SFJackBauer

Do you work for ED? Have you compared their source code and FSX? Because you may seem very resolute in your ideas, but to me is just something like could have been copied and pasted from the internet. So if you would like to elaborate exactly how DCS does not work in a "CPU bound fashion" (since in your opinion this is the fundamental problem in FSX, which it really isn't), I would love to hear it. I just find it funny that people like to spout about things they don't have a clue about. If you have a better idea of how to make a simulator of the FSX or XPlane scale run better, maybe its time to write a paper about it. Not to say the lack of appreciation for the hard work of those people. I wonder what would be your reaction if someone said some work you done was utter crap without presenting any constructive arguments. Tell me another flight sim that had a detailed ATC, weather, AI traffic (not only air, but on roads and sea), and the drawing distance and ground detail FS had. And that don't run like crap. The problem is some people made their objective to MAX OUT all sliders and install all the possible add-ons and still wanted it to run like butter, instead of enjoying the experience of flying in a simulated environment.

Yeah, visuals are great but... what about the driving feel? It is a good simulation?

"DCS runs crap on my computer". "Of course the problem is you, your computer and your unwillingness to spend more money on it." "FSX runs crap on my computer." "Of course the problem is FSX, that crappy outdated engine". I love it.

Remember Rainbow Six - the old ones, like Rogue Spear? Or the first Ghost Recon? Then go to this page, watch their video, and choose to be a backer.

I recommend the site, bought an ECM pod to jam my neighbors WiFi, worked flawlessly.

Wow I have never heard of it before :) Seems like it would be perfect for racing sims (i use iRacing) when you dont have space for a full blown motion rig. Are they still on business?

DCS need that terrain engine in the OP video :music_whistling:

Does it mean that DCS:Fighter has been in production for 8 months and will get released next month? :music_whistling:

If Mustangs are used as AFAC its not ED fault, its the mission creator fault. Why, instead of rambling about "P51 vs MiG-29" or "P51 vs S-300" no one sees the potential for P-51 X P-51 air combat? I hoped the mind of people that fly simulations were a bit more open... But one thing is sure, its gonna be fun to see the responses when the other DCS project is announced :D

Oh my God, so many people can't see beyond their jet's canopy here? Maybe they are too busy heads-down fiddling with the HSI and TGP :D But I think 90% of these people didn't read the thread or even the first post at all - just the thread title. Props to ED, you have one more buy from me sure enough. Should be fun to fly.

:D

For those who do not mind paying monthly, and want an experience close to professional racing series, there is iRacing (http://www.iracing.com).

They are equivalent to the three-way switch in the Warthog for switching between UHF, VHF FM and VHF AM. It is only useful in missions with realistic radios enabled, otherwise they all have the same functionality (open the comms menu). And thanks to all who expressed their gratitude :thumbup:

Moore's law is not a law per se, more a trend prediction that Gordon Moore did half century ago and proved accurate for the last 50 years. He himself said that it could not continue indefinitely. The processors future lies in innovative manufacturing process that can put more stuff in smaller sizes without electrons crossing the barriers. However a physical barrier will be hit eventually, and hopefully at that moment a quantum computer would have been researched already. He is 100% right. Graphics card processors are constructed specifically to work efficiently mathematical operations on large arrays of simple values - like RGB values of pixels, or XYZ coordinates of triangle vertices. Since some time ago graphics cards were made "programmable" - before their functions were completely hardcoded - to give flexibility to graphical programmers. Hence the "shaders" - programs that run on each pixel or each geometry vertex, written in a human language, and compiled and executed inside the video card, bypassing almost completely the CPU. So any kind of data that falls into that same category - like long sequences of DNA which is made of basic types of proteins - can be processed more efficiently by a VGA chip than a CPU chip. The "shaders" in this case doesn't produce graphical results - only calculation results that are then used in practical ways (or not-so-practical ways, like Seti@home :)).

The computer is a giant minuscule calculator. Take a huge mathematical equation, and try to split it between 5 people so each people solves 1/5th of the equation, and then order them all to work simultaneously and arrive at a correct result. Impossible? No, you must break the equation in parts that are independent from each other first, calculate them, and then do a final step to unite all smaller pieces to achieve a final, single result. Problem is you reach a wall where you can't split anymore parts of the equation in smaller independent pieces, therefore they must be calculated sequentially. Its an analogy, but believe me it is very close to what multi-threading programming is.

Gave it a try, visuals and playability are indeed impressive! But I miss the speed of jets, propellers are not my cup of tea :)

Just put your mic close to the nose :D And an adhesive tape around the mic holes works well as a high-pass filter ;)

Oh thanks for posting, didn't noticed at first. So yes, I will update as soon as I can.

Speed is joking obviously: http://www.whois.net/whois/a-29b.com

CBU-97/105 AKA SFW targets the heat concentration of a tank, therefore most likely hitting its engine from the top. This does not necessarily means the crew is killed, but the tank is very likely to be disabled. It would be good if the sim modelled the difference between a disabled and destroyed AFV.

Sounds like you are in CCIP mode, change to CCRP by cycling the Master Mode button (M key). LGB profiles come by default with CCIP set, I don't know why (who would drop an LGB using CCIP primarily?)

Did you let the CDU display "ALIGN READY" flashing before switching to NAV? In which airfield you were?

I applaud the 104th for thinking outside the little box of "lets stay 100% accurate in relation to history books" and deviate into the fictional realm, while staying plausible. After all this is a computer game which probably will never receive any more love from ED. For 99% accuracy we have DCS series.

Reset your keyboard and joystick shortcuts and try again. By the way, I don't see anywhere anyone putting out sarcastic answers for you. jeffyd123 above posted something unrelated, just that.