Rongor

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...

1) RTFM 2) watch the tutorial videos provided in the training section 3) do as told in those videos and add what you recall from RTFM 4) fly

shouldn't they continue to turn due to air flow?

Does that really matter? Why?

Ok, I understand your question now. Well, you may want to put that pinky switch into its center position when fencing in. We have to be sure that lights are off after doing that, so the spring loaded acol switch is forced to flip to aft position. If it wouldn't be designed that way, we would have to trust solely the pinky switch. But we want to be sure that lights are off right? So, switch flips back and we can judge the anticol is shut down by its switch position. So the pinky switch actually has the force to alter the switch positions, if pinky is not aft.

Bahger and Gurby, simply look it up in the manual... Hint: pages 160 and 92

Since it isn't in this thread, the answer is no.

Since we lack multicrew cockpit, I don't see any use of this. ED should invest all hands into EDGE finalizing instead. Also the mentioned a/c are all FC3-level. So ED would need to implement advanced systems modelling for them first, to get them out of their current simplified state. This will probably happen in some distant future. Until then: ED should invest all hands into EDGE finalizing instead.

Use your TGP as SOI. Locate target and make it SPI by TMS UP LONG. Slave all sensors to current SPI by CHINA HAT FORWARD LONG. Switch to MAV page on preferred MFCD. Set MAV as SOI. TMS UP SHORT. Fire. Done.

you can attempt to listen to stuff like this http://www.lazygranch.com/red_audio.htm in your car or mp3 player to get used to radio chatter like this. Helped me a lot to train my brain memorizing all those numbers... [url=http://www.lazygranch.com/red_audio.htm][/url]

What you are listening to are brevity codes, you find them on this wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiservice_tactical_brevity_code or better yet via the footnote #1 of that linked wiki page...

I see. CBU warfare - here I come...

so what?

Only thing I was referring to was the OP's "defense rich environment". Either get enough intel to rule out the no go areas for your helicopter before diving into that environment or do the scouting yourself. And yes, I emphasize to do that reconnaissance from safe distance.

Generally spotting small targets isn't easy. To fight this fact with going closer by flying low is a wrong conclusion. You don't improve your search by going in low. On the contrary. Your awareness greatly suffers from increased blocking of LOS and also you decrease your ability to actually notice something due to your higher angular speeds when passing a potential target. Don't depriciate your E/O sights. While doing so, you deprive them of their main purpose. Black and white is how it's done, also with the TGP of your DCS:A-10C and in the real world with most drones, targeting pods and also in law enforcement. If you want to do surveillance and search for targets and threats, you will do it high, to gain the maximum efforts out of this nice equipment. Aircraft and especially helos going in low is mostly found in action movies, because it looks cool of course. Other than that, you don't gain anything. I wouldn't go in low, as long as I can not be absolutely sure about the absence of potential threats or as long as I don't face serious air threats I would prefer to hide from. If you scouted your target zone enough to be almost certain where your potential threats are located, feel free to descend while doing some attack runs, but always climb when egressing. Staying low will not only endanger you but again, you also won't receive any advantage of awareness by it but sooner the contrary.

Flying higher is generally better to scan an area for targets. Flying higher means lesser obstacles in your line of sight and certainly a better overview across your sector. Maybe it is harder then to spot that one single tank hiding somewhere, but do you really want to discover it while flying low around the next house corner? You can and should use your camera to scan an area for targets, from a safe spot some miles away downrange. If you don't have to fear SAMs or enemy air patrols, you surely would go in "high". Fly above 5000 ft / 1500 meters and you will be pretty much safe from AAA. These numbers can vary a bit upwards to around 7000 ft. If an AAA engages you, shots might be quite inaccurate, giving you the opportunity to spot the AAA. Which might have been difficult while flying ground hugging...

may I ask how we could join a server featuring Abu Dhabi as long as we don't have the Hormuz map? Or did I miss the map's release?