Leaderboard

This mod will turn off all the immersion killing status update messages seen in multiplayer in DCS:A-10C and DCS:Black Shark 2. All 'player has kill XXXX', 'X has joined in A-10C', 'X was killed by X' etc messages will no longer be seen when this mod is installed. The only messages not disabled are the screenshot notifications. With this mod installed you'll actually need to confirm you've killed the target. Installation instructions included in the readme. DCS Multiplayer Message Removal Mod.zip

Third generation ANVIS NVGs work in the range of 570-930 nanometers. Litening TGP has three types of lasers: - Non-eyesafe (combat) laser - 1064 nanometers. - Eyesafe (training) laser - 1570 nanometers. - Laser marker (IR pointer) - 808 nanometers.

:music_whistling:

Installation via Modman Download BS2 Blue Pit v1.2

My guess: you will able to purchase a full version FC3 or a cheaper "update" patch if you have FC2 installed. Just like BS-BS2. I think LOMAC/FC1, "ubisoft" will not be a criteria. Perhaps :smilewink:

The avionics of the A-10C are constantly getting updated, the "suite" we have in the sim is older than the latest suite currently available.

Even better...A Mig-28:lol: That settles it, it's the Super Hornet. :megalol:

А я тут запустил freeflight, лечу себе в горы, любуюсь... Обратил внимание на облачность, смотрю, маленькое облачко, думаю странно откуда оно тут. Вот из таких маленьких вырастают большие кумулонимбусы... И тут раз! Оно выросло!:blink: "А ещё вырасти?" /Ctrl+Z+Z+Z/ Оно совсем большое стало! Короче пока вживую не увидел, не поверил в dynamic atmosphere.:thumbup:

Almost finished The next pictures show the cockpit in it's current state.Unfortunately i don't have pictures of how it was build (always check before deleting a memory card). For the instrumentation i build a Samsung 21,5 Inch lcd screen on the back of the panel (witch just fits in) Using LOVP (Lockon virtual panel) so the most instruments are working. (when in outside view i can actually fly the plane with the panel:)). And front panel. More to come. Cheers!

Большая просьба в будущем ЛОГС совместить возможность выбора подвески через НОП из некоего стандартного списка, без прерывания вылета, с возможностью создания "кастомной подвески" перед вылетом, как это было в первом ЛОГС! Это очень актуально во время сетевых баталий, когда задачи меняются по ходу миссии.

O-wjtP90d_g

Almost three years of training and still learning.

Yes Hellfrog. BS2 upgrade and great night flights now the NVG bug is corrected in multi screen. Time to have my pit ready for night flying! Once my office lights off, headset and NVG on, I have to say I am in pit building heaven. :P Detail on the right panel where I used an array of 12V blue leds strip: :prop:

I have it and is very good and precise. No failure in 1 year.

First, I saw 30% figured in this thread as the power lost to the rotor disk due to gearing the tail-rotor. That's high. It might be true on some helicopters at a narrow data point along their speed/altitude/mass range but it is not typical. Second, where is the fabulous yaw rate? The initial hovering yaw rate of the Ka50 (as modeled by ED) is pathetic. That low power in yaw makes the "unlimited sideslip" velocity sort of irrelevant because above 100 kph you run out of yaw authority anyway. Plus, the videos of the Commanche demonstrated what appeared to me to be much better sideslip performance and initial yaw-rate than I have ever managed with the 'Shark. If they want to sell the Ka50 based on the small rotor diameter for ship borne use then I certainly see the value. Same is true for high altitude OGE hover performance. Other than that, I think the coaxial advantages way oversold. None of this has stopped me from enjoying the hell out of BS since its release.

Design is a very practical thing that also depends on experience. So this argument is only poor if you disregard that a reliable design needs "experience", by being confronted with a lot of different empirical situations, be it through testing, experiments or having used it in a lot of different conditions... But since that has never been the case (the bicycle is a rather new invention, compared to a four wheeler - not limiting a car to an automobile). It further obscures the argument by making it an universal question, rendering particular circumstances under which a car or bicycle have value irrelevant. Being better or best is a (normative) question that (at least) depends on what your aim, means and circumstances are. You always have to specify being better with regard to, under what circumstances and so on... While not having read the manual (:poster_oops: flying what shark? - here comes a universal presupposition about how is often argued for new designs), I suspect that things that could make it look like propaganda is to be a bit too bold with the universal potential of this particular design. A modern sports car might get you easier than legs from A-B when roads are present it might not have been so easy without roads, gas stations, oil rigs and so on... Circumstances change and that particular design might become more viable than others. Paving the road, so to speak, for the coaxial rotor is probably going to get it going in some direction, for some time, for some people in some places... If it is done right ;) If you already have a conventional helicopter and the whole sociotechnical infrastructure for this particular design, you might be hesitant about putting another rotor disc on top of that ;)

I think one of the best ways to advertise is through youtube. I know many who have purchased this sim after watching videos like mine and Glowing Amraams.

I found that screen on the russian part of the forums :D Imagine the Su-25 with USAF insignia :doh: For those unfamiliar with cyrillic it says "Russian AF" on the engines.

"Single rotor designs are best" because that is what "we have experience with" is a pretty poor argument. Yes, experience is good, and initially may be a benefit over a new design, but if you don't try another design, you will never advance. Imagine if they argued that the cycle is better than the car as we have more experience with them!!! Best regards, Tango.

You got to be kidding me:music_whistling: I think our community is very patient however a lot of people (I'll speak for myself); I'm fed up with the wait for a DCS quality fighter. Since LOMAC was released I graduated University, started my career, got married, had 2 kids and purchased a home....yeah I've been patient lol. /end rant

Если найдете ошибки, пишите здесь. TARGET_User_Manual_v1.6_RUS.pdf TARGET_User_Manual_v1.6_RUS_TEXT.pdf

It depends on your definition of killing a tank. I mean if the missile impacts and: one of two things, 1- The tank explodes immediately just like a light hummvee? 2- The tank ignites fire under the tracks and then kaboom. In BS1, #2 above happens alot with a vikhr on turret back/ drum set (I T-bagged your drumset! lol) In BS2, well, waiting input cuz I dont have it, now that the pilot corpse is gone..:mad::mad::mad:

Same with DCS Black Shark... If you want to be picky on that also than the list will go on and on for that game also. Maybe its the closest thing to reality simms we have now. But its still not reality and we can find tons and tons of things that are not implemented or not done right. So.. Ze list goes on for DCS also. Look at it from the game its own perspective... DCS and FC2 are awesome and my personal fav's and everybody knows they are one or maybe the best simm out there. But your sounding so arrogant with that comment. Like if you dont have all that stuff its instantly rubbish... Maybe it is for you. But TOH is actually a great game and simmulates enough to be called a light simm. And its extremely fun to play. Seems fun isn't in your dicionary..... only FULL boring realism flying only training missions with the Black Shark because the Real life pilots in the blackshark do the same. I can understand people wont like the game.. but some comments on this forum are only from their own personal perspective without seeing the bigger picture. Especially form the ED tester TEAM. Its the same attitude as with Falcon. Thats a fantastic flight simm also but its talked down on these forums like it is some kind of HAWX.

^^ people just don't know anymore what ED can and can't do.

You don't know that!:mad:

Наверное имелись в виду Р-27. Хотя ИМХО они в ближнем получше, чем например Р-60, а в целом в ЛО лучше ракеты, у которых больший запас энергии. Как объяснить то, что от сверхманевренной Р-73 на всех дальностях гарантированно помогает уйти правильно выполненная кадушка, а от менее маневренной АИМ-120 нет?

Okay, Call me wrong if you like but this is from an actual helicopter engineer... and the one who was the lead test engineer for the comanche to boot! [/url] Hey, why didn't we ever make a coaxial helicopter? Him: Simple - the design never met anyone's mission requirements. Watch this space, though - Sikorsky's X-2 is going to try it again.June 2 at 5:59pm · Me: I can understand that, but requirements aside it seems to me like its just a better design than a main/anti torque design...June 2 at 6:43pm · Him: Define "better." Give examples. Yes, this is a test.June 2 at 8:17pm · Me: Well I'm not helicopter engineer, but with a conventional system you have power from the engine that goes to the anti torque rotor, one way or another. That power is used ONLY to maintain heading and combat the torque effect of the main rotor. With a coaxial design, 2 main rotors moving in opposite directions, torque is canceled out as you have two rotors moving at the same speed in opposite directions. But since they both produce lift, and work together, no engine power is "wasted" on maintaining heading. You also dont have issues with things like cross coupling and whatnot. So where am I wrong? why aren't all helicopters coaxial?June 2 at 8:35pm · Him: Generally speaking, what would the difference in rotor system weight be for the coaxial vs main rotor/tail rotor, given identical cruise speed and payload requirements?June 2 at 10:12pm · Me: ...ah. So the coaxial system would weigh a crapton more, because you now have two main rotor disks instead of one, thus reducing the usable payload and giving it a slower speed due to the increased overall weight. so by "requirements" you mean more payload is needed more than the efficiency of a coaxial system, and a traditional main/anti torque system fits the bill better... am I warm?June 2 at 10:17pm · Him:You're getting there. Why would the coax weigh more? I'll give you one fact to play with - Lift is proportional to total disk area. With two disks, the total area of both disks for a coax will equal the area of the single disk of a conventional for a given amount of lift.June 2 at 10:21pm · Me: Because you have twice as many rotors? usually? I mean two rotor disks, even if they're smaller, is going to weigh more than a traditional one. But if lift is proportional to disk area, shouldn't the coax have twice as much lift? making the increased weight worth it? I can't think of another reason why the coax would weigh more... I mean traditional and coax both use two engines...June 2 at 10:24pm · Him: One step further. For a given lift (=aircraft weight), the area of the two rotors (coax) = the area of the single rotor (conventional), meaning smaller blades for the coax. Totatl rotor blade weight is thus roughly comparable. What's left to be different between the two?June 2 at 10:27pm · Me: Jeeze. the collective system? I really can't think of anything else!June 2 at 10:39pm · Him: That's part of it - controls. The other part is driveshafts and mounting structure. The lower rotor of the coax will be roughly the height of the single. The upper will be much further up, to keep the rotors from "shaking hands" as the disks tilt (forward blade up, retreating blade down). That means a long drive shaft. Then you've got the double swashplate and pitch rods, plus gearing to drive two rotors in opposite directions. Finally, that upper rotor is way up there, increasing moments and thus loads at the point the transmission mounts to the airframe, meaning much heavier mounts. So, for a given amount of lift, and an equal airspeed requirement, the coax has a heavier rotor system weight, therefore a lower payload.June 2 at 10:46pm · Me: And all of that really weighs that much? even with the newer alloys and whatnot we use these days?June 2 at 10:48pm · Him: Both systems get exactly the same benefit from advanced materials in terms of percentage weight reduction, so that's a wash. Even if you're just an airplane driver, you should learn to think like an engineer - there WILL come a time when the airplane isn't doing what you expect it to, and that ability to figure out why things are happening will save your sorry ass.June 2 at 10:50pm · Me: Believe me I know it. They drill it into us at school, and i've had it happen to me in EFMS class. I've also taken systems and components, turbines, and jet transport systems but I haven't studied helicopters at all. anything I know about them is due to my own interest, not due to my schoolJune 2 at 10:57pm · Him:Sounds like you got it.

Wait. We can't have true IADS capability? Each system operates as a stand alone? Lame.

Gosh....your wife wasn't in the mood last night?

Круг вокруг аэродрома, это зона аэродрома. Будет связана с менеджером ресурсов. Пока ничего не обозначает. 67Х это место и канал ТАКАНа.

Сделайте галочку в настройках управления "Применить для всех самолетов". Очень неудобно менять назначения одних и тех же клавиш для всей техники...

Даже для старых можно добавить? У вас получалось? У меня просто не получилось добавить новые окраски к для старых моделей.

Не надо сравнивать, хоть и сам частенько этим грешу... даже если ЛО или ДКС начнут продавать по 1 копейке, с Ил-2 по объемам не сравнится, тут дело не только в цене. Тебе ЛОГС2 не нравится уже потому, что в нем читерские ракеты по сравнению с ЛОГС1, а гораздо большему количеству народа ракеты не нравятся в приципе, но это опять таки вторично... ОМ клево подгадал с временным сеттингом, по сравнению с игрой про глобальную и самую жестокую реальную войну, с эпическими воздушными битвами, ЛО и ДКС - вообще не о чем, отличие от СтарВорс только в якобы реальной технике...

Мое мнение, что продажами надо заниматься. У вас есть отдел продаж? Сравниваю с ИЛ2. Видел в магазинах примотки диска ил2 к джойстикам и дополнительную выкладку в отделе где продаются джойстики, пиар опять же в СМИ. Вот ты говоришь продажи слабые. Товар, чтобы он продавался надо в 1 очередь поставить на полку магазина. Есть товар который продает себя сам, а есть тот который надо продавать... Я в городе миллионнике нашел диск только в паре магазинов. ИЛ2 в каждом втором. Не разбираюсь в продажах программ, наверняка тут есть подводные камни. Но я уверен, что игра продукт импульсного спроса и при грамотном подходе продажи можно увеличить в разы.

Не твоего ума дело. Я тебе ничем не обязан.

Ну а раз консенсус найден, то вопрос к alert все еще остается открытым. :)

I got the caution panel finished from a fabrication stand point last night. Here is the backplate after painting. And here is the faceplate after painting and then after engraving. And finally here it is with a few indicators lit. Sorry it's a little fuzzy. I'll try and retake one tonight, but it's hard to get my phone to focus on the lit areas. Tonight I have to solder another 32 LEDs and mount the Phidgets board on the standoffs.