shagrat

That's how it begins... and suddenly you find yourself redesigning you living space around a DIY "home cockpit".

You are aware that is NOT a belt, but a flexible feeder system?! ...and actually the munition transport inside(!) the feeder is animated (at least it was in one of the recent videos). But honestly that's the least of my personal priorities. Though I like the details, I am more interested in the Flight Model (that seems to be top notch according to Casmo, a real life KW pilot) and the cockpit I actually look at 99% of the time and then the avionics and internal systems. If my focus would be on creating cinematic DCS video, my priorities may be different, but for simulating flying and fighting in the KW, I definitely prefer top notch FM and systems.

I personally love the concept! The George AI modes are problematic in a stress situation, because you need to monitor which mode you are in and maybe switch the mode (from hover to combat) if you want to evade an ATGM. For commanding the copilot I need accelerate/decelarate, turn left/right and the hover command on a 5-way hat switch. Add a modifier for up/down and drift left/right and that should be enough to have basic control in a combat situation. Anything else may go to keyboard or voice attack... I would like the option to click the "HUD-Interface", though, as an additional option.

Not "also", but "only" because of the weight... there's no recoil from the missile.

Why? There is no recoil. It is a missile, not a bullet. Similar to "recoiless rifle", RPG launchers or your average ATGM, the missile accelerates propelled by the rocket motor, not compression of gas against a breach... it simply slides of the rail. That's not saying it looks a bit too stable, but that decision by the devs has already been explained, and I definitely favor their train of thoughts, as I find George way to complicated to operate from a CP/G position.

Yeah, but OrbX decided to do the Kola Map, not Balkans...

Damn, thanks for the info.

Jupp, es wird ja kontinuierlich weiterentwickelt, also ist eine Woche später schon wieder der Core etwas weiter. Dann kommen wohl alle Module drauf, es wird kompiliert bis eine Version die (hoffentlich automatisierten tests) besteht und dann geht's in die closed beta testing Runde wo hoffentlich noch kritische bugs auffallen... dann fixen, neues build kompilieren und weiter. Man könnte höchstens, eine funktionierende Version verzögern und erst einen Monat später releasen und sich so Spielraum verschaffen, für Marketing und einen verbindlichen Termin. Aber was diese Community tut, wenn sie weiß, das ihr geliebtes Modul "schon fertig ist" und sie es erst in 1-2 Monaten in die Finger bekommen... mag man sich gar nicht ausdenken. Aber das würde das Problem mit dem Termin tatsächlich lösen.

Wer sagt denn, das der breaking bug in der Phantom ist? ...und welche PC Systeme betroffen sind?

Events have been split into multiple, so fixed, but not by the original event. Dead (now when the killed/lost vehicle actually explodes and dies) https://wiki.hoggitworld.com/view/DCS_event_dead New events: Kill https://wiki.hoggitworld.com/view/DCS_event_kill unit lost https://wiki.hoggitworld.com/view/DCS_event_unit_lost

No, they provide ammunition to ground units. In Combined Arms, if you drive any armed vehicle and spend all on board ammo, you can only rearm, if inside the black circle ( 200m ) of a truck that has Logistics capabilities, e.g. M939, Kamaz or Ural 375... You need to drive in range and reload ammo. The same goes for AI units, if they spent all ammo they can reload, if ammo trucks are close enough (they do this automatically, but they don't drive to the truck).

^This! One of the most challenging aspects of COIN operations like in Afghanistan and Iraq is ROE and the limitation of collateral damage. We really need at least the standard insurgent model without an AK-47, so we can distinguish between an "armed" vs an "unarmed" insurgent. Same goes for the Technicals, simpy give us a pickup truck without the DshK. Lifestock and multiple civilian models, like people and cars, bikes etc would be the icing on the cake. As of today, it's basically "if it moves, shoot it", when it comes to Counter Insurgency or asymmetric warfare and ROE are not really a concern. This would give us so much options to implement ROE and challenges into these type of scenario. That would be awesome!

Today's news is fantastic! We soooo needed this integrated in the game! Now I can adapt proper HESCOs for the FOBs in RotorOps, create airports that look alive and new FARPs and outposts in mission templates etc. Everything I never could, because it would require people to download and integrate stuff into their installation of DCS before joining a mission or creating a RotorOps mission. I hope ED looks further into integration of community content. I understand it is critical to ensure it doesn't infringe on Intellectual Property, but if it's an original creation of a community artist, it can be a great asset for mission builders.

Es gibt 3 Auftritte, alle ohne das Gesicht zu zeigen. In der letzten Folge klärt Higgins die Nummer mit "Higgins sei Masters" auf. Er sagt sinngemäß, er habe gelogen, als er sagte er sei Masters. Gespielt wird der "gesichtslose" Robin Masters zumindest in Staffel 1 Episode 17 von Bruce Atkinson (siehe Credits am Ende der Folge). Auch wird in Staffel 5 Episode 6(?), als Teil von Higgins Backstory erwähnt, daß Higgins und Robin Masters 1976 an einem Bootsrennen um Hawaii teilnahmen. Ein Wal kollidierte mit der Yacht und Masters brach sich den Arm. Sie machten dann den 8. Platz...

Maybe the writer from Aviation geek is just lying and making things up? Can't tell how credible the source is, but it says it was only procured for ANG units and beginning in 2019.

Tatsächlich nur ein Gerücht. Robin Masters wird von Bruce Atkinson gespielt. Abspann Staffel 1 Folge 17 ...er taucht wohl nur seeehr selten auf.

Just considered it more as a funny coincidence, stumbling over this exact news...

The key here is: everything negative, shocking, disturbing, offensive, aggressive or infuriating generates more attention, more clicks, more views, more advertising and thus more money, than anything healthy, wholesome, positive or uplifting content. No wonder it produces echo chambers full of negativity...

Because it is an Early Access, so there is no "finished product to try"... trial is usually added when the finished product is out of early access, or at least feature complete and close to final release.

Yes and No... (...)"Actually the Guard and Reserve A-10s received a parking brake in 2019. Researched and developed, uses the backup braking reservoir to provide pressure. Active units did not get it, since it was not funded."(...) source: https://theaviationgeekclub.com/warthog-pilot-tells-why-taxiing-in-the-a-10-feels-like-leg-day-at-the-gym-not-all-of-the-warthogs-have-a-parking-brake/

I simply checked since the release date... but you can never have too much nostalgia.

1) That has been answered already even before the Early Access launch: Yes the map is getting lots more updates, textures, cities, airports etc. 2) The Green bubble on the picture from ORBX, basically the border area between Finland and Russia. 3) For any aircraft in particular? It's pretty normal, in EA for maps. Don't worry, it takes 5 minutes max to place an aircraft of your liking on the map in the Mission Editor. If you have no prior experience with the Mission Editor, search for "DCS Mission Editor tutorial" on YouTube, or if you prefer reading, the DCS manual (Program Files/Eagle Dynamics/DVS World/Doc ). Mission Editor is covered in the second half(!). Hope I could help.

Well, with the OH-6A Mod released, I just have to: https://youtu.be/xIaXl7SqkBw

Yeah, but even then, the revenue from 10-20 YouTubers isn't really the point. It's the customers attracted by content creators that matter. And to get their money, you need the product in a release ready state. It may be good enough to provide content creators something to show, but the customers buying make the revenue, not the dozen YouTubers.

The first months of the initial campaign against the Taliban, had no airports in country. The USMC established landbased operations as soon as possible and in Nov/Dec 2001, FOB Rhino was established, then the focus was to seize Kandahar airfield... The availability of airfields in country eliminated situations, where aircrafts running into defects or fuel issues would have to land somewhere, and AFAIK the pakistani government, did not really want US aircraft landed and supported on their soil, at least not officially. The long range bombers, F-14s and F/A-18s did indeed fly long legs from the carriers, a lot, and actually the 10 hrs seem to be the longest ever flown regularly and en masse by USN strike fighters, but as soon as KAF, Bagram and Cmp Bastion were established, helicopters and land based aircraft took over a lot of the workload, as the carrier battle groups had to shift focus on Iraq... So yes, I would indeed love to see an option of at least a strip of flat Pakistan/Iraq and some ocean, but it isn't a killer criteria...