JayPee

:pilotfly: Clear explanations,1080p, and lots of informative shots! Perhaps a bit Discovery Channel super-duper-mega-power-helicopter-ish, but interesting nevertheless.

That fish's name? HODOR!

Well, I'm sorta stuck.. I can select it in the loadout screen for stations 1 and 11. It also shows up in the DSMS page as ALQ-184(v). Only issue is it doesn't show up under the wing while the game does recognise the CLSID and .edm file. I'm busy finding out what's wrong.. Will keep you posted. In the meantime, why don't you help me? I added the following to db_weapons_data.lua { CLSID = "{ALQ_184}", Picture = "ALQ184.png", displayName = _("ALQ-184"), Weight = 200, Cx_pil = 0.00083740234375, attribute = {4, 15, 45, 142}, Elements = { [1] = { Position = {0, 0, 0}, ShapeName = "ALQ-184", }, -- end of [1] }, -- end of Elements },The following to Types.lua wstype_containers[142] = {wsType_Weapon, wsType_GContainer, wsType_Jam_Cont} -- ALQ_184The following to A-10C.lua under station 1 and 11 { CLSID = "{ALQ_184}" }, --ALQ-184Credit goes to Eddie for these 3 steps. He's using it with a set of internal squadron mods. Currently I'm finding out why it does work in combination with his squadron's mods and why the model doesn't show up for me. Everything else besides the missing model does work it seems. PS: You either have to make a .png or copy another one and rename it. Whatever you do, you need a .png with the same filename as the .edm.

Don't get your hopes up, it's still a notebook... Anyway, I think youre right but I find a 200 buck purchase a lot to simply base on a gut feeling. No offense :) EDIT: yeah good point about the return policy. Probably do that if I can't find an answer to my question within a week or so.

Hi all, I've got a bit of a weird research in mind but I figured it's worth a try. Currently I have a steady 30 FPS (capped at 1/2 vsync) with only minor drops at my native of 1366*768. Given the small size I am thinking of getting a 1920*1080. This results in 2Mpx rendered vs. 1Mpx. I'd somehow like to get a fair prediction of what my FPS will be prior to buying a screen. Since Fraps measures at the endmost of the pipeline I am thinking to benchmark the sim at a resolution higher than what my current screen supports. This will lead to a 'no input' screen if it is possible to force a resolution at all... Any thoughts on how to pull this off? Obviously I don't have a 1920*1080 at my disposal to try out.

A-10C Audio production mod - Diveplane Cockpit spelling error fix v8 - Snoopy Enhanced terrain low'n'slow v1.2 (guaranteerd no FPS drops) - Toby23 Eddie's custom countermeasure programs v1.3 - Eddie GAU-8A 30mm cannon audio mod - Diveplane NVG Mod 1.0 v4b2 - Nrgized RAE RWR Audio expansion - Tetra

Problem solved.

We should get a mod going on for more useful and more realistic countermeasures. Currently I'm doing some preliminary homework for it.

Let's not do that prior tp multicore support. I do agree, there are details not implemented accurately which could have been without revealing underlying secrets around used techniques by simply emulating the noticable results of an action.

If that is true, I must be mistaken by what I thought to remember as visually different colour schemes on the MAV's image.

I know, but the RL manual says otherwise and I also recalled seeing otherwise on images on the web. No specifics links at hand right now. OK thanks. I can stop looking now.

The info in the post you link is outdated. The game engine's using A, B, and L. It doesn't auto select any other programme. Little short on time now, but if you select all posts by me you can find a topic about it not too long ago (8 weeks or so).

Quick question, I'm pretty sure when I tap the polarity switch the MAV image is supposed to switch between dark cold on light hot or light hot on dark cold. However, only the MAV symbology is noticably changing from black to white or the other way around, not the footage the sensor's feeding my MFD. It feels weird, it should look different somehow. Did I mess up graphic options? Is it a bug perhaps? I couldn't find other reports of this.

+1 My point exactly, perhaps I didnt elaborate on it as much as you did.

OK, thank you.

And which items would be regarded as secret info?

I took a moment to read the transcript of the YouTube conversation with Coretex. The fidelity of the 18E will be limited by the information available (to the public) and will therefore not be entirely on par with the 10C. Given this knowledge I wonder how ED will brand it, sim (as in: 10C, 50, etc.) or simplified?

Was looking for one, couldn't find it. Am I blind? :)

L-39, L-159... My bad. The A-10C suite 3 is modeled minus accurate CMS and IFF and some other things I forgot to mention. I wonder what will be allowed to be left out for something to still be of sim fidelity. For instance, the Apache D/E is still a no go for ED because they can't model it accurately.

Henceforth I'll use FC3 level fidelity and sim fidelity to not step on anyone's toes. Still leaves me to wonder where the classification of sim fidelity versus FC3 level fidelity will for upcoming modules like the L-159, F/A-18E, etc. will be based on.

So summarised, there's the DCSW core including the arcade SU-25T. On top of that you can install sim modules like A-10C or arcade modules like A-10A. And as a 3rd option you can install all arcade modules combined at once by installing FC3 onto DCSW. Why is it worth a discussion? If it isn't an in-depth study sim it is an arcade-ish flight game. Unless you have reasons to define a grey area in between... With regards to the topic of arcade/FC3 fidelity versus sim/DCS fidelity, I would like to know what the hard criteria according to ED are when classifying a module. Especially when 3rd parties are making modules of which we know they can not model it accurately because of limited publication on systems. If for instance the F-18E would achieve a sim/DCS status, that would IMHO totally cloud and undermine the DCS brand/standard. As a matter of fact, I do find this interesting and I am actually willing to start the discussion on the boundaries of FC fidelity versus DCS fidelity.

I'm near to totally lost so hopefully someone can shed some light on the matter by pointing me to the proper references. What I know is, once upon a time there was: LOMAC, an arcade flight game LOMAC: FC (1), an expansion set FC 2, a stand alone arcade flight game leaving the link to LOMAC behind The most recent version: FC 3, a stand alone arcade flight game Then there is the DCS World core on which the different DCS sim modules run including the free SU-25T module which is an arcade module. So where does FC 3 come in with respect to world? And what about those FC: DCS modules like the F-15C which is basically an arcade module? Aren't they included in FC by default? Obviously I'm no FC user but I'm interested anyway. Oh and please let us not start a dicussion on the definition of arcade because that is not my intention. For the sake of simplicity I'm simply distinguishing between either a DCS sim module like A-10C or KA-50 or a simplified gamer-friendly aircraft such as those in FC 3. Thanks

Coolts, where do I get the standalone update installeer you mentioned in your first reply?

I do have the W8 enterprise installation source... Where do I get the standalone update installer? I don't have an MSDN/TechNet account.

I would like to give W8.1 a try before EDGE comes out as I've read reports of better overall performance compared to W7. However the reason I've skipped 8 is the tabletization of Windows. Hence I have two pressing concerns: Is there a way to get a full 8.1 update installer? Is there a way to completely disable and remove the Apps sandbox and every single app in it? I'm using one and one only (admin) account and I can't even get in the store because of built-in restriction. I've Googled these issues but haven't been able to find a working solution. Probably a little early given the release of 8.1