Eihort

As long as the raytracer was adjusted for RF, as it behaves completely differently than visible light, even the occlusion, that could work. Be really funny to use the 3D model of the RCS instead of the physical models and see these strange mis-shapen blobs flying around. LOL

Pledged.

Remember: Configuration managment is your friend. :D

"Here's today's cards guys!" *drops ream of paper on table* *groans* -------------------- "Today we're doing the B-12 series..." "BINGO!"

First, focus on flying the plane, and getting it to do what you want. If you're in relatively stable flight, and you're tired of having to apply pressure to the stick just to keep it straight, trim it out. If other things are going on and you don't have time to care, don't worry about it. Just focus on making the plane do what you want it to.

Not sure how sneaky the AI is, but other systems carry optical methods of target acq. Granted this is only good for ambushing if an IADS can tell you where to look, or the target gives itself away first, plus a whole slew of other obvious drawbacks. however, the first notification a pilot gets is an RWR screaming at them, followed seconds later by impact if it's done right.

Although expensive, the information in this 'game' (more accurately called a simulation) was derived from real world sources and is widely regarded as a very reasonable simulation of an extremely complicated topic. In the scenario book is a good analysis of the doctrines of both the US Navy and the Soviet Navy of the era. http://www.clashofarms.com/high-tide.html

I'll raise this topic from the dead too, since I'm now a Journeyman Radar Tech. PRF is how often you're sending out a pulse. This is important, because given the speed of light, the farthest you can see is how far the wave travels out and back in the time of that pulse. If you get a return outside this time, the radar doesn't know if this is a close contact from the second pulse, or a distant contact from the first. EWRs work on exactly this. Typically they have long PRFs so they can see a loooong way, and the actual time of the pulse itself is a bit longer too to put out more energy. This results in a min. range because the pulse is still being transmitted when it's bounced off an object. There's a fancy switch that seperates the transmitter and reciever from the antenna, so you don't fry the reciever when transmitting. A CW radar needs two antennas because, well, it's transmitting a continuous wave. This is great for knowing the speed of something relative to you. They can modulate the wave, and also generate range data. If you absolutely have to know exactly where it is, or at a minimum, what direction it is, and what speed it's going, CW is the way to go. This is used in some SAM systems when they launch missiles to track targets and their own missile to guide it. This is also how RWRs know when they're being shot at. Another viable method is using really high PRF to get a lot of accurate returns with both range, speed, heading, azmiuth, and elevation data, but again, because the PRT is so small, range is limited. However short range SAMs don't go far enough to really care.

Rise topic. Yes, it's called blinking. No, I don't think the AI does it on it's own, but I believe you can set it up with triggers. P.S. As stated, people will hate you.

"I'm out of it for a little while and people have delusions of grandeur." Good ol' Han. After much reading, I'm all for getting out from under this yolk called Ubisoft. The F-15C and Su-27 AFM releases are a good way to do this and get more people interested in the sim by giving the late comers a way in without having to order a redonculously old game just to play the new one. However I hope ED treads carefully in how they integrate this with the current FC3 customers. That could be a pretty big sticking point for people. We are rewarded for our long time devotion to a staple of ED's products by repeatedly being asked when we purchase add-ons to hang onto discs for YEARS, and adding only marginal feature sets every time. A lot of us were hoping this kind of business would stop with DCS World and now we're being asked to endure it again, with the sneaking suspicion that it's going to keep happening with Su-25, A-10A, MiG-29, and Su-33.

I very much appreciate the updated news!

PCGamer sim of the year, and they didn't knock the physics. I've driven large trucks, and yeah, there's a little off here and there, but otherwise it's pretty close. I really don't see how you can compare the physics to something like a racing game as you can't come close to comparing the conditions. I could see someone knocking the physics in GT5 vs GTR. The high end vehicles in that game do not behave at all the way they should, compared to GTR. However, GT5 still accels in simulating more modest cars.

RIP. Wish you could continue the journey of this hobby with us. You got us this far.

Just the lies.

Doing the dome is easy. BWHawthorne I think it is advertises/works for/demos software that does exactly that. Predistorts the image so it shows up perfect on whatever surface you're using as a screen. That's clearly FSX/Prepar3d, probably running Superbug with custom panels for the touchscreens, and the magic of a WSO can be accomplished by just putting a keyboard in front of the controller tied to each bay. Not buying that it's not FSX. Sorry. EDIT This video clearly shows an FSX screen on the touch screen for the Bell.

Just in case the post falls off the bottom of the first page.... http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=102464

That and the on again, off again production can cause those sorts of issues. Doesn't make it a "great cockpit building platform", quite the opposite. If you think it's bad for the pilots, the wiring behind that cockpit would make maintinence a huge problem being different from airframe to airframe.

You mean to tell me that an empty cargo plane weights substantially more than it's AEW cousin with no fuel? That makes absolutely no sense even if the engines are better.

That last point has me on the edge of my seat. I truly hope we can get multiseat multiplayer.

It actually really is just that simple. There's a lot of things out there that don't move all that much that you don't want to be looking at. Chaff namely, after it's had time to disperse. Certain bands are also sensitive to water vapor (clouds). Additionally, there's things like multipath and ambiguous returns that even objects "at altitude" don't get rid of. There's also the radar type. Most air intercept radars are pulse-doppler, and a zero doppler shift has to be thrown out by necessity or you get a bunch of unintelligible garbage. The plus side is you get things for TWS modes. In a missle, it's helpful to make sure you don't see this massive loud return otherwise known as "the ground" and home in on that instead. When you really get into the voodoo science of RF, it's actually really simple to make a small object look far bigger than it really is, and some of that geometry is not all that rare on man-made structures like buildings, and even smaller objects. A mylar baloon from the store is a good example.

You're not out anything by getting a Steam copy. The key Steam gave you *is* a "real" copy. DCS even has an autoupdate function now, so there really isn't any feature of Steam you're missing. Unless of course you want to tally the obscene amount of hours you've played it.

Did you turn on the "sync to hotas on start up" optoin?

The F-35 and Pak-Fa threads certainly prove this.

I did not see this when I just rearmed in a MP mission. I did not jettison the tank while I was out. I grabbed a new external tank and missiles, and the internal tanks did not fill, and the tape didn't move. Only after moving the fuel slider on the rearm window down and back up to 100%, did it finally take fuel.

Go to the controls area of options. Select the aircraft (you'll have to do them individually). Then the axis commands catagory. Find the column corresponding to your joystick, then the axis you want to change. Click it. Click "Axis Tune" at the bottom. Changing the curve will determine how hard the axis changes for a given amount of stick deflection. This is probably what you're looking for. Changing the steepness of the curve will determine how far the axis can possibly go at max stick deflection. Suggest you leave this alone for flight axes. Useful for a mini-stick set up to move sensors around to fine tune it. The dead zone determines how far you have to move the stick to get anything out of it. Too small and resting your hand on the stick could give unwanted inputs. Too big and you're moving the stick farther for no real reason. Experiment to find what works for you.