Leaderboard

I took these a few months back flying over Georgia. Mt El´brus Coast 1 Coast 2 Coast 3 Moldovka Kutaisi....i think...

Hi guys, I thought the forum members could use a new toy - helpful in daily forum use and especially useful in these tense pre-release days ;) Martin...

I'm really buying one this time! I'll be ordering parts next week, still looking to see what I'll get, but this is basically what I'm looking at. Money is in the bank, but leaving for a business trip June 4-13th and won't have time to start building til around June 16th anyway. Already put orders in with Newegg and Amazon and newegg is cheaper by about $40. Also thinking of getting a 32+ inch LCD TV to use as my main monitor. The price is under $1500 so far, not counting the new TV if I get one. Here it is, just ordered it, can't wait to put it together! G.SKILL Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1866 (PC3 14900) Desktop Memory Item #:N82E16820231550 Return Policy: Memory Standard Return Policy $59.99 ASUS P8Z77-V LE ATX Intel Motherboard Item #:N82E16813131823 Return Policy: Standard Return Policy $164.99 Intel Core i5-2500K 3.3GHz LGA 1155 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor Item #:N82E16819115072 Return Policy: CPU Replacement Only Return Policy $219.99 Crucial M4 CT256M4SSD2 2.5" MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) Item #:N82E16820148442 Return Policy: Limited Replacement Only Return Policy $199.99 Antec Nine Hundred Black Computer Case with Upgraded USB 3.0 With Side Panel Window Item #:N82E16811129021 Return Policy: Limited Replacement Only Return Policy $99.99 Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit Item #:N82E16832116986 Return Policy: Software Standard Return Policy $99.99 Western Digital Caviar Blue 500GB 3.5" SATA 6.0Gb/s Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive Item #:N82E16822136769 Return Policy: Standard Return Policy $74.99 Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Compound Item #:N82E16835100007 Return Policy: Consumable Item Refund Only Return Policy $11.99 ASUS 24X DVD Burner - Bulk Black SATA Model DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS Item #:N82E16827135204 Return Policy: Standard Return Policy $18.99 EVGA GeForce GTX 670 02G-P4-2670-KR Video Card Item #:N82E16814130782 Return Policy: VGA Standard Return Policy $419.99 ZALMAN CNPS9500A-LED 92mm 2 Ball CPU Cooler Item #: N82E16835118223 $44.99 OCZ Fatal1ty 750W Modular Gaming Power Supply compatible with Intel Sandy Bridge Core i3 i5 i7 and AMD Phenom Item #:N82E16817341041 Return Policy: Standard Return Policy $99.99 Grand Total:$1,538

Just kind of tossing an idea around in my head. Does anyone besides me think it would be cool if we could have multiple squadrons participating in a single server? Say three squads are invited to participate, then you could have operations within the scope of CA. Each squadron has their own strike package and callsigns and briefings. And anyone qualified within all three(or however many are participating) squads to be a JTAC could be. Tossing this around seems really exciting for a couple reasons: 1) adds a very real feel to the gameplay regarding working with NATO forces where a FAC might have to communicate with English, US, or any other country, say Egypt or French.. Squadrons involved could also be based around the world to reflect this mix of Nato forces. We'd have to work on the language barrier and such but to me this says "real world ops" considering a citizen never chooses who his allies are, regardless of race, nationality, or language he must work with them. 2) Another reason is the lack of communication. This sounds crazy right. But just stay with me. You get on a server to play with your buddies. 3 or 4 of you are ready to go up. Now it would seem to me to be really cool if you jump in the server and at the base your operating out of there is another squadron who you dont personally know that is also operating there. You dont really have to talk to them besides taxi, takeoff, landing movements and occasionally whenever your crossing flight paths, or entering the same range or AO. Otherwise they do their thing, you do yours. This also says "real world ops" to me. The problems I can foresee: 1)There are servers capable of having 16-20+ clients that I have seen. We may require something better though. 2) A common teamspeak, although this isnt really a problem. Were all pretty friendly around here and I wouldnt imagine anyone would have a problem with opening their ts to another squad or group. The only problem would be if this were a full time thing then both squads would have to come to some kind of agreement on splitting the pricing for a shared ts server. 3) Common language. Although another squadron could typically be from another country the squads involved would have to agree on a common language (sad to say but we already know which one that is) and a common use of brevity and communication guidelines for operations. Snoopy already has this kind of manual and its readily available on the forums I believe. (Give him rep he deserves it). 4) Common JTAC training for anyone wanting to play this position. It must be approved through all participating squads and administered by approved parties within those squads, with some kind of qualification. It must be seriously and formally administered since the operator will be required to communicate effectively and professionally with any flight that enters his airspace. So basically like Hawgsmoke but full time I guess. Any thoughts? Keep in mind when Hawgsmoke happens it will expect the pilots involved to be very professional and follow procedures. With that being said this is not the kind of thing where a couple pilots can show up drunk, fly around and cause trouble, shoot down tankers and friendlies and expect to be welcome. This idea is more of a highly realistic idea of real operations in a NATO environment where everyone is expected to be at their very best, basically like RL pilots, joint exercises, and RL operations. I think it would be pretty awesome.

not really sure. I know the arg plugin can be tricky sometimes. Ive have an animation disappear before..

Get FRAPS and save your screens wherever you want!

Thank´s to both of you for the very fast replies - I only had a quick glance through your links, but this seems to be exactly what I had in mind.... I´ll be back when I encounter my first problems (which I`sure will happen :-) Great forum

Yep, it's pretty simple really, any missions we in the 476th organize will be as realistic as DCS allows at the time. The flight/package organisation and the mission planning process will again be as realistic as we can achieve. So in other words, no air quake. It may well be that the overall ground commander's intent for the operation would be to secure a given position (a couple of the scenarios I've outlined involve just that) but as far as the air element goes that is not so relevant. Each flight will have its mission to carry out as described by their ATO frag, and it may require them to perform any of the roles their aircraft is capable of performing from on-call CAS to interdiction to recce to name but three. I (we) are also looking at the viability of having each participating organisation/flight lead plan their own mission based on their ATO frag tasking, rather than having people simply jump in to a mission where everything is done for them. But much of the stuff we're looking at we want to test out internally first to be sure it works in DCS (it seems to so far). Sov13t, I and others are well aware of the events that have taken place within the lock-on community. I personally have been taking part in multi organisation missions as far back as 1999, before lomac was even released, as I'm sure have many others. But the point is what we (the 476th) at least vision is something very different to what has happened within the FC2 community previously, and they are not what we want to see. Were not planning public events, but rather closed private joint operations between a network of v organizations, much that same that has been happening in the Falcon community for well over a decade. As for FC3 involvement, unless and/or until TARS supports FC3 we at least won't be involving it in any events we plan/host. Without TARS our method of working just isn't possible, and many DCS organisations are in the same boat. What that means, for the time being at least, is that any event the 476th arrange will be for organisations operating full DCS standard aircraft only, simply due to the limitations of FC2/3. Of course should things change in the future we'll be all to happy to bring FC organizations and their fighter cover on board.

I strongly recommend reviewing at least a few different events that took place in FC and FC2 worlds and requesting briefs/debriefs from various squads that hosted them. Don't try to reinvent the wheel. It took years, and lots of failed/rescheduled events to weed out various short comings - which is what I believe some of the more veteran pilots here are saying. I am willing to wager that there are FC2 squadrons out there that are a lot more competent and serious about flying than some that exist within A-10C, especially when it comes to multi-squadron operations where ability of switch flipping means nothing in the grand scheme of things. So it is a bit discouraging to keep reading threads where A-10C pilots come out questioning those who have been around this community much longer and have probably logged far more hours participating in virtual events than they have.

Counting that you guys will be back... Thanks for the years of hosting

On the takeoff from ramp option there's the parking spot number below it.

To be honest, I currently think about all those guys that said "This will never happen", "this is not possible", and such things ;) But you are right, such a project is a fu**ing lot of hard work, and if ED will make this happen...then everyone working for this project has earned my greatest respect. But on the other hand exactly those third party addons is the thing I worry about a little. Who can stop me from making my own fully overpowered super-duper-plane and "own" the servers with it? Hope server admins will be able to select, which addons are allowed and which ones are not ;)

Correct, seems exactly like that... DCS: World is - what's in the name - the environment "World" these Sims plug-into. DCS: World is the Framework with the Caucasus/ Georgia Map the AI, the Mission-Editor, the Vehicles, ships and planes, coming with a free FC2-fidelity SU-25T to try it out on your rig. Then you may decide if you would like a A-10C or a KA-50 or whatever is next, to fly and enjoy personally. No need to buy the KA-50 if you don't fly it. Still others in online Multiplayer can join a mission you fly with the A-10C and support you. With DCS:Combined Arms we get a module players may go and "simulate" the ABCCC role by "only" commanding ground units on the map and airplanes via TeamSpeak, others may join as JTAC on the ground and - as far as I understood - with Fog of War coming, will be able to scout ahead and identify enemy units and engage them as JTAC, or even with an more arcade like "TankCommander" view. First time in DCS you may also take over IR SAMS/AAA like the Tunguska and lure your buddies into a nice trap (engaging last moment when they least expect, and can't evade easily) :D EDIT: multiple snipes here...:gun_sniper: :crazy:

think of DCS:World a being the large files and game engine, and then all the different addons (CA, A10c, KA50, P51,Su25T) use the DCS World files to work. Other names could be DCS:Core....or perhaps just DCS... *edit* ^^ also what he said!

DCS world is the core in which the module i.e. DCS-CA,DCS A-10C etc, or whatever thirdparty addon integrates. So: D/L the core and bye a module and we will all be together online. :thumbup: well.. What he said ^^^

Correct. Oh yes, you forgot the part where, just before you release said bomb, another friend in a Tunguska completely ruins your day by chasing a coupla missiles up your tail-pipe :D DCS World is the core install needed whereto your A-10C module and your CA module is installed to.

As someone mentioned we (the 104th) have OPFOR and our brothers at the 51st have G.I These two are very similar to the event that is planned / mentioned however there are key differences. What this sounds like is something more geared towards a Red Flag style event, which is a different set up from both the events mentioned above. Another person mentioned his squad not flying on FC3. We at the 104th are evolving all our training and squadron work around to get ready for FC3. FC2 will always have a place in our hearts however we intend to hit the ground running as fast as possible with FC3. We like others have set out some very very 'preliminary' plans for a Red Flag style event, once DCS world is fully integrated with FC3, A-10, Black Shark and Combined Arms. A Red Flag event is something the 104 would really like to do in the future further down the line. Or.... We would also be very happy to work 'with' the community to help make a Red Flag to remember, in the future. If there is enough interest from the community and we can all work together like adults.... I think having a 'multi squadron organized Red Flag' would be a seriously good way to get kicking in FC3!!! I want to also say that I 'respectfully' think doing any type of Red Flag event solely in DCS A-10 with no FC3 is a bad idea... I'm not saying anyone has suggested this I just want to point it out. Red Flag as most of you know is about safely escorting a strike package to and from a target area (very simple breakdown of how it works but you get my point) Doing a online Red Flag without real people in FC3 fighter aircraft is not going to be a Red Flag.. it's going to be another bombing exercise with bots. The whole idea in real life is if the Blue Force can't beat the Red Force in the air.... nothing gets through A2G wise. I agree that a DCS A-10C Red Flag would be 'kind of' cool but I want to add one thing to Boberros's signature. Sure fighter Pilots make films, And bomber Pilots make the history........ But Fighter Pilots (some of us anyway) get you safely to where you need to go to make history... and get back to talk about it! ;)

исправили бы уж Combind на Combined

BlueRidgeDx, do I really need to post the FX and LFX engineering requirements? The F-15 was a pure dogfighter...and the F-16 was a pure dogfighter. So was the F-20 and the YF-17 that also competed for the LFX contract. High transonic performance and emphasis on subsonic BFM was part of the requirements for both, the main difference is cost caps, and ferry range for the FX (for euro deployment, to be used from major bases), high turnaround short range operation for the LFX (for frontal airfield deployment near the combat zone). The FX added a 2.5 mach requirement and twin engine requirement, the speed capability was cheated though and achieved through an override of the engine management system, usable only in emergencies since the engines require full tear down maintenance if this is used. They're otherwise speed restricted to 1.78 Mach. The high speed requirement was in response of course to the Foxbat of which little was known, it was assumed that it couldn't handle well as a fighter at combat height but was high altitude specialised, but just in case it was good at combat heights, the speed requirement was added to the FX requirement. Generally the Eagle is a 1.8 Mach range fighter, same as a Viper or a Hornet. In air-air form, no tanks the wing loading is about the same, the Eagle is 20 tons to the Viper's 12 tons combat loaded, depending on the production block it's got up to double the Viper's thrust. Let me find an article by a pilot I've seen before, rating the F-15 supreme in low altitude BFM among the teen series. edit, I managed to glean some interesting technical points after some searching, it's a pretty random collation from various sources,

Nice one Hitman. Are those DX9 or 10?

Thanks for the quick reply! Yeahhhh.... youre right:P It doesn't work in BS2:doh: IMO this is the best sound mod ever made for DCS.

PS: thx ;)

I'm thinking it is probably extensible by lua script...have a ponce around the script directories, you might find where the log book entries are defined, and how to update it yourself )

S! airdog All sorted. Cheers & Thank you!

I have used all of those too Peter. It's a good idea to have posted it here. :thumbup: I just used JoyID's along with AutoHotKey to bind my Warthog pinky lever to control TrackIR, short press is CENTER, long press is PAUSE TrackIR. Here's another one. I found this on some forum in which the problem was a Cougar that would not work on a USB port (or more than one USB port). After using this program to delete all instances referring to "Thrustmaster HOTAS Cougar", the Cougar could connect thru USB again! USBDeview: USBDeview is a small utility that lists all USB devices that currently connected to your computer, as well as all USB devices that you previously used. For each USB device, extended information is displayed: Device name/description, device type, serial number (for mass storage devices), the date/time that device was added, VendorID, ProductID, and more... USBDeview also allows you to uninstall USB devices that you previously used, disconnect USB devices that are currently connected to your computer, as well as to disable and enable USB devices. You can also use USBDeview on a remote computer, as long as you login to that computer with admin user. :pilotfly:

ModelConverterX

А можно будет ли в СА управлять морской техникой или корабельными ЗРК и артиллерией?