Laud

The whole vJaBoG32 votes for a DCS-Competition!

Also remember, that also RL pilots will never know about each and every manpads' or AAAs' position. There will always remain a certain risk when rolling in low. ;)

Hm... let's me think about a Boom-Operator view, looking at various nice modelled aircraft... :)

Man, how did you get this perspective?

Are tanks placed on the roof-top? I once did a test with beta1 or 2, where I put a UAZ into a building to let blue infantry fire at it with their rifles. That worked pretty well.

TY mate! Great explanation! Well deserved to join the Testers-Team!

As seen in Wags vid about the GAU-8, you can alter the altitude warning via the UFC. But you can also edit the OWC (obstacle warning cue) on the CDU->SYS->LASTE->DTSAS. Can somebody explain me the differences of these both systems or what they do different from each other?!?

No automatic translations mate! At least as far as I know, because else we could read the russian forums-section too!

However, the article is a good find anyway.

So is it a remain from an older version, as the flaps retract automatically?

Thank you for that link! Great reading!

Airbrush is indeed like TIR for simmers: Once you get used to it, it really boosts your results!

Hehehe, sure it's been demands! Urgent demands! ;) All those things we need to have, or need to have running proper, to run our squadron on the level of realism we want it on. :joystick::book: :smartass: LotATC works with FC2&BS (the competition at Ahaus was on FC2 & BS). Didn't try it yet with A-10C, but at least the new part of the map would be missing, and as DCS got a new coordinating-system with the A-10C, it could well be that some misalignments between the DCS-World and the LotATC-Map appear. And I've got to say that I really enjoyed it, coming as a guest this time, without all the equipment, and have a relaxing time talking to all the guys there.

OMG - I'm caught right in the middle of Sci-Fi nerds... And those are the guys talking about realistic simulations here! :doh: :joystick: :D :helpsmilie: *running*

Great built!!! Looks really fantastic!

On the left bottom of the altimeter, there is a rotator to set the pressure/field elevation. Get QFE from Tower by radio or look up the field elevation in the ME.

I thought that is the fun-part of this thread!?! :D

You can at least control where the aircraft (or better helicopter!) will be shot down! I once let a helicopter fly along his WP-Route at about 300ft. Then I let him activate a trigger by flying into a trigger-zone, which lets a Shilka appear right beneath him and BOOM. The position where he will hit the ground would be within an area of, let's say 500ft radius. You can then go on from there: Once the helicopter is destroyed it triggers the Shilka to disspear (as it's not longer needed and not really wanted there). The same trigger creates a group of 2-5 men (Inf) who take the role of the survivors. At the sane time the attacking vehicles are generated (maybe with some trigger-controlled randomization). And so on, and so on... The bad thing is, that it would be static as hell. For dynamic scenarios you would need to be able to request position data of different units by triggers and have it useable for other AI-units. Something like that is unfortunately not implemented as far as I know. Besides that, It would be possible (and not too difficult) to create a static CSAR mission with what we have. What won't be possible would be a "detect and process randomly shot down aircrafts' positions" feature...

Download this and start to study! Easy going... it's just 902 pages... ;) http://publicintelligence.info/F18-ABCD-000.pdf :)

Of course the F-15E is useful. But just for the USAF, not for the USN! ;)

Some kind of Transformer-action is going on there! :)

Such reviews happen, when people want to blow up stuff, before they know what the CDU is and what it does... You don't learn how to drive a car by taking part in a formula 1 championship race.

It would be one single (and maybe simple) restriction that needs to be implemented, so that mission builders can decide which loadouts are available for the pilots in-game (even better being able to set that for every client aircraft individually, depending on their task). But still that would be more simple than introducing a complex funds/inventory-system, don't you think? There is still so much more important stuff to do, which needs to be focused on.

But this whole inventory-thing can easiely be done by the mission-builder. Just don't put that much expensive high-tech weapons onto the aircraft. Put some Mk-82, leave the TGP home and let the pilot do the job "A"-style if you want to. Why does this require a special feature of the game itself?

I have to agree with a lot of points brought up here: - It's a hard and long way to go - even when you're not new to flight-simming. Studying RL stuff available on the net (AFI11-whatsoever, TO-, etc.) and trying to adsorb everything useful out of it, and as a squadron leader: right after you slightly begin to understand stuff, teach it to your squadmates. - The reward really is getting better. And by getting better I don't mean kill more stuff in a shorter time, but fly according to RL procedures within RL limits, while flying precise formations with your squadmates. Doing all this in an online squadron is a 100% extra feature. I don't know if I could motivate myself if I would be a SP. - Learning by myself just with the different documents available on the net and of course the DCS-manual and the help of the community, gives that extra immersion of "simulating the life of a fighter pilot". Not just flying and fighting, but also a lot of studying - just like in RL. My 2cents...