Zakatak

God damn you guys look to be making fast progress!

Currently I have a CH Eclipse Yoke which I'm using for Prepar3D, and it has a lever for throttle, prop, and mixture. I'm currently flying the A2A C172 for training but I'd like to buy the either the Milviz C310/Baron 55 or RealAir B60 (too big?) later for twin training. I see three options. 1. Buy a throttle quadrant 2. Use mouse for individual lever manipulation 3. Set up the Eclipse to switch modes I've already dropped a lot on flight sims, more than is healthy for a university student, and I'm running out of desk space. Number one isn't ideal. Number two is pretty awkward, and I figure that if I move my throttle when I have them set in different positions, both throttles are going to follow my joysticks inputs, which is problematic for twin training. Three is ideal but I'm not sure it is possible. Here is what I'd like: I have a three mode switch on the front of my Eclipse. When set on mode 2, I'd like the levers to control both throttles/props/mixtures. When I turn left to mode 1, I just want them to move the left side levers. When I turn right to mode 3, I only want control of the right side. Is that doable with CH Control Manager? I seem to have an 8 axis limit, so I wonder if I'd run into the problem of having 9 for the lever controls alone. Thanks in advance.

Wouldn't angels be 1264? Or is it different than flight levels?

I hope this is an intelligent movie with something worthwhile to say rather than a preachy or meaningless cash-in on the controversy around the use of drones.

The F-5E with the APG-159-1 (TV mode for Mavericks) is basically my ideal module, I'd love to fly this.

I'd probably buy one of the later S variants used by Italy, which have AIM-7/AIM-9L capability.

I'm not putting this in the Wish List because it's an incredibly far fetched proposal that I wouldn't expect to happen in dozen a years, but I can dream. I'm looking at buying a civil simulator to act as a training aid (working towards CPL) so I can study up on emergencies/procedures/radio/etc while having fun with it, and I'm not really a fan of my options. FSX is unstable, outdated, requires payware for a remotely realistic experience, and has an ass ugly UI. P3D requires me to pay $200 for a professional license if I'm to use the product in good faith, and that's still just an updated FSX, which has an engine I don't like. X-Plane 10 has good flight modelling but it's not really geared toward GA and I've heard bad things about what it's like out of the box, especially in regards to AI/ATC. But ED's products, flawed as they are, just feel so right in comparison. Setting up controls is nice, flying feels convincing, systems are deeply modelled, the UI is gorgeous, the graphics are nice, the standard of quality ensures I know what to expect when I buy something, adding lots of addons/mods feels unnecessary, etc. EDGE looks to be eliminating most of the issues I have with the engine. I gotta say, if ED magically tripled in size and created Digital General Aviation Simulator side by side, that'd be my ideal sim. Replace the mission builder with a flight planner, replace load out screen with a weight and balance, improve the ATC significantly, more in depth training that could be setup like flight school, a map with various terrain a few times larger than the Black Sea theatre, and bam. Perfect. Simulating an entire world isn't of much importance to me, just make it big enough that your average GA plane can expect to require a stop for fuel if they wanted to cross end to end. Start out with your standard set: C172R for basic training with steam gauges or the G1000, Tecnam P2006 for multi-engine, R44 for rotary, C208B for turboprop and air taxi, work your way up from there. Maybe someone could throw in an AT-802 for crop dusting and a CL-415 for firefighting. It'd be a blast. Yeah, not going to happen, just a ridiculous idea. edit: I guess it got moved to wishlist anyway

Yes, just release it as a beta with SFM and include AFM as a regular update instead of a paid module. Increase the cost of the release a little if you need the cash, people won't mind. They are getting two aircraft after all, even if they're similar.

We already got an M2KC from Metal2Mesh/RAZBAM and their FSX version is pretty excellent. I know a Mirage III isn't the same and that the 2000 would kick a MiG-21's ass up and down Europe, but I'd rather not have "overlap" in a sim as sparsely populated as DCS if you know what I mean. An F-5E would be a fantastic addition and a good competitor to the MiG-21bis. The joy of AGM-65B included! Either that or the Draken/Viggen. I love Swedish jets.

I don't think anyone would be interested in keeping SFM. I'd just increase the initial cost by 5$ and make the AFM update free, you'll get less bad press that way. Having both SFM and AFM C-101's would be especially a pain in multiplayer since one of the two is going to have an unfair advantage over the other. Not to mention that flying them in formation will be much more difficult since the flight lead can't give certain power setting/climb angles/etc without different players performing differently. This could also create a problem for training, as what tips applies to SFM may not apply to AFM. I suggest you reconsider your plans. Also, does Spain use a combination of Metric/Imperial like we do in the US and Canada, or do they use strictly Metric like Russia? As much as I hate the Imperial system and wish it never existed, it's what I'm used to as current pilot-in-training and having Western measurements/acronyms/gauges/etc would make this a little more educational.

I'm sure this has been stated before and I missed it but will we buy both models in a combo pack or does the EB and CC have their own modules? The former would make more sense to me.

DCS is set in a fictional timeline, so making fictional sub variants of aircraft is hardly an issue. I don't imagine rigging a C-101CC for a Sea Eagle and Maverick load out would be a difficult task. It's less ridiculous than throwing US paint on a Ka-50 and Russian paint on an A-10 and having them fight, something ED already lets us do.

I'd be fine with a switch in the options menu or load out screen to add or remove it before flight, but honestly, whatever. The current method works fine and Leatherneck has a thousand other things that they should prioritize over this. This is something they should do when one of the guys has run out of tasks and is so bored he feels like programming video games.

Pardon my necro. Just tried this out. I have TrackIR 4 which works just fine, and I have 6 USB ports to play with, but it doesn't sit very well on my oddly shaped laptop (GT72) and I like wearing my earbuds over a headset (needed for TrackClip). I'm not OCD in any medical/legal capacity but I love minimizing the amount of cables and wires too. I have a built-in camera which is advertised as being 30FPS and 1080p, so I gave this a try. It was horrible at first but after messing around with the settings quite a bit, it's quite playable and reliable. However, I still notice a response time of maybe half a second, sometimes more, for my movements to translate on screen. Is that normal for Facetrack or is it just my webcam? Yes, I've noticed several options which decrease response time and I've adjusted them.

I don't support the release of SFM first, so I won't be voting with my wallet until AFM comes out, but well done. That's got to be a record time for module announcement to release.

It would make for an excellent F/A-18 stick because it seems to have the same number of functions. Two hats, two face buttons, a three way switch, one trigger, a pinky button, and paddle.

How do you make it so the ministick movement can be read as button presses instead of axis without CHCM? And doesn't pressing in the ministick serve as a mode switch by default?

I purchased a Throttle, Combatstick, and Pedals from CH but it'll be a couple weeks before I recieve them and maybe longer before I can use them (I have a busy schedule next semester). I'd like to know what I can and can't do beforehand. I've never owned a CH product so I don't know how the software works exactly. Without using any mods or software beyond the DCS profiler and the CH Control Manager, would making such a profile be possible? *Asterisks mark a shift state. And if it is possible, is there anything you'd change about it? I'd rather use the right trim wheel for zoom since it's closer to the stick and right below my pinky, but the chart didn't have an option for that. I'm pretty confident pretty much any other aircraft in DCS right now (or other games like Star Citizen/IL-2) can be mapped without any tricks, but I want to get back into the A-10C if I can.

From the FSX version, but I imagine it'll apply to the DCS.

I pay my taxes, get yer filthy government hands off mah missiles!

Belsimtek is not ED. ED is introducing their own ideal multiseat with the L-39 which will have multiplayer compatibility, something the UH-1H doesn't have.

They went with the Ka-50 because it's a single seat and therefore perfect for simulation. And the A-10 does not have an A/G radar. ED has an A/G radar in the works with the Charlie Hornet but it's not done yet.

Reading other simmers opinions on the FSX version of M2M's M2000C and RAZBAM's Metroliner really boosted my confidence in this project. It looks like they do great work.

Hell yes. 35, 37, 39, 39NG, I don't care. They make such good looking and unique aircraft. The Draken in particular looks like a spaceship.

Looking good! Is it just coming with HOT missiles? I was also wondering what the grey circle on the left side of the cockpit was, kind of looks like an RWR. What does it do?