lxsapper

I'm afraid not Frodstomp. ATM not even by a third party. But an F-18C is in the works by ED and a the SuperHornet has been anounced by a 3rd party developer.

The only problem is that unless we go for the hack we will be limited to using it in DCS. Other sims don't copy the x axis behavior of a FF controler over to the another one. Wich is better in my opinion, I think RoF suports (don't quote me on it) FF rudder pedals, even though none exists. Something DCS cound copy actually, eggbeater pilots would benefit wonders from FF pedals as well as cyclics.

You can download the A-10A here http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/421087/ And the SU-25 http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/421088/

EDIT: Sorry didn't see Skatezilla had preaty much covered it allready. EDIT: This was a fail editing of the previous post! :)

Part of the motherboard actually. Very few people use dedicated Sound cards nowadays, and very few dedicaded cards will give you advantages over the onboard ones, except for a few very high end ones.

Maybe you saved a personalized default view?

Ok I came up wtih my own solution for this. It's not the solution I wished for but since I have now converted to using TARGET (trackIR commands related). The TARGET manual states that the warthog throttle afterburner detent's enter afterburner region at 80% physical travel. I found this to be wrong. Although if you use a J Curve as described in the manual 80% physical to 95% directx output it will work because the real values will be roughly the same. The Real values are 66% physical travel from idle to afterburner detent and 78% directx output just short of engaging the afterburner on the F-15C on 1.2.8. I tested the SU-33 and it seems that however close to this values of 78% this plane at least uses a slighlty diferent value to engage the AB. Then I have another problem wich I don't know if it's common to all Warthogs but on mine the Left Throttle actually travels further before hitting the AB detent aprox 69% physical travel (just a couple on mm). My solution to all of this was using a custom curve on the Scripteditor in a way that instead of something looking like a J Curve I have something close to two Straight lines, giving me virtually linear response in the dry power region and then a diferent line with diferent sensibility but still linear for the AB region. I also put a small deadzone in the left throttle from 66 to 69% so that both throttles hit Full Mil when they are aligned but I can also not worry about pushing the left throttle all the way to it's detent. And here is the Script code for this: MapAxis(&Throttle, THR_RIGHT, DX_ZROT_AXIS, AXIS_NORMAL, MAP_ABSOLUTE); SetCustomCurve(&Throttle, THR_RIGHT, LIST(0,0, 10,12, 20,24, 30,36, 40,48, 50,59, 60,71, 66,78, 70,81, 80,87, 90,94, 100,100)); MapAxis(&Throttle, THR_LEFT, DX_Z_AXIS, AXIS_NORMAL, MAP_ABSOLUTE); SetCustomCurve(&Throttle, THR_LEFT, LIST(0,0, 10,12, 20,24, 30,36, 40,48, 50,59, 60,71, 66,78, 69,78, 70,81, 80,87, 90,94, 100,100)); Note: That I altered the default TARGET assignment of DX axis names to the physical ones. So adapt to the circustances of your script.

That is not normal TARGET behavior. If I understand you correctly all that you were trying to do is the very run of the mill stuff that you can do even with TARGET GUI very easily, TARGET can indeed send all kinds of Keystrokes to DCS. But do realize that when you compile a TARGET script GUY or Script Editor it does disconect all TM devices in that profile and connects a simgle virtual controller. This is then reverted when you stop the script. However from your description it does not sound like this is what happened. But whatever did it sounds like a fluke behavior.

Pending... :P

You can specify wich profile TrackIR uses for each game and you can switch profiles once the game is launched.

A 4670 would have been even faster (stock at least) and K would be better if your are thinking to overclock. An i7 with faster stock speed would be faster, but once the i5 is overclocked to the same clockspeeds the i7 should give you none to neglectable advantage in DCS (and most gaming/flight simming)speacially when you consider the extra price on the i7. As for that rig in particular. You could probably build a system that would cost less and had the same components or even better ones if you were to source the parts yourself. All in all it's a good system, but the motherboard is a bit on the budget side and with limited features, and would have to do some math to figure if the PSU is really adequate for the rig (it probably is, and the corsair is an exelent PSU, I'm talking watt wise), a lot of people don't realize but a PSU is usually at it's ideal output up to about 80% of it's rated power wich for a 600W PSU is up to 480W. Say if your system was using 540W when gaming, that's 90% of the rated power of a 600W PSU but only about 67% on a 800W PSU, so the 800W PSU would actually use less power, because a PSU only uses the power that's beeing demanded of it but the 800W one would do it more effeciantly with less power waste.

Also beware if some other programed function in target is holding down Ctrl, alt or shift, that will also make other keystrokes not beeing recognized as intended.

You can use the Screew on the paddle to modify how much you have to press it before it activates if that makes it more confortable for you.

This is a problem with the TrackIR software, even TS diferentiates from witch device a certain DX button is beeing sent. I tried my hand at AutoHotkey but found that it didn't work as well as expected with complex key combos (Shift+Ctrl+Fsomething). So in the end I ended up going back to using TARGET wich I didn't wan't to in the first place, and came up with a very decent and usable configuration. Everything in the HOTAS works as default DCS, all buttons that are required to be held for more than just momentary presses are programed as DX buttons to avoid conflicts (am also using a modified thrustmastercombined.lua along with the TARGET script). The way I have it working the HAT on the Joystick is used for trim but when I press the slew control (the same button on the throttle you are using)it pauses track IR and makes the Trim HAT became a view HAT again. The MicSwitchUp is My trackIR center (no function on the A-10 and MicSwitchZ is my TS PTT) but when trackIR is paused it further modifies the trim HAT move the head in the cockpit instead of panning. I'm preaty happy with this arrangement and even tough I don't like the way TARGET works, it makes it worthwhile to use.

I think he's complaining that he then has to press the F keys to select the actuall message to be transmited. But there's no real way around that that would be a realistic one. The pilot in the real AC presses the currecpondent mic switch of the radio he wishes to use, then he talks. You can't really talk with your Hotas, having a scrollabe menu (actually there is a mouse usable mod from PeterP for radios) from your HOTAS would not be realistic eighter and it would be a lot slower than going to your keyboard to press an F key. But if you are willing to go with another bit of software and configure it, you can actually use VAC to talk your into your mic and have that translated into the sim as keypresses. What could be more imersive than to press the right mic switch and then talk the radio instruction as intended? I'm more lazy than that and just say F1 to F12 into VAC and have VAC send that KEY press, plus it's much easier for the software not to recognize wrong commands when used like that.

Ok that makes sence. I think my field of view (without moving my eyes) must be around 160-170º. Since OR is only 110º, it makes sence. But that also means like I said in my first post that the other eye will add very little extra Fov.

I realize they are slightly offset of one another but it seems that it's so small that it's neglegible. Does is make that much of a diference? Both eyes I mean. When I close one of my eyes in the real world it seems that I am losing much more (quite a few degrees) of FoV as oposed to the images I've seen from the rift that seem to be 1 or 2 degrees offset tops.

I have a question, how is the FoV wider if both eyes are seeing a slightly diferest version of the same thing?

Why is it allways the nose with DCS? :)

In all fairness I would settle for a simple lua edit for a simple .lua edit where you could define the percent (00.0%) of throttle axis to use as the MIL Power mark. I really doesn't have to be in the UI. Please ED.... Preaty please.....

DCS Needs a way to define your afterburn detent like falcon 4 has, period! A throttle axis has no business having curves whatsever!

A little input. This number may actually be off, but I belive the the stick in the A-10 (other planes are probably not far from that) has a 15º offset in any directions. But this is with a much shorter control column since the seat in an aircraft is much closer to the pit floor. There are simpler ways to limit travel range but not as elegant as the piece you are developing. However I must point out that you have to redesign your piece, because you made it round all the way around. If you look at the warthog's original piece that limits the travel you'll notice that it's actually sort of a square with round corners (to match the diameter of the pole base that hit's it), this is necessary or else at max aileron you can't command max pitch and vice versa.

Roughly calculate how much Horizontal FOV your display is allowing you at the distance you are sitting from it. And then set your default FOV via lua configuration.

(Wrong sub forum by the way.)

Downlod and run the calibration tools. http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=46775&d=1295476242 http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=46916&d=1295912997