Leaderboard

I just got started this week with A-10C, and I must say this sim is just so much fun and so awesome it's hard to put into words. So I won't even try, but you get the picture. I do have some complaints though. It has gotten really hard recently to choose between flying the Ka-50 or the A-10C. There is the sleep deprivation from doing and redoing training missions until late at night. And between A-10C/Ka-50/FC2/[*cough*F4AF] it is getting increasingly hard not to confuse the various HOTAS profiles. I anticipate further problems whenever the US fixed wing [edit: fighter] release comes out. Well, actually not if it means F4AF can be retired ;-) As it is bad form to shout I won't be using caps, but if you want to you can imagine that I'm hitting caps lock just about ... now. A big thank you to ED for this fantastic sim! :clap_2: Please please please continue to evolve the DCS series and push out new releases for a long time going forward. I would probably buy them even if I did not had the HW to run it, just to support the DCS concept. / Helios

So far, my favorites: :)

I created an A10C start-up guide based on the training mission in the SIM. It includes several screenshots with the controls highlighted just as they are during the training mission. I've found it helpful as I learn my way around the cockpit and thought that others might find it helpful as well. On Google Docs: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oSPiSZn2C10N5KbuJgvF2kETX9olzRt3Nqm8P-_hYms/edit?hl=en# Enjoy

Да он издевается над нами! :D

Если стоит упрощенная динамика, то включается автоматически. Если полный реализм, то все ручками делать самостоятельно.

There i fixed it for you

I'm in the armed forces and am delpoying for a few months soon. I'm taking my laptop and was looking for advice on a good sim that can be played on a decent laptop (but with limited graphics card) and with a mouse only. Stratergy games bore me a bit and I'm leaning towards something like SteelBeasts (original) or T72. Any thoughts..?

Does anybody have a diagram showing the measurements of the cockpit panels? Millimeters would probably be best. Also I would prefer one that shows distances between instruments as well and not just the main panel housing height and width. I would like these measurements for the top panel, the main front panel, the side panels, and the rear panels. Thanks for any help.

Да, Андрюх, ибо в авиации, как говориться, надежда умирает при ударе о землю. Но давайте называть вещи своими именами. Авиасимуляторы для PC сейчас балансируют на шаткой грани самоокупаемости. Я даже не берусь определить - мы ещё до, или уже за. Не берусь потому, что сейчас всё очень сильно зависит от того, как поведут себя наши пользователи. И если тенденция "я за это говно платить не буду, потому что я ожидал шедевр" не изменится - то авиасимы сдохнут так же тихо и незаметно, как в начале 2000-х сдохли космосимы. С теми же симптомами и с теми же истериками на форумах, ситуация как под копирку. Ни одному крупному издателю авиасимулятор уже давно не интересен в принципе. Юбики сейчас исполняют обязательства контракта с 1С лохматого года, и то качество, с которым они исполняют эти обязательства - говорит само за себя. Им похеру на то, что из себя сегодня представляет CoD. Лишь бы закрыть эту страницу, с глаз долой. А пользователи задают нам с тобой, Андрюх, вопросы на форуме: "неужели авиасимулятор не окупается?" По всей видимости потому, что Олег 6 лет им рассказывает о светлом будущем и невероятных прорывных технологиях которых мир ещё не видывал, вы (ED) - без зазрения совестии из жажды наживы (это сарказм) выставляете на продажу аддон по цене нового продукта, а мы (777) - имеем наглость рубать капусту за каждый самолёт аж по цене пары бутылок хорошего пива. Ну не охренели ли эти разработчики симуляторов - только и думают, как бы ещё нагреть наивного пользователя. "Неужели не окупаются??" А то, что из обзоров игровых журналов уже давно исчез целый жанр симуляторов - этого никто замечать не хочет. Вот что плохо. Плохо что среди ежегодно стареющей аудитории симкомьюнити так и не кристализуется понимание, что это хобби, которое мы все оплачиваем себе сами. И если мы все не начнём говорить правду - ничего не изменится. Хватит строить хорошую мину при плохой игре. Жанр сегодня держится только на тех фанатах, которые готовы платить регулярно, а не на тех, кто ждёт чуда за три рубля. Просрём - сами будем виноваты. И кроме себя винить будет некого. Инвесторов больше нет, наши технологии одни из самых сложных и ресурсоёмких для РС игр, и они гораздо длиннее чем нынешний фокус интереса игрока (как показывают опросы - это 4 месяца максимум). Издателей нет - не тот масштаб аудитории, издателю не интересно вложить 5 миллионов долларов а собрать с рынка 6. Потому, что вложения и сборы с ведущих игровых тайтлов уже давно сопоставимы с киноиндустрией - а это масштабы сотен миллионов долларов. У ED есть меценат - Ник Грей. У Олега, возможно, появится гос.поддержка (если повезёт). Мы (777) научились балансировать на грани самоокупаемости продавая самолёты. Но ребята, это не бизнес. Симуляторы - это хобби. Дорогое. Пора это понять, и не питать иллюзий.

Good read about joystick responses by the highly respected An.Petrovich. http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=2564&hilit=response+curves

Blasphemy! :D Nice screenshots Goose :)

Well, I finally pulled the trigger on a new system just to play this game.. ************************************ Thermaltake Element G Gaming Case - Black AMD Phenom™ II X4 840 Quad-Core Gigabyte GA-870A-UD3 -- AMD 870 w/ 2x PCI-E 2.0 x16 Liquid CPU Cooling System [AMD] - 120mm Fan 8 GB [4 GB X2] DDR3-1600 Memory ATI Radeon HD 5770 - 1GB - HIS IceQ 5 Turbo - Core: 875MHz 600 Watt Power Supply 1 TB HARD DRIVE -- 64M Cache, 7200 RPM, 6.0Gb/s - Single Drive 24X Dual Format/Double Layer DVD±R/±RW + CD-R/RW Drive - Black Creative Labs Sound Blaster Audigy SE ********************************************* These screens is making it difficult to resist the urge of squeezing the trigger one more time!! Keep them coming guys

This is an awesome resource! A complete guide on how to make 3D (mainly aircraft) models using freeware software (Blender, GIMP and Inkscape). Even though it's in Polish it's so well supplemented with images, 3D models, textures and all the other source files used by the author that in my opinion non-Polish speakers will find it useful as well. The cover features the 3D model development of which this eBook documents http://samoloty.wjaworski.pl/wm-000_p.xml (website available in Polish and English) The book was published on CreativeCommons license http://creativecommons.org/

Yeah we should remove Georgia too, don't you remember Russian-Georgian war? It's just terrain, nothing more nothing less. Anyway I would more like to see Afghanistan than Libya, nicer area for choppers.

Can we use the phrase "Douchbag" on this forum? Cause I might just use it. If we can...that is.:mad:

В любом случае пиратство и торренты -это не правильно. Будете качать крякнутые версии ,не будет больше ни чего.Надеюсь Вы это понимаете.

А я купил коллекционку, развернул карту, почитал мануал, но диск не трогал... Комп явно не потянет, будем апгрейдить потихоньку (Кабанчик тоже еле-еле идет).А купил зачем? А чтобы было, рано или поздно я комп обновлю, они оптимизируют...

Во Фланкере 1.0 была арифметика ЦЕЛОЧИСЛЕНННАЯ. И сравнивать просто объем моделирования там и здесь - это как сравнивать авионику в аэроплане бр. Райт и в F-18... Современные компы многое позволяют впихнуть в них, но это, естественно требует бОЛших затрат времени на разработку физ моделей, настройку, кодирование.

Всегда с удовольствием покупал игры серии LockOn и DCS, но платить по 600-1500 рублей за, например, очередную версию Call Of Duty чтобы за 3 дня в нее наиграться я не готов. Тем более лень ходить за ней в магазин своим пешком. А ожидание очередной версии любимого симулятора и последующие поиски в магазинах города коробочной версии превращается в долгоиграющий квест ))

Go to min 2:30 Heres a place to start. You could get away with putting all the Fuel switches to one Real toggle. The problem is that in game has no Boost pump on. Boost pump off command. Its just on/off as the same command. So if you set up a toggle that when its on, it will turn all four switches. When its off it switches everything again. Sync will have be backwards if you start a backwards state. Before After Sadly this didnt work. My experiment failed. It only flips the Boost pump Left wing. I know you can put as many switches to run one function as you want. (every key on your keyboard could be Fire Cannon, roll your face on keyboard when you line up tank) But running 2 functions off one key has eluded me. I hope this helps put you in the right direction. BTW If you run vista or Windows 7 and install on a different drive than your C drive. You have to find the controller profile in C:\Users\<Your USER NAME>\Saved Games\DCS Warthog\Config\Input\A-10C\joystick. On my computer I installed A10 on the D drive and the file path he gives in the video only has that default game profiles that come with A10c. Not my own.

thank you all, I will try these solutions. And then return to ask more. It just has bothered me a lot that there are many buttons that I do not use when flying; collective brake being one of them. I also thought that you couldnt't trim the rudder... but looks like you can?

А у Dzena неплохие кампании .

It's actually pretty handy in the hover, and cruise. It has limited authority but if you're trimmed correctly it'll hold your height perfectly. The other thing I forgot to mention is have a look at the collective and check the route mode, specifically checking it's in the middle position. It's controlled by the 'r' key. If it's up then the aircraft will try and point at whatever waypoint you have selected. It's a bit gotcha as it is not obvious.

I agree with you guys, I only bought it 2weeks ago and am having a ball. I loved xplane, but am hardly flying it right now. So much to learn. Well done DCS! and it runs very well on my 18mth old pc. And I'm finally getting the hang of the cameras!

Не я обычный вирпил, начавший полётывать ещё в ДОСе - Gunship, LHX:) Просто пытаюсь искоренить необоснованные фразы "рулит" и "отстой", на сонове которых несведущие могут составить ложное мнение. Все вышеизложенные симы у меня ессно есть:pilotfly: Про БоБ читаю, но своё мнение составлю только после личного знакомства.

Turn to target: (I assume you fly with AP channels always on.) (1. Reduce horizontal and vertical speed as you normally would when entering stable hover, but make sure your trim is in neutral.) (2. When stabile hover is acheived, hit the trimbutton and your copter should now be reasonably stationary by itself.) (3. Engage Autohover.) -I got the understanding that this is already what you're doing. 4. Engage "Turn to Target" on your target mode panel. 5. Designate any target using your Helmet Mounted Sight or uncaging your Shkval. 6. You can now turn your copter just by scanning the Shkval. Collective brake: Collective brake is a nescessity in real life, but has no practical use in the sim. However, it is also used to designate new height/altitude when AP Alt Hold is engaged. Spot turn: If the copter starts yawing uncontrollably, the likely reason is that you are going adrift backwards or sideways, or you're hovering in wind. Pay attention to wind speed and direction before taking off. While hovering (w/o Hover Hold) keep your eyes at the HORIZON and you will find it easier to hold a stable hover. Also do this during spot turns, keep the horizon level and at a constant attitude (unless adjustment for wind is needed). Personally I fly most of the time without AP, even during hover and while scanning for targets unless there are difficult wind conditions or I am setting myself up for attacking multiple targets in quick sucsession. The flying style with and without AP is quite different. When flying without AP, you use the copters inherent instabilities to your advantage and just "nudge" it in the direction that you want it to go. -Didn't move just like you wanted? Then nudge again! I find the copter being more predictible this way. Most important: Fly the way you like and have fun! :D

Beautiful screenshots!

Damn Red - that's gonna be awesome and I can't wait to see the video of it all in action :D Other options for design software (especialy for PCB layout): Inexpensive 2D/3D CAD - TurboCAD by Imsi Runs abourt $80 retail. Thas a PCB library, but I find it inefficient to use for PCB layout. Schematic Capture & PCB Layout - Diptrace The free version is limited to 500 pins & the pcb layout has an auto router. Schematic Capture & PCB Layout - ExpressPCB. You can print to file (good when etching your own) and export dxf files. You just can't import dxf files. Also, no auto-router, but unlimited connections. (heh, Deadman posted his link after I posted this lol! Gret minds think alike lol!) Making my own UFC. Nowhere near as authentically pretty as Red's, but I'm going for placement and function over authenticy in order to keep my costs down. Already have an X-Keys USB Matrix board, so going to use that for the interface. Rough render of the panel I'm building (done in TurboCAD 16):

The current theater has been around for ever and is getting very old, and the fact that you have a A-10 Warthog flying missions in Russia against a large amount of SAM's is just a MAJOR turn off for me. I understand it would take a large amount of time and resources to build a whole new terrain, but for me this theater is just turning me away. Imagine DCS-A10 Iraq/Afghanistan/Iran, etc. Even a middle eastern fictional theater would be fine, and i think it would boost sales a lot. Honestly Navada sounds boring if you ask me, I simply don't buy a combat flight sim to fly around and do training. I don't understand ED putting all this time and effort into a training area of operations. Just my Opinion.

This turned into a bit of a paper. Important points italicized. The main focus is pitch control, but lateral (aileron) control is essentially the same, just in a less changing context. First off, Chops is the one who got it right. Think of trim as a helper to relieve the pilot of large and/or constant control forces. On many gliders, the trim is simply a bungee which can be made to pull on the stick with a variable force. Early implementations of trim surfaced during WWI. The planes were built for low speed flying and manoeuvring, which meant you had to push the stick forward to stay level at high speed during cruise. Pilots solved this with a bungee cord attached to the panel which they could hook to the stick. Voila! Instant trim! This, however, has its drawbacks. The elevator position, and hence the stick position, effectively determines the angle of attack the aircraft will seek. Google for "static stability" for more background reading - there's plenty. The stick (and the connected elevator) is an angle of attack selector. A constant angle of attack means that for a constant airspeed, lift will remain constant. Another way to put it is that as lift is (more or less) constant due to the non-changing weight of the aircraft, an aircraft will when stick-fixed maintain a constant airspeed. It will do this through adjusting the rate of climb, either at once or through a series of climbs and descents at decreasing maximum climb/sink rates (google "dynamic stability")*. A constant angle of attack means an aircraft which will seek a constant indicated airspeed. This stick-fixed behaviour is desirable. However, the stick force required for a given elevator deflection varies with airspeed. You need a larger force to keep the stick forward in a constant position at a higher airspeed. With the bungee cord solution, the trim force is constant. Hence the stick position will vary with varying airspeed. Not really what you want for trouble-free hands-off flying. Ingenious minds considered this problem and trim evolved. The trim tab was invented. Rather than pushing the stick forward manually to make the elevator go down, or have a bungee attached to pull the stick forward, someone decided to use the same aerodynamic forces which pulled on the bungee cord to replace the bungee cord. If you have a trim tab at the trailing edge of the control, it will apply a force to the control surface as it is deflected. This force will be proportional to the airspeed - just as the force on the main control surface. As the trim tab is deflected, the position the control surface returns to if left to move freely in the airflow is changed. Remember that the elevator position determines the angle of attack. The trim tab changes the position the elevator will return to if you take your hands off the stick. Trim tab deflection changes the stable hands-off angle of attack of the aircraft. Of course, to make the nose go up (increased angle of attack), the elevator has to go up (stick aft) and the tab has to push the elevator up. This means the trim tab has to deflect down in order to make the elevator go up. This is, as we have seen in this thread, counter-intuitive to some people. To raise the nose through elevator up deflection, the elevator trim tab deflects down. Now, as aircraft got bigger and faster, the control forces increased beyond what humans could achieve through control wires and pushrods. One way of countering this was to introduce servo tabs. These are similar to trim tabs, but automatically move as the control surface moves. As the elevator goes up, the servo tab always goes down in order to assist the pilot to move the control surface against the air flow. There have also been light aircraft where anti-servo tabs, operating in the opposite fashion, were used to increase the control forces and achieve better control harmony. Some aircraft have no direct connection between the controls in the cockpit and the control surface, relying on servo tabs to fly the control surface which then flies the aircraft. This too has drawbacks, so eventually powered controls were introduced. Hydraulic actuators move the control surfaces in accordance with commands from the pilot. All fine and dandy, except for the fact that the amount of control surface deflection needed, desired and allowable changes with aircraft speed. This didn't use to be a problem. The pilot's limited muscle force automatically limited control surface deflection at higher airspeeds, meaning x Newtons of control force created a smaller control surface deflection at high speed than at low speed. The physics work out so that the anticipated aircraft response to a given applied control force is reasonably similar across the speed range, albeit with a much smaller control deflection at the higher airspeed**. The controls are loose at low airspeed, and as speed increases they feel as if they are stuck in a concrete block. The aerodynamic forces on the control surfaces stop the pilot from applying large control deflections which would overstress the aircraft. With powered controls, the pilot could move the stick full aft at any airspeed and the elevator would go full up. At high airspeed, this would mean instant disaster due to violently over-controlling the aircraft. The pilot also lost the feel for the aircraft and airspeed normally given through the feel of the forces required to move the controls. This was solved through artificial control forces, or q feel (as the letter q is normally used to designate dynamic pressure, a fancier name for the part of air pressure felt on the deflected control surfaces due to airspeed) was introduced. Actuators are used to increase the forces required to move the controls proportional to the airspeed, just as they would be increased by air pressure acting on the control surface in a non-powered control path. (Another method, commonly seen in FBW aircraft, is to have a spring loaded control, with constant control force for a given deflection, but to limit the deflection of the control surface for a given control deflection depending on the airspeed.) Obviously, as powered controls negate the forces created by the airspeed on the control surfaces, they also negate the forces created by the trim tabs, rendering them useless for trimming. With powered controls, trim has to be introduced by somehow biasing the control system actuators instead. This is what we have in the A-10. Powered controls, with a trim system to change the control surface deflection at which the control force felt by the pilot is zero. However, pilots still need to be able to fly the aircraft if the hydraulics go out. Thus, the trim tabs are still there but are only used for trimming if the hydraulics are lost. In normal operation, they augment the hydraulics which also means they will be in more or less the right position if a transfer to a non-powered mode has to be done. On the A-10, the elevator tabs will act as trim tabs in manual reversion (lost hydraulics) mode, while the aileron tabs will act as servo tabs. No trim tabs on the rudders, as they should normally never be out of center for normal flight. Lose an engine with unpowered rudders and you can expect to have one tired leg upon landing, and try to find a runway without too much of a crosswind. As with most things (except flutter and navigation), indicated airspeed is what matters. You trim for an indicated airspeed, which the aircraft will then essentially maintain if left to its own devices (hands-off flight). Cheers, Fred *) Some aircraft are dynamically unstable and will climb/descend ever more violently. That's not a nice behaviour at all, and beyond the scope of this discussion. **) What you are really looking for is essentially a constant G load for a given control force, which makes things nice and predictable. You know what happens when you apply a given force to the stick, regardless of airspeed.

http://ifolder.ru/22586464

Hmmm :huh:try out to Reset your trim. If the Helicopter beginns to turn to the right slowly it is normal then and no Setup Proplem. Or.. turn on Shkval >Auto turn on Target>and let Heading hold on please. The Rudder now should turn the Helicopter into the Direction your Shkval is looking, but make sure there is no Wind in the Mission you try out this. The point is you always have to do something to make YOU fly the Shark, OTHERWISE THE SHARK FLYs YOU. ;) If this doesnt help. POST a TRACK.:thumbup:

Something that helped me a lot was to use Ctrl + Enter (I think that was it) It shows you your rudder and joystick position AND how much you've trimmed it. So when you're in a hover, it should always roughly be trimmed (unless there is high winds) in the same position, once you start to learn the correct positions for ie. Forward flight, Hover, Strafe, Turn, etc. It really becomes quite easy.

To graywo1fg: A buddy and myself have been flying this mission (2 person flight) for a while now and have been having a F'N blast. Played > 3 hours last night. Just wanted to say thanks and hope to encourage more missions. Thanks, Kenco

US Navy ships left Norfolk (VA?) on Wednesday (23/03/11) towards Lybia. According to the Pentagons News Channel (thx mvsgas :thumbup: ) the USS Whidbey Island, USS Mesa Verde and USS Bataan were deployed.

Есть ли новости? 26го будет что-то или нет?

Understanding the concepts of Sensor of Interest (SOI) and Sensor Point of Interest (SPI) and HOTAS control names/fuctions were the important foundation topics for me.

Мысль вырази яснее, без запятых, в буквах слова переставляешь - уменьшаются на один все че- что хотел сказать ? Ты когда печатаешь на компе , если ошибся то слово подчеркнется красным то исправляй .

I don't think you have enough intel to properly model this. ED would have made DCS:Midget if there was enough declassified info by now. If you insist making this mod I suggest that the midget pod features ECM with 10 second spool up so there is no midget blinking.

http://pcper.com/hwlb.php You can check the forum for people with similar setups and just copy what you are seeing as proven stable systems. No geeking.

http://www.youtube.com/user/ExcessiveHeadspace http://www.youtube.com/user/Tigerpwrr http://www.youtube.com/user/SpareTimePilot?feature=mhum#p/c/24181A658668FAC0

И что же это даст? Сейчас вроде стоит 160 км и за это время я успеваю набрать высоту 10 000 и ведомый успевает занять позицию "охват" справа или слева и начать атаку. Просто начинать продумывать свои действия нужно с момента , как только обнаружатся вражеские цели. Нужно сразу определиться, какая задача будет у ведомого и как только 220 дает добро на атаку, сразу выдавать приказы ведомому. Хотя конечно же это моя тактика, но если всеже большинство решит что это нереально то поправим миссию :) П.С. Я конечно понимаю , что оно посчипывает нервишки, когда враг уже вроде недалеко , и уже видно что идет прямо на тебя , а в атаку все непускают и непускают :) Но в этом то и есть загвоздка остросюжетности миссии, так сказать "фабула-фикуса": адреналинчик повыжимать ,да нервишки повоспитывать :)

:smilewink:

Then I advise you to go to the cockpit building section of this forum. All the dimensions are already posted. You just need to use a bit the "search" function. I think there even might be some dimensions in my thread too (see signature).

Building your own cockpit?

I could make an iPhone app for a mission card pretty easily, but I don't have the know how to automatically send the Mission briefing info to the phone... If there's enough interest out there (and nobody else is already working on it) I could make a standalone app that allows you to quickly tap/scroll pertinent info for a mission. My thoughts of the basic most important info (that I usually jot down on a notepad) would be: Flight names and their mission Frequencies Enemy threat types Time on target Any other ideas? Should I begin to write some code?

Yea right the nort african coast is very beautiful this time of the year, If a map is only a map I will like USA or Israel or Dubai, way not???. Less not include actual conflict zones in the DCS series, so we avoid misunderstanding with the families of the death peoples that are suffering now.

That would be the ****. I Gau-8 with some tusks on it. I hope with a Steam advertisement there will be some major sales and a lot more people!!!!! I hope you guys can consider revamping the MP game list to add a lobby so we can more easily teach all the nuggets.

maybe the Heavy should get a Gau-8