Leaderboard

I do not recommend it watching it in full screen, you better use the expand button. Youtube ruined this video -.- You can also download the movie here: Download Link: http://www.virtual-jabog32.de/index.php?section=downloads&subcat=28&file=1178〈=en Tip: Burn it on a dvd and watch it on your TV :) Enjoy :)

Well one statement is FACT: Russian combat jet avionics are way behaind the technology curve with the plethora of steam guages and the RWRs are hideously unuselful.

VOi vittu mitä paskaa. Ei tällästä voi tulla ulos kenekään suusta! Nice work, omfg. :megalol:

Sounds like you did things the smart way ;) As for entering a threat territory where you think MANPADS or other IR missiles will be used again you, forget about spotting them - you have a job to do, ie. kill your targets, have your flares out pre-emptively at some reasonable interval. So ... Ingress: Set your flarespammer to full power Find targets Kill Targets Egress: Keep flarespammer going Run like a little girl Do NOT come back for a re-attack if flares are low or out. Hopefuly you survived.

Yes :D When i look my VRS F-18 pit and the pit on this vidéo... same??? I think yes... We can dream! A whole new world:music_whistling:A new fan-tas-tic point of view :music_whistling: Colonel: Pougatchev? Pougatchev: Yes? Colonel: Can you shut up and go back???Please:mad: Pougatchev: yes :cry: Colonel: Now!!! Pougatchev: Ok ok... Stop drunking vodka and smoke... Just need to see and found the exit door...

Alternatively you might want to try using this in the batch file instead: start "DCS:BS with VAC" /d "C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\Ka-50" bin\stable\launcher.exe --console In both my cases though, I actually have to use bin\x86\stable\launcher.exe for it to work but otherwise it's just fine.

Clickable pit: F-18 Hornet in Lock On 2.0 or DCS: BS? I just stumbled upon this: WOW! That guy has talent! Maybe he should team up with ED? Wags? Try contacting him! Too bad you can´t comment on the video, I may try to PM him. he can´t just have this all for himself? I want it too! :)

pix from pittsburgh airshow

I've read that the su-25sm got some sort of radar installed in the nose, and that the lase is moved further down on the fuselage. Only problem is i can't find any picture that seems to support that. Su-25SM and Su-25A (not sure)

My main gripes with the Maverick seeker lock range is that it feels very gamey. The patch reduced the range specifically for SHORAD platforms, presumably in an attempt at improving game balance or somesuch. I feel like it's unrealistically low, and results in the A-10's only stand-off weapon being virtually useless against the only threats it really needs to use stand-off weapons in order to destroy safely. However, I can't comment as to whether the ranges are realistic or not, so I'll just take ED's word and adjust accordingly. What does bug me is that it's inconsistent. Put an Avenger and a regular Humvee out on a field, and the regular Humvee will be lockable well before the Avenger. Apparently putting a missile turret on top of the vehicle makes it much harder for the IR tracker to lock it??? Then put a single soldier out in the field. Apparently it's much easier for the Maverick to lock up a person than a large vehicle? I think it would bug me a lot less if the lock ranges were more consistent amongst vehicles of similar sizes. But as it is now, it feels gamey.

Не совсем так. Повесить-то можно, но. Захват цели ГСН ИК-ракет ближнего боя поколения Р-27Т осуществляется еще на пилоне по целеуказанию от прицельных систем самолета. Поэтому если вы посмотрите на фотографии, то увидите что Р-73, или Р-27Т, или AIM-9M вешают только на те пилоны и располагают на этих пилонах с учетом геометрии планера так, чтобы их голова могла видеть цель, находящуюся в верхней полусфере носителя. Например, на пилонах F-15 сайдуиндеры расположены так, чтобы их ГСН была впереди передней кромки крыла. Обычно в БВБ и вообще при визуальном обнаружении цель как известно находится "выше" относительно атакующего (классический пример - бой на виражах), поэтому нет смысла располагать Р-27Т на подфюзеляжном узле, где вся верхняя полусфера экранируется носовой частью. Опять же, ОЛС "вниз" практически не смотрит, при сканировании вдоль продольной оси РЛС смотрит в основном вверх, вниз через приборную доску для нашлемки тоже не посмотришь. И еще возможно негативное влияние на ГСН от нагретых элементов планера, расположенных рядом. ps. А почему вопрос задан в теме сервера РАФ? :)

In the AEF we write after action reports for the games we play, BC2, IL2, DCS, ArmA, ect, and the guys have a read and it helps motivate new comers into trying it out. I thought I'd try something a bit different with the million screenshots I have. So I made a comic strip. :) I hope you liked it. I've never used Photoshop before. And I'm very new to FC2 and I'm aware that some artistic license has been used here in terms of available game features, but never let the facts get in the way of a good yarn.

Very good post dude. I should have specified that it is not a nationality issue for me it is rather a geographical issue and what I am use too. Now if you want to give me a good bottle of Russian vodka I'm all for it ;)

Its not ridiculous if you prefer one type of cockpit to fly in over the other. Its not at all about nationality, since im neither american or russian. I used to admire the russian planes very much, but now after flying so much russian planes after all these ED sims with russian planes I have lost some respect and I can say I MUCH prefer western type modern cockpits and weapon systems. I agree, its all precious work from ED yes, but if we get for example Su25 again then I will keep to the A10C because I just dont like those types of cockpits. I think they suck TBH. And we wont get a modern russian cockpit since they are so new ED doesnt have all the info required to make one. Just my opinion :)

It's for shooting guns, not for flying or driving. Also, when you get it, reduce the headbob in settings... otherwise it's like watching the blair witch project set in afghanistan.

check this http://www.leobodnar.com/products/BU0836/

Price and IIRC you cannot use the OEM if you get another computer, but you can if you get the retail version and I believe other than that they are both complete versions. I have Windows 7 Ultimate 64 OEM as I figure that by the time I get a new computer it will be time for Windows 8+ anyway.

You can also check out http://www.mycockpit.org and http://viperpits.org for tips on DIY as well as off the shelf solutions.

FTFY (fixed that for you)

Check out Mike's http://www.mikesflightdeck.com/ he has two great books and a web site full of information and links to different IO cards

My point being, have you used an IIR system in real life? Maybe, maybe not. But here is someone who has used one telling you how it was for them. Shame you are again appear unwilling to listen. It's the same technology. I know, I've designed and built multi-wavelength imaging systems for scientific purposes. I know a huge amount about EO and CCD internals and operation (including specialist non-visible low and high wavelength operation) so if you think you know more than me, you don't. Sorry to be so blunt, I'm not here for a pissing contest I just want to head off any arguments about what you think you might know about advanced imaging technology. So please don't bother arguing this point. I really hope this was tongue-in-cheek, otherwise this appears to be one of the most arrogant insinuations I've seem on these boards - I hope I'm very mistaken. Yes. Can I say it any more simply than that. If I say it twice will that make any difference or will your mind remain closed to the possibility. I have watched cows and horses kilometers away through IIR from several thousand feet and they have a far lower signature than vehicles. IIR is so good you can see differential cooling through metal at closer ranges. Blame? Who gives a damn about blame? I became a much better developer when I learned to take my ego out of my development and not worrying about blame. Sure I am proud of my work but I realized being defensive doesn't help - an open mind is far more valuable. So, from this I surmise that you acknowledge the possibility of a problem but don't want it to be made your fault. Absolutely cool with me - it is not your fault. Can we move on now please to addressing the issue at hand? I simply would like the problem looked at and a work-around determined if possible. Again, you are not listening. Earlier posters mentioned they cannot achieve a lock even at close range. Ignoring the fact that guiding the seeker it 'doglegs' (one fault), you can ground stabilize over your target with little clutter but when you lock the seeker it jumps to a random location off the target (second fault). In some situations amount of retries will put it back on target. Naturally, sometimes you can lock after a couple of attempts - which is why you haven't had riots so far. Artificially degrading weapon systems is something we saw with the AMRAAM but I didn't know it was done to the AGM-65D as well. Isn't it bad enough that there is no player flyable Western aircraft that can launch HARMs (meanwhile the pet Su-25T can kill all manner of stuff from 60 km away) and the A-10 has to do SEAD with a Maverick. The Maverick is a devastating weapon against all targets, witness Gulf War I where it was indeed a 'Turkey Shoot' after the first few days. Big picture, at that time (80's - 90's) there were four thousand F-16s and F4 Wild Weasels to do the job for the Hog. It's bad enough to make the Hog do SEAD but to degrade the weapon system further is totally misguided. IMHO no product aspiring to be a 'simulation' should be doing this. To show you the fault as it appears for us. To show you that the seeker will not lock up a Tunguska at 2 nm when there are no other viable heat sources in the seeker's field of view. Clearly you think all of EDs customers are wrong and are unwilling to read and re-read the posts on this thread until to understand what they are trying to communicate to ED. Perhaps a video of the problem might help show you the issue, or give you an opportunity to state what you believe we're doing wrong (although I think even you finally might become convinced of the former). [reply to another poster] BMPs are nothing. The ground fire from BTRs in this game is far worse. I fear BTRs far more than Shilka - there is something very wrong with that picture.