effte

The change in the crossbar behaviour is actually a fix of a long-standing bug. It is not an ILS repeater, even though it was implemented as such in DCS, but rather command steering - a flight director. Well covered in these fora, search and ye shall find.

No, I do not agree, but that's not the issue here. I don't think anyone here will be able to convince me to change my view, and I do not really think I'll be able to change the view of anyone else here. I simply do not care enough to put in the effort required. As I stated, I posted since I do not understand and would like to have it explained. Clearly some people have very different views on this than me, and I'm curious and interested in broadening my perspective. I'm giving you the chance to explain your reasoning. If my jibes appeared at all offensive or judgemental, I think there is indeed something to explain. Why would explaining the employment of CBUs be preferable to explaining the use of foul language to little eavesdroppers? There is no outrage from me, moralistic or otherwise. I do perceive a bit of outrage from other posters though. I'll refrain from any deeper analysis as to why the issue appears to be a sensitive one with certain individuals. kontiuka, 'sanitary'? I'd say 'Orwellian'. :) I think the world would be a better place if we did not allow politicians (or others) to refer to the dirty business of war in a sanitized way. But that's probably my light infantry background speaking - I had little hope of war ever being anything near sanitary for me. Viper, :megalol:

OK, so the kids have to be able to enjoy listening to dad/gramps simulating blowing people to smithereens with high-explosives and depleted uranium on a combat server, without being subjected to four-letter words? Just double checking that I understood the issue correctly. I'm a bit slow on the uptake at times. "Daddy, what does it mean when you say 'shack', and what's 'infantry'?" Ah, quite the preparation for The Talk later on! Now, a public service announcement: If you ever see this link on the net, be warned that it is highly offensive and do not, I repeat, do not click on it. I'm warning you, I'm still flushing my ears with a concoction reminiscent of lysol, alcohol and a touch of gasoline after making that mistake! The tomfoolery above aside, I'm actually interested in hearing the argument for what I perceive as hypocrisy and double standards on a galactic scale. Clearly some people find it absolutely rational but I just cannot grasp it, even if I do try to see the other side of the argument. Care to enlighten me?

It still fails to turn on entirely. All parameters mentioned met - no cargo cam. To narrow it down, let me rephrase my previous question: Those who do get it to work, are any of you running full-screen mode?

By your description, you're seeing the way a real HUD works. It is focused on infinity, so if you lean in closer the size of the symbology remains constant as compared to objects far away but it will appear smaller as compared to the HUD frame. Conversely, if you lean back the symbology becomes bigger as compared to the HUD frame and will eventually not fit on the HUD combiner and you will not see the entire HUD picture. In real life, the pilot's eye position is very carefully specified. You can't move your virtual head away from this position and expect the HUD to keep working correctly. Instead, you have to use FOV to see more of the cockpit. When you try to squeeze a 135 degree field of view into a screen occupying 30 degrees of your actual field of view, you will get a fish-eye effect - no way around it I'm afraid. Find a FOV setting you're comfortable with, as a good compromise between lack of fish-eye effect and field of view. Cheers, /Fred

No joy on the cargo cam here. Are those of you who get it to work running windowed mode, by any chance? Something causes it to be unavailavble.

Strobes OFF prior to taking the active should be about as universal as anything can get. Why? Aircraft on the ramp with strobes on wreak havoc with the situational awareness of others in general and the situational awareness of the tower in particular. Those strobes are very disruptive to our ability to see what is going on around them. Wearing green clothes will not change that.

Set up a mission where you can shoot them down repeatedly. Then fly it over and over again. There were less than 800 A-10s (total, not A) built, so you'll be rid of them all over a weekend if you keep at it! :thumbup:

And even then, trim won't start pushing the stick forward until you gain a bit of speed, at which point the rudder should start to give you a bit of aerodynamic control anyway.

Ran a quick test of my own, FWIW. TOW 4419 kg, so GW probably around 4350 kg once I got to test altitude. 19°C/770 mmHG (1027 hPa) @ SL (FWIW) Tests at 5000' pressure altitude MAP 15-16"/2700 RPM Clean a/c. Very gradual approach to the stall, well below 1 mph/s I'd say. Buffeting at 101 mph IAS Stall break at 96-98 mph IAS Reference area S = 240.1 ft^2 = 22.31 m^2, as per ADA800868. Let's call Vs,1g at 97 mph IAS, 44 m/s IAS Dynamic pressure corresponds to IAS, q = 1/2*rho,SLS*IAS^2 = 1,225/2*44^2 Pa = 1186 Pa (11.86 hPa) L = 4350*9.82 = 42.7 kN = q*CL*S CL,max = 42700/(1186*22,31) = 1.61 Compared to figure 8 in the linked paper, that's a bit on the high side. OTOH, can't exactly call the test methodology high science so not ready to call anything or draw any conclusions. Besides, someone will point out a calculation error shortly... :) Cheers, /Fred

Does it go on for a long time? There'll be some fuel left in nooks and crannies of a fuel tank even when the pumps can't get any more out of there - you have usable and unusable fuel. Won't be much though, so if you get a hole where it'll drain, it would probably be completely empty very quickly indeed. That being said, if a reportedly empty fuel tank does leak, my money will be on it being a bug rather than a feature. :)

Demon, sounds like what can be seen in the pictures in the first post? If so, that's the reticle doing its job in CCIP mode - see reply #11 and p523 of the manual. If that's not the case, I second the previous posters suggestion of posting a track. Cheers, /Fred

Well, that is a real source. Unfortunately, it is also about as useful as a badger in a dance contest. "As required"... Good try though! Repworthy. :P Thinking more on the lines of what lays down the required lighting, i e but A-10 specific. AFI11-2A-OA-10V3 contains some information, but IIRC it's not really exhaustive. I'll check later. Nav light steady in the air is there though I'm afraid. :) Edit: Heck, this is later. AFI11-2A-OA-10V3 3.19, night ops: Flight/element leads anti-collision OFF and pos lights STEADY (BRIGHT or DIM if desired) when reaching the run-up position. Wingment with anti-collision ON unless directed to keep them OFF, switching them ON and the pos lights to BRIGHT/STEADY at brakes release. Formation lights ON. After join-up, only the last aircraft will have the anti-collision strobes ON. I expect procedures to vary wildly, depending on unit, base and situation though - still interested to hear a more official word than some old AF instruction dug up on the interwebs. There's also this thread on the subject. Knew I'd been discussing it before on here.

This is one thread, or rather type of thread, where I would like those posting procedures to indicate the source(s). Otherwise, it's "some guy on the interwebs said..." As we all know, that's the Ultimate Source of The Truth. :)

D'oh, yeah, P*funk is right - head position is way high. Your line of sight is supposed to be just about along the top of the glareshield, IIRC. The reticle is doing it's thing, but your viewpoint being way up there isn't helping any.

Now, caveat emptor - haven't flown the A-10 in a very long time so I was waiting for someone current in the machine to step in - but what happens if you load the aircraft up to 1G in a steady dive in the 1st pic? The reticle shows where the bullets will land. In the last pic, you're way nose up and the reticle accordingly shows that you are out of effective range from the spot where they will hit - they'll drop below the bottom of the HUD before they meet the ground, and the reticle is crossed out. In the first pic, you're at 0.6G and manoeuvring, possibly throwing off your aim.

As the text symbology and pitch ladder remains where they are supposed to be on the HUD combiner, it's not a head position issue. That's just where the system is drawing the reticle.

Wires from the trim wheel operate a jackscrew connected to the leading edge of the fixed part of the stabilizer. That's the way they generally operate, albeit the wires may be replaced by electrical or hydraulic trim motors. Cheers, /Fred

Get hold of the POHs for the aircraft. I'm sure they are linked somewhere in this forum - there are at least two available, one from 1945 and an F-51 version from later on. They contain all the data you need. Cheers, /Fred

That's the one maintenance set on the ground, as part of rigging the aircraft for balanced flight. It can't be controlled from the cockpit. With the aileron trim control, you move the left one.

You guys aren't really suggesting that there's any way of knowing what a jet will perform like in combat until it's combat proven, are you?! I mean, seriously, until a jet has been through WW III, or at least participated in the destruction on the ground of the remains of a dilapidated third-world air force whilst flying out of international airports, there is just no way of knowing the performance you can expect! Excercises, flags, live firing... that will only tell you how an aircraft will perform up to the point where the missiles go off the rails, and how the missiles will perform once they are off the rails after a target drone. It is well known that a declaration of war will reduce aerodynamic performance by at least 40%, and cause approximately 13% of all systems in any given aircraft to go Tango Uniform! When that drone is replaced by an actual hostile target, the hittiles will instantly transmograte back into miss-iles, grab a few beers and head for the beach. Excercises and evaluations are, after all, put together and evaluated by amateurs who need something to do after their day job flipping burgers. Those involved just need a good chance to blow off some steam every once in a while! The ridiculous expenditure required is of course not offset by any expectation to produce anything meaningful. It is only justified by the armed forces of the world having more money than they know what to do with at the moment, so they have to spend the excess by going off to Nellis or Alaska to goof off. The rankings in the evaluations are auctioned off afterwards, with top performance scores going to the highest bidder. You make it sound as if 'combat proven' is not at all the ultimate hallmark of quality we all know it to be. Rather, I get the feeling that some of you are trying to imply that it is a tired buzzword used as a last resort by desperate marketing departments trying to flog has-been buckets of bolts with nothing else going for them than being old enough to have managed to get in on the tail-end of the Guadalcanal campaign. How utterly ridiculous! :P:pilotfly:

Lo and behold! The key was there, but somehow the DCS World installer had failed to set the path value! It was set for the modules, but not for DCS World itself. I set the path value manually, and of course the configuration tool works. Thanks a lot! I'll have a shot at the automatic installer as well, see if it can work with this now. Edit: Quick installer works. Good job! Makes me wonder if anything else is amiss with my install. Perhaps I should do that clean reinstall after all... Cheers, Fred

Manual installation doesn't work, I'm afraid. When starting AriesConfigurator, it exits stating. "The location of DCS World could not be determined. A configuration is not possible. Aborting the application..." DCS is installed, by the DCS World installer, in a folder other than the default. The location is not modified since the install, so it matches that in the registry. In other words, the prerequisite is fulfilled, so I should really be able to use the normal automatic install? But that one exits with more or less the same error message. Cheers, /Fred

Thanks. For a non-default installation path, will creating a fake C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\AriesWings folder enable the configurator to work? I guess you could either modify the Export.lua entry to point out this fake AriesWings directory, using a full path, or you could modify the files in the fake path with the configurator and copy them to AriesWings in the real DCS World install directory? What would work the best? Would either option work at all? Cheers, /Fred

Oh, forgot: The MANPAD pickup beacon for the red side (starting from the east) seems to be misplaced. It takes you through the south of the target area from the FARP.