FSKRipper

:thumbup: I also learned it the hard way :music_whistling: I think the most current problem with 3 different versions is that most of the developers won't even know if their last fixes were implemented or not (Like the big actual changelog shows which is still missing lot's of critical fixes by Razbam that entered the current build). I won't be in ED's situation of managing updates for 3 versions and try to keep track that the working fixes will enter a build on the next patchday.

Would not have happened if you kept your 1.5.2 without using the beta. I agree that this issue is present for a long time but the last patches were always fine. As you can read by Cobra It happened due to a personal error. Just a minor issue and we get one activation back. If you can stay at one version of your choice for the next two days you won't loose another activation.

It is an open Beta. If you have a problem with it, stay with the puplic release and stop complaining. If you stay there you wouldn't even notice this problem.

You can be sure of :thumbup:

I should have added that he flew no stripped down version of the BO-105. That was the standard commercial version for private customers. He was famous for developing several maneuvers on the Bo-105 including the looping (this was restricted by the manufacturer afterwards because they feared an accident which could influence the good sale numbers).

Lean back and enjoy... [ame] [/ame]

Hm, in this case ED would have to seperate modern equipment from 90's years insurgent stuff. Not easy to make all people happy :smartass:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2667762#post2667762 I would expect it during the next 2 weeks but everything is subject to change. I would guess even the developers can't give you a final date yet.

I think it is still on their schedule but in my opinion bugs should come before features (which can introduce new bugs)

But maybe this was subject to change :lol:

I understand your point of view even if I have a different opinion. I can't tell you the exact reason for their decision. At the moment every developer seems to decide for himself which loadout will be realized in terms of workload and realism. Don't forget we are not flying the Vietnam version of the helicopter. Several developers (ED, Aviodev and LNS) seem to counter this "problem" by creating different versions of the same plane (L-39, C101, F-14). This leaves enough room for creating several weapon lodouts without infuriating the hardcore simmers by adding theoretical loadouts. There were dozens of disscussions (should the F-15C carry bombs f.e.) on this topic but I think the current solution (creating different versions) should get us rid of such disscussions in the future. If you can wait some weeks/months we will get different choppers from Polychop, all are able to fire guided missiles :smilewink:

If you wan't the real experience, I have to say sorry, CCD is in B/W. If you wan't it for exporting and modding you may take a look at this thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=138664

Sorry the developers stated before the Huey release that this version (only 2? operational prototypes) won't see daylight. Maybe they change their opinion some day but this is the actual stand. Never said and meant something you can make such a judgement. There are mods out tbere (I also use some) which give you another feeling for this game. And If you take trying another game (like BMS) for flaming you should think about your attitude to people you don't know.

Ok so you are one of the guys who would vote for the Tomcat with Amraams...:music_whistling: Thats open for dispute but everyone deserves their opinion :thumbup:

First of all according to your list of weapons and modifications by the US Army, only the door mounted machineguns are carried by the UH-1H. There have also been wishes for the TOW missile and even more exotic Systems (xm-m61) but the developers decided to use the UH-1H as weapons platform (not sure if this could be a license issue with Textron) xm9 - really more firepower than a M134 with rockets? I doubt it... xm11 - seems to be a mix between experimental and field modification. Very little reliable sources found (maybe you have more?) xm30 - as you already said, experimental. never used in numbers. xm31 - the only gun system that I found was used in larger numbers and would be ok from my POV xm-59 - even a 40mm grenade launcher won't deliver you more punch than the 2.75 rockets (and this was the point of the OP) A/A49E-11 - not sure what part of the System you mean as an improvement (http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/bru-20.htm)

Do you have any suggestions proved by real life documents for heavier weapons (not experimental of course)? If you only looking for some kind of "shoot them up" gameplay you may search for a mod or try another game...

I tried your first sample Mission in the actual 1.5.2 build which works fine. If I try to create a new one the JTAC is always Messaging no mark even if i set him to lase and the target is in his FOV. I added my simple example. Is there anything wrong in my settings? test.miz

Yep, seems that the ME still hides many secrets from me even after all These years :music_whistling: Viele Grüße zurück nach Bayern :thumbup: Thanks for the explanation, I will definitely play a bit with the settings. Hey Snoopy, thanks for the confirmation. Never thought about such a way to model a DTC. :thumbup:

Thx for the input. No idea where this settings are coded in the mission editor. As said, I have never seen it before in a created mission and this is the breakpoint for me. How can you alter this deep system settings in the editor? Also this special altitude band seems not be discussed in this manual part. Maybe time for a revision...

Hey guys, I made a strange experience today. I took Stukas NTTR Mission and created a single A-10C flight (by editing a given F-15C flight) on hot start which gave me a totally unknown new HUD symbology with bullseye reading (pic 1). Checked the instant action take off mission and it gave me the well known normal HUD. So I'm guessing this seems to be no feature but a bug? Or I'm missing some kind of update? I have never seen it before... If some of you 476th guys could bring some light into this? EDIT: Since this mission is the only one I'm experiencing this issue I will share it for further Analysis. Be sure to use the single A-10C (New airplane Group). A10.miz

For the number of cores, yes I'm sure. Only two are used for DCS. Regarding FSX I can only assume limits in programming and memory usage (32bit). The game is 10 years old and I turned away after I made a landing at Heathrow (add on scenery) with 16 fps with my current Hardware. That's simply mad. I think regarding the performance boost from 1.2.16 to 1.5.2 people often ignore that several effects (tree and cloud shadows f.e.) were added. I played 1.2.16 mostly on medium to high settings and with these exact settings 1.5 was a big performance gain for me but now you can activate even more advanced options (extreme visibility f.e.). These can eat most of the performance in object rich areas. To give an example, in 2.0. with all options to high I can play with stable 50-70 fps but there is a mission made by Stuka including most of real life NTTR objects. There are also dozens of parked fighters on the Nellis ramp and when starting there my fps drop down to 25. So in my opinion DCS performance is more perspective based. For me it was a huge advance but I know I changed much of the possible Performance for even better graphics but that was ok since the hardware allows me to do that...

Sorry to say so but you GPU is hardly reaching the absolute Minimum and looking at your ingame Settings they are way to high... Visib Range low to medium, trees to 0 or at least 1500, Cockpit Display Resolution 512 Maximum. Your current settings are typical for a 970 but not for use with a 560. Also your CPU can't make up for the lack of GPU power so it would not reach it's maximum. I think with 20fps in your current Settings you should be very happy... BTW DCS uses only one core for Simulation and one for Audio. It doesn't matter how much cores you have enabled. Maybe you should start with everything at minimum and go up step by step until you reach the point at which it is not longer playable for you...

Once again Pepin. please show us a track from your machine with these (in your opinion) false behaviour and we can discuss about it like adults.

At least you have not brought us one evidence supporting your crude "This is all shit" theory. I asked kindly to show us a track since your first testimony in your "bug report" also proofed wrong. If you can't or won't this is not more than trolling and I'm pretty sure moderators will see it similar.

Post a track, otherwise everything you said simply didn't happen.