Conure

Thanks a lot guys :)

Well, my TAD monitor died and I forgot how to switch the left screen on to the right :D

Hey all, Been practising JTAC and realised that after ive accepted a position and it's hooked, I can't work out how to "unhook" and return t normal nav mode with the VVI etc. How is this done? Just cant work it out! Thanks..!

Go for 1.1.0.8. Cockpit shadows are beautiful and we have no idea how long it'll take for 1.1.0.9. Oh, and on my rig I get a very very smooth FPS at almost maxed out graphics at 1900-1200. Bear in mind I run monitors at 256 and have water on low though. (I kinda lied, that's not nearly maxed out graphics at all, is it!)

Me too, the X52 does have a bit of a hardware dead zone - Does the Warthog just have perfect tracking from the moment you apply the tiniest force?

Challenge risen to. I will produce a video of me AAR with an X52 pro!

Hi all, I have only played RoF since the Iron Cross addon came out. Is CoD currently in a worse state than RoF was upon release? If so it could mean good things for CoD as I have heard RoF was awful, and now it's generally accepted as one of the best sims going - along with DCS. Just curious!

Oh, and obviously I understand that from a marketing point of view a Sim that only ran on those specs wouldn't be plausible, but isn't the technology there? It would be nice to see these sort of things in the near future...Games like IL2:COD, although apparently a train wreck, really show the way graphics are going for us Simmers. A10 can be absolutely beautiful at times, if not for that terrible terrain they've been using since before the Wright Brothers first took to the sky......

I'm not programmer, but I think I an interject with some naive common sense. It seems to me that at the moment, whichever game I play, all four of my CPU cores are never maxed out. Further, it doesn't seem implausible to have 8x cores on a CPU, we have 6 already. Maybe we do already have 8. Is it not then safe to assume that with a 6core CPU @ 4ghz + per core, or an 8 core CPU with the same spec, coupled with sufficiently programmed software that makes absolute maximum use of every single core, that some of these wishes could become fact? Let's be honest, a decent quadcore at 4ghz maxes this game with ease...Double that and can't the other 2 or 4 cores not handle all the graphics and environment physics effects going? It seems that it's less a limitation of technology (as our technology can be stacked, for example SLI, multicore CPUS), and more a limitation of software programming to make full use of a computers available potential. With sufficient programming capabilities, would it not be possible to divide a game as follows: Core 1 - Flight dynamics and avionics Core 2 - Ballistics Core 3 - Friendly AI Core 4 - Enemy AI Core 5 - Environment processing Core 6 - something else that needs doing...Repeat until core limit reached... Apply the same process to the new multi GPU cards, one for water, one for terrain etc etc... Do we really need a quantum computing for this?! From a non educated point of view, I can't understand why it isn't possible with current technology to have games that look like Crysis, are as realistic as DCS A10 and have ground level AI on a level of Shogun 2: Total War. Considering all of these games currently run fine on a dual core processor...Perhaps I'm wrong, and if so...Why?

Hi mate, I understand your frustration but as somebody that has played since early Beta on quite a few flight simulations, part of our community involves learning, growing with and developing the product. It can be frustrating but it's a highly involved community and, in my opinion, well worth spending time pointing out issues and helping to improve things.

Sorry, close though :) Thanks very much for your vids, they've helped me no end with landings etc.

Potential Xbox 360 exclusive? It's tougher to pirate there, I hear.

Hey, are you BrandyTyran?

Hi all, could anybody let me know what kind of performance/graphics I can expect on from this sim at 1900-1200 on my rig in the signature? cheers :)

Ah cheers, so they're a loose guide to intercepting the glide slope, at which point you use theHSI and triangle on the ADI?

How does “Microsoft Flight” differ from “Flight Simulator?” Why the new name? What’s changed? A: With “Microsoft Flight” we’re approaching the virtual flight genre from the ground up, with the focus on the universal appeal of the experience of Flight. We believe the simplicity of “Microsoft Flight” perfectly captures that vision while welcoming the millions of existing Flight Simulator fans I don't think Flight is going to be much competition. They won't be able to balance the game to be great for newcomers and hardcore vets. Microsoft can't even make their previous iterations run properly!

Hmm, I don't understand? I've been using the yellow bars just fine for my approaches? that said I 've used them as a rough guide then I fly the final 50 or so feet with my eyes....

It is working now but thank you very much for the offer :-)

Thank you all very much, makes perfect sense now :) I presume the heading that ATC give you is the heading which perfectly places you in a position to intercept the (eg, 270o) to land on the runway? Thanks again :)

Hey all, Just a question to satisfy my curiousity really.. When I approach an airfield to land, particularly with ils I set my heading on the hsi. For the sake of simplicity let's say I am landing.on a runway 27 with an exact heading of 270 degrees...why then does that 270 degree steer me exactly onto the runway? Isn't 270 degrees a heading relative to me rather than a universal heading? For example a heading of 270 from where I am in london is certainly not the same as 270 for somebody in mexico, I would imagine?? Why then does this heading work so well at lining me up with a runway? I may have worded this so poorly that no one will understand! Cheers

Thanks so much!

Infact to simplify my question, it seems I am simply asking, how can I create 2 (or more) independent waypoints on the CDU using lat/long coords?!

Hi all, Wondering if somebody could help me. I'm setting up a navigation test to make sure my nav is up to scratch and...It isn't. I'm plotting a flight plan in bad weather at night using only coordinates manually entered into the CDU for the first few airports, then using TACAN and ILS nav...So, I'm trying to set up my flight on the ground as follows... WP1 - lat/long coords WP2 - lat/long coords WP3 - TACAN WP4 - TACAN Tacan is fine, that's easy enough to change, and in theory my first two flights should consist of just punching in the coords, however, I want to set up a flight plan and am unsure how! Whenever I create a waypoint I can enter it into my FPM fine, but, when I switch back to create another WP for my second landing, it overwrites the first. eg if I make WP1 and load WP1 into my FPM, then click WP and make a WP2, it overwrites WP1 and replaced it in my FPM with WP2. Does this make sense? I presume I'm overwriting rather than creating a new WP, hope someone can help! :) Thanks

Have there been any official statements that 256 is more realistic on the monitor displays?

Thanks Dragon, I have been using them and they are of great help - you are awesome :)