agentkgb

According to the linked doc, the answer is yes, rudder is also included in the trim system IRL (page 55, sect. 2-33). However IRL there is no recentering after trim, only the forces are removed. http://server.3rd-wing.net/public/Deus_Olympus/TSMO%20Dash%2010%20%28TM%201-1520-Mi-17-10,%20Apr%2007%29.pdf Credit goes to mvsgas: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1816772&postcount=6 - KGB -

Thanks Kuky, I will try and get back with the result. UPDATE: I've run repair, now the radio issue seems to be OK, but still there are issues with Su-27 and Sorbciya pods. (however I agree, this way it is not critical) The following scenarios has been run: 1. Clean aircraft, request ECM pods, they install OK, looking OK. 2. Remove ECM pods, without replacement on the tip pylons, wingtips are invisible, looking strange, the nav light lamps are "hanging" in the air. 3. Request any payload on tip pylons, and the tips are back, visible, looking OK. 4. Request ECM pods remove, and any payload on tip pylons at the same time (same rearm), that way you won't see the issue, tips are back. These were run on two separate installations, reproducible anytime. - KGB -

Hi, After updating to DCS 1.2.6.18933 Update 2, the ECM pod position on Su-27 is a bit strange, it looks like the tip is removed. Also when removing the ECM pods, the wing is broken. When I request for a rearm, the first time I get back the copy message, but when I try to request a rearm again, no copy back from the ground. May it be a DCSW issue? - KGB -

Hi, After updating to DCS 1.2.6.18933 Update 2, the wheel brake sound is completely removed. Also the volume of the radio is way too low, when I radio to ATC/whatever, I hear only some whispering as my radio sound, and the same is true for answering side aswell. - KGB -

Thanks again, appreciated. - KGB -

Thanks A16! Good to know, that even with some Russian language knowledge, it is not my blindness that I couldn't find it. I've looked through the cockpit 10+ times just to find that instrument :) Do you have any info on the dispensers? - KGB -

Hi Folks, I wonder if there is an OAT gauge (outside air temperature) located somewhere in the cockpit. Did someone found it, or the Mi-8 cockpit is simply not equipped with that? It would be really useful, to know whether start the engine/pitot heatings or not, at the moment I have to ask it from Shark pilots if there's any in the mission. The second observation are the dispensers. I like the way it is now, but I have not found any pics on the net with the current side window replaced one. Is it a real setup, or it's still WIP, and the final model will include the rear fuselage fitted "standard" ones? Other than that, fantastic piece of work, really enjoying every minute in the Mighty-8 :) - KGB -

What do you mean? Mi-8 without DCS World? That would be interesting :) Or separate install from the current stable 1.2.5? I did a full update with updating all the modules. - KGB -

Thank you Belsimtek and ED! Really nice piece of work, this beauty was really missing from my hangar :) The FM feels very cool to me for the first look, it's smooth and handy until you're handling it softly. A big :thumbup: ! - KGB -

:) BTW can't wait for this beauty! - KGB -

For those, who vote for a new shkval/flir/laser system etc. What about this version? :) This thing does exist, however I suppose it stands for some kind of evaluation purposes. - KGB -

In FC3 aircraft you won't get the lack of thrust depending on the pressure. In a shark you have that. I think the same is true for the icing conditions, SFM doesn't handle that, but sure, I'm not an ED dev, so I may be wrong. I'm sure there are a lot more things in DCS:W, I just highlighted what I have experienced so far, and came into my mind. The wind affects FC3... It would be very sad, if it wouldn't, but the original topic was about the implementation of complex weather system in DCS, and I think that the evaluation of that with an FC3 aircraft is not the best idea. Moreover my point was the way it has been expressed. - KGB -

Where did I wrote that? I said FC3 will not utilize each and every capability of the World's engine. This is valid for the weather system also. -KGB -

OK, just short answers. - You're right, in DCS there is no standard "dynamic" real world weather, no argue. - There is thermal gradient in DCS. Not for FC3 but in BS2 there is definitely. If I climb up to the mountains of Caucasus, I have to switch on all the heaters to carry on. Don't forget FC3 SFM! - You can choose what overcast you want, you can choose from 0-100% of cloud coverage and the thickness from some 100m to 1000m or more, not sure now, I have to check. This is available even in the standard weather options. So I don't understand why is that you cannot create your cloud fighting scenario. Well OK, one layer of clouds, that's right. I'm not a meteo expert, but I personally never seen full overcast of high-level clouds. - Wind options, right 3 layers as you described in standard weather. - Pressure system is also implemented on some level, again no effect for FC3 level flyable. I think that is more then you described, but yep, still far from perfect. But if the message is "hey do something instead of this shit" we won't get it. - KGB -

Please read my post, no offense. It has just been introduced. Before that, we had no dynamic weather at all. It is still not perfect though. Maybe the gui is still not perfect. But at least we have something to begin with. I didn't say weather system is a civilian aviation issue only, please note the "or" in my sentence. For me it's like ED is introducing something new --not as a separate DLC-- for free in DCS world, which is still under dev, and then people coming here to state how simple and bad it is. This is what I meant to say. If I were ED, I would say: you know what, you don't like, don't use it at all, and stick to the simple weather... For me it seems a few guys started to experiment with dyn weather, and got nice results, Grimes already linked it: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=82610 I followed those posts, and I also like what I got, no matter how realistic it is compared to a real life weather system. - KGB -

@Demongornot: I don't get your point. DCS is not FSX, and it will hardly ever be. DCS stands for Digital Combat Simulator, so the main purpose of the "game" is to create a virtual battlefield, instead of creating and modelling the real-world weather systems or a nice environment for civilian aviation. Of course it would be nice to have everything in one game, like DCS+FSX+ArmA+... but it is not going to happen. Anyway we get more and more in DCS, and as it was mentioned this dynamic weather system has just been introduced, as many other improvements, which makes the world of DCS more and more realistic. And it makes a lot of simmers more and more happy. Who knows, if everyone supports the game, maybe in the future at some point we will all get those "personal features" what we want from the game, which makes it even more realistic. The rest is just whining, not sarcasm... - KGB -

Your welcome. FC3 can be bought via ED's webshop or you scroll up this page and click on the FC3 icon. It will get you there. - KGB -

That is Ukraine right now... - KGB -

I am fully satisfied with the X65f after more than 2 years of simming together :) It is very precise, but true, everyone should get used to it after a traditional joy. Mine is used at F3 force setting, with decreased X (roll) axis force with one unit. In the game options I use the following settings for axis pitch and roll: 5-100-100-30. For the rudder I use Saitek rudder pedals with the ingame setting of 10-100-100-35 for yaw axis. I hope that can give you a baseline for finding the right configuration for yourself. If you need help drop me a PM. - KGB -

No problems with X65f in DCS, I am having the same config. You don't need to waste time with Saitek SST software, creating and tuning profiles. As it was mentioned you can do everything withing the game configuration, axis assignments, axis tuning, setting modifiers (kind the same as pinkies in SST), assigning functions to joy buttons etc. Be advised to give some exponential to the pich/roll/yaw in order to get smooth controls, instead of full linear aggressive axis assingments :) - KGB -

Which indicators have lost their functionality? I ask this just for curiosity, I'm a quite new shark pilot. -KGB-

I understand your point, no argue. What I meant is if you want something to succeed you have to be constructive. Comparing mobile phones to microwave ovens is pointless. I used to be an active member of the OFP/Arma community, and I remember, that they had also very hard times regarding the physics (damage model), and the netcode, because the amount of data to be shared between the server and clients was huge. They might have used a different model to get feedback from the community, but it is a completely different product and community, so I also wouldn't compare things in that sense. Now DCS reached a point, where the previous code was not good enough. As PRE-purchase customers, we should accept all the hickups of the beta. In order to succeed, we should help ED devs and testers by sending reports. Constant complains and whining leads nowhere. What I tried to say (personal oppinion!), is that I like how ED handles us, we get feedback, and we can change the scope, we can ask for new features in the beta. It is really uncommon I should say. But in the meantime ED accept bugs, and do they best. The rest of the story is about time... The thing is, everyone here is eagerly waiting for the patches and new DCS modules (including me), which is OK, but you can still enjoy the game in it's current state, like I do :) - KGB -

Compared to what? Compare BFx to Armax, to CODx, to MOHx etc. It's environment may seem complex, but the real deal is in the capabilites of the engine. In a such comparison, I would say, look at what ArmA can deliver with it's scripting support and all the features, which made it's predecessor OFP live almost 10 years with an active community. That is something which BF doesn't have. The same is true for DCS. Compare it to FSX, CFS, IL-2, Falcon, ROF whatever. That makes sense... And it seems, there are a lot of guys doesn't like the way ED handles DCS, but in fact, they are still on the market, while others are far away. And the community of the real simmers is much smaller then the "connect 'n' killemall guys". There's no sense to compare these things. Even the main purpose of the engines are sooo different. Yes, I do share the "we are the biggest enemies of ourselves" statement :( - KGB -

So what? It is already history :) On the page, where you can actually buy the product, it is clearly stated, that it is a beta. For me, that means, that ED actually wanted to release as final, but the huge codebase and the integration of the modules created issues. So they didn't sell you this as a FINAL product. - RESPECT - Pre-Purchase also provides access to Beta versions of Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 3. Please, just simply accept, that it is still a beta, and the majority of the community is very happy to try the beta, and help devs to get faster and better. In return, we can ask for new features, which were not in the original scope of this release. Fair enough, isnt't it? More than that... And I don't want to go deep into sw development stuff, but believe me, you're not the only one involved. Different scope, different size, different business model, I hope you try to compare apples to apples. We get more and more, because we ask for it. That is not for free and not for tomorrow. Big sw multis sell the first release as final. Then the patches/upgrades are released to actually finalize, and meet the demands. At least that is my view :) - KGB -

+1 My formula DCS have bugs: Yes No matter the bugs, still we are enjoying the game: Yes (even in MP) Are the bugs accepted and processed: Yes --------------------------------------------------- We're good to go! GJ ED! - KGB -