Ala13_ManOWar
-
Posts
3501 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Ala13_ManOWar
-
-
That might well be the case, turn auto rudder off and check. If you plan to learn the plane either auto rudder and take off assistance should be off, not just it's "helping", in my experience whenever I forgot or a patch put those on again they are only messing with your controls, to me it's no help at all, specially while taxiing.
-
1
-
-
I believe if he doesn't own the assets pack those missions shouldn't show up in the first place, like when you don't have the map, or module, but maybe they do show in this case for whatever reason, never happened to me since I also own the assets pack. Without the assets pack he won't be able to run those missions, that's obvious.
Anyhow you're right those missions, some of them at least, shouldn't use assets pack since it's not mandatory (some wwii assets are there for free, actually, and those should be used instead), and if mandatory the mission shouldn't show up as they don't for other similar cases when something isn't owned. Actually, he does have TF-51 and Su-25T, I wouldn't know now if TF-51 does have quick missions in the new Normandy map (or the old one, didn't check TBH). That message though, means assets pack if I'm not mistaken, so it might well be the reason why it's not working.
I don't think that might be module related (109) since when you don't have the module those missions just aren't there. If they show they should work. Perhaps the TF-51 check might be worth it. Or, running a repair just in case anything might be wrong in this install since the free wwii stuff are there for everyone.
-
Negative, stick hat and it worked perfectly as intended. That's alike any other button, let's say.
-
Yep, that instrument panel was quite noticeable, but I thought it was a mod, reshade, or whatever that made it look like that.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, motoadve said:
I made this video about smooth landings, power is your friend, speed needs to be spot ON
Of course after you film all of your landings some have to be good ones, which are the ones I show here, all of this are power ON landings, coming slow adding power to arrest the sink rate, so no bounce.
Dunkirk airport in Channel map, is a short one, no floating or bouncing on that one allowed, good place to practice.
Very nice video indeed!! Is that white and orange C182 yours? Beautiful machine
.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, TWC_SLAG said:
DCS shows I have Normandy 2.0. But, I don’t see it listed as a choice when I want to, for instance, run a quick mission. Is it embedded in Normandy, or what?
SLAG
Yes, probably there's no name change, it's just listed as Normandy in quick missions list, but it's the new map if you have it installed.
-
1 hour ago, breezedcs said:
Can you explain how to do this?
Glad you fixed it. I believe that was yesterday's hotfix. In case you need it any other time, in your Windows start menu there should be several options, DCS.exe, cleanup, update, and repair. Sometimes running a repair just makes the trick, it checks the files and download anything it thinks is lacking or wrong, even when it looks like it does nothing sometimes it helps. The updater also runs some repair options after initial check, that also might have helped.
-
"Quite different engine" depends on what you call father and son
.
-
Actually, ASh-82 is a very common engine used even today. Just look for an An-2 or a Dromader and there's your La-7 engine, but not only that since Fw190N newly made not many years ago uses that engine also. Plenty of chances to listen to that engine mates.
BTW, terrific looking star-up and good looking aeroplane. Beautiful, eagerly awaiting for it
.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, jef32 said:
Sorry ManOwar, but it's for the visual. Sometimes the IA of DCS has so strange unrealistics behaviours that are we really seeing the difference if a Lancaster has the same flight model than a B-17 or if a JU-88 flies like a Heinkel 111 ? But we're seeing the visual difference and this difference is important for ambience and realism of this period . So it's just a question of view models and I don't think they need months to create a new visual model and giving it a flight model of a similar plane. We wil not see the difference in fight. I just speak for the IA, not for the flyables planes. I think that the customer buying this map has the rights to use it with many items and planes from these times. Can you imagine buying this map if ED hadn't create some warbirds to use with it ? So, Ok , there are a few warbirds to use on this map, and happily the more famous, the Spitfire, is here, but plenty of others are missing to give to this map, the realism it deserves. Perhaps ED should begin to create these missing planes, only if IA, before selling this map.
No, a Lancaster doesn't have the same FM as a B-17 for sure, but the IA in DCS is being updated actually, in general for new traits (modern jets do stuff they never did before, for instance) but also for WWII is being updated since it needs specific traits for that well different than modern jet stuff. It's been updated several times already, but if I recall correctly it'll be further updated for that, fighters, ground pounders and bombers.
About Pacific scenario, yes it's coming, Hellcat from ED but a Corsair from Magnitude 3 is also coming, that's on final testings apparently, and ED is making also a WWII Marianas map version, plus M3 also is making ground assets for that and a WWII aircraft carrier. We don't know about IA aircraft, but an a6m would be mandatory for all of that and we expect it to come of course. Whatever it is, I mean, yes, all of that is coming mate and we all hope very soon and all together or almost together despite being two separated developers.
-
Have you tried erasing FXO and Metashaders2 folders in Saved Games/DCS folder?
-
Weird, have you tried a running a repair?
-
4 hours ago, jef32 said:
… but for the customer we are, it should be not considered. …
But it should, it should, all the bakers still want to see what they pledged for, including Me262 which has to come at some point and will be the last module related to the infamous kickstarter still not there. Sadly it all is not over yet.
The assets and all you say, of course, I've been hoping for that all to come sooner than later, and they've said many times it has to come, they have said it's not if it's when many times, and they've talked about BoB stuff and all assets they can possibly manage to model. The problem is, and I guess you realized by now, DCS is such a complex simulator that whatever it is it takes several years to develop, which in turn means also it's an expensive business. For instance people ask for "just IA models" so we can flesh out things and all. They have explained several times when we see those "updated" to current standards (have you seen new B-52, or S-3? that kind), or brand new models, that "just IA" takes thousands of man hours to complete, and figures on the hundred thousands $ to finish. Just an IA. Meaning, yes, they want all that to come, but still ED is a relatively small team, it takes so much time, and it's expensive for such a niche market. They do those things and aim for all of that and more in the end, slowly but non stopping, still it takes so much time to develop such a complex thing that many people lose their patience before it happens. -
10 minutes ago, mla306 said:
Does it matter if you are on the open beta version of DCS?
Sorry meant to say if you are NOT on the open beta version of DCS?
It matters all, only OB for now.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, wsbudesign said:
Do you have to be running Beta Version of DCS in order for Normandy 2 to work rather than the full last stable version?
Yes, only Open Beta for now. It's not because of the map but because multithreading needs great polishing since it's a really complex thing.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, jef32 said:
Nobody is saying that but the logic yes. We have a map for the WWII. One of the highest moment of this war was the battle of England, from July to October 1940 ans the blitz in May 1941. No need of winter textures. Then after we have the D-Day and yes, at this time, the Luftwaffe wasn't as very efficient as in the first times of the conflict. But why creating a so interesting map just for a short period of the WWII ?
The problem is we're still dragging the burden RRG kickstarter left behind. Luthier (old Il-2 developer) chose those for the kickstarter, planeset, map, everything, and since they dropped out ED has only tried to honour that kickstarter despite it never belonged to them in the first place, we're stuck with a map choice an a doubtful planeset, but people pledged for that in the kickstarter and that's what ED's tried to do. Now with N2 and size increase it's really enhanced since originally intended Normandy 44 map by RRG was ludicrous in size and details compared even to N1, but still, now it's really something big compared to that. Planeset on the other hand, well we've got a couple non expected planes and the ones chose by Luthier are greatly improved over what they intended to do. Still, bad choice from him and a tough work to fix the mess he left behind. That's why.
-
The thing, apparently is you're assuming "new tech" means something different than what ED means when they say so. Internal new tech, not something you see anywhere in the game itself aside from the actual result of that new tech, is because it allows them for things which were technically impossible in this game previously. Nothing more. It's definitely new tech since they're able to make new things which we haven't seen in this game before. It's new tech since comparing these new maps, not only to LOMAC old map, but even to third parties and ED previous maps, these new maps allow them to make things which were just impossible previously, so since they were impossible we haven't seen those ever before in DCS. And here it's easy, compare old Normandy map to the new one. They aren't just different because they "enhanced" the old one, it's a whole new map using tech unavailable for them back when N1 was first made and released. All of that, bearing in mind it's a proprietary graphic engine which is made by ED either, so they expand that graphical engine and it's possibilities all they can, and continue doing so, otherwise we would still be playing Flanker 2.5 graphics, FM, DM, and all. That's why it's new tech, have you seen those details on the Normandy 2 map ever in DCS? No? Me neither nor anyone, hence there's your new tech, internal new tech for them and developed by them. Stop thinking of other games or whatever, this is all made by ED from the beginning and graphical engine is also made by them. Any changes they make allowing third party and themselves new things not seen previously happen because they developed some new tech allowing them to do so. Just that, and it doesn't mean anything more than that. It's not like they're trying to compare or compete with any other software, that's only in you mind, not in their intentions when they talk about developing this or that new tech (DCS internal new tech, just that).
-
34 minutes ago, jackd said:
Ah, that might be it ...
Sometimes, even if you turned it off previously, patches turn it on again. Check it just in case.
-
Yesterday I tested N2 map and flew Spitfire in a quick mission. Trim worked as intended, but I have them set to my HOTAS. Do they work by mouse clicking/mouse wheel? If they do something might be going on with regards to your bindings. Are you sure they aren't doubled somewhere? Maybe other devices you have connected?
-
27 minutes ago, jackd said:
Guess i'll have to learn handling it then, but right now i am trying to figure out what WW2 planes are worth it ... so far had an itchy start with this spit ...
Have you checked if you turned off the auto rudder and take off assistance? That wobbliness and controls movements you mention sound like those might be turned on, which they are by default.
-
1
-
-
Yeah, probably it was that.
-
17 minutes ago, AlpineGTA said:
Fair points, but why do the two wartime maps, set at the same time on the same date (6/6/1944) not match each other? Maybe one is incorrectly using modern time instead of wartime hours?
Yep, didn't check for different maps. They definitely should boast similar timing regarding that, I guess. What's sure either is you can't use straight historical timings and expect it to match current time or Sun position, they were using a different standard during the war, so operations were noted back then with that timing and it never matches current actual time and Sun position. It's like Germans using Germany time in every front, that's why you see they say sunrise happening on the Eastern Front at 3.00 in the "morning", and weird things on the like.
-
Different products from different developers. Just that. Assets are there, of course they are, and still from time to time we get updates and new units for it.
-
Can't recall exact data, but I recall old posts talking about that and in the end the problem was wartime timing was modified to whatever they needed during the war. The time is correct, it's just you're using modern time while back then they were using another reference for the time in order to synchronize operations in different parts of the globe, or something like that. Long story short, you can't use wartime hours because those were different and many writers, researcher, not to mention amateurs, use those times as absolute when they weren't at all so those never match current time.
Rudder and Elevator trimming not working? - FIXED!
in Bugs and Problems
Posted · Edited by Ala13_ManOWar
Do you realize that "flappering movement", if aids are off, only responds to your control inputs, right? If you don't like to see that (are you flying in external view by the way?) just don't move your controls so much
. If they move on their own your controls might be a little messy mate. Check those potentiometers.