Weta43

First few loads will be compiling shaders

Bizare ! It's almost like it's not quite finished ... ! Like maybe, rather than selling it as a finished product, they should be just selling it as early access to people that are interested in helping optimise it prior to it being declared 'finished'. Edit: All the maps have been 'under-optimised' at release, even the various iterations of the Caucus' map. That has had shocking pop-up at various stages. It's good to report issues (like stutter or poor frame rates), it's not helpful to bag the product that was plainly labelled as unfinished.

Doesn't really reinforce the idea of Syria as master of its own destiny does it ?

...because after years of user requests, E.D. made it just another view of the SIM.

This is turning into the same sort of discussion as the features wishlist for the Ka-50 upgrade. 'Navy' F/A-18C were never cleared to use them. DCS models the Navy version. Therefore the version that is available in DCS isn't cleared to use them. Simple as that. We're already getting fantasy systems and weapons on the Ka-50, now we have calls for the same thing on the F/A-18C The thin end of the wedge has been inserted, and now people are pushing to get it further in.

yes

The collective brake does set the altitude hold (when you let it go, not when you release the brake), but unless you're using a model collective, the collective and the collective brake are decoupled in the SIM - so you can move the collective without releasing the brake. In the real aircraft, you have to release the brake to move the collective, & at the point where you'd finished moving the collective and released the brake, the altitude hold would reset the value. In the sim you don't have to release the brake to move the collective, & if you just move the collective without gripping (releasing) then letting go (also releasing :-)) the brake, you appear to just clear the altitude hold setting. Move the collective, reset the brake.

There's a post somewhere from Chizh with a document E.D. were prepared to take as evidence, saying that the flame out results from turbulence over the engine intakes, not ingesting gasses (though that was why Su-25's were forbidden to use S-24s)

There's no recoil on this jet, but the people behind it still take a tumble: wpdnLoram4Q Also - watch the trucks kick with each launch in this: o6aSghkwCEg

Can't see it mentioned, but pretty sure it's modeled that the moment you move the collective you clear the assigned altitude, so you have to get level first, then set it, and if you've got too much (or little) collective in for the system to compensate & adjust the collective, you have to re-set the altitude hold.

Except in so far as they suddenly direct a jet of extremely high speed gas against all the forward surfaces of the aircraft, and can cause enough turbulence to flame-out the engines. That effect can throw the aircraft around in yaw and pitch, and in the other thread on the same subject there are videos demonstrating that. Other than that, no - no recoil.

If we don’t have internet connections to the rest of the world - that means none of you people are real, and My ISP has been scamming me for years. Damn ! It also means someone in New Zealand makes a good flight sim ‘cause we can download this thing called DCS...

We’re already under quarantine (both islands). That’s why we have no community transmission of Covid-19 Well that and the life extending off-world DNA serum that the aliens teleport to our hospitals ;-)

Hilarious So you think they're doing it to make a living, not as a hobby ? Who'd have thought ! You mean they're not finished ? Different thing. & if there are people waiting for the project to get to where systems can be integrated into the F-18 & F-16, why would they not do work that brings other modules forward ? Well something happened, they brought out major changes to the rendering & lighting with the intention of improving it, but got mixed results and are trying to get the improvements they expected. It's a shame it didn't work, and if I were using VR I might be irritated that their efforts haven't achieved what they (& users) hoped for, but to say they haven't done anything is to deny reality.

I don't understand what you're saying You start with 'ED never wanted to share this', but everything after that is prefaced by 'I would say'... Do you have figures to back your numbers up that you got from E.D., or is it all your opinion ?

Did you watch this through to the end ? Edit - somewhere there's a post from Chizh I think (from memory - someone at E.D.) saying firing rockets from a hover causes flame-outs.

According to the table posted by S.E.Bulba in the link below, there is a minimum launch speed for S-8 of 100 km/h... https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4107373&postcount=12

This is not 'Reporting it", this is whining that the software you acknowledged wasn't finished when you downloaded it - isn't finished.

As Squiffy said, only the AI uses the SFM, and E.D. have said they intend to transition them off that...

So the table and the cropped text afterwards say that 1 round in the wing will be lethal, but it might take 3 to the fuselage of a Spit to bring it down.

If they're going to integrate a breathalyser into DCS world, it should be on the Forum & you should have to pass before starting a new thread...

nm

Whereas to me everything about the 2020 version looks better & more realistic. I guess that's why they have menus in restaurants.

Give the all the same name as her car

Actually, it only has one control surface, so has to fly a spiral. If it really put in full control deflection, it would just fly a tight spiral with a ballistic average path. Logically, given the nature of the control surfaces and the flight path, if you're correct and there are 4 zones, I'd imagine they're concentric & give guidance about how hard to turn in to get back to the centre of the beam's scan zone.