Kuky

I noticed that too, when very light the lift force is greater and even max trim down still leaves some need to push stick forward tad more. Now about that FBW controls... I don't understand why the computer would need to adjust trim? I understand that computer adjusts pilots physical controls to not put aircraft into bad flight parameters, but using trim, and literally flying hands free (physical stick centered) why would the computer need to adjust there? Trimming is not the same as yanking the stick all the way, which without computer input, would make you into bad position... Trim is adjusted slowly and once set (with or without computer input) pilot's hands are off the stick... so it doesn't make any sense for need from computer to further adjust Trim? Basically what I'm saying is that I am not of the opinion that turning FBW off (pressing S key) should not suddenly push the nose down, instead plane should just keep flying level as it was flying leved to begin with. :huh: EDIT: wait, I think I get it now... at slow speed the computer can allow for more direct control surface deflection, while at higher speeds the computer reduces them (same stick deflection but at higher speed the actual control surface deflection is less than stick deflection) So as you turn off the computer, suddenly control surface deflection increases, causing the already set Trim to be too high, hence the nose suddenly goes down.

I would actually like to see taxing turning with rudder only without braking disabled, I preffer the realistic way (using brakes) even if its harder.

Edge is dx11

I think price is fine. If you are poor you will find everything is expensive... but expensive or not is relative. I determine if something is "worth" or not by amount of money to spend vs time of fun/use I will get. If you get hours, weeks, months or years on somehting that costs as 2 movie tickets... that is not expensive in my eyes. But anyway, each to his own... I like to support developers that produce quality aircraft (when I am able to) so I have no issues to buy it (and I just did). Once they complete C-101's they will work on something else, probably better and more popular (you need to start with simpler initially anyway, and learn along the way) but hey, if they can't make their hard work worth while, they are not likely to keep working (on other aircraft) so really... only way for any developer to keep doing what they are doing, is to earn a living and be able to support their work. Just buy it if you like it and can afford it (but hey you don't need me to tell you this, you know this already :))

Don't let it expire, if you do at least don't drink it :)

I've been using this sim for years now (as many others) and never had any issue with it. I don't know how often you change your hardware (erm... surely it's not that frequent) and if you do, by the time you run out of 10 activations (that is if you upgrade PC every year), you still have years till you run out... and when and if you do, it gets replenished by 1 new activation in a month. This is not bad at all so I don't know what your issue is. There's been many upgrades in sim and I've upgraded my PC many times (new SSD, new Video card etc) and not once did I have issues, and I still have few activations left. So I don't understand that you see such big issue with it... it's no issue at all, and ED need to protect their intellectual property and hard work, you cannot complain about that.

Cannons, rockets, bombs and missiles for me :)

I didn't get the wink ... but you're right, he was pulling our leg :-)

na, don't need to edit anything in Graphics.cfg What you want to edit is in ...Config/Terrain/High.lua (if you are using High Visibility setting) and in there edit this part but once more, high FoV and it won't be as effective

Its the same with cockpit view in any aircraft, zoom in and distance of objects on terrain increases. In the UH-1H you have larger FoV in cockpit then in externals, that's why you see less of the buildings. You can manually increase the distances also but if you still use use wider FoV it won't matter much as the size scale is not the same with different FoV. What I mean by this, even if you increased buildings distances to 30Km, they won't look very visible as they will be very small as they will be scaled down. But if you reduce FoV in cockpit (where you lose peripherial vision) they will be larger (like in that F2 view) and then you can notice them at further distance.

er.. that is very low end GPU :noexpression:

Just realised something, dopler effect comes from target approaching speed towards you, so doesn't matter what speed you or the missile is doing, if target is beaming dopler effect is not there, and missile has to pick up the target by other means (simply by "contrast" of the incoming signal compared to background... and who knows what else they programm into these missiles)

By the time ARH gets into terminal phase and picks up target with its own radar, it would have slowed down already (it won't be mach 3-4 missile any more) so better dopler effect might not be much more significant compared to at least 10x stronger radar from aircraft... but again, it's still a guess.

Maybe someone, somewhere has started work on it and we just don't know it yet :)

I assume that SARH should have better tracking of the target than ARH missile, because aircraft's radar is much more powerful than that of the missile, which has to mean that signal bouncing off the target back to missile receiver has to be stronger also... however if both missiles are still suported by shooting aircraft untill impact then I would assume ARH would have better tacking (as both aircraft's radar and missile's radar are painting the target). But this is just my guess.

You shouldn't need to re-enter the codes, game updates do not change module activations.

If you can get this happen (good F/A-18 HOTAS that can attach to Warthog, or maybe even Cougar) you should do quite well... I would get it, oh and then pattent the bloody thing! With DCS hornet it should sell quite well... wish you luck!

sad indeed

58" 4K TV here (I win :D) joke aside, with large screen you can use smaller FoV which actually helps with visibility (most people use too high FoV and then use zoom to check more closely, which is not realistic either)

I just want to say I am so happy that people like ED and you and all other flight sim developers exist. All of you make my life happier and I hope you continue to do so. Thank you for this interview

Sorry for long time to reply (never noticed this thread had more posts, especially directed at me) :) To answer your question: DEF X22 NOT H3D AND X23 is same as DEF X22 X23 NOT H3D And you are right, the X22 is for short buttom press (under 400ms) of the button H3D. Press and release H3D quickly (in less than 400ms), X23 is true and H3D is not... this is when X22 flag becomes true. Press and hold H3D (for 500ms or longer) and X21 flag becomes true.

So my guess is Tomcat is in the works :)

wow... F-14 comming next?! We love you Leatherneck! (not just for the F-14, if its indeed comming, but for the MiG-21Bis :))

Satellite images only work nice from high altitude. To get the terrain looking very real you might have all objects placed without "teplates" (so that everything looks and fits to terrain texture), might have good light tracing (and that consumes awfull lot of CPU power to be done in real time) and you need to have propper detail to everything at any altitude and distance. Very big task if you ask me... it's not just if technology is available or not, but also to get such huge task takes lot of time (you can see just how many years ED has been working on EDGE). I'd stick to my 20 years... maybe :)

Remove the ; character marked red