Rongor

Then I recommend the OP to edit the thread title, which still claims to address issues with a Flight director (which we don't have in the simulation).

This is some poor judgement on your side, piston. You conveniently post a bug report but even after 8 pages of discussion refuse to deliver any evidence for your claim. There isn't even evidence for assuming there is a flight director at all in this simulation. The term "flight director" isn't mentioned a single time in the 670 pages manual of this sim. Yet you claim there is one, simply judging by the looks of those two yellow bars. Advised to notice the related pages in the manual (which would enlighten you how to understand those two steering bars) you refuse to face those descriptions, solely judged by your religious faith in those bars being a flight director. 1. There is no FD in this sim. You don't find a FD in the manual. 2. Those two bars are explained in the manual of this sim, nowhere did you report they wouldn't function as described there. 3. You claim the ED manual is doing no help here because it is addressing a simulation only, yet you don't deliver contradictory statements from some real life document. Think about this and provide some facts. Your real life experience in airliners are facts, your videos may be. But they prove nothing, they are in fact worthless in this context here, because we need knowledge of the A-10C in this case and not of any other aircraft. ED didn't model a flight director at all in this A-10C sim. Hence they didn't model it wrong. You may wish to have it modeled, but even then we would need some fact telling us there is a FD in the real one. As long as we don't have this, we will be left by the flight manual, which is telling us how to interpret those steering bars. Since they work as described: No bug.

Because what you are saying may work for VOR radials, TACAN courses and GPS/INS but not when the FD operates solely on receptions of ILS transmissions.

"No" says it all. You can slave the TGP to SOI or to the current steerpoint. The gun pipper is none of these.

Sounds more like an idea for mission scripting. I don't see how you would implement it otherwise. There is no such thing like airspace in the game nor an AI which can handle decisions like that or even have a clue what we talk about here. AI is very limited in DCS...

In real life you can't change color nor intensity.

Great. So it is a start. Good luck!

Piston85, you find those courses in your DCS installation. They are published on the approach charts in the DCSWorld\Doc\Charts\DCS_VAD_Charts_A10C.pdf Hope this helps. I still don't see why you need a FD to do a proper ILS approach, especially since you say you are familiar with IFR. Also I still don't see why we should assume the A-10 bears a Flight Director, at least not one we would expect to behave like FD in civilian aircraft. Regardless if there is a FD or not in the real A-10C, there certainly is none in DCS A-10C.

The A-10C doesn't feature a flight director. You probably refer to the yellow pitch and roll steering bars in the ADI. Read pages 112 and 113 in the A-10C flight manual to understand what exactly they indicate. Let me add on a side note, that a FD should of course react to a course setting, as it is its job to guide you on that course. But again, this is no FD.

No wonder, ED makes us think so every year again.

since OP didn't mention that step, I would assume he omitted that necessary action before start up attempt.

Enter the controls settings and redefine the according axis. All of them.

I would support any development of additional sceneries, no matter if photorealistic or not. DCS lacks theaters.

I added my opinion to the discussion. You aren't required to agree nor to question the point of offering my opinion here as there can't be a discussion without diverging points of view.

Then I just don't get the point of all this hype nor of those livestreams. I don't even really understand what there is to discuss in this thread when still nobody can tell when DCSW2 will arrive. It can't be that close, otherwise they could simply say so. All this teasing about DCS World 2 is going on for about 2 years, maybe even longer. This is ridiculous.

Incorrect. They can be and you should assign them to your full desire with all modules you use.

New summer sale now open http://store.steampowered.com/app/223750/

I really do hope we will have some autogen scenery (like in prepar3d and former MSFS) between the detailed DCS map chunks, so that we actually can have a globe.

They would have to create a layer of textures for IR, for all the models there are ingame... Edit: read it as "for all surfaces there are" Don't get me wrong, of course it would have been cool if they had tried that. But I can also understand that they didn't and probably won't. Probably it is not worth the required work. DCS features so much more than E/O.

DCS is working digital in this case. Either the object can be tracked or it can't. There is no computing of sensed data, which distinguishes between weak and not so weak signals and attempts to calculate best tracking marks and profiles out of this. Real life E/O trackers compare whole scenes and evaluate these for trackable signatures. DCS only jumps on an object if it is defined to be trackable and if no environmental factors prevent that from happening (sensor masking, weather) In real life things like background scatter (especially IR) or diffuse contours play important roles. Not so in DCS. And that is why won't help here, as this is not how it works in DCS. DCS doesn't know temperatures.

I absolutely don't. As long as there is more than one server online, there will always be fragmentation. If I have map A, I will join servers playing map A. Where is the chaos?? There isn't any more confusion as at its current state. I may join a server to find out that my preferred a/c isn't playable in the played mission. That can happen today and it will happen in the future. So everything will work out as usual.

Library section is empty...

It is "near" since 2 years or so. So I don't really understand all the hype about it, only because some thread was moved. ED did a great job in keeping up the notion that EDGE and NTTR are somewhat near. Only this doesn't work so well anymore after so long time. I don't mind waiting longer, I just have given up to get hyped because of some meaningless hint of "nearing completion" which meant nothing at all in the last times. Frankly I don't understand why ED does this. Wouldn't have hurt anybody to tell us "soon" when it is indeed right around the corner. Since we now learnt "soon" and "last 10 percent" can mean anything, I don't care anymore for all their teasing. Just wake me up when it's done.

Flagrum, as you will know, the contrast you refer to is also nothing but colorful pixels. All imaging in DCS is a processing of graphics, not of simulated sensor inputs. Same with gain. Just wanted to point this out very clear, since the OP's is looking for the simulation of sensing.;)

DCS is a simulation. So it is simulated. There is no contrast. There also are no real objects nor sensors. It's all colorful pixels on your monitor. The TGP and maverick a modeled in a way that you will enjoy a perception of operating real sensors though. This simulation has its limitations. IR-imaging is somewhat odd...