ZaltysZ

Windows is still alive just because of long support for legacy apps. This is the strongest point of Windows. There are too much business apps created, and enterprises just can't stop using them. They would rather continue using legacy OS, than investing into new software, so Microsoft always avoids breaking backward compatibility as much as possible (even if that means keeping some stupid aspects of OS), or else they would loose lots of sales. There is lots of fuss about Metro apps, because lots of sites mixed Windows 8 for Desktop with Windows RT for ARM based mobile devices. Only the later has Microsoft Store as the only mean to get software.

To be precise, this is because of rectilinear perspective, which is used in almost all games as it has an advantage in keeping straight lines straight, and so it is pretty natural. Unfortunately, it also gets things stretched and enlarged at the edges of image. There you can see alternatives, and what distortions they give: Note: Standard = rectilinear.

Check control profiles for FC3 planes. Looks at axis category and make sure TrackIR is assigned for view axis.

Night mission, fast startup, forgotten oxygen switch, high altitude, prolonged hypoxia and frustrating search for a hotspot of a switch. :pilotfly:

Vibration caused by airflow separation.

It really depends on material... ...of ballz

In addition, he has only 512 MB VRAM. Under Windows 7 WDDM, VRAM is virtualized and can be swapped to system RAM. This means, that if there is not enough VRAM left, some unused parts can be paged out to system RAM for later use. This is very costly, because RAM is slower than VRAM and data needs to be moved via bus. It is also a good candidate for increasing the count of CPU cache misses.

In fact, he needs to move his head closer to HUD.

P51 expands well when MK108 hits it :devil_2:

Do you have to be able to survive MK108 hits to join? P.S.: could not resist :lol:

Western part of current map is called Kuban. Lots of air combat happened there. In fact, some veterans have said, it was kinda like one large furball,. and if you were flying straight, eventually someone got into your sights. Planeset varied, and even included lend leased Spitfires and P39s, but no P51s.

1) Ground units that "fit" is possible thing. Take T-55, change 3D model, adjust parameters and you have a Tiger tank. Take ZU-23, change 3D model, adjust parameters and you get Flak-38, and so on. 2) Terrain is a difficult thing, just because of amount of work required. However, it is still possible if 3rd party is hired and terrain is sold as addon. 3) Flyable opponents for P-51 seem really difficult for me. DCS has high standards, and it will be hard to model something if there aren't plenty of documents on particular aircraft. I suppose, ED is going to model planes, which are in possession of http://fighter-collection.com, because Fighter Collection knows those planes well and can provide lots of information. Sadly, they don't have nor BF109, nor FW190, so I am not very optimistic with DCS having a true WWII branch.

1) You can trust only the photos you have made and corrected by yourself. Yes, most raw photos need to be corrected to represent real life colors. Most landscape photos are corrected not to have real life colors, but be very vivid and impressive. 2) There should be a thread somewhere about terrain building and texture generation. If I remember correctly, more vivid textures look more awful, and you have to live with slightly washed out colors if you want overall acceptable picture. 3) Lightning model is not perfect, and won't be. Same problem is present in other games too. Basically, colors are affected by lightning, so you can't get away with simple texture recoloring, because same color can look ok in midday, but can be way off at dusk and etc. Compromise should be made, so that colors were acceptable (not spot on) in anytime.

Don't confuse rotor and collective brakes. Former is supposed to stop rotors from spinning while aircraft is on ground and shut down, and later is supposed to prevent unwanted movements of collective.

Well, software is accounted for absence of FFB, and has compromise trimming methods for non FFB users, however those methods change the effects of some pilot mistakes (i.e. same mistake with FFB stick would not be very noticeable).

CPTM method disables controls when trim button is released, and enables controls again only if physical controls are brought inside activation zone, which is close to neutral position. This means, that accidental release of trim button or failing to neutralize controls precisely end up in uncontrollable aircraft. OP suggests simple thing: if trim button is pressed again before controls are neutralized, sim should enable controls instantly and behave like trim hasn't been released. In other words: successive trim press should cancel trim release, if that is done before neutralizing controls.

I get missnig canopy reflections with 1.1.1.0, but only when looking at forward hemisphere. If I turn my head back, they reappear; if turn by head to look forward, they disappear. It seems 3h and 9h is the barrier passing which reflections appear/disappear. It is very noticeable, because perceived brightness of scene suddenly changes once camera passes mentioned positions. I have Win7 x64, NVIDIA GTX470 with 285.58 driver.

I don't know Russian protocol, but maybe this can be used as hints: 1) Pilot must know area of operation. He have to study the map before flight and needs to know landmarks. It must be supposed that landmarks might be used not only for navigation, but in communication with friendly forces too. As mission designer, you can mark them in ABRIS in advance. 2) Every force use some sort of reference points, because it is easier that way. We are stuck with NATO bullseye reporting, what isn't very useful for Russian birds. You can workaround that by: a) setting bullseye as Target Point, that way pilot can select it and check his relative position by using HSI b) you can do some drawing in ABRIS and put circles repressing bullseye (helicopter is slow, and so his area of operation is small enough for such drawing to be useful). 3) FAC should be giving latitude/langitude of target + descriptive information and notes. Pilot can punch coordinates into new target point via PVI and get navigation information + ability to turn Shkval directly at target automatically. This can be tricky with INS drift, but unfortunately, we don't have it.

Is there a changelog somewhere? Not the one about new features like in 1st post, but the one about bug fixes. :)

Well, I think the whole pay-for-DCS-upgrade thing is wrong. Not because of pay by itself, but because of the vague advertising of module system. There were talks about whole module system in period of last 4 years (DCS was announced in 2007), and it hasn't been clearly stated that module upgrades won't be free (in fact, I hardly remember if someone even mentioned such possibility). Now we got a 20$ statement that upgrades won't be free. So be it, but it was nice, if that statement was made in 2007. ;) P.S.: 20$ and still no INS drift. :(

FARP lights are automatically turned on at night upon requesting permission to land. However, lights are seen not by all players in MP. I don't have means to test this more precisely now, but it is either just host sees the lights or just pilot, who asked the permission, sees the lights.

Illumination of PVI mode buttons is bugged. If cockpit panel illumination is not turned on, mode buttons light up when engaged (indented behavour). If illumination is on, some mode buttons (like ППМ, АЕР) won't light up (bug), although corresponding mode will be engaged. ---- +1 for INS drift and ABRIS nav data input. I suppose it was not planned to be implemented, but this is very important feature, which could add a lot to long flights and preplanned target engagements. I personally think DCS should not have such things omitted.

You don't have to press it hard, you just need to press it deep enough. Resistance isn't big, however 2nd stage is very deep, and if you use middle part of finger to squeeze trigger, body of the stick might stop your finger from pressing trigger deep enough. Try using tip of the finger for pressing tip of the trigger - it will be very easy then.

This will work well with single SAM, however it can get really hard with multiple SAMS (i.e. multiple SAMs on same bearing, but different distances). Also, if mission is complex, and SAMs are "scripted", so that they would activate/deactivate periodically or depending on situation (like in RL), triangulation would not help much.

Landing, take off, gun strafe is tricky, and air refuel or flying damaged plane is more than tricky without joystick, but in all other cases it is pretty playable without joystick. After all, this is not a sim in which you have to dogfight with guns.