Leaderboard

Having trouble finding a parking space for your Ka-50 ? Tired of high fueling prices ? Introducing

It's the latest version. Steam version auto-updates.

:megalol: If you don't count the completely new terrain engine that wen't into it in the mean time, then yeah.;)

Yeah, this clip older than internet:).

That was cool, thanks Phantom. Nate

I have a pc only for my SimPit. The powerline for all the equipment has a switch. If I shut down all components via this switch and restart the pc, windows tries to repair itself. If I just switch the pc out, the start is normal without any problems. If I disconnect the power, windows starts again and tries to fix itself. Any idea what is happening here ? My pc specs are in my footer. I guess the SSD has a problem becoming disconnected from the powerline.

Bhè, un motoelica da 1600 HP è duro si da domare! :) Magari non godrà di un'avionica complessa, ma a giudicare dai prodotti con marchio DCS penso anch'io che non sarà affatto una passeggiata pilotarlo...

For some time I tried to understand and consolidate all altitude readings, in cockpit ones with external view and even that reported by Tacview. Looking only at the readings the cockpit provides (barometric & radar altitudes) I cannot understand some variations and lack of consistency. For example, set up a very simple mission over the sea. Establish level flight and set pressure so that both barometric and radar altimeter give the same reading (4570' AGL = ASL in this case): Go down to 500', and look at both altimeters. Barometric reports 70' more than radar altimeter: OK, 70' is not a great amount of error, but keep in mind I simplified things a lot. If you add external view altitude reading to the equation which I believe is measuring ASL, you can extend the altitude range and observe a few hundred feet variation between 500' ASL and 20000' ASL. Why are we seeing these variation? Is there some kind of effect or error modeled in the sim that induces it?

The painting is finished.. I used the RAL 7046.

Есть не маловажная ХОТЕЛКА! При загрузки из сети миссии клиентом , чтобы была дорожка "загрузка в % ", а не висела просто надпись .... у всех разная скорость и не могут дотерпеть и сбрасывают ибо не видят что миссия качается !! большинство думают что игра зависла !! И это не только касается ГС

Great work there Ivan!

Thanks - BTW: I'm sure it was at 3 by default. - but it wasn't overwritten by the new installation. Most of this kind of problems can be fixed by deleting/moving the "Config" folder in your "saved games" - instead of doing a complete new install. When this folder(s) are deleted manually, DCS will create a new one on the next start-up and all settings a reverted back to default. So, prior to a complete new install, people should always move their Files in their "saved games " folder to see if this will fix the problems. Example: Renaming the the "Config" folder to "Config DCS 1.1.1.1 Backup" will do the trick. While keeping your self-made/downloaded missions and tracks in place. Further: - this should be a mandatory procedure before applying a new patch!

Unfortunately I have given you too much rep already and I need to spread my rep around more. If I could, I would give you 5 Reps! You deserve it. Always helpful and courteous.

Actually I am with you in all your points. FC3 is a waste of time in my eys as well. But we dont have to forget that the Community sitting here in tjhese forums is simply a small part of the Customer base at all. ED can´t just listen to us, they have to listen to their market studies and those seem to confirm that a Mustang would fit the economy plans...they wouldn´t develop any further FC series if it wouldnt worth it...as sad as it is from my and your point of view...

Here are all the airfields you queried plus Anapa as a Free bonus. Headings are all true from Point 1 to Point 2. Since its a great Circle there is both a Start and end heading. Not really relevant over the distances we are talking about though. http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/5505/krascentral.jpg Anapa is weird. In Game the ME Ruler tool gives a value of 041 and the HUD/HSI heading gives 035. Anapa physical orientation is wrong imo on the map. Figures above give Real World orientation of 042T (i.e. 036Mag) Overall the issue is that in the Sim the HUD/HSI heading is incorrect. It is showing as if a Mag Var value of 6 deg West has been applied by the Sim. The ME appears to be correctly displaying Magnetic heading. Anapa orientation is physically incorrect in the scenery. Its error is 6 degrees. QUICK FIX IMO Check the code in the Sim that applies Mag Var to determine current HUD/HSI magnetic heading I think its a typo and is using a westerly correction rather than an Easterly correction. "Variation East Magnetic least" "Variation West Magnetic Best"

DCS will evolve into a modular platform. :)

Try changing their ROE to = Weapons Hold. Fire at point will still work, they will just ignore other targets that "threaten" them.

In Augest when the new revised cards and higher ram comes out, should bring the 1st released down a bit.

Quoted Dump rate FA18A is 600-1000lbs per min and 1300lbs min for the E/F. I don't think this is really relevant though. A clean Hornet suffering a single engine failure will easily be able to climb away on one engine ... no real need to dump fuel to reduce weight. Secondly they were only airborne (if the figure is correct for 55secs). In the scheme of things not a long time to be considering Duel dump etc ... flight path control would have been the prime concern. Only the front seater can initiate Fuel Dump in the A-C Hornets. I think the "Fuel" seen may have been as a result of a major failure rupturing fuel tank s .. like an uncontained engine failure. Like all these events though best to await the actual crash investigation.

Because there will always be error indications. If you leave it alone at the start, I see a roughly 1.7% erroneous indication compared to radar reading, which is extremely satisfactory for a pneumatic instrument. (If I could have that kind of precision IRL I'd be extatic. :D ) If you descend without touching it, error diminshes as far as actual numbers go, and you get no disturbing error when nearing the ground. However, if you change it according to the radar reading when up there, and have that same error (which you will have), after descending 4000 feet you'll have a likely error on the indication of 4000x0,017 = 68, which happens to be exactly what you are seeing. The "problem" is that the error you get will be relative to the point where you aligned it. If you set it such that it will be correct on the ground (where it matters since the biggest part of flying is avoiding the ground), you'll have your error indication up in the air - and the further up you go the bigger the error will be in actual numbers (though it'll remain roughly constant as a percentage, I except). However, obviously, this doesn't matter since you'll switch to STD anyway once at altitude. Now, as for whether there's a bug or something going on - might be. But the error is so small that I'd suspect that removing it would be the unrealistic thing - there's so many things like temperatures, airspeed effects etcetera that can affect a pneumatic altimeter that this looks very good to me. :)

I will buy all of them to support the development of the DCS fighter :)

F/A-18C or I will just sit in my simpit and curse at FSX.

Happy April Fools!