Kuky

Not correct, its quite the opposite. There is no image over the object, the object itself (actual 3D model) is resized. For ground units currently all units have basic rectangle shape object show at 10km and this "box" size is maintained when it reaches certain distance (whatever value is used in Impostors.lua)

There is Flat shadows and the other options are all Dynamic shadows. So if you have Shadows options to Flat Shadows, that's all you need to do to disable dynamic shadows which eat more FPS.

Disabling Aero gives very little performance improvement. You might as well leave it on (I do). Leave mirrors to off, and don't use Depth of Field. They both reduce FPS a lot. Dynamic shadows also give good hit when flying low over forests, so if you can use Flat shadows for more FPS. Rest can be on high.

Simple... mirrors are another full render of the sim, in opposite direction of your head view (to the front). For example.... you fly over a city and you no longer see city in front of you, but now mirror will see it.... so it will render all of the objects in them. If you are inside the large city, both head view and mirror view will render its own image... hence 2x the rendering and lower frame rate. Also you don't really need 8x MSAA, 4x is enough. Difference will show when you fly low over forests.

Nice video mate!

I don't think so, right now we can't change the effect depending on the season. I might (actually should) make a new feature request to ED for this as I was thinking about it recently also.

Nice one :thumbup: Now I need to try them out

Much better fuel tanks look! But I have one more tip for you... the camo pattern "edge" is too sharp. It looks like being painted with brush. To make it look more natural and more like paintbrush spray-on, use brush tool to making edge, with 3-5 pixels of "softness"... that'll make it look even better... trust me ;)

Plane camo looks good but tanks have the sharp straight line cutoff (it must be tha tanks use 2 separate parts for the texture). Can you make their camo stop bit earlier and round it off so it doesn't cut off in straight line?

Must be very slow to print one piece... I can't see this as something you could use for mass scale (if you want to start selling them). Am I right? How long does it take to print that one piece? To make your own parts seems perfectly viable (which I am thinking about also for much later on if VR doesn't catch on).

You too

Nope... he was not stating that it did slide... he was just guessing. There is difference. And developing cracks in air frames? Did I miss something here? What's new?

Well that's a bit low and quite frankly incorrect, especially when I know that I am actually always trying not to be one sided and as fair as possible which you should know if you hang on forums for past 3-4 years. :music_whistling: EDIT: having seen just this post of yours (http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2546433&postcount=56) I can see that I am on the spot about you in my comment above. That you say that EVERYONE knows I am biased... says you work/think like your beloved media. ;)

Can I add one more thing... if ED's PFM for F-15C and Su-27 are anything solid to go by (or close to real thing)... man... the Flanker eats the Eagle for breakfast in BFM. Alright... now I'm a bit biased also :D

Here is flight performance well in 29's favor then this also That's big difference But at the beginning of talking about MiG-29 and BFM he said that when against F-15 and F-16 you wouldn't want to be in a MiG-29... why not? Also when MiG-29 came out, the F-16 didn't use AMRAAM at all, and MiG-29 has medium range SARH missile already. Fact that when he did this training exchange, it was years after the wall fell, no support from Russia for parts, maintenance... and there was new missile (the AMRAAM), it changed things. He said the 29 is very reliable (unlike F-15's engines, especially the first one, not the -220), it has IRST and very maneuverable IR missile, the plane itself is very maneuverable, can handle slow speed much better than F-15 or F-16 both of which have to keep their speed up to stay in fight. 29 also climbs better. Simple, reliable, cheap, very maneuverable and easy to maintain... and great in BFM (and is point defense fighter) what there not to like? Also, almost forgot, the German version was slightly downgraded from Russian MiG-29. The way the 29 was intended to be used (not according to NATO standards) was not used, and instead they did the training using NATO tactics, and the fact that he didn't have too many hours in it, and also has to be bit biased (its just the nature of the business, you have to face it), and he is used to the NATO ways and western style cockpit layout and everything else that goes with it... I would definitely say, if he was to be left to fight in MiG-29 squadron, after few years he would be telling it bit different. I think this was not a fair comparison, and it was biased. Sorry but that's the way I see it. In BVR definitely both F-15 and F-16 have the edge, no discussion there, but in BFM I'd take MiG-29 any day. But hey... maybe if I ever tried them myself, I might think different, and until that happens I will love my Fulcrum :D

Ok, how about this bit aren't these contradictory? First he says 29's handling is mediocre (this to me translates into pretty bad, average at best), but then he says it is very maneuverable?

he did say it was block 40 and Germans has base, and somewhat downgraded Fulcrum A

But that's what I did. I pointed out that he was using guess work. I am no pilot so can't say which of his statements are true, and I've heard Russian side talk good about their aircraft. SO my conclusion is that I should take this article with grain of salt and rely on my trusty life experience which tells me he exaggerated (which both sides do). He also used most basic version to compare with more modern one with more modern weapon. He gave no specific of engagements (which I am sure he is not allowed to begin with as they are restrictive to military only) so he had to use descriptive facts... with bit of political influence :smartass: right?

Again, 500 hours in that pit would make you know it either happens or it doesn't. To you it may not mean much, to me it does. It tells me he is just guessing, and if I wonder why... well I said already, he wants to bring his side up and enemy down. You have probably also seen video's of some debrief of the US pilots during red flag or something (can't remember exactly now, I think it was them "fighting" the Indian Su-30). The speaker/pilot was making jokes, laughing and of course telling how they kicked their but. Now if you pay attention, in any SERIOUS debrief in any military, there is no such "attitude" with comedy remarks. They are professionals, and take their training most seriously. To laugh it off when "fighting" one of the best and modern machines your "enemy" can throw at you is simply not serious matter, which explains again why he did it, and why such debrief was released to the public... it is for morale lifting purpose which all armed forces do. Its just the way things are with military, when they talk about how they fight, they always talk good about themselves and bad about their enemy. :music_whistling:

Terrain elevation adds to that also (your indicated altitude will be over sea level)

Your DCS settings are in Saved Games folder c:/Users/xxxx/Saved Games/DCSxxxx

I didn't misinterpret... those were his words, and they don't make sense IF the guy has 500 hours in the plane. We all know each side wants to look good and talks good about itself, nothing new there. This comment however is clearly evidence that the guy writing the article is guessing (or he could also do it on purpose, why wouldn't he put them down a bit? They are the enemy remember?). So if he guesses this, then there is good chance he's just guessing other things also. You can believe it if you want.

I wouldn't trust this... it seems bias to me, but one thing caught my eye This pilot said he has 500 hours in the MiG-29 but then says this? This makes no sense at all. If he flew the 29 for that many hours he would KNOW if the throttle would slide or not... and would not say probably... probably means he's just guessing. ;) For this reason I would not take his word as true. If MAPO says the air frame can be stressed to 12G and he says it can't... and says Germans found cracks, well that could be just due to age of the air frame, and doesn't say how the cracks actually developed. The AMRAAM works in F-16's favor, that's very true. But other than that I think they are on pair.

You were right, it was a typo. I edit the post... thanks :thumbup:

Adding to these mods modified World.lua file, change is to increase burning time of aircraft wreckage (increased from 1 min to 10 min). this file goes into ...DCSxxxx/Config/World folder World.lua