danilop

Although I have a lot of complains regarding inner workings of the latest ED's products (especially FC3 philosophy / whole concept of it in DCSW), it's clear that we have to accept delay times in DCSW / software updates. ED's not guilty for delay, it's the small (and extremely picky!) market which dictates how many programmers they can hire in the end. Let's face it - we have no serious software alternatives to DCSW, so we have to accept what we are getting ATM. However, as soon as ED start to abuse its obvious monopoly position (that's thankfully not the case yet) I will be the first to post and attack them here! So, yes - BE PATIENT, I'm sure they're giving their best ATM :)

It is screen snippet from this tool on Nvidia support page (scroll down to the bottom of the page): http://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/3dvision-surround/system-requirements

Here you go. However, IIRC, there are (were?) some issues with Nvidia surround and DCSW (do a forum search).

EDIT: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Titan-Nvidia-GeForce-K20X-GTX,21086.html There are speculation all over the net about future performance of the Titan. One thing is evident though - it should be considerably faster then GTX 680. And it's single GPU, so it should be much more efficient then 690 (less power hungry).

This new flagship Nvidia card should be available near the end of this month. It was shortly listed on Danish website for approx. €900 with tax. We are looking at the single GPU (gk110) card with 6 GB of memory, which is allegedly 60% faster then GTX680 in synthetic benchmarks.

I would definitely upgrade PSU to something like this (Seasonic X series is extra quality :thumbup:): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151110 850W capacity is perfectly adequate for your sistem though, so you could save some $ going for X-850 (SS-850KM) ...

Thanks guys, you're doing great job. This was needed to make DCS more realistic in basic flight department. Looking forward to 476th IFR publication/mod. :thumbup: This should be ED's job really, but they're overwhelmed ATM, so the comunity comes to rescue. Top-notch stuff! :joystick:

Do you need Track IR? Yes, you definitely do need a head tracking capability if you're serious about DCSW or any other simulator, be it flight, driving or whatever. If you like to DIY, you can get away with free head tracking offerings, but if you can afford it, get the real deal.

+1 MP performance will make or brake DCSW and future mods, so take your time ED!

Great work Ebs. If you could add real IFR/VFR charts/data for every airport in DCS with finished mod it would be awesome. Take your time, finish the lot - it's well worth the wait! :)

Community is growing up rapidly. FC3 quality stuff was really great 4-5 years ago, but after tasting the DCS stuff, I have a feeling that your average combat flight enthusiast wants more now. I understand that FC franchise was historically the biggest money making product for ED, but market is changing (and ED is responsible for this positive change) ... You need great dedication (months) to completely master FC3 class airplane - you don't need that much more (ok, couple of months more perhaps) to master DCS class aircraft. And rewards from learning DCS stuff are order of magnitude bigger.

No one will fly FC3 anything when DCS fighter hit the World. Why? Simple, it will be couple of years from now (yeah, they're saying this year, but I don't believe that :)), so FC3 will be very old news by then ... That is the reason why we've got FC3 in the first place - to keep us interested in DCS franchise until proper stuff - DCS fighter(s) arrive(s) ..

So basically we need ATC plus TACAN (VOR/DME) mod and RL approach procedures for every single airport in DCSW to even come close to FSX realism in this department. That is the only reason (plus small (turbo)prop planes and whole world as a theatre) which keeps FSX installed on my machine. There is much more to flying than bombing and fighting - RL flying procedures and navigation is essence of flying and any serious flight sim. It would be great to have this sort of realism in DCSW.

:notworthy: L-39 is just perfect for an intermediate, jet training - now, we need 172N for really basic stuff

+1 Cessna 172N would be perfect for squad training thing - new pilot candidates should start learning basic flying and procedures on 172N, than moving on to military jet trainer - something like L-39, and only after that on full blown military combat jet. Third party developers, where are you? Carenado?

Net code is mega important - it will make or brake DCSW. It's top priority, really. So, we have to be patient - let them test and debug the code properly.

+1 The first thing you do on modern export hardware full of electronics and computers is to downgrade software. Basically no one knows how the real deal works in detail. It's top secret and any attempt to publish/sell the info on this is punishable by long prison time/death sentence (I don't know US law regarding espionage and treason, but I'm sure the punishment is as severe as in Russia or anywhere else, for that matter). And software in complex DSP systems is of paramount importance - performance of modern digital radar could be significantly improved with advanced DSP processors and algorithms. And somehow, most conclusions about quality of current Russian aircraft and electronics are drawn from analyzing wildly available performance data of the crippled export models.

So is it official then? F/A-18C as a next ED fast mover? :)

We are getting FFB and MP definitely fixed in 1.2.3: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1657526&postcount=3 So, if everything goes well, we should expect 1.2.3 early next week? Great! :thumbup:

And what if this video is promo material for potential enterprise investor/buyer? It makes sense to build hype in that case ... :)

I was hoping for a F-16 & MiG29 announcement :cry:, but I'm not complaining in any way! SU-27SM, F/A-18C & F-15C will keep me more than busy until we see these two iconic fighters in DCSW. :thumbup:

It makes sense to get a basic and cheap HOTAS when starting out, especially if new to the genre. With something like Thrustamster T.Flight HOTAS X you're not getting a second mortgage and it's perfectly adequate to see if hard core flight simulators are your thing. If you get hooked, then upgrade to whatever you can afford. If not, you will have perfect joystick for BF3 or simple PC/PS3 flight games. In those cases TM Warthog would be very expensive overkill.

+1 :thumbup: :D

Could be, but they are catching up extremely fast - so fast that Russia was high on the agenda during recent presidential elections in the USA. NO HARD FACTS WHICH COULD PROVE STATEMENTS MADE. Some really bold statements have been made based on pure guessing, one of them being SU-27SM is inferior/equal to '90s F-15c. No, I cannot prove that SU-27SM is superior (obviously), BUT no one on this board could prove that it isn't. ;) We are beating a dead horse here, again and again ...

Fairly good reason why Russian privately owned company would withheld exact and complete info on their product vital to Russian National Security! OK - APA is rubish according to many, NiiP marketing Web material for obvious reasons is not reliable ... So, still looking for that elusive source on which some bold claims were previously made (SU-27SM inferior/equal to '90s F-15c).