Laud

It's at the Callsign Overview... ;)

Looking great so far! Gonna be a blast! ... and it's JaBoG32 not JoBog32 ;) "Vanguard 1-1, ready for weapon training!" :)

OK, so you don't need them. To avoid problems caused by freq.-changes, we tested with the default set ones.

No, as far as we noticed, no TS crashes. Are the tracks important? I mean we were not even leaving the ground as we were just testing TARS. But I'll upload them if you need them.

Still problems on our side. According to the attached logs, TARS seems to take the frequencies wrong by .001-.003 on AM and FM. UHF seems to always work propperly. TARS-Logs.rar

#1 for all of the guys in our squadron who had issues.

Those who try to get a jet-only enthusiast (like me) to like props or vice versa need to learn to accept, that it's just a matter of taste and not a thing about which is more intense or real or whatever... It gives ME thrills to board a virtual jet and get into the fight. Others get this feeling from flying props. Simple as that! And some lucky guys love both of it... Unfortunately I'm not one of those. I absolutely like these aircraft and it gives me goosebumbs to see and hear them flying at an airshow for example, but I don't have the slightest desire to fly them in a simulation. And GG is right: BVR is so much more than some WWII guys try to downgrade it to. Same goes for DF. It's as good and intense as YOU feel it when you fly.

I understand your disappointment, I'm also disappointed about some issues we still have (with each ED product), but how can you say they don't care about it? The fact they haven't yet managed to solve stuff doesn't mean they don't care about it. When you refer to FC2, I'd say the FC3 announcement shows the opposite.

TY Headspace!

Hell, you're doing all the work, the guys should do themselves! ;)

No. People chose to become part of a community, thats based around a company that produces modern air combat simulations. After playing Flanker and LO and FC for years, they experience the announcement of DCS (which sounded amazing back in the days: "Platform for various types of military vehicles/aircraft, to form a large high fidelity battlefield"). At present day, things have developed slightly different than they had expected in the past. That leads to a certain degree of frustration, which is totally legitime in my eyes. At least because there is no other product you could switch to, which better fits your needs/wishes. The real problem is how some folks express their frustration, when they start posting offensive stuff. But I somehow understand where they come from and what makes them disappointed. They simply don't understand, that the P-51D is NOT the reason why it takes ED way longer to release a module than it was initially planned, or that the ME still lacks a lot of features, that the community modded many years ago already. So while some need to learn to express themselves in a mature way, some need to understand why things happen as they do, and some need to stop praising every decission by ED like they are absolutely infallible. My 2cent...

2-Ship Mutual Support! ;)

So far so good, but a battlefield simulator with mixed units from 80 years of history is somehow strange don't you think? Just to be clear: I'm totally Ok with the Mustang and everything that will follow it from this era, but when it comes to further modules like ground vehicles, ships, maybe even soldiers, it would generate the biggest benefit, if they were from about the same decade! ;)

As many referred to FSX, I did too. :music_whistling: Your concept would of course negotiate my two points. :thumbup:

You're right. I also just thought, that a common DCS thread would be useful maybe. But there are already sooo many subforums here...

I hope they stick to that attitude!!! A combat sim is always a cometitive platform. Opening all doors to 3rd party stuff does a) let ED loose the final quality control and b) open up the doors for all possible types of cheating. So when you want to mod the world: Go FSX! If you want to pick up a fight to see who's the better guy (or girl ;) ): Go DCS/FC!

Sure, but is this thread sooo different from the announcement-thread? Now go, and open the P-51D Subforums! :)

Now how comes we have a P-51D thread in the A-10C forums? Here's the same stuff going on like in the "Main"-thread for this topic...

There is a BF-109 flying in Germany. I'm sure the owners would give any data needed to make a DCS sim of it. That shouldn't be a problem I guess...

As I said: Valueable showcase! ;)

Probably because FSX is for grabbing your aircraft and have a "flight in the park"? ;) When I fly a warbird in FSX it always gives me the impression of flying an oldtimer just for fun and not taking off for a fight in a certain conflict-scenario (between 193X and 195X). As so often before in these forums it's again a matter of taste That means we will have those who like it and those who don't and both should be free to express their feelings, not only the "Groupies". ;)

Which is the good thing with this event!!! No Hollywood type missions...

Oh, they're about to leave? Didn't know that! However: They're based so far south from my home that I never ever saw one in the skies... :( (Except for being at an airshow) ;) Oh, sry for getting OT!!!!

Not to offend Paul, but it's more stealing from RL than an idea! ;) Honestly: Just joking...

JaBoG32 usually flies the Spangdahlem SP1 Skin. Of course... German squadron using the skin of the only A-10 squadron, based in germany! :)