Frostiken

I'm using the TrackClip Pro with TIR5 and, well, it's annoying. I'm using it clipped to a hat since I use surround sound (bah, headsets!), and it sure as hell beats the normal hat clip for accuracy, range, and just about everything else. Problem I have is that it's really pedantic and constantly drifts off-center. I have to recenter the damn thing more than I have to trim my aircraft. Look to the TCN panel, look back at HUD, view is totally sunk and can't see bottom of HUD, have to recenter. I'm not even moving my body, you'd think it would take a few times for it to finally drift away, but no, almost every single time I look over my shoulder or something, when I go back to looking forward, it's as if I sank 6 inches in my seat, with the forward console filling my view and only the top of the HUD visible. Anyone else had this problem? I really don't want to go back to that stupid clip but this is kind of ridiculous.

All standard loadouts keep the pod on the right wing, and there's really nothing to be gained from doing otherwise...

Some hints for the future: - Only difference between auto and manual lase is convenience. If anything, auto is better as it relieves you from having to concentrate on lasing the target. - Don't lase too early, or else the bomb will try to cut the corner and run out of energy and fall short. Typically 8-10 seconds before impact is when you want to being lasing. - Watch the M on the pod to ensure you're not going to mask your pod, as it will hinder you from lasing. Typically my egress from a mid-altitude bomb release involves a gentle turn to the right to ensure the pod has maximum visibility.

GBU-31s and -38s are GPS-guided, not laser. They're programmed by the aircraft armament system before launch (which is why you have to hold the pickle button) and fall under their own guidance from there. What you want are GBU-12s and 10s, which are laser-guided.

To be fair, if you use an image you found on the internet as your avatar, you're breaking copyright too, so let's not act like it's a bigger deal than it really is...

Not to be Debbie Downer but isn't it kind of pathetic that we're praising a company for, you know... having QA? Are things really that bad that *not* breaking your game makes you an awesome developer? :) Allow me to say what we all really felt when we first read the thread title: "GOD DAMMIT." I want meh shadows :D (Actually I want my new graphics cards first...)

I'm pretty sure Eagle Dynamics is in position to dictate what NP does, not the other way around, given that the DCS series probably makes up the second-largest bit of marketshare for them next to IL2.

Turn ILS off.

:cry: Don't worry sorcer3r, they'll fix them up for DCS: F-15E :D

A GBU-31 in-game would move a *lot* of dirt since we can't air-burst them :D

Having more complicated failures that don't necessarily mean an aborted flight would be a great way to have your cake and eat it too - the only real way to get this information would be from maintainers, and unfortunately we don't have the MTBF information (every jet is a piece of shit to us :D). As an example - failed color channels in the MFCDs, HUD out of focus, stuck OSBs, displays that blank out under Gs... the real unfortunate aspect of our current system failure setup is that many parts are either bricked or they're not. For something like the CADC, a failure in real life doesn't always mean a catastrophic loss of everything like we have now. Having more inane 'nuisance' failures make up the mainstay of them may make it more appealing than the current 'it either works or it doesn't' approach. A failure involving the TEWS pod never means that it's totally useless (though it could!), but do something instead like cause you to be unable to jam targets in the rear aspect. Or maybe your video simply doesn't work on the TEWS scope and you'll get missile indications, you'll get tones, but you won't get any RWR symbology...

Please stop giving crew chiefs credit for things that aren't their job :P Thank them for putting gas in your jet, and maybe making that wheel really pretty looking, but that's all :D As CompressorStall pointed out, I find that random failures or problems provides new levels of excitement. I can understand how you might want to turn them off for the occasional rare event, and a CADC failure means your flight is pretty much over, but they talked about being able to reset some failures as well. Combined with more 'realistic' fail rates as well as the possibility of resetting them (this is not a 1.1.0.8 feature yet though and may never make it in-game) I for one will be leaving them on. As mentioned, I've had more bird strikes than random failures. - Signed, a spec who's tired of getting confused with a crew chief :P

Quality of maintenance has nothing to do with it. Avionics parts suffer internal failures and the only thing that could possibly curtail it in the real world would have been finding someone more competent to manufacture it :P Myself I've suffered next to zero random failures... I've actually hit more birds (250%) than had random equipment failures.

PS: Whenever a pilot says 'oh it just started working', what it really means is 'Oh shit I didn't even have it turned on'. :D

In conclusion - pilots are lazy :P Turn off whatever you want, just make sure the power and engines are no longer running :D If you blew up an avionics component, oh well, just redball it next sortie!

Heh, I already called it 'sissy mode' :D

Nope. A-10 uses the same ILS receiver as the F-15: AN/ARN-108. No localizer, you get no glideslope.

Anyone cheating in a flight sim has definitely got their priorities in the wrong order :D

I'll post it here, but you seem to have found a bug, Fish - you shouldn't have your Glideslope needle before / without a localizer signal. On a more minor note you shouldn't hear the Morse code unless you're within the localizer lobes either. Excellent video though, I'm going to give it a shot myself.

Actually, for me the strangest part about the ILS system is that you can pick up the glideslope before / without a localizer. ILS systems, at least American ones, don't give you glideslope without localizer present. The reasoning is that you can land hard, and you can land soft, but if you completely missed the runway it doesn't matter :D Makes sense to me! This actually should be considered a bug. You can see it in Fish's video, he rolls out of the turn and instantly has glideslope, but no localizer. You also shouldn't be hearing that Morse code unless you're in the localizer lobes either, as the code piggybacks on the localizer antenna signal.

In -15s, they don't turn off fuel, or even the engine masters. Hell you still find them with the JFS switch on.

DCS: SA-10. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... *Blip* *Blip* *Blip* *FWOOSH* *Blip* *Blip* ... ... ... ... :D

Well my problem with DLC is that it's always massively overpriced when compared to the value of a full game... Additionally I have more problems with, say, 3rd party apps. I'd love to pay for something like TACView, but the programmer wants £17 for it... consider *that* value compared to, maybe $15 for the entire Nevada theater. Let me be the first to point out that the iPhone app store didn't make a billion trillion dollars because apps cost $30 each :/ If TACview was $8, or even $10, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. $30 is hard to swallow... But I digress :D

I turned off SAS while landing because I thought that's what you were supposed to do. BIG mistake.

The funny thing about mods is you can chose what and what not to install. Additionally, if you think mods automatically equals bullshit moron console horseshit, go peruse the selection of mods for ArmA 2. The admirable work that BI did with the game pales in comparison to the extent that many people have taken it. They haven't. FC2/LO, Blackshark, and A-10 all work on slightly different 'engines'. This is why there's such problems getting them all to play nice, and is also why you have to have three different installations. Ideally, you'd have just ONE "DCS" program that contains the game world. Any and all patches alter this. When you install KA-50, it'd see you have the game world already installed, and it would install the KA-50 plugin. They would all literally run on the same program. That there are such problems getting KA-50 and A-10 multiplayer working together is pretty much proof that the engines are too different from each other, when realistically they should never have a problem talking to each other as they'd all be running the same 'rules' and updated code.