Supersheep

@Skate: That looks ergonomically stressing as 'uck. Now, it's the military, but if they do eight hour training events in there, jeez. BTW, no TIR. That's a whole new level.

Isn't that from the integration of the force over distance? Mathemagical, but not arbitrary IMHO. Now my High School AP course ends there, so I don't know how I'd be able to scale out a constant (it's there for a reason).

Now that you mention it... I remember the missile looking somewhat differently. But I had the concept of a general lack of information about the TOW from the BW in mind. Anyways, at least the link wasn't useless. Glad you like it :)

Some time ago, some images of the TOW were needed. I don't know if that's still true, but here's one: http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/images/tow-08-2014.jpg (I like the site for its daily images)

Yeah. Think about where you want to put it while simming. Placing it badly can royally mess with your tendons and joints (*) if you maintain that over days/weeks. I found the joystick too tall to simply place in front of me on the desk (muscles get tired holding the arm up, leading to fatigue) and the throttle position was not good, either. Figure out where you need the devices located relative to you and only then go hunt for something to make that happen. Maybe your chair allows you to add some structure to it, or you have a keyboard tray that you can try. If not, check the link in my signature. For the throttle, I found a little wood box (approx 40 cm tall), added some screw-on wheels and had a mobile, perfectly-sized stand. Don't get too hung up on "that perfect place" where you think it should stand, because that's likely not comfortable. Don't be afraid to try something else if you feel weird or uncomfortable during (or after!) simming. (*) This is true for all things computer, not only simming and the TM:W. I had to take a three-week break from simming because I ignored all this and ignored the cramps ("see, I can just shake the arm and it's good again!" Don't do that to yourself). Heh this post sounds like it's written by a priest or something, but maybe it saves you from my mistakes. Happy flying!

ATI 5850, DX11

Easy as can be. Is there more to it than making them reflective? I'd hate to have nobody thinking of that and someone with a can of high albedo spay paint laughing his ass off as he upgrades the inventory xD

Could it be that we mean different things with the term 'first stage'? I don't understand this idea, to be honest. The first stage is the big rocket engine that is continuously burning, and continues its ascend. The other part is something that does not produce thrust before being jettisoned, as it originates from the top of the missile. The smaller motor quickly fizzles out. If the first stage was dumped, wouldn't there need to be another rocket booster? Anyways, thanks for all the input!

Another thing is that language which resembles Urban's dictionary oftentimes leads to gradual and almost imperceptive (imperceivable? iDunno) shifts in the communicated content. This is far worse on other Teamspeak servers, but might or might not contribute to OPs request. And not only is there nothing wrong with that, but it is also considerate and responsible. Been there, done that x2, and it's a peepton of work even for a smallish group. For the situation that I picture Fakum in, it is just remotely helpful but effective at "guiding" the discussion.

Mine usually pulls a chameleon, stays hot and makes itself noticeable :(

I am also thinking about some sort of fairing, but had assumed that it'd be better blown off after max areodynamic pressure had been reached to protect whatever is under it. Which leads to the question as to why it's blown off in the first place, since it'll be exposed to aero-pressure again later in the flight. My thinking does not seem to plausible to me, maybe we'll get more ideas. BTW I think that it's a land-based, silo launched vehicle. In the first few frames of the scene, the horizon appears to be "land-ly".

Another curiosity, at 52:52 min (link is timestamped): What is the thing at the top of the missile that is blown away, and why does it need to be discarded? It looks like the vehicle gets a good kick out of it, and makes attitude control more complicated. Plus, it wastes some nice thrust. (Sorry, I cannot identify the missile type although I see how that would be helpful) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJxN_2sXuHA&t=52m52s

Cheers. Can't rep you up, so have a +1 for masterly deconflicting a rigged post.

Now see what you did there! I've gotten used to see c0ff being dragged out of his caffeine-flooded cave, but you managed to get the big boss here. Run! :) Side-note (and not intended to annoy): Are "Edge" and "2.0" synonymous or is someone pulling another Duke here?

I didn't read the other nine pages, but doesn't that statement only prove that a) there's no 1.3 and that the 21 will come with 2.0? Now, what if we get a 1.5, a couple minor updates and then .6 - .9? That's not excluded by the statement, as "later, after" leaves a lot of air.

You mean with the loading screen image (the orange background one)? I have that printed out and on the back of my Manual and "stuff" Ringbinders :)

(bumping that other thread from the top, might as well post something useful) Happy birthday and many happy landings!

Delivered today :) Might post a picture tomorrow after Germany has rotated back under the sun.

What you are seeing are rented dedicated servers in a data center, operated by a professional company. However, they are most likely root servers completely administered (Teamviewer etc) by the people running DCS; I don't know of any turnkey DCS servers. While this is pretty expensive (50-120 USD/month?), the upsides are a beefy internet connection and compute power. However, especially the CPU and memory requirements drive the price.

If this is intended to increase the rate of players on voice com, I'm afraid that members of the subset of players that takes the extra step to install the mod also belongs to the subset of engaged players who is on teamspeak already anyways... :( Otherwise, I agree, that'd be a nifty feature. Also: Cheers Ian!

Aye thanks. Looks like I'm not active enough at all to follow the issues and fixes. Changing the settings isn't a big deal at all, but having to constantly monitor and instruct and nag people to set it makes the MP part much more complex than it needs to be IMHO.

Haha! My neighbor was a telco engineer (retired) and when he build his home in 1990, he installed ethernet lines in his home, in every room. Said the contractor: "Those are some expensive speaker wirings..." Is there a system behind the changes of the DCS network setting? I remember LAN being the recommended one, and then, IIRC, 1024. I'm glad that some people have enough data to figure out the most stable setting, but having this change arbitrarily with every other patch seems both arcane and inconvenient. Edit: for lack of attention and spelling.

Before I saw the video in the first post, I was rewinding it over and over to see what the flas might be. Now, I don't think it's guidance at all, as has been said. More like a distance measurement, fuze indicator, video time stamp or equipment calibration. @dok: I really do dig your avatar.

The one flash at 2:14 (approx) looks more like 10 - 20 cm indeed. In the video desc it says that the distance was 3,x and 6,x kilometers, so it is definitely comparable to the slant range of the C-130. I wonder if it is unrelated to a laser as above and has to do with the weapon/fuze because it is only seen with the Hellfire, but not the other missile. Different purposes might explain the difference in diameter seen here. Additionally, there's an AH-64D doing some work in the test here, throwing in another variable... Edit: My edit got lost. Standby. Edit edit: Edit is edited back. Right now, I only know that I know jack :book:

This video gives the impression that either the beam is not particularly focused from the beginning or it gets disturbed by the air and what is in it. Since it is visible in NVGs, I assume it has to be IR, which might not be as focused as an actual invisible laser. Is this still useful for guiding whatever would be used or is it a more general illumination/tracking/marking device? Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuBPigVpPy0