arteedecco

Yes, but... I *believe* it has been causing crashes on the 104th server... what I was noticing is I would sign on... get about 3 minutes in (it varied) and then I would get disconnected always. When I disabled tracking in Tracview... problem went away (so far). My total guess is that it's due to file verification on their end, but I really don't have a clue ... could be a red herring. But yeah, Tracview works well and I run FC3 and DCS A-10C. "Snipe"

Yeah, that's pretty much what I aspire to. Pretty sweet vid.

Yeah, my biff... thanks for the correction. I edited my posts accordingly. Cheers! :thumbup: "Snipe"

Oh yeah, definitely. In fact my twist is totally shot and I have to disable it or it just drags full right rudder on/off, the centering spring is pretty weak now, and the plastic ring (guard) that went around the base of the stick got ruined from too much flying. My one beef with the X52 is that it's moment and "throw" is too much. It is sort of awkward to me and you feel like you're really moving it through a lot of travel... trying to figure out best way to explain... I think basically teh stick is too high which makes it feel / fly weird to me when sitting atop the comp desk. I don't have a center pedestal or stand which would be nice. But I figure... I can buy 3 - 4 X52 (not pro) for the price of 1 TM HOTAS Warthog, which saddens me because that stick is smooth as butter, weighted well with a heavy base, and very precise. Would just be super nice to have... but economics are just a b__ch! :(

My understanding is that "3" (Vertical Scan) and "4" (Bore) are limited to 10nm. I can often acquire an enemy visually much further out than 10nm if they are high enough to drag a contrail. My follow-up questions are... A.) when you flip to Vertical or Bore, the radar range is auto set to 10nm, but will it detect enemies further out and put their target brick at the top of your radar screen? My experience has been "no", but I'm still learning a lot. I have heard that Long Range Bore is coming??? B.) How do you know aspect of enemy before you TWS (limited range, takes a little longer to build a picture), lock them up (STT). In other words... how do you determine which PRF to flip to (F-15C cycles automatically by default)? Two scenarios to consider: 1.) You have (or had... maybe enemy is being coy and switched off RADAR temporarily) an RWR threat, so can assume enemy is headed at you (so I assume you use PRF Hi), and 2.) You are just plodding around in CAP searching... do you just use PRF Alternating (Med/High) for best results? C.) I have heard from a pilot that PRF Hi means "highest power" so best chance at acquisition, so whenever he's just searching for unknown threat, he is in PRF "Hi". I didn't think that sounded right? (somewhat tangent) In the Su, I was messing around following HAWG pilots in their A-10Cs practicing my intercept and sensor skills. I was trailing an A-10C at about 1000 - 2000 feet and went to the EOS system "O" (radar off). It never picked up the A-10C. It was like I was too close. I could use the Helmet targeting method to acquire and lock with EOS, but at that close range it just never presented a bar on the HUD. Thoughts?

Or.... make "official" test missions with very clear parameters like Pyroflash did ... maybe a youtube vid showing it demo'd with callouts for critical test card parameters. Then... have ppl fly in single player and provide tracks. Then consume all data collected from tracks and average the results. Tangentially... I think the point of Pyroflash's tests is to gain empirical experience / evidence on the way the missiles are working to provide "user feedback" in a sort of standardized format. Simply shooting for AI replications is not a good test either IMO, since nobody wants to watch AI bots fly a sim :) It is the human valuation of the missile performance that matters. Some... with more xp and good arguments should have more input, but throwing out human user testing with the bath water would also be a mistake. "Snipe"

Here's a Singleplayer track (MP tracks mess up missiles and other things for many reasons) I made of me fighting 1 v 1 against: 1. Su-27 with 2x R-27ER, 2x R-73, cannon, ECM 2. F-15C with 2x AIM-120B, cannon, ECM 3. same as 2 4. same as 2 & 3 I end up getting killed at the end by AIM-120B. I am loaded out with max fuel (3 bags), 2 AIM-120C, 2 AIM-120B, 2 AIM-7, 2 AIM-9M, cannon, ECM. Question is... what could I do better / differently to succeed? At the end... when I die... I am having trouble determining if I have defeated the second AIM-120 and it is hard to know if I have notched because I am maneuvering and already low'ish. Please reference this post http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1648748#post1648748 from @EtherealN on tactics if you want to understand some of the terminology / tactics. [EDIT: reposting @EtherealN post on tactics in case his post moves or thread moves] [/EDIT] "Snipe" Notching_BVR_practice.trk

:D Thank you @EtherealN for putting that together (esp. so quickly)!!! Many many thanks +1 Some of that (the energy state as money analogy) I recognize, but your explanations help a lot especially in the context of this thread. In my experience in BVR you don't "see" the other aircraft and for that matter you certainly don't see the missile... especially if you take immediate evasive action to "notch". So... big question then... A.) how do you *know* the enemy missile is defeated (R-27ER or AIM-120B/C) after notching? B.) Seems like notching needs to be initiated a little after shot warning not immediately... unless within 10nm? And for notching, C.) How much alt do you need to drop down to assume you've done it with confidence? Plus I am guessing if enemy has more altitude than you when launching and is diving on you... it will be harder to notch because his radar seeker is pointed at you to begin with (yes, still looking down, but not gimbaling as much... I understand this probably doesn't matter, but...)? Thanks a ton. [EDIT]Added a new thread to follow-up more on tactics, maybe you wouldn't mind reviewing: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=100117[/EDIT] "Snipe"

Again, my recommendation was a value statement. I spent $40 on A-10C, $20 on LOMAC Platinum, $40 on FC3, approx. $100 on a stick (X52 about 4 years back), about $60 on the Cougar MFDs, and about $180 for TrackIR 5 w/ pro-clip. What I was saying in my post was ... for where I'm at financially (which I think translates to plenty of other peeps, not all)... the pedals are something I can live without... more than a stick and more than TrackIR which adds a huge positive jump in the SIM experience IMO. So... everyone is entitled to their own *wrong* (laugh) opinions, but that's where I'm coming from. I totally agree that having pedals would be a great next step and that my crappy ole beat up X52 (twist no longer works... sensors are shot) should be replaced by the amazing HOTAS Warthog by TM (Thrustmaster). I would love all that... but... I can get by and have a great sim experience w/out those two items and save myself about $500. So what I was trying to convey is... you can sacrifice some awesomeness and still have an amazing sim to fly by saving yourself $500 (pedals and Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog). Oh... now you got me dreaming... can someone please buy me a pit because that would be sweet!... and 3 projectors that I can mesh onto a large 180 - 210 degree concave screen... thanks!!!! :music_whistling: "Snipe"

What I was getting at is that the HOTAS Warthog is a precise model of the Real Life A-10C stick and is therefore optimized for that application. Totally agree that it is an exceptional piece of hardware that would work for any flight sim. It's just that for me the extra value in the HOTAS Warthog is in it's application for the A-10C and I feel that a lot of the value/justification in the purchase price of nearly $400 USD is lost when using it for other applications. Now, as @metalnwood is indicating... the HOTAS Warthog is probably one of the best sticks (if not the best) available and would do you well in any application... just a steep price tag for lots of us. "Snipe"

Hey everyone, this thread has been a great read. But... I'm coming into FC3 as a huge newb. I've never played LOMAC, FC1 / 2, so A2A tactics are a HUGE learning curve to me. I see a lot of people bandying about some of the following terms as if common fireside chat (if you read the thread from start to finish you'll probably see the same): a.) Beaming b.) Notch / notching c.) Knowing the energy state of the opposing aircraft d.) "Extending" e.) Being able to keep enemy locked at edge of radar extremes (azimuth) as a moderate defensive measure f.) Understanding that firing AIM-120 at Rt means it is "Pitbull" immediately and Eagle pilot can go defensive and/or break lock Then I hear the routine complaints (or is it just chest pounding?) that lots of newbs on servers just don't know what they're doing and this game is not challenging enough etc. I'll tell you... much of the time I sign onto the 51st or 104th I see a bunch of F15C drivers and a few Su guys (rarely a Mig guy... meh... I guess because avionics are rough despite having R-77 capability). At any rate... I decide to learn Su-27 to provide more "sport" on the servers and learn a thing or two... My point is... a LOT of the tactics you're talking about are unfamiliar to me (and I'm sure countless others). I don't even know which terms I don't know. I think it could go a long way if someone could post some links to the "primer(s)" on A2A / BVR for us new to A2A guys coming in with the release of the FC3 Beta. I (for one) would supremely appreciate it. One of the huge draws of this Sim is to learn about things I couldn't experience in RL and I see many of you talking about stuff, but I can't find it in the threads and I haven't been immersed in it since the early days of FC. Would certainly appreciate the help, since I rarely know how to: a.) Determine how far a missile is from me based upon RWR... lots of times seems no smoke cause missile motor is off at that point b.) How to go defensive then reacquire enemy w/out being blasted c.) Be able to aggres. as Su pilot an F15C guy successfully, despite what I'm seeing about AIM-120 being pretty defeat-able (I seem to die always) I realize this is somewhat tldr and also somewhat off topic, but if you want more, better players to fight and make the A2A more respectable... this is a good place for this in this particular thread because my mind is screaming... HOW!?!?! (and yeah... I do/have searched the forums... which is why I'm reading and responding to this thread). Thanks a bunch guys and thanks for the great conversation. Very interesting. "Snipe"

I recommend the X52 (Pro, if you can afford a few more $$). Why? 1. It is about 1/4 the price of the HOTAS Warthog (which I would LOVE to have if I could afford it) 2. Works for any other flying games 3. Has been around long enough that there are plenty of good profiles available in these forums that you can use to program it to work with A-10C (and probably most of the other aircraft too), so lots of support.. and plenty of Youtube videos showing how to fix / repair / mod / improve the X52 (making it more responsive, etc... I've seen some videos myself but haven't looked too hard) 4. Lots and lots of programmable buttons 5. Use the money you save to buy Natural Point Track IR 5 (can get it on Amazon ) with pro-clip (this takes the game from ... oh... nice... a pretty awesome flight sim... to ... OMG this is flipping amazing!!! :pilotfly: ) 6. Rudder pedals are nice, but non-essential... I do just fine using "z" and "x" keys... and frankly... in a jet you generally won't use rudder that much 7. For the A-10C get the Cougar MFDs... inexpensive... really enhances the realism / fun of the A-10C So... to answer your question... why did you get a flight sim and not just another XBox (PS2/3) game??? I presume... that like the rest of us you were looking for a more realistic experience. Flying a Fighter (or any airplane for that matter) with a gamepad takes away (detracts) from that realism and fun. Get a joystick like the X52 if you're on a budget... it makes a huge difference... They don't call it "yanking and banking" for nothing! :) And do yourself a favor and get TrackIR 5 with the pro-clip as well... tracks your head movements so you can effectively look around. TrackIR takes the game from really neat to that next step you've probably never experienced before in any other game / sim. "It'll blow yer hat in the creek!" :joystick: IMO... FWIW "Snipe"

Yeah, that's one "problem" with the 3rd party approach. You end up with two solutions each of which have pluses and minuses, when they would actually do much better merging efforts into one and combining strengths in a single offering. Course, like many others have already opined, an F-15E without a human-playable back-seat in multiplayer is a pretty significant setback.

Yeah, I really don't care which direction they go, if there is or isn't a bias... it will be cool to have a new high-fidelity aircraft to fly that is a fighter (not ground-pounder). A modern Eastern plane would be sweet because in my experience we get a lot more attention to the Western planes than we do of the Eastern ones and I love the Russian fighters. But hell, I'm stoked for the F-15C too! I get pretty tired of being lectured to on these forums about which things do and don't make commercial sense. I love high-fidelity combat flight sims and this is the best one I've ever had the pleasure of flying. Unless you work at ED and sit with the teams that make these decisions, you frankly don't know what you are talking about and should probably not pose your opinions as if you were an expert. Stick to what you do know, what you dream about, what is awesome to you, and support the other people on this forum when they share about things they are excited about and love! ED will filter, read, and do what they deem best. Keep giving them your money if you like what they do... otherwise don't. Give people a break, it's not always easy to communicate perfectly in a forum post :) Also, mission designers can easily make Red and Blue, player-flyable A-10Cs, so if you want a balanced mission, it is possible. Sure.. it would be great if you had an Su or Mig, but hey... that's what some of these 3rd parties are working on. And as far as I'm concerned... as soon as any 3rd party aircraft is available, I'm probably gonna buy it and keep flying it as long as it is done well and to a similar fidelity of the A-10C, because it is fun! Cheers everyone!

@Grimes, thanks so much for the response. I tried to re-create the issue this morning, but of course... tweaked some things... First, for those coming into this thread (not wishing to read too much): I *believe* the solution is to run DCS World & DCS World Multiplayer as Administrator. That may sound obvious, but it wasn't to me. The way I have been working with the ME to create missions and edit them (based upon the stickies best practices I have read in the forums): 1. Run DCS World, start the ME 2. Create a new (blue) airplane group and name it something like, "Bombers_BLUE" (note the underscore, "_" wondered if it might matter that I use underscores in my group names?) 3. Set their task to "Pinpoint Strike" (oddly... it is colored light gray... sometimes I get it to go to black... *seems* to be based upon the aircraft loadout, but I haven't been able to confirm or get the steps to replicate down pat) 4. Select the aircraft type (F-117A, or B-1B) 5. Select the loadout (use PGMs! not Mk.82s for B-1B, F-117A only has PGMs as default loadout options) 6. Set starting waypoint groundspeed and altitude (MSL) 7. Add new waypoint (1) which will serve as the IP and the point where we will add the bombing task 8. In the Advanced tasks area click Add and select Perform Task, select "Bombing" 9. You SHOULD get a little filled-in triangle that you can select and drag around on the map, extending out from the second waypoing (1) 10. Select static objects, select "Russia", set name to something like, "TargetCommandPost_RED" (again, note the underscore "_", since I am not sure if that could be causing a problem) 11. Click on the map near where you placed the Bombing task triangle for the aircraft group to set the new static object, which should be a structure, and a Command Post (I believe that's what it's called... may have the object name slightly wrong, but you'll see it in the drop-down). 12. Save the game 13. Without closing the ME, use alt+tab and open up the DCS World Multiplayer (again, when testing and submitting this new thread, I was NOT running as Administrator, which I suspect was the issue). 14. Start a new Internet server and open the new mission you created 15. Unpause (how do you get missions to load w/out starting paused!?), click briefing, and fly, then F2 to view the aircraft group I've also gone back and added Stop Conditions to the Bombing task with a duration of 1 day and 15 minutes, though it does not seem to have any effect and they RTB after dropping a bomb... eventually I was able to get them to do repeated bombing runs by tweaking some of the Bombing task settings (sorry I can't be more specific right now.. I'm away from my gaming PC). Anyhow, try those steps I noted before but without running as Administrator. What's odd, is that everything works for the most part and no errors are displayed in the client, but it obviously does NOT work in the ME. Wish there were a way to address this in the game code so admin privileges were granted for the process for the ME. I would say this is a bug.. IMO, but please feel free to educate me on this one. I'm not 100% sure that the Run As Administrator is the fix, but it sure seemed to this morning when I tried to repro. The other differences this morning during my attempt to repro were I did NOT run TrackIR (just wondered if for some reason it was mapping through and capturing keys or something weird). I doubt this had anything to do with the problems, but I wanted to note it so you would know what I was doing. I also run the Saitek X52 programming software with the SFJackBauer profile, so I have had that on and in the system tray in all instances. I do not believe this is the issue either. Thanks for all the help everyone! Great community :)

I've been trying to create multiplayer missions that use "Pinpoint Strike" for aircraft such as F-117A and B-1B, but something with the Mission Editor is messed up. I try to set the advanced task for the BLUE AI aircraft to "bombing" for the second waypoint, #1, but the side-bar in the Mission Editor gets messed up and all I see is "No task" in the advanced tasks area. When I save it goes away. Then the top part of the aircraft side-bar also goes away and I have trouble even selecting any of the other waypoints. Every time I try, the initial starting point of the aircraft (the aircraft group icon) jumps down to where I click. And the one time I actually got an F-117A to accept bombing as an advanced task, and got a little triangle for the task that I could reposition on the map, the aircraft would only bomb once no matter what and then RTB. The whole ai bombing thing is frustrating and appears messed up. CAS works, but that's it. Ground Attack and Pinpoint Strike seem to be haywire. Thanks for any help you can offer. ai_bombing.miz

Sorry bout that. I forget that tracks are recorded automatically for every flight (what a good sim!). So I've attached the .trk and the .miz files. The .miz has been updated some since that track. So.. you will see the JTAC predator to the south of the main blue airport (Kobuleti). In his actions for his second waypoint what I changed was that I *added* enroute commands for "FAC - engage group" (even though he is without weapons... the engage thing confuses me). There are 5 groups of enemy ground targets. In the original .miz file that the .trk file is from, there were only "Perform Commands" (not enroute commands), one for each group of enemy ground units. In the .trk, it takes me up to about 6 min to takeoff. I start interacting with the JTAC at around 11:45 min (maybe closer to 12:50 min). I check in, then check out the first time. I kill two tanks (there are 4), then I cannot find the third. The JTAC says that the target "tanks" is South of the mark, which is *not correct*, it is actually almost due West in retrospect. I say "unable to comply" and that's when I cannot get in contact with the JTAC for more targets. I have *not yet* re-flown the .miz after my updates of adding the additional "perform enroute commands, FAC - engage group", so maybe that is the way to go. Can you shed some more light on the difference between: a.) the automatic FAC action that the unit starts with, since I gave it the role of JTAC b.) the perform command FAC - assign group c.) the perform enroute command, FAC d.) the perform enroute command, FAC - engage group I know there are descriptions of some of those in the GUI guide.pdf, but I still could use some more understanding on that stuff and how/when to use each. EDIT>>Oh yeah, and all of the A-10Cs are client (pilot) and are Ctrl+c / Ctrl+v (copy/pasted) so they are copies of each other... not sure if that makes a difference. Oddly, I cannot adjust them from Springfield 1 1, to something like Springfield 1 2, 1 3, 1 4, 1 5... it keeps switching them back to 1 1 (the flight callsign "springfield" is changeable, just not the element number).<<EDIT Many thanks, as always! refuel_this.miz server-20121121-085803.trk

Hey @Druid_ I have a follow-on (related) question. I have seen the new "FAC" assignment for groups, so I created a Predator group using that option. Under its tasks I assigned it as FAC for something like 6 different groups in the order I wanted to attack them. It seemed to work fine and immediately I was able to contact and it started assigning targets, starting with the first group I'd set in the task list. But then, after killing a few targets in the first group, I couldn't find the target the FAC was telling me to attack, so I used the radio command, "unable to comply." The FAC then checked me out and responded with, "no available tasking"... game over. I then checked out and checked back in and kept trying to get the FAC to start assigning targets to me again, but he just kept saying, "no available tasking" despite the fact that there were still plenty of targets in other groups in his task list, including targets I hadn't killed in the first group. So what gives? What did I do wrong and how do I fix it? Any ideas? (thanks for your help in advance!)

Yeah there is an apache sim, but it's for XBOX, which makes me want to tear out my hair and punch myself in the face.

Sidenote: I would like to say that the damage model LOOKS amazing for the Su-25T! So many different parts and pieces can be blown off the thing, it is really neat to see! Kudos on that! However, my issue is with how much punishment the aircraft can sustain without going down. Issue: It appears that the damage model for the Su-25T (operated by AI, not human) can sustain an unrealistic amount of damage. Repro: Air-to-air: Human (DCS A-10C), AI (Su-25T), guns only. After several different engagements, hitting the Su-25T with many directed GAU-8 bursts, the Su-25T just continues to fly-on without any evident trouble other than cosmetic. On the contrary, if I hit another A-10C or many other aircraft with even one good burst of GAU-8 they go down. It seems that the Su-25T has an extraordinary capacity to absorb damage. I thought maybe someone could look into it and corroborate my experience, or tell me what I'm missing??? My gallery pics: http://forums.eagle.ru/album.php?albumid=710&pictureid=4922 http://forums.eagle.ru/album.php?albumid=710&pictureid=4921 http://forums.eagle.ru/album.php?albumid=710&pictureid=4920 I've attached a mission file you can use to fight the Su-25T. Start the mission and fly as an A-10C. Fly to the waypoint "Air-To-Air" and when you get close the Su-25Ts will spawn (2 of them). Try shooting them down with the GAU-8! It can be done, but it sure doesn't seem right to me! Thanks! Cheers! Love the SIM! refuel_this.miz

OSX would be a good middle-ground for sure and I would be in support of that effort. I agree that the business decision behind a Linux port is *thin*, but then again people have been talking down on it for ages and yet it still grows and sees widespread use, so maybe someday it'll make sense.

@EtherealN, I would say that Steam opening up on Linux is a.) indicative of some market research they've reviewed (i.e. it's been deemed worth their dollars to do the work), b.) "if you build it... they will come" (chicken or egg... digital download or titles argument). I would say it is a significant step for Steam to show up for Linux, though it's not as if tomorrow every game developed will have Linux support (as you've indicated). Just like Linux's history... it's a slow, burgeoning market segment, but... it's growing. Now that there's a reputable platform for downloading and DRM'ing titles on Linux, it seems pretty logical that you'd start seeing more titles support Linux. Ubuntu is a good example of how adoption has been increasing in general. IMO. @BRooDJeRo, first I've heard of it. Interesting to see that Valve says Left 4 Dead 2 runs better on Ubuntu. Big titles like that getting that kind of press is going to help drive more dev to support Linux. A gaming "flavor" of *nix seems good to me. Focus it on all the key parts demanded by gaming.

I reminded myself of the limited inverted flight time while showboating upside down... only to end up flaming out both engines... managed to get the APU going and then re-light one engine, which provided enough thrust to keep me off the ground. The issue is... I don't have split throttle and didn't remember how to idle one engine, so to restart... you have to set throttle to idle during startup sequence. So... I had to pull both throttles back to idle while engine 2 restarted, once again brushing the bottom of the jet off the ground. I think I saw 30 feet on the radar altimeter twice, but did manage to get it done! FTW! What is it again... "the burned hand learns best..." :)

Because of it's market share among more "common" users, I'd say Ubuntu (debian) rather than RedHat (rpm), which is more or less enterprise'ish (IMO). Well... at least that's my perception. I've used Ubuntu a LOT over the last 2 years and have found that there are lots of answers available online to resolve various issues, so I've never been 100% hosed by any issue. Plus... just nice to be able to download my OS as an ISO, burn to media, and install, re-install whenever I want / without being required to purchase and enter an activation key.

In another thread I mentioned it would be a great idea to have a "training" or "newbie" sub-forum. Not sure who can make this happen? Anyhow, feel free to PM me. I'm happy to schedule a time to do some training sorties and answer all your questions. Can arrange for a teamspeak server to get voice comms. We could even schedule what I'd call a RAG, or advanced training squadron for those just getting into the A-10C / DCS. We could set up a group sortie for some evening during the week. Could have some pre-requisite material to review and a few things we would cover during the time. If we could get a sub-forum going we could have a thread for scheduling and setting up the syllabus for each sortie. Anyhow... PM me to let me know if you want / need some help.