Booger

I never suggested otherwise, I was simply stating what is possible (and more practical to use) now. I would love nothing more than to have an in-game comms engine, but the reality is it probably isn't going to happen anytime soon (it seems the initial idea of doing so was dropped). In my humble opinion, the next best thing would be Spinter's TsSimComms, but unfortunately he's ran into difficulty while developing it for TS3. Still, it requires the installation of TS. The last being what I previously suggested. It's the most ideal option to use with the software that we have currently available.

Although the idea is wonderful for the player, I just don't see what would be so attractive on the business side. One company would have to head the whole thing & pretty much build the base for others to 'hook' in to. To make a little return, that main company would charge other developers to use their "base"...which would be passed on to the consumer (equating to higher prices per aircraft/equipment). Let's not mention the stupid competition that would be going on. There would be 12 different F-16s (11 of which would bitch about others copying their work). No one would agree on dividing up the airframes because they too are in the business of making money. Seriously, the flight sim industry isn't the grand beast we all (I assume) wish it would be.

This is why I love TS to be honest with the ability of sub-channels with channel broadcasting. You can stick your 'flights' in sub channels (you and your wingman in one subchannel, others in their own)--you two can communicate all day long really with no worry about bothering anyone, yet there is still the "open" channel to talk with other elements. Just use a little radio discipline with the open channel & you have the ideal comms setup. I honestly don't know if Vent has the same capability.

Yes we all know 5 is better, but is it really necessary? It's like trying to sell the X-52 to an X-45 owner. It isn't necessary to get a more modern HOTAS when the X-45 will clearly suffice...but the X-52 is obviously better.

The patch will only consolidate numbers on servers, but it won't return pilots into the Shark's pit. I think that's pretty obvious. The number will dwindle even more when the A-10 is released. Seriously, if ED were to release the F/A-18 or F-16 after the A-10, how many of you would fly either previous airframes? VERY few would be my guess--we stick with what we love. Soon the only ones flying BS will be the no-nonsense helo fans.

4 is more than adequate. Ironically, they're running a 'pro' bundle for TIR4+TrackClipPro. It might be worth jumping on. Of course, getting the latest would always be better.

:doh: Shows you how familiar I am with the weaponry. Thanks for the reminder.

Ha! Yeah I've been yelled at a few times after refueling & forgetting to switch back over.

The scope that appears at 0:09?

Not so, I (and a handful of others here) know of at least one. I won't state who he is since it's not my place (his call, not mine) and since he still plays the sim, I would assume he more than likes it.

Exactly. Unfortunately the rocket model isn't accurately portrayed. I can fire rockets, hit reasonably close to infantry, yet they all remain. For a non precision weapon, you have to hit precisely? :music_whistling:

Yeah ditto. Coordinated turns at higher speeds aren't really a problem, but I would say 130 & slower it's still challenging. I think the most difficult thing I've had to deal with is trying to anticipate the aircraft since I (still) expect fixed wing behavior, which may also be part of the problem the original poster is having.

I probably worded it poorly. What I meant to say was the aircraft "hooking" into the engine. I'm no software programming guru, so I'm sure I'm saying it wrong, even if I'm reading it right. Read the post above yours.

Nono, he means upgraded modules, not additional aircraft.

Apologies if I came off aggressively short to you or anyone else in this topic. It just kind of irked me about how this guy is trying to do something he considers fun & is referred to (as I read it) as a friendless idiot for doing it (the "challenge"). I just think it's cool that he's at least trying to do something openly with the BS community. +1 from me for, if anything, the effort.

I know right? Or any helicopter for that matter. I've flown in them many times, only once in the front. I've always enjoyed the fixed wing, but as a child watching shows like A-Team, Airwolf, Blue Thunder, etc (shows/movies that glamorized helicopters) and constantly seeing Cobras flying around, there's always been that interest. Still though, flying fixed wing but a rotor fanboy, I can appreciate (as I'm sure many others) the difference between desktop simulators and sitting in the actual aircraft. Yeah, they're then called "Engineers" :lol:

Yeah, good call on that one. I too had a bit of anxiety on that descent.

uhm... I really hate to point out the obvious, but there's a big difference between poking someone's ribs and kicking them square between the legs.

There was actually a discussion about the OV-10 Bronco in other topics. If I remember right, it was more with the FC2 & BS crossover ones. If you look at the rear panel, mainly the Rocket & Gunpods Ballistics Settings Dial, #1 is the selection for the S8T-sM Missle w/smoke warhead. Some mentioned that in co-op, the Shark can also be equipped as a FAC platform when the aircraft is configured with the above equipment. Whether or not that is an available config option within DCS:BS, I honestly don't know since I haven't personally tested it. Whether or not it's a feasible option to use an attack helicopter as a FAC, eh I guess that can be its own topic. With it being an 'oldie' yet still keeping the interest of some countries, I think that although there really isn't an immediate demand for such an aircraft (that is, if the BS can/would be an optional FAC in co-op), having it eventually would be worth anticipating

It doesn't matter who Sobek, it was a completely ignorant comment for him to say. Honestly, if I knew this would turn into an anti-Spider76 topic, I would have avoided it. Parody is one thing, but damn. All the guy tried to do is get others involved in some friendly competition. There's obviously a little language barrier there, but his intent was no less spirited. For that alone, I'll gladly accept being a "candidate for casting".

This was covered (I believe) in either a post here or in the Trim Developer's Notes. You only have a certain amount of time after trimming to center your controls before your current adjustment is in addition to the trim setting. Trim, neutral controls, then adjust.

You don't want ur is teh glory Toast? I think it would be neat having ur is teh glory.

Sorry for DP... Snafu, after doing a little hunting I found this post in the FAQ that should shed a little more light on trim.

RCTRL+Enter It's all in the controls .pdf under the /Docs/ directory...an excellent reference.

The comment cracked me up.. Still, 9 projectors ran by 120 computers? Yeah, good luck getting the wife to agree to THAT pit.