Demongornot

I want the Mig

Avast for a Free Antivirus is not bad, but this is the king of false positive alert, at least unlike previously he now also detect virus ! :lol:

Don't read comment just the original post, but, well even if i play music while flying, i will say no, it will require more work to the dev for...Nothing, their is plenty of way to listen music actually, including running a media player on background. BUT the idea make me think about something else ! What about this : http://www.liveatc.net ? I have always wondering why FSX (or X Planes) have never include REAL chatter (on background of course) on various frequency in game which will be linked to real one, imagine you are flying around the airport next to Las Vegas (once Nevada map get released) and you hear IRL chatter in real time of real plane actually landing/take off and operating at this position, i will enjoy it personally !

Ah oui peux être un numéro de série, ça date de tellement longtemps que je ne me rappel plus, en tout cas j'ai eu la version CD et je me rappel que avec FC1 j'avais eu des problèmes de drivers qui avaient empêcher mon Windows de démarrer comme beaucoup l'on eu, j'ai jamais su qu'il y avais une versions téléchargeable en fait.

Je pense que oui, DCS World dois être sur Starforce. MAIS ! mais, à part le nombre d'activations limitées (et je pense que si tu arrives en bout tu peux demander à ED d'en avoir d'autres), ça n'as plus rien à voir avec celui de l'époque de LockOn (avec FC je crois) qui était vraiment, vraiment, vraiment nul, dans DCS World on rentre juste la clef CD. Mais j'avoue que à l'époque avec LockOn ou on devaient installez les drivers Starforce qui pouvaient corrompre notre installation Windows, c'était une plaie ! Mais aujourd'hui pas de soucis, on rentre juste la clef comme pour n'importe quel autres jeux ! En espérant avoir répondu à la question :)

This is cause when we look back like that, we are supposed to also move our body, but their is no animations for moving body in DCS World actually, so when we move our view we just move a camera, not a head on a body, it can only be fixed by disable pilot body when looking back or create animations for the body that will be sync with the camera movement. So i think we will not see any fix soon, the P51D Mustang also have this problem since its release !

Strange, i have try to find the control for pilot body since basically BS2 was release and i have never see it on the controls... And i mean that ED basically change a lot of things every patch, too much in fact and some mods stop to work, modder are sometimes forced to almost rewrite completely mods for almost each new version of DCS, it happen for almost every mods, PeterP have done a kneeboards mods, and it just don't work with newer versions, it have too much issues... Or example from here : http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2116018&postcount=40 It happen everytimes in DCS, so mods are not a viable long term solution. Anyway, like Wolf Rider say, it should be present (since it make no sense to not have it) but optional and off by default, but still be togglable like it is for the P51D/TF51D Mustang !

Are you sure that EDGE/DCS 2.0 won't be release sooner than you might think ? It look like everyone think that EDGE = NTTR and that both will be release in the same time... Don't you remember that http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=129972 ? I don't even think that this map can work without EDGE since its build for it, and since NTTR will be release for December, their is IMHO a change to see EDGE just after the 1.2.11 So EDGE/DCS 2.0 maybe will come end November/early December i think ! But of course it is just what i think ! By the way very nice newletter, thanks ED ! Sadly we have no more new on the Hornet, i would like to know how much percent of work was done on it !

Hope, their is no Pilot Body in BS2, or it was reintroduced some 2/3 month ago then... And yes, but this is a MOD, and every mod in DCS come to be useless after 2/3 patch cause ED change for idk what reason everything in the way the sim work (without really improve it by the way) every patch...

I really hope that DCS 2.0 will have sound improvements, cause this sim have a too ridiculously loud engine sound, yes like state MTFDarkEagle IRL one are loud, but that not a reason to make players deaf...Its a sim, if we lower the engine sound, it reduce the distance it can be hear, its actually too short compare to IRL (where we can hear airliner cruising FL300, in DCS we can't hear over 3Km), and if we want a correct level, we cannot open cockpit or use external view, everytime someone make a low pass over us with open cockpit, i feel like my ears will explode, and i have lowered the engine sound slider, but still too much loud... Simulate how aircraft work don't mean force the player to use ears protection IRL for playing the sim... What the next step ? C4 under our joystick that will explode and kill us IRL if we crash on the sim ? Something that will choke us irl when in the sim we have hypoxia ? Here look at (for example) this video and notice the volume difference between external and internal sound, that TOO MUCH ! Even the sound feel like it make headphone/speakers saturate...And NO this is not a effect from youtube compression, it that do the same in DCS. Realistic or not, nothing justify the completely unbalanced level of sound between open and close cockpit, it should in fact be optional and disabled per default... And i have anyway in the past make and show a video that prove that the actual DCS sound engine is completely wrong in all aspect except sound speed, but everything else is wrong, from Doppler to distance. I really hope DCS 2.0 will have a really new sound engine and that ED will finally realize that this is TOO LOUD, seriously, even in Youtube, the ONLY video i'm forced to mute or lower the sound are...Guess what ? Yes DCS video ! Sound volume need normalization.

Like Laurius say, thanks a lot Ralfidude for your amazing video, always a pleasure to watch them !

I think in picture and every missing visual things is a complete immersion killer for me, mainly no body on the seat which is not logic at all... So i can only agree with that ! But in BS1 we was able to toggle pilot body on/off, and it was removed for BS2, i don't know why, so it can make think that ED are not positive with the idea of pilot body, but the P51D Mustang have one, so its a complete non sense of why ED don't include it... Anyway the best thing will be the possibility to have it, those who don't like it, simply don't enabled it, and it permit to everyone who want to have it ! In the mustang i always enabled it except when i need to see something behind a gauge, i disable then re-enable it. Think that is should not be (re)implemented its like thinking that Oculus Rift support should not be in the game since (like ED state before) we can't see keyboard buttons while wearing Oculus rift...Yes but i don't think that every HOTAS Warthog owner that have an Oculus Rift are against this implementation. It seam logic that the body will be "optional" like it is on the Mustang, so their is no reason to refuse it ! And for avoid ED's 3D artist to work on it rather than others projects, well just allow unofficial 3D creation to become part of the game, after all RICARDO have become a ED partners ! And we NEED better kneeboard with custom page PER MISSIONS and PER AIRCRAFT, some will use it for remember startup sequence/put emergency procedure (mainly with all the new aircraft that was released and those planed), notes and others memo, flight plan or simply payload, and having a kneeboard that float over the seat or appear on the screen and NEED to be toggle is not a good idea, togglable body that have kneeboard which will be also toggle (like in the Mustang) will be a nice solution ! After all we already have 3D pilot body (when you eject) that can be see on first person without animation/3D model issue. + it will be the best opportunity to include something like the PeterP's Reworked Cockpit Views with proper Neck : http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=96116 And if like SharpeXB state, it can be bad for some people to see headless body when we look at our 6, some feel exactly the same with no body under the head, the fix will be to make the body moving with the camera, of course it require an animation, but if the body work with a skeleton based animation, a single will be necessary for every aircraft, and not really an animation since it move under 3 DOF with our camera control unlike landing gear or P51D ejection which are both animations, its a "camera controlled moving skeleton animation" sorry but if its not clear but i don't see others way to explain it !

Even if i like the A-6, he is NOT a BOMBER, he is a ground attack aircraft, exactly like the A-10, or (my favorite ground attack) SU-34 ! For a bomber, well of course i will like to flight the beautiful B-17, this is a shame that no one have done it, DCS WW2 have only it as a pledge goal which is stupid, this is by far the best bomber ever, hard to flight, not 1 but 4 engine to manage, having to flight to the right spot at the right altitude and having a guy that release bombs, having ton of guns that can shoot in all direction any fighter that come too close... But their is too much WW2 plane, even if this one is a nice to have, always fighters and small aircraft it is nice but... Anyway, if i have to make a choice, except the B-17, it will be between the F-111 and the B-1B, both are two great aircraft ! The F-111 with his incredible dump and burn ability http://www.militarydesktop.com/data/media/2179/F_111_Aardvark_56439.jpg And his ejection cockpit as a capsule ! And its interesting moving wings, but also his small size for a bomber which make him probably really agile http://media.nara.gov/stillpix/330-cfd/1988/DF-ST-88-05713.jpeg Or the B-1B which is beautiful http://www.acc.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/050207-F-2907C-253.jpg He have style, speed, stealth (even if it mean nothing), low altitude and agile flight ability despite of his size, crew of 4, nice equipment ! He is a train of bombs http://laconqueteduciel.free.fr/images/b-1b_4.jpg He also have like the F-111 moving wings and its a nice bomber, far from things such as B-52 or B-2 which almost only make high altitude flight for LOOOONG duration/distance, which will be nice for hardcore people who create a cockpit, but a pain and quickly boring for others peoples, with the B-2 we have train of bombs, big and complex machine, and actions http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_8_4GnCTp578/TDv3M7gNZvI/AAAAAAAABY4/UR_GI6SakWg/s1600/B1B_2ship_Flares.jpg And it is not a small/toy size And damn it one of his mission is to buzz the enemy, flight low at high speed, that what we all take fun to do in free flight, flight low and fast, which mean one of his objective is to do what we do for fun, it will be the best bomber ever in DCS !

I was talking about adjustment.

The issue with DCS is that for simulate the fact that in-cockpit sound is lowered, the actual external sound is ridiculously too much loud, seriously the difference between in cockpit and external sound is ridiculously too much, yes this is a simulation, but this is also a video game, it don't wort to become deaf just for having a realistic sound level reproduction... The issue is that if we lower external sound (or make internal louder) the sound distance which is actually false (too short, irl we can hear airliner at cruiser altitude over FL300 and in DCS we can't) it will lower even more the distance... Pleases dev !!! Make a better sound level, we don't need to become deaf just for having realism !

And you ? Are you expert in aeronautic ? an aircraft designer ? or strategic advisor on pentagon ? F-35 its the worst aircraft ever, period. All argument in the video i have link is valid, and the guy have "only" create the F-16 (co-designer) and he know what he talk about, even the guy who manage all the test around the aircraft, he is a general if i remember correctly, he simply try to defend this flying thing but he clearly sometimes explain that the aircraft is bad. Explain me why i don't know what i'm talking about and i'll seriously look forward to this, but actually i have arguments, valid and reals ones, and you don't. Even the first time i "saw" this aircraft many years ago i know way before heard any arguments about it that this will be a bad aircraft. The ONLY potential good things can be the STOL and its really badly done compare to others aircraft like the harrier... Even the people that make this aircraft know that he is so bad to turn that they have prefer to include a feature (that will fail most of the time anyway) that is supposed to shoot missiles behind the aircraft... So yes the F-35 is useless and the worst ever.

If you want for the F-35 but ONLY if this "thing" don't delay others aircraft... Seriously this aircraft its not yet finish, they have not yet test the high performance flight envelope et actually if this aircraft is hit by a lightning, it explode... And even finish, it will still be one of the worst aircraft ever... and That's why the kickstarter campaign fail, cause even virtually, their is not that much people that want this "thing" If we talk about Stealth, i will like to see the B-1B Rafale with technology assisted's stealth which is one of the best aircraft actually available, he have prove that he have defeat the Raptor, its rivals the Eurofighter Typhoon is also nice. But damn the Su-35 and mainly the Mig-35 !!!

Really nice newsletter ! But PLEASE ED ! Focus on EDGE, Nevada and the Hornet ! That what people long before third party expect first ! Stop consume time with WW2 aircraft and others map, it can wait !

Do you mean on the map or in the game itself ? Try to create a simple mission with an enemy plus a friendly aircraft on any airport (rampstart) and put your own on the same location if possible in the closest parking slot and look around if you can see them ! I've never try this option so i'm not sure, but maybe is related with the "fog of war" option

It depend if it have thrust vector nozzle or not ! :D

Try yourself, download any 3D software such as Blender 3D to understand the basic of 3D creating. After that download the free graphic engine/terrain tool Unity : http://unity3d.com (for example, or any other you want) And try yourself to make...A SIMPLE SMALL TOWN, not a global map, not a continent, not a country, not a region/state, not a big city, not small city, not even a big town, just a SMALL town with a lot of terrain around it. 50x50Km for the terrain, and NO ! flat terrain don't count ! And hooo by the way ! You HAVE to recreate a REAL town with the real wild around, road, forest, rivers, terrain elevation you have to put everything ! Now, see in how many time you do that, and after that you know what ? Divide the side of all the map you have quoted by the size of your, and multiply the time you have needed to archive your map with this value, and you will get the idea.

I have not read comments, but i agree 100% ! The first reason why in the past i get interested in LOMAC (its how i have know it with FC, BS, A10C and DCS World) was cause it permit to flight MODERN aircraft, except Falcon 4.0 BMS, their is NO MODERN realistic simulation available for modern aircraft. We only have 10 yo sims which is completely obsolete or sim that only have old aircraft such as WW2... Their is a true invasion of WW2 Aircrafts everywhere, simulation, arcade, semi realistic etc etc, WW2 plane everywhere... Their is even MMO/free to play of this... I know that this is nice and i don't complain about my Mustang (not yet buy FW190 & F86, i'll one day when money will stop to be a rare resource) but i will REALLY prefer see modern aircraft. In fact i can't afford module but i'm sure if any REALLY modern aircraft (not just a F4 Phantom of course) i'll try to do my best to buy it, cause damn i want modern aircraft... After KA-50 and mainly the A10C, i was expecting a modern fighter...Nothing yet... Third party aircraft are full of promises but we still wait and they won't come before long long time...I'm sure we won't see any modern jet (fighter/attack or F/A) until 2015... A lot of people wait for DCS F/A-18E from Coretex Design, others wait for the F-15E from RAZBAM but we all waiting for the F-18C that should be an official ED's aircraft... People also wait for the Mig-21, but not cause its an old aircraft, but cause its FINALLY a fighter with a radar even if it old, but its also cause its the first third party aircraft announced... I'm happy to see the announcement of the BF-109, in fact if i have to choose between two WW2 aircraft it will maybe be P-47 (or Spitfire) and BF-109 even if i like the Fw-190, the BF-109 its better in my eyes... But anyway, i'm afraid that all the release of those WW2 aircraft put delay for the official F/A-18C Hornet and the Nevada map... Even if its third party aircraft, it look like ED put too much work on them, they focus on them and helm third party team to do the aircraft which is probably not what people expect from ED... Please ED focus on Nevada and when it will be release on bug fixing for majors issues and before adding useless features, focus on the Hornet, its boring to have the A10C as the only modern aircraft, even the Mustang is faster than this... Hornet = Everything : Attack aircraft, fighter (even if he is better as a attack aircraft, he have prove that he can engage enemy fighters without even need to jettison A/G payload), carrier and everything that both F-15 and F-16 can do ! And probably way more than what the F-35 will even do if this "thing" is finish one day haha... Even if we can't have F-22 Raptor (which is anyway not a good aircraft) or Su-35 / Mig-35 / Typhoon / Rafale or any others "yet too much classified" ultra modern aircrafts, at least the Hornet or the Eagle will be really nice ! Even if surprisingly no one want to make the Falcon... Please MODERN aircraft ! DCS is the ONLY sim that CAN actually do it ! Don't waste it ! WW2 and others old aircraft can come later !

Well about what i know...DCS like almost every others games/sim/software use your defaut audio device, per default he play on my headset but if i set my HP to default audio device in Windows, DCS use it. Look at this : http://www.7tutorials.com/how-change-default-playback-recording-audio-device

I think we should not just having two nation but the possibility in the game to create groups, such as Blue or OPFOR, in a war their is never just two side + neutrals, their is a side, resistance, others country that can be not really allied or enemy but that will just try to defend themselves, which can make them fight against the BLUE for example but if the OPFOR start trying to invade them, they will join OPFOR fight, without really being BLUE, for a WW for example, their is country that is not neutral, they fight, but its hard to say... Look at actually, Ukraine being invaded by Russian, USA and European country are against this idea, but both Russia and USA are for example together against North Korea, still that North Korea are allied with China... North Korea are "friend" with Iran... In conflict their is NEVER just two sides and neutrals betweens, its always more complicated than this... I think we should be able to create our own "factions" in plus of Blue ORFOR and Neutrals, we can with this create a complex war scenario and be free to create BLUE Aggressor and OPFOR Aggressor. In fact the we should also add the "training" task which allow AI aircraft to use training weapon on ground target (both real or training weapon, cause their IS training with real weapons) and dogfight in SAFE mode which they just count as a kill when they "virtually" shoot missile at us at the right angle or gun in a good position. And new radio options : _One for when we get "kill", we state that we "comeback to the arena", the AI will wait for us in economic flight for safe fuel and will engage us again when we state that we comeback. _One for when we shoot missile on the target aircraft, he will simply flight away in a correct distance (not too far, enough to engage again the fight) and told us when he become aggressor again. _One for when we shoot with gun. _One for AG hit, both inert charge or weapon that stay on stations. _One for when we are ready to start the training flight in itself, and state in the radio menu distance options for say how far the AI will get away before head again on us. _One for end the training flight. Of course also possibility for huge training such as RedFlag, possibility to set aircraft to land, refuel/rearm and take off again to comeback to his task, in fact this should be available not only for training ! Cause in RedFlag (for example) aircraft that get virtually kill land and take off again. By the way option for Touch and Go is missing for AI or for the tower ! With all my idea combines, we can create a really flexible bench of possibility, mainly for training, it will be useful for those who want realism AND practice dogfight without having to respawn or for those who like realism have to restart mission or wait idk how many time to fight again. And training flight that both allow practicing for combat AND things such as handling/formation flight (including a valid task value for those aerobatic server which are the most populated one) and others aspect like this. I fact i'm surprised that training are not a important part of DCS, first cause its a really complex sim that need practice and who look to be realist as possible, so we need to train, in fact after testing Falcon 4.0 (AF) i was disappointed to see that our first SAM evasion training was with...Real missiles... But also i'm surprised that this is not on the sim simply cause of we look at what actually pilot do...Most of the pilot do more training than anything else, in fact some pilots have probably never be deployed and have never do anything else than training mission and except drone and others practice target, have never shoot anything.... Training is not a "toy" or a simple forgettable aspect of aviation, its what military pilot do the most and without it, their is no pilot at all, its an important aspect which should be proprietary over a lot of others things !

For fuel i have not test but for altitute, the ceiling altitude indicated on the files is wrong anyway... Trying to climb at 20Km with the F-15C is...painful, almost impossible and require afterburner, which i'm sure the real don't need to do... Same for the Mig29 for example which is supposed to have a operational ceiling at 69000 ft/21Km I'm sure in DCS we CAN'T do it without afterburner while the real one can goes to 75000 ft without that : Informations can be wrong in websites, but a video don't lie... In DCS the aircraft over FL 500 can't do anything, we can only flight level and avoid to turn or we loose speed and altitude for a low bank angle turn, and we need afterburner to sustain it even without any external payload and with almost empty fuel... Stratospheric flight in DCS seam to be wrong... Same for the fuel quantity of the F15E which have conformal fuel tanks (the 3D model show them and its rare to see a real F15E without those CFT) the fuel quantity is wrong... Both without or with cft the fuel quantity is wrong... DCS Need a lot of fix, including missiles AFM !