. А на неподвижных видах (например "быстрый взгляд" на приборы) "тачскрин" опказывает себя вообще практически идеально :thumbup: . Промахов просто нет. Что касается конретно монитора и его сенсорных функций, то такм есть несколько настроек его работы: Сложная и простая Сложная - может распозанвать одновременное касание двух пальцев (это для того чтобы работали такие функции как "правая кнопка мыши", "пропутка", "поворот", "зумирование" и т.д. ) Однко с этими настройками точность и чувсвительность к касаниям получается хуже чем при простой установке, когда работает только "одна левая кнопка" Поэтому конркетно для ЧА -лучше выбрать простую настройку, при которой не будет возможности использовать "правую кнопку" (или скажем заарентировать или разорентировать резервный авиагоризонт), но зато точность и четкость работы сенсорного экрана будет заметно выше. Вообще , в дополнение к более менее функциональному джойстику - сенсорный экран очень даже удобная вещь. Нет необходимости запоминать кучу клавишных комбинаций, или парится с назначением нескольких кнопок в профайлерах джоя. Просто тычешь в экран на нужную кнопку и все. На последок, скажу что в Ка-50 сенсорный "тачскрин", показал себя вполне удобной штуковиной (хоть и не особо нужной :D) Чего не скажешь об MFS... В данном симуляторе управлять арматурой ЛА через "тач скрин" оказалось не очень удобно. Возможно за счет реализации кликабельности в самом симе. В остальных приложениях, таких как Paint - тач скрин (домашние как увидели, что можно рисовать пальцем по монитору, сразу выгнали меня из-за компа, не дав мне толком насладится полетом на Ка-50 :D и целый день рисовали всякие картинки).... ....в общем в остальных приложениях - "тач скрин" полностью заменяет клавиатуру с мышкой, а работу в некоторыхй приложениях превращает в своего рода забаву ;) Буду рад если кому-то данная информация покажется интересной и нужной :D

I have purchased FC2 (also own BS, LO, LOFC). Been a few years since I have flown, had a brain aneurysm/open brain surgery and wanted to go over training to refreshen. Videos are downloaded and installed fine, but the sound and quality are....well, not good. Is there any tweaks I can do to make those videos better? Sounds like Matt is talking in a well, I can't understand what he is saying, and the video res looks real low, very grainy. I am NOT flaming FC2, just wanting to know if there is anything I can do to improve, or are they going to have a higher quality version available for download? Thanks v3t

If there is no picture then there is no proof! That's the standard that was established for EA missile. :smartass: So, picture please, or else ...

Agreed however their music lives on forever.

:D Still looking for F-15

No I would include Gunship 2000, Tornado/Hind, EF2000, TAW, Falcon 4 and EECH as having reasonable semi dynamic campaigns that enable reasonable unrepetitive gameplay. I wont buy any sim that doesnt have at least a semi-dynamic campaign I hate canned missions. This is why I didnt buy LOMAC or any of its offspring. I like to fly a mission against a target and have another generated to suit the unfolding war and have previous targets destroyed. I dont expect campaings to be ultra complex and have supply effects etc as you would in a wargame - this is not what I am after. I just want to be able to replay campaigns several times or alterative campaigns without repetition. Tornado was a quite good example - it came with several campaigns, you had a few varied missions affected by the previous one in a semi dynamic manner and you had free choice over how you configured the attack. This to me is fine for a flight sim. I dont expect the full on complexity of Falcon 4. In EF2000 you had a variety of missions and targets to pick from and a variety of planes waiting for you although they were obviously always waiting at the last waypoint before the target. That was a bit lame when I figured that one out. To me its all about suspension of disbelief. Once you figure out a game is coded a certain way that breaks the game for me. Of course I loved TFX which was canned missions but it wasnt too important that the missions were repetitive as they was quite a few of them and three planes to fly. But I wouldnt buy a sim like that again unless it enabled free choice over mission planning, target etc etc. Thats what I expect these days. So I probably wont be buying A10 or any other ED sim until they manage to get an interesting backdrop to the flying - Microprose always managed it and things have moved on a lot since then. In Gunship 2000 you had a variety of helicopters to fly, you could select wingmen etc and you had a group of pilots to award medals to etc. That was really fun stuff. You never see that anymore these days. If they could manage it then, software houses these days could certainly manage it if they had a will. But these days its all about an 'accurate flying experience and realism' etc etc. BOOOORING! Lets get some fun sims out there again. This is what I want to see before I buy - semi dynamic campaign enabling shoice of targets, choice of payload, group of pilots to choose from, medals to award, a few base screens to watch whilst you are waiting for the mission, a choice of wingmen and control of their setups, damaged targets stay damaged for a long time and maybe affect the war somehow (in a minimal way possibly), in flight refuelling, a mixture of Airtoair and Mudmoving missions. See no need for complex flight simulations - its all the rest that makes for a great game. Why cant developers see this????

Awesome tune by Kenny Garrett:

I know i for one would be a much happier chap getting a new DCS every year, it means we may get round to a classic British attack aircraft while im still young, variety is what we all want ofcourse. I think alot depends on how DCSWH performs over the range of our systems, im hoping for the best, i suppose we will fing out soon enough. I didnt see anything offensive in sticky's post?? were all friends here :)

Excellent points. From my experience the key part would be if they´d have to start entirely from scratch, making the new engine project basically a 3-yr R&D project + 1 yr for adapting the content to the engine and bug fixing, or if they have already done experiments, prototyping, and/or have gone through the low level design exercise that is required. If they did do the R&D part during the last four years (say since the establishment of the Core technology in the consumer market), I´d wildly guess a 2 year work. I would think that going multicore is not the only benefit of a new engine. DCS could improve fidelity immensely by actually modelling the atmosphere, as a dynamic fluid rather than the current static simplification, allowing for thermal currents, wind deflection in mountains, aircraft induced turbulence, all things that would take the overall flight "model" to the next level on par with high-end systems. Besides that, dynamic modeling of air temperature and humidity would allow for a very realistic weather system. Couple that with the enormous room for improvement in the visual simulation given by the new technologies, with particle-based dynamic clouds, smoke and precipitations; using DX11 tesselator for terrain (maybe going procedural) that could allow, for instance, to have very detailed cities where all non-building objects become 3D instead of textures at close range (i.e. cars, traffic lights, small plants, crops, etc) while at the same time, the long-distance textures are pre-rendered from those objects (so forests don´t pop up from nowhere); using newer techniques for object drawing (i.e. full DX11 geometry instancing); collidable trees (why not); and finally, dynamic terrain lighting with mountain, building and vegetation-casted shadows on all objects plus dynamic higlights in the terrain according to the sun position (so that sun-bathed forests look like a sun-bathed broccoli if you get the picture). So I would think a beefy engine update ED-style, would be quite something, and something I would personally pay for and enjoy as much as a new plane. The level of detail in the plane simulation, at least for me, means that I need to get close to professional standards to fly the machines well, with a true sense of satisfaction, and that takes years, not days, to obtain, so I´m in no hurry for new planes if I´m getting something like I described above instead. Couple that with a more complex and realistic mission evaluation system, career mode, dynamic campaign... hell I´d pay a lot.

I know this isn't modeled... but the Leo 2s need to turn their turret to point behind them in order to reload their ready rack. Such an ID method would be most tragic in this case. :) Itkovian

I do not think they can use that type of system on supersonic fighter aircraft. I have been looking around the net see if I can find more info. http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/hydraulics.htm I just started reading some of this sites, but, the reason is that type of system I do not think can produce enough pressure. For example, if I converted the pressure on the MIG-29 manual correctly, MIG-29 uses around 2600 PSI for its hydraulic systems. All other aircraft I have worked on have very high pressure systems as well. I will read more and come back later. Thank for the info tho

к сожалению не знаю, видимо потому что за 200 более ранней версии и не может делать это: -Добавлена поддержка новых форматов цифрового звука Dolby HD и DTS-HD Я взял кабель для версии 1.3, хотя тоже не уверен, что в них есть отличия, ну разве что в том провод был хлипковат.

press trigger and hold it about 2s

working on video now.

I ACCEPT them, be assured. But opposite to you im not biased and try to bring up valid arguments instead of some stuff you bring up. AK-47 for example was a great soviet invention, or the RS-12M2 ICBM, or the SS-N-21 SSM. You see? RUSSIA STRONG!!!1 but on certain fields.

Try here. Shipping should be around 5$ but you need to check...

Well I'm happy I gave you a few options. Good luck!

We (The War Hawks) are happy to help anybody that feels they can benefit from asking for help. War Hawk or not. I have personally helped 3 people I did not know that could not keep the chopper airborne (rotor collision, engine torque, transmission, mostly due to rough handling and fighting the stick) due to trim problems. After 2 hours they could take off, fly straight, and execute simple turns with some clarity and purpose. Did I turn them into elite pilots? Of course not, but they were better off and less frustrated afterward. Some people just need a foundation to build off of. I never claimed to be an Elite pilot. I learn new things all the time from a variety of sources. What I am claiming is I don't require a pre qualifying level of competence before I feel like its worth my time to offer any assistance and I don't feel like any assistance or advice I offer is worthless. I have been exposed to aviation for years (I work for the largest (commercial) aircraft maintenance base in the world, get to see F16's take off everyday, have seen the stealth bomber do touch and goes (we are super close to the runway), have seen AWACS do fly bys, have gotten to go into a Russian Antonov An-124, and I will be one of the early people to see the 787)and flown a variety of flight sims, but I have never appreciated aviation until DCS. So it's very important to me that people have a good time playing it instead of feeling like it's an exercise in frustration (like say from breaking the chopper due to fighting your trim). I want to serve the hobby not just my squad. If you just want to learn and have fun and help others give us a try. WH_QuickSilver http://war-hawks.net/

что за нуб написал "в бсод от перегрева"?) ладно, это лирика. Практика такова - мы с другом на его ноуте гоняли и в арму2, и в дкс ча - и все это без каких-либо подставок, на одеяле. Да, одеяло пованивало паленым в итоге - ибо неудачный центр тяжести у ноута, на мягком заваливался назад, перекрывая себе вентиляцию. Да, об клаву можно было греть руки, а брать ноут на колени даже мысли не возникало. Но никаких бсодов не было :)

Aaaargghhhhhhhhhhh............My ISP said, and I quote (I shite you not - I have the voice-recording of the telephone conversation): Never mind living in an established area of Scotland's third-largest City and supposedly the Oil Capital of Europe........I however digress :music_whistling:

US based: http://war-hawks.net