NoodI
-
Posts
97 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by NoodI
-
-
in here arguing and sobbing over a month delay, meanwhile the f4u forum is in flames and sorrow
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Vortexstate said:
Obviously, but it's just stuff I spotted. No need for that
my bad i thought you were full on criticizing them
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Vortexstate said:
Also, the backup instrument is completely off. Also seems to be way too light. Here's a list of things I pointed out, that I believe are wrong;
- The backup instrument is completely wrong in the CH-47F
- Some caution advisories are missing, taking into account that they were even displayed.
- Pitch control links don't seem to be connected to the pitch control arms
- Chronometer isn't on
- Spotted that the slip indicator was perfectly neutral in a left hand bank
cause its not done...
-
2
-
23 hours ago, Tiger-II said:
From what I understand, it was Windows 11 that choked on P-cores/E-cores of the latest Intel processors. It would schedule threads onto E-cores and then die if any of them MT with anything on a P-core due to the performance difference between the two. That ignores the fact the whole E/P core thing is just the dumbest idea Intel have had yet. Who the hell doesn't want max performance all the time? If you're that worried about power consumption, computing isn't for you. Gamers sure as hell don't want power efficiency as that is directly proportional to lower performance for a given piece of silicon. It's physics; not wishful thinking.
The thing with this browser integration is it is probably trying to use E-cores because what websites need performance? Chromium wants to be efficient. This is probably where the problem lies.
https://blog.chromium.org/2021/10/renderingng.html
Huh...LOL!
Uhh...yeah. Maybe read the docs next time? I found this after 10 seconds on Google. I wouldn't put this software near anything I was writing. Ever.
This link: https://developer.chrome.com/blog/renderingng/
gives 404. That tells you everything you need to know about the rubbish state of this software! Junk.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/comments/keuev4/frequent_crashes_of_chromiumbased_applications/
More LOL!
last link was the op's pc problem, and stop throwing a tantrum, you arent heatblur or a dev, stop making this a huge deal chromium isnt gonna fry ur cpu or kill you. and whats wrong with a 404, you can enter the wrong url anywhere and get a 404 doesnt mean anything associated with it is evil and dog<profanity> and again youre literally using chrome, or even any browser to use this forum...
-
7
-
-
On 4/14/2024 at 8:28 PM, G.J.S said:
Depends what you are using the set for.
At very very low altitudes then the beam “grazing angle” will be unreliable to adequately break out a ground return at ranges greater than maybe 5NM, for instance finding an offset.
Weather should have not really a too great effect, but heavy weather of the monsoon type would certainly degrade however (non existent in DCS).
Chaff, if used correctly by an adversary should do what chaff was designed to do.
The F-4 is not a beast that you only have to hold on a leash lest it swipe all others from the sky.
You as systems manager will have to find out how to get the best out of your aircraft, through proper management, proper placement (of your aircraft to maximise your weapon), proper understanding of your weapon limitations, and just a little cunning.
Once you can utilise your aircraft well, you should be able to surprise even younger aircraft types.
thank you
-
im wondering if the radar be completely unusable below a certain altitude, and if clouds and heavy weather mess with the radars visibility making it unusable. and does chaff completely spoof a radar lock and if it does will it ruin the track of your sparrow forcing you to relock a target?
-
i'm sure the devs know what theyre doing, and you're on a browser to even get on this forum in the first place if you hate it that much then dont be a hypocrite complaining about it there and using it here. even if they were using chrome i wouldn't care, they know what they're doing
-
4
-
-
26 minutes ago, Q3ark said:
No logic was used in coming to the conclusion that the mig would release before the F4. It’ll be here in a few weeks, people just need to chill out and relax a bit.
lmao that is true
-
mig29 wont come before f-4, by that logic the ch47, f6f, marianas ww2, iraq, afghanistan, and ed pacific will come before f-4 since they were announced a while back right?
-
3
-
-
its fine stop whining no ones gonna hack ur phantom
-
6
-
-
F-4E definitely, but the F-4J/S looks nice too
-
1
-
-
-
On 2/24/2024 at 11:22 AM, Somu said:
Hello I preordered the module and had a redeem code.I have same account of dcs 2.9 one in my desktop computer and my laptop.
When I use my activation code on one of these two machines, will it be valid for the other one? Or do I need to install the other one in the same way after installing the first one, or is it enough to update DCS ın the second machine?
prob good for second one too
-
in short wear and tear simulation is cool af and we're all excited
-
14 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:
I'm pretty sure that when they said the performance is "under" the F-14 benchmark, they meant it's worse than the Tomcat. They're likely referring to FPS you get in the cockpit, not any particular system.
thought under meant better
-
22 hours ago, Viper33 said:
Please don't make my sim freeze whenever I merge with a F-4 like is the case with the Tomcat.
electronic warfare
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Zabuzard said:
Our performance benchmark is the Tomcat.
The simulation depth isnt necessarily what drives your performance up, its mostly other things like detailed models and rendering. Or simply mistakes in the code like too many radar or laser raycasts that cause issues. Even your fridge can run a billion math computations per second already.
very relieved
-
22 minutes ago, Punkmonkey22 said:
Just seen the Episode1 feature on Youtube. The more I see of this "individually modelled systems", the more I worry about performance. Will using the Phantom mean we can have less AI in a mission compared to other modules if we wish to maintain the same level of performance from the sim?
+1 i hope its not worse than f14 cause i can barely run that on my reg graphics setting
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, Zabuzard said:
Yes, everything under our control is subject to wear/tear, generally speaking. That includes stores like the pod. Missiles also to some extend (mostly when it is about the interaction with the plane - not so much when it already left the rail).
Yes, the pod has several components that are subject to the system (iirc around 30) and it can overheat and also melt. And then there is of course also combat damage.
tysm this only fuels my excitement
-
1 minute ago, Stackup said:
For weapons to fail it would have to be while on the jet since once it leaves the jet, ED is in control. Third parties only control how the weapon interfaces with the aircraft, not the weapon's behavior itself.
:c
-
5 minutes ago, Oesau said:
No idea on the missiles but recall that the pave spike pod is as remember Nick talking about gimbal movement speeds varying
i hope you can destroy it tbh, it'd be cool to test melting the pod and having the "MALF" go off
-
Will systems in the jet be the only things to wear, or will things on pylons like the pods wear too? and will the missiles be able to wear, and can things have malfunctions over time, like the pod melting if you keep the laser on for too long or missile malfunctions, or jet systems malfunctions if you pull too many Gs.
-
-
Something i was rlly anticipating i hope it is
-
2
-
Aerial refueling
in DCS: F-4 Phantom
Posted
wasnt rlly excited for this but hearing that it might be an actual capability one day only makes me alot more excited for the f4 and the diff stuff we'll eventually get