VincentLaw

I was watching some players land in multiplayer. They made me nervous because they kept coming in really low at like 400 km/h, and basically flying down instead of "landing." They caught the cables every time though. I guess in the end that's all that really matters.

I have not played it in a while, but YS Flight Simulator also has a basic implementation of this so you can filter out the WWII content.

Fine, you made me do this. So can anyone tell me if this triangle in the middle is a mistake or if it is supposed to be that color? That is the first thing I noticed when I saw the picture for the first time. I didn't even notice the cloud thing until someone else pointed it out.

Look closer. This has already been discussed, but obviously it is a WIP, so such things are to be expected.

We live in a world where sometimes you have to ignore the complainers. If complaints are enough to stop creative people from releasing their creations, then there will never be any creations again. Even if you made something "perfect" people would still complain about it.

Without rereading the entire thread, some of the deductions could be made in combination with these two EDGE pictures as well.

Looks like you answered your own question there. (I agree with the answer.)

Except WWII: Europe is not a module. It is a separate installation from DCS World. Two is bad enough. I really don't want to have to separately install everything three times (extrapolate to N times) on my computer and run different .exe files to play any module on different maps. What I would support is a date/category tag system applied to everything, so that when you create or select a mission, you can filter missions by date. Then when you run DCS: 1975, you get the 1975 interface with 1975 filters set by default, but it should still get the module/map data from the same directory.

I did a quick search and I couldn't find a topic on this, so feel free to discuss fixing any of your sim equipment here. My joystick (AV8R-01) is probably about 9 years old, and I am too cheap to buy a new one. My throttles are loose, and my stick centering has worn out, so I decided to open it up and see if I could improve anything. The first thing I noticed is that some of the sticky grease that holds the throttles in place had leaked out of the bearings. So I got the thickest grease I own and applied it to the inside of a bearing, but it actually made the throttle looser. Does anyone have a recommendation for what to use to keep the throttle from slipping? (Obviously I don't want to glue it in place either). As for the worn stick centering, I have not looked much at that yet, but I think part of the problem is the way the handgrip of the joystick is connected to the shaft. It is a twist stick, so it has to rotate about the shaft, but the grip can rotate a few degrees on the x and y axes without moving the shaft. I'll post here as I make progress.

WaterWorld is coming. You cannot escape the WaterWorld.

March 7, 2014, too old? If you have a source of it older than that, I'll change my opinion. Maybe you are thinking of this picture though? Note the difference in the horizon coloration between these two and the cockpit one. (or this one)

I am inclined to agree with Suchacz on the Su-33 image. The sky coloration near the horizon is distinctly different from any other DCS images I can find. (And distinctly similar to the first EDGE image.)

I have a pen right here. All I need is the NDA.

Speaking of which, I wonder if Oculus rift support will be an EDGE specific feature? (Although it's kind of irrelevant if the old IG is completely dropped before it is supported.)

I propose that CORNER be renamed to VERTEX. That name sounds much more technologically sophisticated.

This is why I didn't point out the spot where you could see through the mesh.... oops.

Yeah, I'm not sure either (especially the Exocet, but see the quote below). These answers are difficult to find with just internet searches. The S5 is basically the same airplane with improved avionics though, so I assume the airframe is already certified. I think the question is if the avionics have been officially approved for specific weapons, but we are going to be putting the airplane in a lot of hypothetical conflicts in which the AdA has no other ground attack aircraft available. How quickly could they certify something in a pinch if it is already completely compatible with the hardware? That is kind of an interpolation from this post and the above one. It seems (at least to some extent) that they want to represent some export models as well. That may provide justification for some of the weapons included. You are right, that should probably be longer. Remember actual range depends upon launch conditions though. I assume RAZBAM/M2M will make sure the missile specifications are appropriate for the module release. (but to make that short range feel even worse, the Super 530 is semi-active, so you will have to keep your target illuminated until impact) And now for some on-topic, have a screenshot from the facebook page with the FSX electrical system in development.

Of all the names for them to pick, they had to pick EDGE! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_Games

Then the rest of us complain about how the sandal straps on DCS: Jesus are off by one degree.

You would need to go about 10 times faster than max speed to get a Flanker into orbit.

Okay, you are right. I made a similar looking battle in DCS and it was a bit laggy. Maybe that will improve with EDGE, but one thing to remember is that the other game is an RTS, so it probably cheats a bit more with the combat calculations. e.g. using statistics instead of simulating every bullet. (also, all of those vehicle models were lower res)

You can already have battles like that. Just use the mission editor. Ships would never get that close together in real combat, but nothing is stopping you from putting them like that anyway.

Here is another one (from 1988 ): http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1988/1988%20-%202724.PDF And a manufacturer advertisement: http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1985/1985%20-%201314.PDF

I have had trouble finding information specific to the Mirage 2000C S4/S5, but I know the earlier models had CCIP for guns, rockets and bombs and CCRP for bombs. If you noticed, our discussion has been mostly limited to unguided weapons. The two main exceptions being the ARMAT (which is self guided) and the Exocet (for the Greek variant). The loadout chart image posted by Stratos is not applicable because it is for the Indian Mirage 2000. edit: This is the most detailed information I could find so far on the RDI. If this is accurate, then the Mirage 2000C S5 should have an air to ground radar mode. http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1980/1980%20-%201654.PDF

I don't have a steam install, but on my version it is at ...\DCS World\Sounds\Effects\Aircrafts\Feeding.ogg