Jordan4

I wasn't talking about CIWS systems. In that application TOF is the only reason an apfsds is used. Maybe they could use a delayed sabot so that the sabot only sheds from the projectile after a certain distance when it is no longer a threat to the host aircraft. Just a thought.

APFSDS Ammo for any gun especially a 30mm is substantially more effective at armor penetration than full caliber ammo especially when range is considered.

Well I picked up a 670. It is able to run max settings however during missions when more stuff is there it slows down. I guess my bottleneck is my CPU.

Do you have msaa, tssaa, HDR on?

I saw a video that newegg posted on the 660TI that said that it is good except that its 196 bit is not suitable for some of the graphic features such as msaa and tssaa and such. I'm am so utterly confused because for the same price range the ATI 7950 offers 384 bit what am I missing? I want to make a purchase A.S.A.P.

Any input on which would be a good one for about $150-$200?

Im confused... is the GTX 670 the same chipset as the 560Ti? If so how does the 660Ti stack up against your setup? Would this do the trick? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103960

Hello. I understand that this is most likely a beat to death topic however I searched and found nothing recent and as we know graphics cards come out all the time and every possible card cant possibly be discussed. Anyways I just want to see what people are running and who's running max settings flawlessly on what card. At the moment I just began my search yesterday and my preliminary thoughts are going to the ATI 7950 or potentially an nvidia 660Ti however I am open to any option. Right now I am running an ATI diamond 6770 and it is substandard for A-10c. I want something thats ganna run max settings with all graphic enhancement options on. My CPU is an Intel Q9400 quad core at 2.66ghz and 6gb RAM. I would love to hear input from people who are running max settings and with what card they are doing it with. My price range is $250-$330ish. Thank you for your input. P.S can anybody explain the difference between the manufactures of these card such as EVGA or ASUS or MSI? I see similar cards made by different brands and the price difference seems to be rather large so I would just like to know which companies are the most reputable.

Ok thank you. I tried changing the saturation levels for the tgp slew axis. Regardless of what I did the horizontal plane continues to by hyper sensitive and uncontrollable. I just cant figure out why these random little things keep happening to me. The entire reason I switched to D.C.S world was to avoid the issues I was having in the standalone copy. Not to get new problems! I set both saturation levels to 30 ( the x was at 100 previosly ) Perhaps you could tell me what your settings are so I can duplicate them and see if that helps? Thank you for all your help agian. I suppose I will keep playing around with it. I spend about 90% percent of the time troubleshooting this game and %10 percent playing it which is incredibly frustrating.

Thank you PeterP for the extremley useful information. Looks like I will probably be aquiring a new GPU to allow me to run the game more smoothly with those graphic features activated. What would you recomend for DCS in the $250-$300 range?

The Hotas Warthog is an unbeleivable asset. If you can throw down the cash than theres nothing better. It took me about a week of nonstop reading and repetition to become proficient with all of the systems however who knows how long it would of took if I was just using the keyboard. I would recommend just doing one training mission over and over until you have all of the material down. For instance I did not even get in the air until I could do a cold start from a blindfold. Once you complete one mission and absorb all of the material you gain confidence to truck on to the next. The hardest things for me to learn were the start up procedure and DSMS. Once I had those down the rest of the mission were relatively easy.

Ok I did what you said and it did solve the pointer problem. Thank you. Can somebody tell me what vsync, tssaa, preload radius, msaa, and HDR are so I can decide if I want them and how taxing they are on my system? Also as far as my tgp slew rate is concerned I know that it is possible to adjust however I did not think that it is adjustable on just the horizontal or vertical plane. I need to somehow slow down the horizontal plane substantially so that I can actually use the tgp instead of having it make quick erratic movements every time I touch it. Thanks.

Ok thank you PeterP for the advice I will try this. In addition to the problems I mentioned before I now have new ones. When I first enter a mission the mouse cursor does not click any buttons on the cockpit. I move the cursor over to the left around the left MFCD area and then I can see icons from windows lighting up and then the yellow cursor turns into a white desktop mouse at which point the game exits to windows and than I have to click on the DCS tab and it comes back and the yellow cursor works like normal. VERY ANNOYING. I now uninstalled my original copy of D.C.S and this has done nothing. I have had nothing but problem after problem with this game. I just want to play but I am plagued by all of these new issues! Please Help!

So I finally got around to downloading DCS world and the A-10 module ( in addition to purchasing the mustang module ) Well now I seem to have a whole new array of different issues than I was having before. The first which so far I think may have been resolved which was that my graphics/realism settings were not getting stored and reverted after I played a mission/ exited the game however It appears that they are stored now. Another issue is the game just seems to be running substantially slower. The load up times are insane and when Im in the game and do time warp it seems to be more taxing on my system than before and it is slow and unresponsive. Also when I try to exit the mission the mouse clicker wasn't working and I had to control alt delete and then when I went back it finally worked. Also I noticed at least on the mission that I play that instead of a runway start it is an in flight start ( defending camp Yankee is the mission ). Another annoying issue is the tgp slew rate is like 5 times faster in the horizontal plane than the vertical which makes it almost impossible to manipulate. Has anybody seem these issues when they switched to DCS world. Now one thing I should mention is that I still have the regular DCS A-10 installed in addition to DCS world and the A-10 module for it. Are there operating issues that come up when you dont uninstall the original copy? Should I uninstall my original copy of DCS Warthog? Thank you for the help. P.S Also the controls were not mapped properly for some reason but that was a quick fix. Thanks again for any help that might resolve my issues.

So awesome. I wish I had the technical expertise to do something like this.

I still do not understand whatsoever why they cant just put up some kind of gate/filter in front of the fans so that in the case that a sabot pedal does end up in the flight path of the engine it is blocked off. It seems like a real performance disadvantage to be limited to full bore AP projectiles. Perhaps they could create a sabot pedal that has a more predictable flight path and engineer it to stay clear of the engines. Or simply put up some sort of gate to stop the things from hitting the fans in the first place. If it effects airflow and subsequently engine performance that much than just make the damn engines more efficient. There is plenty of power to be squeezed out of those ancient T-34's by use of contemporary materials and re-engineering. Perhaps some sort of combustible sabot pedal that once exposed to the drag forces of air once exiting the barrel disintegrates or ignites? I don't know but you would think that they would put some further work into making the damn thing fire real ap stuff instead of just a full bore 30mm slug of D.U. If they are going to do that then why not just develop an H.E.D.P round for it. I mean if the AH-64's 30x113 H.E.D.P ammo can penetrate 50mm R.H.A than that is already an improvement especially considering that that penetration is possible from any range ( chemical vs. kinetic penetration ) unlesss behind armor effects are not as severe. Another thought. Slats similar to window blinds that are horizontal during normal flying conditions and then as soon as the gun is fired they angle down 60-70 degrees so that airflow is still permited however f.o.d has no room to enter. Just a thought.

Yep they both have there advantages. I think overall the A-10 is the better platform, however there are definitely some aspects about the SU-25T that I think would be welcome to the A-10 to make it an even more potent adversary. The A-10 has no light/medium atgm capability. You don't always need 125lbs of shaped charge warhead to take out an mbt... Plus the mav targeting procedure is outdated and cumbersome. It would be much easier if you could just track on tgp and launch. Your launching 4 mavs in one pass? Damn I got some practice to do to catch up to your level. However I highly doubt that in real life 4 targets could be acquired and engaged in one pass... especially since common practice is to take evasive maneuvers directly after an engagement so that capability would not count as a real benefit in my opinion which could be wrong. Not to mention anything the mav can do the KH-29 series can most likely do as well ( aside from being able to mount more than 2 per sortie ) With the vikhers a skilled pilot can engage multiple targets in one pass by launching a missle right before another impacts and then quickly acquiring the next in the shkval plus you got 16 of those mofos at your disposal so missing one or taking more than one hit to produce a kill aint all that bad and more than makes up for the guns lack of ammunition capacity compared to the A-10. Plus any vehicle that take a hit from a vikhers and isn't killed with most likely have some operational capabilities disabled/be a mobility kill. Not to mention for any target that is not an M.B.T the vikhers has a high likely hood of killing that target (APC's/IFV's)

You mean in Lock on? Ok Ive done it before, sure its easier to do in an A-10 but I think that is purely based on flight dynamics and not the gun. The GAU-8 is only marginally more effective in real life. That's not a matter of opinion but fact. Its rate of fire is only 900rpm less, and its ammunition is only marginally less powerful which is irrelevant when firing at an MBT's top armor. The only true disadvantages are by the nature of having fewer barrels it will be prone to overheating/barrel erosion much quicker, and as the SU-25T is set up it only carries 250 rounds. However if you were to mount that gun on the chin of an A-10 and give it the same ammunition capacity I do no believe you would see a drastic difference in performance. I do not however know what the mil rating is for the GSH-30-2 so that is the only unknown in my equation. I will post a track of what you requested as soon as I have time to setup my HOTAS Warthog for the SU-25T.

If there were A-10's in the air waiting for every single patrol to get into a fire fight and then just swoop in and save them than sure that would be more effective than waiting for a faster jet to come in. Unfortunately that is not the case. You request air support and if you are so lucky to receive it you wait for that air support to arrive. That is unless you are on an operation that is specifically set up and expecting air support than you may be lucky enough to have those assets in the air. My friend who was in the 10th mountain said the A-10's took the longest time by far to arrive for C.A.S ( The AH-64's were apparently parked in most of the major F.O.B's so they were never to far from a patrol. So I am not entirely sure were you are getting the idea the A-10's are just waiting to swoop down to save you on a moments notice. Oh and im sure when you are receiving fire that extra 200 knots would make a big difference to you because every second is a second that you could be dead. Not to mention an A-10 with any substantial load out will not achieve an optimal cruise speed. So the difference could in some cases be more than 200kts. Sure the jets may not be in full afterburner to come to your rescue however depending on how close there station is then they potentially could and have fuel to spare. They have the ability to do so if necessary. Why would making the A-10 faster be bad? I'm not sure what your objection to that is. Perhaps we are imagining different scenarios. I am speculating about a large scale conflict. Not a counter insurgency. A target rich environment where you never have enough weapons. That is not to say that this is likely or would happen all the time even if there was a large scale conflict of that sort so yes you do have a point there. Not every mission will even require that much ordnance however the one that I am imagining does ; ) How exactly is the Mav sooooo much more effective than an S-25L? Cant really think of much other than the fact that it has a longer range and in some versions can carry a larger payload. However for some targets they have similar capabilities not to mention how much easier target aquisition and guidance is for the S-25L ( no finagling with mav seeker ). As long as you have rockets why not make some guided? If we didnt think the S-25L was any good than why are we developing laser guided Hydras? Are you or were you an A-10 pilot? That is very cool and obviously you insight is much more accurate then my pure speculation. Thank you for being here to clear up my conceptions. I do however think that just because one is a pilot does not mean they are experienced enough with every combat scenario to know whether or not for sure what I am saying is true or false. I guess for that matter neither do I but then again that is why it is speculation that all. Very true I did somewhat imply that just because S.E.A.D has been performed that you can just fly around without a care in the world. I suppose I was imagining that EVERY possible S.A.M threat was some how magically eliminated and thinking again you never would really know. That is unless you made enough close in passes and weren't shot down. Well when you have 16 atgms on station I suppose you have the luxury of carrying such a weapon. Lets say you only get 8 out of 16 Vikhers on target and two fail to penetrate or produce a kill ( maybe still a mobility kill however ) In this extremley unlikely scenario you have made the same amount of kills as all 6 Mavs on target. All without having to play around with the mav seeker until it achieves a lock. Perhaps the inaccuracy of the gunpods is one of the things that I am advocating for. Just saturating a target area with fire. I know this is just pure speculation and I know that it is based on my experience in sims which doesn't even closely resemble the way things happen in real life. This may be a stupid questions but have you used the SPPU-22 in the SU-25T for lock on? As far as it is modeled in the sim it shows to be incredibly effective on soft to lighty armored targets ( not sure how the 23x115 performs on light armor in real life im not sure if they have saphei and I doubt there is apds or apfsds ) It seems to take the place of rocket pods performing the same mission however with a high degree of hit probability. I am not so much advocating that these weapons be a replacement for GBU's or Mav's however I think they are more of a supplement. As long as you are going to have rockets why not have a larger variety? Something you can handpick for your mission. If you are likely to engage a lot of infantry or soft targets than why not have the option of a gunpod? The mav is great for certain missions however I think that a smaller atgm should be an option so that more missiles can be carried with less weight. How are these insane ideas? If you need a gbu or a mav then equip them however why not have supplement weapon available in case you think they may come in handy. I appreciate your input and I was hoping for a good discussion so thank you for sharing your ideas. However I do not appreciate the notion that my ideas are insane. Please keep this civil. Thank you again for sharing your ideas and opinions.

Lets face it... the gau-8 is an incredible system however I imagine that more often than not a pilot only decides to come in for a gun run if he is out of guided munitions. It is generally used as a secondary back up weapon with the most of its usage being to engage the targets left over from other weapons attacks. So what I mean to say is that if all your going to be doing is dropping a JDAM or gbu than waiting 2 to 3 times longer for that air support to arrive is a big downside. Plus when your talking about SAM countermeasures the Strike Eagle is gonna drop that bomb from as high and as fast as its sensors allow then its gonna gtfot. The A-10 might be able to take a beating but that's only because it is much more likely to receive one. Relative to the SU-25T yes I think that there is a large difference in the amount of weapons options available to take to the fight. For example the S-25L guided rocket carries a large payload, can be used against moving targets and probably cost a fraction of what a mav costs. Sure rockets may not be pinpoint accurate but once you get close enough and launch a few S-13's its not ganna be hard to make a kill on whatever your aiming at. All without the extra weight of a bunch of mavs or bombs. As far as gunpods are concerned I believe they allow for a much greater area to be engaged than with the gau-8. And sometimes you dont need a 30mm round to get the job done. Think about how many stored kills an SU-25T has vs an A-10C with any given load out. How many enemy positions, trucks, light armor could be destroyed with a big loadout of rockets/gunpods? Who knows for sure but its deffitnley more than the amout of bombs an A-10 can carry. And as far as the Vikher is concerned obviosley they have the K-29 at their disposal however im sure they realized as do I that sometimes you dont need a big fire and forget weopon and once effective S.E.A.D is utilized than you can fly towards the target all you want. The west sort of contradicts itself. On one end they say using " multimillion dollar aircraft for strafing is a waste " And then they built a C.A.S aircraft around a strafing system! To me its very similar to the whole 3rd gen fighter concept of " not needing a gun " and then as soon as they get into the merge with a mig the pilots go screaming for a fix. With a system like the SPPU-22 gun pod effectiveness is drastically increased and to an extent becomes a smart weapon. If we made a similar system utilizing a pair of A-50 guns or maybe even a pair of GAU-19's than that would allow for alot more area to be covered in a strafe. And would make long range almost indirect strafing possible. Im not saying that every engagement would benefit from this however it is likely that many would.

Revelation that is right. I want the Su-25T to be upgraded to D.C.S standards. The A-10 is plenty fun however I find that the vast quantity of different weapons that the SU-25T is capable of carrying creates a very high entertainment value. From the 5 different types of rockets, the guided rockets, all the different missile systems especially the Vikhers, and last but not least the mighty awesome and incredibly devastating SPPU-22 gun pods. It really seems like in real life the A-10 is limited in its capabilities by its available weapons. Mavericks are really just too big and heavy and relatively difficult to employ compared to the Russian counterparts. The maverick is really overkill for most situations that it is used for and the A-10C would be served better by a cheaper smaller system that could carry more missiles. When the SU-25 goes into battle it can take along about 20 or so atgm's. The A-10 can only take 6 at most! JDAM's and GBU's are great and all however the A-10 is a dedicated CAS plane. An aircraft that has a max speed of less than 450 M.P.H and without the ability to climb to high altitudes with heavy weapons payload does not make a great guided bomb platform. Especially when you can just throw an F-16 into the air that is able to release bombs from a greater standoff at a higher altitude. The A-10 is a C.A.S dedicated platform and would be better served by a greater variety of rocket types, atgm's and even maybe gun pods! Sure it can loiter around for a longer time but think about how much longer it takes for an A-10 to arrive than an F-16 or a strike eagle. I would imagine that the fast movers have enough time to at least acquire and engage their targets with bombs more often than not within their loitering window. And as great as the gau-8 is it is excessive heavy and large compared to the GSH-30-2 which I think is a largely underestimated weapon. Its fire rate is more than 75% of the Gau-8's and its size and weight are a small fraction of that of the GAU-8. Sure the 30x173 is slightly more powerful however I am not convinced that it is enough to make the 30x173 capable of much that the 30x165 is not, and that is especially true when firing HE. With a larger ammunition capacity I think the GSH-30-2 would make a comparable gun platform with its fewer barrels still provide an overheating threat. The A-10 may be a better flyer however as it stands it doesn't seem to be able to bring enough armament to the fight. To add fuel to the flames the SU-25T is capable of true S.E.A.D missions, not just hoping to find a long range S.A.M in a targeting pod and hoping to lock a maverick on it before it launches on you. When I think about how great of a flyer the A-10 is it seems to strike me odd that it is equipped with such underpowered engines. I really wonder how hard it would be to upgrade the TF-34 to produce more thrust or just scrap it and throw something more powerful in there, why not a turbojet? Clearly the A-10 could never be a supersonic aircraft but a little more speed, better climbing, and overall a better thrust to weight ratio would really highlight the great flying dynamics of this plane which I believe are however far superior to the SU-25T. They seem to have really cut short what should be the best C.A.S plane in the world by limiting weapons variety, and giving it anemic engines. Any thought?

Cool that's very close to where I live.

Thank you BlueRidgeDx you wouldn't happen to be a V.A resident would you? Well I figured out the radio command button at least for the keyboard which apparently is " \ " could not find the intercom dial in the rear left panel however I will keep looking. So many things to learn in this game! You think you have it all down and then something pops up that you have no clue how to resolve. Its fun... Keeps you on the edge of your seat. There is something rather boring about " knowing it all ". Random thought here... I really hope the SU-25T comes into the D.C.S world. As far as I am concerned that addition was almost the first step towards the first D.C.S product. I wonder how much modification it would require to bring it up to D.C.S standard. After they do that obviously us lock on fans want to see a fast mover in the D.C.S universe. As far as I am concerned anything but a fighter jet will be unacceptable for the next incarnation. I love blowing up tanks and all but man do I want some good dog fighting, and with a more advanced B.V.R model that would surely come with a D.C.S sim it should prove to be very entertaining. I don't think a 5th gen would be inline. Id be happy with a mig-23 to be honest I just want to get in the merge a shoot stuff. F-16 block 52+ would be pretty cool too. But I think everybody would go ape shit for a SU-30 series fighter maybe even an Indian MKI. Or maybe something random like a JAS-39 Gripen or a Rafale. SO MANY GREAT CHOICES! I cant wait to see what the first true fighter will be to D.C.S. I know about the Mig-21 Bison project however Im not sure if that will be of the same caliber due to the fact that it is independently devoloped and not worked on by the same production team that is responsible for real D.C.S sims? Not really sure about that any insight would be great. Will the Mig-21 Bison be a true D.C.S Sim? Or just some knock-off?

Ok I accidentally pressed the button that opens the radio command menu and found out what I needed. Now I just need to figure what button I accidentally pressed to get to that menu! Please help! As far as the lights I must not be reffering to them properly. What I mean is the lights that are on the edges of the wings an the horizontal stabilizers. How do you turn those things off?

Not in DCS world but hopefully that will work. I just realized ive been flying all my missions with my landing lights on! How do you turn those suckers off?