dotChuckles

Asterisk around a word denotes emphasis or a bold font where a text editor cannot provide one. I forget which text editor used it as a font switch. It has become fairly common shorthand now for emphasis and tone of voice for online communication.

Q: With the new graphic effects, will this also include an update to how IR images are displayed. For example heat maps on vehicles or hot vehicles standing out against cold backgrounds, rather then the current method which can have parts of the ground in WHOT for example be whiter then the vehicle. Thank you :-)

Lars, you deserve some serious recognition for this work. Very much appreciated. I have had two aborted attempts now to try and build some panels and this has inspired me to give it another go. Your drawings are going to make that endeavour much more achievable. I salute you.

Hiya, I can heartily recommend OpenOffice Fully functional productivity office package. It opens and saves to all office formats and in many cases it has a UI that is much more functional then current office. Should be able to open all the documents you need. Oh and it's free!

Hello All, I am sorry if this is in the wrong section... A friend and colleague of mine is involved with a group of dedicated pensioners in Scotland that are building a replica of a Sopwith 1 and a 1/2 strutter. They have done this in their own time and with their own money, using skills and technique all but lost in aviation. The quality of craftsmanship is outstanding and it has been a real labour of love for them. Their aim was to have it completed in time for the 100th anniversary of the Sopwith's first flight and it's arrival in Scotland. Unfortunately it is looking like they are about to loose their premises at East Fortune that they have been using as a workshop and storage before they can finish it. And with funding not available from the NMS it will force them to sell it and watch it disappear to a collection outside of Scotland. It would be heart breaking to think that these wonderful pensioners will not see their baby fly in their own country or not be able to maintain and care for her the way they dreamed they would. Also to have the potential of seeing it go into a collection where it may not be displayed for the benefit and education of the public would just be criminal. If you could please see your way to help them with their Indiegogo campaign to get this beauty in the air it would be amazing, there are some fantastic rewards up for grabs too. They only have a week to go so time is running out! If you can't help out with money, spreading the message about this is just as valuable. Please share the link https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/get-the-strutter-flying Thank you all so much.

Perfect. Very handy :) thanks.

Ah-ha! Thanking you all. I've finally had the time to sit down with the Mig and was itching to get going. Guess my nervous excitement skipped a couple of pages when I was scanning the manual. I love that by the time I'd set up my HOTAS the question had been answered. I love this place. And indeed I have subscribed to Bunyaps channel for some heavy vid watching.

Can't seem to find a start up checklist any where... Had a look through the manual, am I being blind/dumb/both?

Would love to see a Phantom as I can just about remember them shaking the ground at RAF Leuchars so vote yes. However someone should probably fix the poll so it's a little less trolling and obnoxious.

Unless I really need glasses I'm sure I saw a Huey orbiting over the Gyle today in Edinburgh. It made a lovely noise, passed right over my head at about 500ft I reckon. Anyone know why it might have been there? I didn't even know there were any flying in the UK.

Does any one else feel reminded of the Studio Ghibli film, Porco Rosso watching that :-)

Vulcan... just for the glorious noise it makes :-)

Dali, any chance you could tell us what your issue was. If you leave it up it might help someone who was having the same issue. Thanks.

Thank you for letting me know EtherealN. Have a good evening :-)

Thanks for that EtherealN.

Hello, I was checking all the sites that I have logins for the Heartbleed vulnerability and the online checker is coming back with digitalcombatsimulator.com as being vulnerable and the forums as being "unsure". Does anyone from that side of things know when the SSL will be updated so I can change my password? Thanks! Chuckles

...if I had the money. Which I don't :-( But 70mpg when you're cruising along and 30mpg when you have the hammer down and emissions less then a Prius is pretty good. The technology just has to mature and the Porsche shows what you can do with enough money behind it. Who knows maybe Formula-E will encourage some proper results.

I'd buy a hybrid... this one.

This may be of interest to a few folks. Nice Typhoon ride along through the Welsh Valleys and the Lake district. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjvgC1cKQGA#t=80

This may be of interest to you... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATLAS-I It's an awesome structure, but it was built to test EMP proofing of equipment. I think it's being preserved now as an historic artifact. EMP is very real :-)

Maybe been a little more forceful then I would have been. But in principle I agree with this. People arguing for 100% realism... does that mean we have to start filling in all the paper work every time you go on a sortie? Or maybe we should have the screen black out every time the pilot blinks? No of course not... it would be ridiculous. Balance has to be struck. Systems are implied, procedures are abridged. It's just plain common sense. Otherwise we would end up with a full scale aircraft in our living room, because that's the only thing that's 100% realistic. (Actually... I'd probably be ok with with that, but you get my point.) Honestly I feel this is a lot of hot air over nothing. Realism or lack of it is not a communicable disease... your copy of DCS:A-10 isn't going to get the clap because party x produces a more abstracted version of an aircraft. Simply don't purchase it. For all it's ills and faults, Microsoft Flight Sim since about 5.1 had a very healthy market place, worth a lot of money for all concerned that made it the dominating sim platform for nearly two decades. Sure there was a lot of unrealistic dross, but there was gold too. PMDG, Aerosoft, RealAir and others all produced excellent aircraft. The point is if you want ED and the DCS brand to continue to grow, have new users and new interest, the market place has to be opened up to allow exciting new prospects that interest the wider community. And that means there are going to be some liberties taken with realism from some 3rd parties. The F-35 may be an aircraft where such liberties have to be taken, only time will tell. There are still plenty of highly realistic modules coming, VEAO Hawk, Mig-21, UH-1H. What is all the fuss... is this going to prevent any of those seeing the light of day... no. If you feel that F-35 is potentially not going to be realistic... so what? Don't buy it. Exercise consumer choice, and let the product be judged on its own merits. Isn't that what free markets and capitalism is about? Which the last time I checked is broadly what we live in. Don't like it, don't believe it will suit your purposes, don't think it will work... then simply don't open your wallet. And that's the long and short of it really. But don't throw arrows and tell them "you shouldn't be doing this". It's just counter productive really, for everyone. As I said at the start, lack of realism in a product isn't a communicable disease. If the community doesn't like it, it won't get bought or put into missions. This will not effect anything. Other then maybe attract some people who might have passed this sim by before, which equals money for ED, money for a third party developer and continued development and growth. Lets not judge this product before it's out of the hanger. Given his background in F22 and B2 avionics I happen to believe that the developer has access to information that should make this module pretty convincing. If that is not the case, sales and reaction from the community will quickly indicate otherwise once the product is further in development. But until then how about we support someone who is choosing to contribute to our hobby community and industry? Rather then simply urinate in their cornflakes. Is it perhaps possible that the reason so many people have their knickers in a twist over it is that as a group flight sim enthusiasts are somewhat elitist and opinionated - and anything other then 100% somehow damages fragile egos built out of not being able to do this for real? I know I have certainly been guilty of that myself, so no offence intended. Perhaps we should all take a moment - collectively un-bunch our panties - and put it all in perspective?

I'd be guessing Fighter Ops maybe?

This is due to Ubisoft owning the rights to LOMAC. FC is an offshoot of LOMAC so the install is required to satisfy a legal obligation. It's unfortunate, but Ubisoft have made it so. It's also been discussed at length on the forums. Have a search and you will find the info.

test